RE: The Direction of the FPC series

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: The Direction of the FPC series

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Flashpoint Campaigns Series >> RE: The Direction of the FPC series

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: The Direction of the FPC series - 11/1/2013 5:12:19 PM

british exil

Posts: 1686
Joined: 5/4/2006
From: Lower Saxony Germany
Status: offline

A big What If scenario, WWII ending and the Soviets are now the bad boys. Patton and Monty decide to stop the Red Army from rolling up all of Westrn Europe. WWII takes a new turn. Will the Road to Moscow suceed or will Amsterdam become a new St Petersburg?

Based on the Books, Fox on the Rhine and Fox at the Front. by Douglas Niles and Michael Dobson.

By doing this a WWII and WWIII will be one. And an end to all problems in the forum?

Mat

_____________________________

"It is not enough to expect a man to pay for the best, you must also give him what he pays for." Alfred Dunhill

WitE,UV,AT,ATG,FoF,FPCRS

(in reply to Duck Doc)

Post #: 61

RE: The Direction of the FPC series - 11/1/2013 6:59:14 PM

nukkxx5058

Posts: 2932
Joined: 2/3/2005
From: France
Status: offline

The problem is that when you guys are talking about WW3 you are actually talking about cold war turning "hot" in the 80's.

When I'm talking about WW3, I'm talking about what might come soon in real life, in 2015/16/17, ie. a conflict involving NATO vs Russia + China and starting because of a conflict in the gulf between Israel and Iran/Syria/Egypt (it was nearly here last month BTW, before Putin and Russian diplomacy made the situation to calm down :-( !).

I really think that the potential of Flashpoint is in simulating hypothetical conflicts in a very near future with modern armament. This is at least what I'd like to play. A realistic conflict which is plausible.

Yes, WW3 (or let's call it WW4 ?) !

< Message edited by nukkxx -- 11/1/2013 7:00:12 PM >

(in reply to british exil)

Post #: 62

RE: The Direction of the FPC series - 11/1/2013 7:21:49 PM

Mad Russian

Posts: 13256
Joined: 3/16/2008
From: Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: nukkxx

The problem is that when you guys are talking about WW3 you are actually talking about cold war turning "hot" in the 80's.

Since that's what FPC:RS is about, yes, that's what we're talking about.

quote:

When I'm talking about WW3, I'm talking about what might come soon in real life, in 2015/16/17, ie. a conflict involving NATO vs Russia + China and starting because of a conflict in the gulf between Israel and Iran/Syria/Egypt (it was nearly here last month BTW, before Putin and Russian diplomacy made the situation to calm down :-( !).

I really think that the potential of Flashpoint is in simulating hypothetical conflicts in a very near future with modern armament. This is at least what I'd like to play. A realistic conflict which is plausible.

Yes, WW3 (or let's call it WW4 ?) !

Call it what you will. You can create any of this with the game files. All you have to do is get CD to finish with the modding guide so you can create the units and you're off and running in whichever direction you want to go.

Good Hunting.

MR

_____________________________

The most expensive thing in the world is free time.

Founder of HSG scenario design group for Combat Mission.
Panzer Command Ostfront Development Team.
Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm Development Team.

(in reply to nukkxx5058)

Post #: 63

RE: The Direction of the FPC series - 11/1/2013 8:00:25 PM

ComradeP

Posts: 7192
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline

I haven't bought FPC:RS (yet) due to not feeling entirely comfortable when playing modern warfare wargames (I dislike the long engagement ranges, electronic warfare and the high operational speed with fully motorized/mechanized forces, it's purely personal), I do think this engine has a lot of promise. I guess that being young and being born when the Cold War was almost over had a direct influence on never really being all that interested in a 1980's Cold War turned hot scenario.

When people say WWII has been done to death, they're mostly referring to some of the 1941(/winter 1941-1942) battles, Fall Blau, Uranus/Stalingrad, Zitadelle/Kursk, Korsun Pocket, Bagration and possibly Operation Konrad. However, in my opinion the battles west of the Dnepr in 1943/1944 could be very interesting with this game engine. There's usually a black hole between Korsun and Konrad, if Konrad is represented in a series, yet some of the battles aside from Korsun (Krivoi Rog, Zhitomir, the German withdrawal to Bug and Dnestr, Hube Pocket and 1st Iassy-Kishinev) are really underrepresented in my opinion.

I guess wargame designers are also conservative in the sense that they focus on improving upon an existing formula, hence all the Overlord/Market Garden/Bulge games for the western front and the aforementioned battles for the east.

I've been waiting for a good sort of operational level wargame for Korea, but the question is if the fluid periods of the war offer enough meat for numerous scenarios. It could be interesting though: first North vs South Korea with limited US support, after the North Korea and China vs South Korea and UN forces.

< Message edited by ComradeP -- 11/1/2013 8:01:05 PM >

_____________________________

SSG tester
WitE Alpha tester
Panzer Corps Beta tester
Unity of Command scenario designer

(in reply to Mad Russian)

Post #: 64

RE: The Direction of the FPC series - 11/1/2013 8:41:49 PM

stormbringer3

Posts: 875
Joined: 7/26/2007
From: Staunton, Va.
Status: offline

I'll give my opinion. I really like this game!! Modern war is not my 1st choice and I'm one of those that think that this fantastic game engine can go WWII or Korea. WWII would be my next choice down the road, but perhaps a middle ground between those who want WWII and those who want mostly more modern would be Korea. You have WWII type weaponry but an area that has not had a lot of attention so there would be a lot of new material.

(in reply to ComradeP)

Post #: 65

RE: The Direction of the FPC series - 11/1/2013 10:33:31 PM

kipanderson

Posts: 394
Joined: 8/27/2001
From: U.K.
Status: offline

Hi,

quote:

Agree absolutely with ComradeP
However, in my opinion the battles west of the Dnepr in 1943/1944 could be very interesting with this game engine. There's usually a black hole between Korsun and Konrad, if Konrad is represented in a series, yet some of the battles aside from Korsun (Krivoi Rog, Zhitomir, the German withdrawal to Bug and Dnestr, Hube Pocket and 1st Iassy-Kishinev) are really underrepresented in my opinion.

What is sometimes called The Battle for the Ukraine... August �43 to April �44 is the most interesting period on The Eastern Front. Both sides are well rained... by the standards of conscript armies... well equipped and the Germans not quite yet totally overwhelmed.

Has outstanding wargame potential

.

All the best,
Kip.

(in reply to stormbringer3)

Post #: 66

RE: The Direction of the FPC series - 11/2/2013 2:05:44 AM

Leibstandarte PzD

Posts: 7
Joined: 6/29/2006
Status: offline

I usually tend to play World War II games. Mostly because having served in the "modern" army I haven't found many games that correctly model modern warfare. After having played a fair number of games of FC:RS I feel this engine does an excellent job of it. And the AI is pretty darn good most of the time as well.

So Bravo and excellent job to all involved in bringing this game to market!

All that having been said after seeing the quality of the game I'll purchase what ever packs/expansions you put out. I figure with good support (read money from us, the consumer) you will eventually get to my favorite time periods to play.

My vote would be to first flesh out the WWIII scenarios. I want to fight this AI from Alta, Norway to Athens, Greece and everywhere in between. Once WWIII is completed I'd like you gentlemen to work your way backwards in time ending with WWII. With some great Middle Eastern coverage 1947 to 2003.

_____________________________

Respectfully,
J. Otto

(in reply to Monkie)

Post #: 67

RE: The Direction of the FPC series - 11/2/2013 2:41:38 AM

Gratch1111

Posts: 171
Joined: 12/21/2010
Status: offline

I really like the series but I would like it to be easier to edit the platforms, and understand what u do, make new ones, and make it easier to make maps and create scenarios. I still play WinSPMBT but it lacks in the gameplay that this game excels in. So take the best from that and use it in this game.

