DeadInThrench
Posts: 318
Joined: 12/27/2006
From: NE Pennsylvania, USA
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Joel Billings
The game is turn based with an integrated movement and combat phase. That means you move units, conduct attacks (hasty and normal), and then continue to move additional units and conduct additional attacks (including airstrikes).
Hmmm.... Joel.... If you open a forum here on Matrix on this project.... I am SURE you will get lots of comments. Yeah... maybe an unbelievable amount <g>.
Anyways... on the movement/combat sequence... I have been playing some TOAW recently and, it does movement/combat along these lines. What it does, when you make attacks, is take away movement points from all remaining units to stop unrealistic things from happenning. The problem with this, is you will have an attack on one part of the front affect what is going on in other parts of the front, or even other fronts if you have them. So, you end up having to micro-manage things across the entire front, and other fronts, on a round by round basis and this gets to be tedius and unrealistic as I see it.
So, what I suggested there (and they do not have the programming resource right now to deal with something like this), is you have an initial movement phase, where you do things like normal movement, moving in reinforcements, etc, as well as schedule all initial attacks... and then once you start resolving attacks, any additional movement points (assuming the unit would otherwise have them) would be based on PROXIMITY to an attack. In other words, if you had a 10 round turn, and an attack started on round 2 and ended on round 5, then all units, say, within 2 hexes of an attack, would have half their movement allowance left (assuming they would have it otherwise), to move and attack, attack again, etc.
With this, the computer would have to keep track of hexes that changed control as to what round they changed control, so that this system would not be abused (and units that moved into such hexes would have to pay the MP cost based on if they had waited for the hex to change control).
Also, in cases where a unit moved into a hex behind a defending unit, to keep it from retreating, the attack itself would in fact start AFTER that unit (and any other such units) moved into position.
And of course I am sure there would have to be many other considerations taken into account so that everything goes as desired. One thing that someone brought up when I proposed this in the TOAW forums, is computer allocation of defensive air support.. and the idea that all initial attacks must be scheduled.... would allow the computer to allocate the defensive air support intelligently.
A key thing here.... IMO... is first the player handles what the Army Group (or higher level HQ) would be handling, and THEN handles what the Army and Corps HQs would be handling, but being allowed to handle these one at a time rather than having to handle all of these simultaneously as in TOAW.
Whatever.... just thought I get this perspective on the table here. The proposal I have above might be a challange to implement I dunno. But, in any case, obviously, the movement/turn sequence of a game is a critical aspect... maybe the most critical aspect... of any game along these lines.
Thank you,
DiT
< Message edited by DeadInThrench -- 3/19/2008 3:02:43 AM >
|
Printable Version
RE: 2by3 Russian Front Game? - 
I hope for this game to be a WITP on the east front.
If matrix make a best map design for War in russia , i Buy the game. bad design , no pleasure, no dollars ...
. 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread