What new scenarios would you like to see? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III



Message

*Lava* -> What new scenarios would you like to see? (10/26/2005 2:20:29 PM)

Hi!

I am hopefull that TOAW: ME, will see the addition of more well tested, fun scenarios. (If I'm wrong here, could someone on the staff please correct me.) So, given that this is true, what new scenarios would you like to see included?

Here is my input.

I like large scenarios. So.., I would like to see...

1) a "war in europe" scenario and
2) a "what if" war in europe scenario where France becomes the dominant force (ala Napoleon) whose objective is to conquer the continent.

I'd also like to see something totally off the wall. Perhaps a near future type of campaign.

Ray (alias Lava)



DandricSturm -> RE: What new scenarios would you like to see? (10/26/2005 2:26:04 PM)

It has been quite a while since I was able to play but if there isn't one already, I'd like to see Lam Son 719.



steveh11Matrix -> RE: What new scenarios would you like to see? (10/26/2005 2:30:50 PM)

I like smaller scenarios. I'd like to see some well thought out scenarios based on individual operations, for example Kharkov in winter 42/43 at divisional level, or some of the British/Canadian attempts to break out of Normandy at (say) regimental level.

Big scenarios, with huge numbers of counters - no thanks. If you really, really must do Barbarossa, do it the way SPI did it 1st and best - Corps level for the Germans, Army level for the Russians. That way I might even finish the war.

Steve.



*Lava* -> RE: What new scenarios would you like to see? (10/26/2005 2:42:07 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DandricSturm

It has been quite a while since I was able to play but if there isn't one already, I'd like to see Lam Son 719.


Whether it has been done by a scenario designer before or not, I don't think should be used as a qualifier. Just because it was done before, doesn't mean it was done well, or couldn't be improved.

So let your imagination and preferences go wild!

Ray (alias Lava)



golden delicious -> RE: What new scenarios would you like to see? (10/26/2005 2:56:33 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lava

Whether it has been done by a scenario designer before or not, I don't think should be used as a qualifier. Just because it was done before, doesn't mean it was done well, or couldn't be improved.


That's absolutely true.

Anyway, my interest in new scenarios would be dependent upon what new features the Matrix Edition includes. I'd want the scenarios to make the best use of those in doing things which TOAW as it stands can't do. For example, if a better Command and Control model is adopted, they could make a decent Battle of France scenario. If they come up with a better supply model, then a scenario covering the campaign in France in August and September of 1944 would be good.

Absent any changes, a lot of the scenarios I'd like to see are already under development. Peversely, the promise that such things might get included in a special Matrix release may lead to designers holding off from releasing them.



*Lava* -> RE: What new scenarios would you like to see? (10/26/2005 3:10:38 PM)

I could definately dig on a new and/or different take on the Battle of France.

Ray (alias Lava)



*Lava* -> RE: What new scenarios would you like to see? (10/26/2005 3:15:10 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: steveh11Matrix

Big scenarios, with huge numbers of counters - no thanks. If you really, really must do Barbarossa, do it the way SPI did it 1st and best - Corps level for the Germans, Army level for the Russians. That way I might even finish the war.

Steve.


Totally agree.

Getting the scale right is one the main characteristics of a good scenario. For those who want more.. there is always the editor.

The Barbarossa scenario which shipped with the game, seemed more of a puzzle to me than an opportunity to try different operational concepts to win

Ray (alias Lava)



*Lava* -> RE: What new scenarios would you like to see? (10/26/2005 3:17:36 PM)

Hi!

Actually, a point was made on another thread that perhaps the Matrix team will not actually be creating totally new scenarios for their release.

Could someone from the staff comment.

Ray (alias Lava)



golden delicious -> RE: What new scenarios would you like to see? (10/26/2005 3:55:21 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: steveh11Matrix

If you really, really must do Barbarossa, do it the way SPI did it 1st and best - Corps level for the Germans, Army level for the Russians.


Sweet. I did a 250km/hex Barbarossa scenario at one point. Gimme a moment and I'll link you. Though I may not have been taking the project very seriously.

EDIT: Goddamn... I took it down. Oh well. It was basically just bad satire anyway.



Siberian HEAT -> RE: What new scenarios would you like to see? (10/26/2005 4:53:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lava

Hi!

Actually, a point was made on another thread that perhaps the Matrix team will not actually be creating totally new scenarios for their release.

Could someone from the staff comment.

Ray (alias Lava)


New scenarios will not be on the first release. That much I know. After that, all things are possible.



JJKettunen -> RE: What new scenarios would you like to see? (10/26/2005 5:02:12 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Siberian HEAT
New scenarios will not be on the first release.


Care to elaborate?



steveh11Matrix -> RE: What new scenarios would you like to see? (10/26/2005 6:04:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: golden delicious

quote:

ORIGINAL: steveh11Matrix

If you really, really must do Barbarossa, do it the way SPI did it 1st and best - Corps level for the Germans, Army level for the Russians.


Sweet. I did a 250km/hex Barbarossa scenario at one point. Gimme a moment and I'll link you. Though I may not have been taking the project very seriously.