As for gameplay, amphib invasion is a start, and go modern. However when you go modern there are some things u need to add. Infantry are more powerful, if slow, drones, Also air is very lethal with laser guidences

< Message edited by Gratch11 -- 11/2/2013 2:49:29 AM >

(in reply to Leibstandarte PzD)

Post #: 68

RE: The Direction of the FPC series - 11/2/2013 4:53:51 PM

Rocko911

Posts: 287
Joined: 7/2/2004
Status: offline

The truth is that modern warfare (anything after ww2) is neglected in the strategy war game industry. The last thing we need is another WW2 game. I vote for a Korean War circa 1950-53 and a modern 80's version of a Korean war.

(in reply to Gratch1111)

Post #: 69

RE: The Direction of the FPC series - 11/2/2013 5:50:41 PM

MikeAP

Posts: 266
Joined: 3/7/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LRRP

The truth is that modern warfare (anything after ww2) is neglected in the strategy war game industry. The last thing we need is another WW2 game. I vote for a Korean War circa 1950-53 and a modern 80's version of a Korean war.

Couldn't agree more.

I think many developers go with WW2 because everything is on the table. No need for a creative back-story or designing new battle fields.

Guys like Clancy, Bond, and Coyle have written enough to give us a direction, but the modern genre is still an approach less taken.

(in reply to Rocko911)

Post #: 70

RE: The Direction of the FPC series - 11/2/2013 5:55:16 PM

Mad Russian

Posts: 13256
Joined: 3/16/2008
From: Texas
Status: offline

I think the reason WWII is so popular is that it was the largest war in history, so much has been written about it, we all know someone that participated in it. It was also the era of modern warfare.

Add all that up and it has great interest.

Good Hunting.

MR

_____________________________

(in reply to MikeAP)

Post #: 71

RE: The Direction of the FPC series - 11/2/2013 6:31:46 PM

Lord Thag

Posts: 4
Joined: 6/17/2010
Status: offline

For me, I would be interested in more modern 'what if' scenarios, and anything WW II related. There has been some good discussion here, and I'll chime in with my two cents.

The modern era is under represented, and as Red Storm shows, it makes for a hell of a game. World war 2 may be done to death, but it makes for a very interesting subject tactically, what with all the different, constantly evolving vehicles and equipment, several sides, and fascinating battles. It may have been done to death, but it hasn't been done to death WELL, in my opinion. Combat mission and close combat do a good job with small unit tactics. The command ops series does a good job with operational warfare, but it's a very different beast from flashpoint campaigns. I haven't really liked many of the hex based ww2 games, even the highly rated ones like the Operational Art of War. Steel panthers is fun but too slow for large battles. They tend to be a bit on the dry side for me, and I think, should the developers go the ww2 route, flashpoint campaigns would end up being the defacto standard for operational ww2 games the way Combat Mission has for small unit/tactical ww2 combat. What flashpoint campaigns has in spades is intensity, tempo, and the awesomely frustrating order system, which makes for a nail biting experience.

My other wish would be for current day stuff. Lots of interesting what if scenarios out there to model (which I hope to gods remain what if) with China, Israel, etc. I imagine the latter would be easier to do and would make for excellent expansions.

Ultimately, however, I've been impressed enough with Red Storm to buy whatever comes out next regardless of theater. I know quality when I see it, and FC sits on the shelf next to combat mission, close combat, harpoon, and all the other games that have outlasted their time.

(in reply to Mad Russian)

Post #: 72

RE: The Direction of the FPC series - 11/2/2013 7:20:57 PM

ComradeP

Posts: 7192
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline

One of the reasons 1980's Cold War turned hot wargames are less appealing to me, might be similar to why some of you might not like Battle of the Bulge games. The game, or the outcome, can feel a bit artificial in the case of the battle of the Bulge. It's still not entirely clear to me why the battle is so popular, considering that within reason the outcome wasn't really in doubt, only the time required to reach the outcome.

One thing that feels artificial to me about a 1980's NATO vs. Warsaw Pact wargame is that it deliberately picks the timeframe when NATO finally started to catch up with the Warsaw Pact in terms of the capabilities of its forces. As Mad Russian mentioned elsewhere, this is the timeframe where NATO started using its new force multipliers and to increase the quality of its equipment (gaining leads in electronics and technology that the Soviets couldn't match in the end) to even out the conventional quantity advantage enjoyed by the Warsaw Pact. Pick any moment in the 1950's to 1970's (when senior officers of various Western European armies published books titled "Europe defenseless?" and variations thereof with good reason), and a conventional conflict between NATO and the Warsaw Pact could quite probably have turned out really ugly for NATO.

Sure, it makes for an interesting wargame to see if the force multipliers would work, but it feels somewhat artificial that the timeframe where NATO starts to have more of a chance is picked. I do look forward to eventually playing this game and learning a bit more about how such a conflict would've played out, as I do think it will be enjoyable from a purely operational perspective. It's the time period where modern warfare shows that it has grown up.

< Message edited by ComradeP -- 11/2/2013 9:35:32 PM >

_____________________________

SSG tester
WitE Alpha tester
Panzer Corps Beta tester
Unity of Command scenario designer

(in reply to Lord Thag)

Post #: 73

RE: The Direction of the FPC series - 11/2/2013 7:30:02 PM

Mad Russian

Posts: 13256
Joined: 3/16/2008
From: Texas
Status: offline

One thing we would like to do is possibly do the scenario set in different time frames. Do nothing to them but replace the current equipment structures and see how the different time periods would play out.

For example, A Time To Dance in 1960, 1965, 1975, 1982, 1985, etc. and the same for the rest of the scenarios.

The list of things this engine could do is limited only by our time and the communities willingness to support it.

Good Hunting.

MR

_____________________________

(in reply to ComradeP)

Post #: 74

RE: The Direction of the FPC series - 11/2/2013 7:48:51 PM

tide1530

Posts: 103
Joined: 4/15/2011
Status: offline

I've been a big fan of John Tiller games for years. I also liked the original Flashpoint. This game is truly great and will be buying addons when they come out.

(in reply to Mad Russian)

Post #: 75

RE: The Direction of the FPC series - 11/2/2013 7:56:33 PM

TheWombat_matrixforum

Posts: 469
Joined: 8/2/2003
Status: offline

One benefit of doing hypotheticals is that it reduces the chance of grognards with stacks of historical documents nit-picking your every decision-e.g., the WitE thread.

(in reply to tide1530)

Post #: 76

RE: The Direction of the FPC series - 11/2/2013 8:05:11 PM

Mad Russian

Posts: 13256
Joined: 3/16/2008
From: Texas
Status: offline

That's not hard to deal with.

I do a lot of research and try to be as accurate as possible., but at the end of the day, I make scenarios I like. When I get them where I think they play as well as I can make them, and if I think they play well enough, I share them with you.

If someone doesn't agree with my presentation of the action or my research they can freely use the editor to make their own interpretation of how they think it should be.

Good Hunting.

MR

_____________________________

(in reply to TheWombat_matrixforum)

Post #: 77

RE: The Direction of the FPC series - 11/2/2013 8:23:26 PM

budd

Posts: 2972
Joined: 7/4/2009
From: Tacoma
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: british exil

A big What If scenario, WWII ending and the Soviets are now the bad boys. Patton and Monty decide to stop the Red Army from rolling up all of Westrn Europe. WWII takes a new turn. Will the Road to Moscow suceed or will Amsterdam become a new St Petersburg?

Based on the Books, Fox on the Rhine and Fox at the Front. by Douglas Niles and Michael Dobson.

By doing this a WWII and WWIII will be one. And an end to all problems in the forum?

Mat

I'm with this guy. Didn't even cross my mind but this would be at the top of my list.
a what if with WW2 material, o yea.

< Message edited by **budd** -- 11/2/2013 8:24:31 PM >

_____________________________

Enjoy when you can, and endure when you must. ~Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

"Be Yourself; Everyone else is already taken" ~Oscar Wilde

*I'm in the Wargamer middle ground*
I don't buy all the wargames I want, I just buy more than I need.

(in reply to british exil)

Post #: 78

RE: The Direction of the FPC series - 11/3/2013 4:04:05 AM

Combatengineerjrgmail

Posts: 77
Joined: 9/24/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

One of the reasons 1980's Cold War turned hot wargames are less appealing to me, might be similar to why some of you might not like Battle of the Bulge games. The game, or the outcome, can feel a bit artificial in the case of the battle of the Bulge. It's still not entirely clear to me why the battle is so popular, considering that within reason the outcome wasn't really in doubt, only the time required to reach the outcome.