EDIT: Goddamn... I took it down. Oh well. It was basically just bad satire anyway.

Oh, well. Later, perhaps! [:)][;)]

Steve.



golden delicious -> RE: What new scenarios would you like to see? (10/26/2005 7:00:10 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: steveh11Matrix
Oh, well. Later, perhaps! [:)][;)]


I do have it on my computer if you want a copy. But I think Bob Cross' 50km/hex study is more what you had in mind.



Aga -> RE: What new scenarios would you like to see? (10/26/2005 8:32:01 PM)

I would like to see a scenario about the German offensives in 1918, and if possible to the end of the war in November 18.
Another one would be the Indochina war.




JJKettunen -> RE: What new scenarios would you like to see? (10/26/2005 8:35:52 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Siberian HEAT

New scenarios will not be on the first release. That much I know. After that, all things are possible.


I'll try this again: Does this by any chance mean that only the original stock scenarios are included in the first release?



golden delicious -> RE: What new scenarios would you like to see? (10/26/2005 9:11:23 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Keke

I'll try this again: Does this by any chance mean that only the original stock scenarios are included in the first release?


In case it fails again; I don't think it'll be just the 'original stock' scenarios. Rather it'll be the compilation which Daniel McBride etc. are compiling from Rugged Defence at present.



JJKettunen -> RE: What new scenarios would you like to see? (10/26/2005 9:20:56 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: golden delicious

In case it fails again; I don't think it'll be just the 'original stock' scenarios. Rather it'll be the compilation which Daniel McBride etc. are compiling from Rugged Defence at present.


Well that was my understanding in the first place.



*Lava* -> RE: What new scenarios would you like to see? (10/26/2005 9:30:10 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: golden delicious

In case it fails again; I don't think it'll be just the 'original stock' scenarios. Rather it'll be the compilation which Daniel McBride etc. are compiling from Rugged Defence at present.


Do you have a link for this?

Thanks,

Ray (alias Lava)



golden delicious -> RE: What new scenarios would you like to see? (10/26/2005 10:58:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lava

Do you have a link for this?


For the list? No. All I know is that Daniel McBride has selected a group of eighteen people who will trawl through all known scenarios to weed out the ones with serious problems. The remainder will get put on the CD.



steveh11Matrix -> RE: What new scenarios would you like to see? (10/26/2005 11:41:24 PM)

Ray, you could do worse than to go over to here.

It's "The Matrix-TOAW Scenario Development Group " thread on SZO.

Steve.



Trigger Happy -> RE: What new scenarios would you like to see? (10/26/2005 11:52:59 PM)

If Matrix wanna have fun, they can put an AI in the enormous scenarios...



Oleg Mastruko -> RE: What new scenarios would you like to see? (10/27/2005 12:29:13 AM)

Am I the only one who is unnerved by the fact that some very important discussions re future of TOAW are being posted on other forums by people now officially involved in game development???

I have absolutely nothing against SZO, ACG, or any other site or web board on the planet, in fact more power to them...

However...

This is the only wargaming board I frequent, and there is a reason for that. I spend enough time here, and have no time nor will to go elsewehere to discuss MATRIX GAMES PRODUCTS. What I am trying to say is:

a) As a matter of netiquette and good manners people who are *officially involved* with ex-Talonsoft games development should discuss stuff HERE. Period.

b) Matrix employess (Erik, David etc.) should kindly ask (if not outright order [:D]) those officially involved guys to discuss important, official stuff HERE.

I don't care if "public at large" is discussing this and that wherever they want to, but now that this game is property of Matrix Games, official people (like Stauffenberg McBride and King Siberian HEAT) should know better and discuss official stuff at official place - ie here. What is the purpose of official guys posting game info on other web boards instead of posting it here??

Oleg



*Lava* -> RE: What new scenarios would you like to see? (10/27/2005 3:21:22 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: golden delicious


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lava

Do you have a link for this?


For the list? No. All I know is that Daniel McBride has selected a group of eighteen people who will trawl through all known scenarios to weed out the ones with serious problems. The remainder will get put on the CD.


Ah!

Very Kewl!

Looking forward to some sort of update on this when the guys start firming things up.

Ray (alias Lava)



*Lava* -> RE: What new scenarios would you like to see? (10/27/2005 3:27:29 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

Am I the only one who is unnerved by the fact that some very important discussions re future of TOAW are being posted on other forums by people now officially involved in game development???

I have absolutely nothing against SZO, ACG, or any other site or web board on the planet, in fact more power to them...

However...


Yep a little,

But you have to admire these guys for keeping the torch lite.

I know I have been a bit of a butthead concerning some issues, but I hope everyone will come together to form a good community here at Matrix.

I think sites dedicated to TOAW cannot be a bad thing, really. It appears there is a fairly diverse group of troops running around. The more the merrier.

But I do hope things, as they firm up, find their way here as well.

Ray (alias Lava)



Oleg Mastruko -> RE: What new scenarios would you like to see? (10/27/2005 3:34:37 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lava
Yep a little,

But you have to admire these guys for keeping the torch lite.