One thing that feels artificial to me about a 1980's NATO vs. Warsaw Pact wargame is that it deliberately picks the timeframe when NATO finally started to catch up with the Warsaw Pact in terms of the capabilities of its forces. As Mad Russian mentioned elsewhere, this is the timeframe where NATO started using its new force multipliers and to increase the quality of its equipment (gaining leads in electronics and technology that the Soviets couldn't match in the end) to even out the conventional quantity advantage enjoyed by the Warsaw Pact. Pick any moment in the 1950's to 1970's (when senior officers of various Western European armies published books titled "Europe defenseless?" and variations thereof with good reason), and a conventional conflict between NATO and the Warsaw Pact could quite probably have turned out really ugly for NATO.

Sure, it makes for an interesting wargame to see if the force multipliers would work, but it feels somewhat artificial that the timeframe where NATO starts to have more of a chance is picked. I do look forward to eventually playing this game and learning a bit more about how such a conflict would've played out, as I do think it will be enjoyable from a purely operational perspective. It's the time period where modern warfare shows that it has grown up.

Why would one NOT pick the most interesting period, when looking at the balance of forces, when deciding to pick a period to wargame?????

(in reply to ComradeP)

Post #: 79

RE: The Direction of the FPC series - 11/3/2013 4:15:56 AM

Rocko911

Posts: 287
Joined: 7/2/2004
Status: offline

Again I think a Korean War version would make both the WW2 and Modern War guys happy as it represented that phase of going from a WW2 Army to a Modern Army in both weapons, infantry and tactics. Also it's base would limit the amount of Warsaw influence due to the fact the Chinese and Soviet Union were both pushing for influence in that area. Just my 2 cents.
Here is a list from Wikpedia
Armor[edit]

United Nations Command[edit]

USA[edit]
Medium Tank M4A3 "Sherman"
Medium Tank M4A3E8 "Sherman"
Light Tank M24 "Chaffee"
Heavy Tank M26 Pershing
M46 Patton
M36 tank destroyer

Commonwealth[edit]
Tank, Cruiser, Cromwell (A27M) (Royal Tank Regiment, 8th King's Royal Irish Hussars)
Tank, Cruiser, Centurion Mk.3 (5th Royal Tank Regiment, 5th Royal Inniskilling Dragoon Guards, 8th King's Royal Irish Hussars)
Tank, Infantry, Churchill (A22) (C Squadron 7th Royal Tank Regiment, 8th King's Royal Irish Hussars)
Medium Tank M4A3 "Sherman" (Lord Strathcona's Horse (Royal Canadians) (2nd Armoured Regiment))
Medium Tank M4A3E8 "Sherman" (Lord Strathcona's Horse (Royal Canadians) (2nd Armoured Regiment))
Tank, Cruiser, Comet (A34)
M10 Achilles
Sherman Firefly

Communist states[edit]
T-34/85
M4A2E8 Sherman "Emcha", 76 mm with HVSS (from the Soviets through Lend-Lease Act during World War II)
M5A1 Stuart (PVA)
IS-2 (PVA)

Light Vehicles[edit]

United Nations Command[edit]
105 mm Howitzer Motor Carriage M7B1/B2 Priest
105 mm Howitzer Motor Carriage M37
155 mm Gun Motor Carriage M40
203 mm Howitzer Motor Carriage M43
155 mm Howitzer Motor Carriage M41 (Gorilla)
M19 Gun Motor Carriage
M8 Greyhound Armoured Car
M29C Weasel Cargo Carrier
Armored Utility Vehicle M39
M20 Armored Utility Car
Willys Overland Jeep MB
Carrier, Personnel, Half-track M3A2
Multiple Gun Motor Carriage M16
Universal Carrier
AEC Armoured Car
Daimler Armoured Car

Communist states[edit]
BA-64 light armoured car
SU-76 self-propelled gun
GAZ-67 jeep

< Message edited by LRRP -- 11/3/2013 4:39:20 AM >

(in reply to Combatengineerjrgmail)

Post #: 80

RE: The Direction of the FPC series - 11/3/2013 6:45:08 AM

ComradeP

Posts: 7192
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline

quote:

Why would one NOT pick the most interesting period, when looking at the balance of forces, when deciding to pick a period to wargame?????