Absolutely... But these games are now Matrix games. So those guys, "development managers", "beta test leaders", "scenario compilers" or whatever they are called, are working for Matrix right now.

It would be nice and civil if they would post their announcements, recruit beta testers and whatnot, here, not elsewhere, or at least here first.

I think Matrix bosses oughta make them do so.

I know communities like SZO did a lot to keep the flame alive, but to find crucial announcements being posted on SZO board and NOT here, by a guy Matrix chose as "team leader" or whatever, seems very unprofessional and rude. Just my opinion.

O.



*Lava* -> RE: What new scenarios would you like to see? (10/27/2005 3:43:20 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

I know communities like SZO did a lot to keep the flame alive, but to find crucial announcements being posted on SZO board and NOT here, by a guy Matrix chose as "team leader" or whatever, seems very unprofessional and rude. Just my opinion.

O.


Ahh,

Yes, I would tend to agree with you there. Hopefully old habits and good friends was behind that. And undoubtedly, since those guys are still active, getting input on stuff like scenarios from them would seem to be a fairly logical beginning.

No reason why they can't double post important stuff though.

If these guys really are coming up with a group of really well made user scenarios for inclusion on the CD, I believe they will find their largest audience here.

Ray (alias Lava)



JMS2 -> RE: What new scenarios would you like to see? (10/27/2005 1:21:23 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lava

quote:

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

I know communities like SZO did a lot to keep the flame alive, but to find crucial announcements being posted on SZO board and NOT here, by a guy Matrix chose as "team leader" or whatever, seems very unprofessional and rude. Just my opinion.

O.


Ahh,

Yes, I would tend to agree with you there. Hopefully old habits and good friends was behind that. And undoubtedly, since those guys are still active, getting input on stuff like scenarios from them would seem to be a fairly logical beginning.

No reason why they can't double post important stuff though.

If these guys really are coming up with a group of really well made user scenarios for inclusion on the CD, I believe they will find their largest audience here.

Ray (alias Lava)


Come on, Ray, you can't have it both ways, you want to muzzle any possible criticism or comment on TOAW here, and you want the people developing the next TOAW here. Get serious.



*Lava* -> RE: What new scenarios would you like to see? (10/27/2005 3:21:09 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JMS2

Come on, Ray, you can't have it both ways, you want to muzzle any possible criticism or comment on TOAW here, and you want the people developing the next TOAW here. Get serious.


Again, you, like other, misrepresent me.

I do not oppose criticism or the desire to change this or that in the game.

What I oppose is the manner in which such criticism is being given. The "holier than thou" approach may work with some people, but it doesn't impress me.

Meanwhile, Oleg is correct in his questioning of where discussion of changes to the game should appear. Having been accused of not reading "the holy 100 bug document" I questioned whether artillery barrages on empty hexes to destroy bridges was really "operational." Go over to the zone... you will find a new thread over there now addressing just that subject.

Working behind peoples backs and bullying developers, these are really crude instruments for justifying changes to the game.

What's wrong, don't have the balls to post your stuff here, where everyone is not your mate?

Ray (alias Lava)



golden delicious -> RE: What new scenarios would you like to see? (10/27/2005 3:27:57 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lava
Working behind peoples backs and bullying developers, these are really crude instruments for justifying changes to the game.


What?

quote:

What's wrong, don't have the balls to post your stuff here, where everyone is not your mate?


I dunno about JMS- but I find this environment more friendly than WHQ/SZO.



JMS2 -> RE: What new scenarios would you like to see? (10/27/2005 4:35:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lava

quote:

ORIGINAL: JMS2

Come on, Ray, you can't have it both ways, you want to muzzle any possible criticism or comment on TOAW here, and you want the people developing the next TOAW here. Get serious.


Again, you, like other, misrepresent me.

I do not oppose criticism or the desire to change this or that in the game.

What I oppose is the manner in which such criticism is being given. The "holier than thou" approach may work with some people, but it doesn't impress me.

Meanwhile, Oleg is correct in his questioning of where discussion of changes to the game should appear. Having been accused of not reading "the holy 100 bug document" I questioned whether artillery barrages on empty hexes to destroy bridges was really "operational." Go over to the zone... you will find a new thread over there now addressing just that subject.

Working behind peoples backs and bullying developers, these are really crude instruments for justifying changes to the game.

What's wrong, don't have the balls to post your stuff here, where everyone is not your mate?

Ray (alias Lava)


Odd, you apparently confuse yourself with this unnamed developers we are supposedly bullying, but in the meantime here's Oleg proposing that the people developing this should be forced to post only here, guess that's not bullying, and we have you, arrogantly deciding what's a bug and what isn't and trying to muzzle people that have more experience than you (both individually and collectively) on the system.

Apparently I do have the balls, since I am here indeed, yet you nor Oleg are anywhere to be seen in those other sites, you know, the ones that kept the game alive, while you hid in your hole. What, afraid that they aren't your mates and may disagree with you? the horror!, but then, that's why the forums exist in the first place.



Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.640625