The "pick a period" part is what I'm referring to. It can feel artificial, because in this case the war never happened. This is one of the few, at the moment only, popular conflict in wargames where a convenient moment to start the war is picked. Wars start at inconvenient times for at least some of the combatants most of the time. In this case the war starts at a convenient time for NATO, when it has found a way to deal with the Soviet advantage in quantity.

Let's say the war had turned hot in the 1960's, somewhere there would've been a stalemate and peace, and after that the development of military technology and the balance in Europe would develop in a similar way to what really happened, so we end up with roughly the same situation in the 1980's, but there's no war. How many 1980's wargames do you think there would be? I would say there would be few, because most would focus on the actual war.

In other words: this particular time for the Cold War to turn hot could be picked because the war didn't happen, as otherwise the moment where it would've started would've been more popular to wargame.

From a wargaming perspective, it is indeed a good and perfectly understandable decision to create a wargame for the most interesting period. From the perspective of historical accuracy, there are some issues with that approach that wargames based on actual wars don't suffer from.

< Message edited by ComradeP -- 11/3/2013 6:46:01 AM >

_____________________________

SSG tester
WitE Alpha tester
Panzer Corps Beta tester
Unity of Command scenario designer

(in reply to Rocko911)

Post #: 81

RE: The Direction of the FPC series - 11/3/2013 12:42:28 PM

Hexagon

Posts: 1133
Joined: 6/14/2009
Status: offline

Well, we need think in 3 diferent periods, WWII, post WWII and WWIII, here we have hystorical and non hystorical and in a diferent position i put what ifs.

why not release historical game with what ifs??? for example in WWII the not very well covered battle for Berlin with a what if where soviets attack allies after fall Berlin and we can see UK+USA+German kampgruppes or Korea 50 with Korea 1985/1989 but maybe maybe i think is better separate real Korea from WWIII becuase Korea 50 needs WWII scale of 200-250m over the modern scale of 500m.

Maybe we need see first some game patches to fix and improve the actual game and at least a pair of DLCs to complete Red Storm, after this... well, if they are very open in their options why not present a serie of options and see what has better acceptation... and of course, why not release a beta-test scenario in a WWII engine version??? something to test how works in this era... could be historical or not, only a test version.

(in reply to ComradeP)

Post #: 82

RE: The Direction of the FPC series - 11/3/2013 1:13:53 PM

Mad Russian

Posts: 13256
Joined: 3/16/2008
From: Texas
Status: offline

What we were looking at was actually in terms of decades.

40's, 50's, 60's 70's, 80's, 90's, 00's, 10's, etc.

This would allow us to concentrate on at least one major war/theater in each of these decades and once those were done it would be easy to add anything else that happened in that time period.

If you think in those terms all that is missing for 2 Gulf Wars are the maps. The war's themselves have the equipment and TO&E's in place for the most part.

Good Hunting.

MR

_____________________________

(in reply to Hexagon)

Post #: 83

RE: The Direction of the FPC series - 11/3/2013 3:34:09 PM

garymiboy

Posts: 56
Joined: 6/29/2006
From: West Yorkshire
Status: offline

hi guys,

i just recently added this game to my large collection of wargames although not especially a fan of "cold war"games.just due to the fact that they are mainly "what if". and im just talking about the period and area this game is set in...but,i was playing another great game in the john tillers campaign series [my most played game ever.had it since release].and just the sheer volume of battles/campaigns are amazing.anyway, i thought "this game would be brilliant with the FC:RS game engine.so mant battles etc already in place... the good thing about factual wars is the easy access to genuine information..which obviously isnt there with the "what if" games.and ww2 games do sell due to the factual side of things.

im not taking anything away from this era the game is set in. i think its a truly great game.and definitely top 5 in my war games. but game engine wise id say probably at the top !!.

just my opinion added in to the mix.

(in reply to Mad Russian)

Post #: 84

RE: The Direction of the FPC series - 11/4/2013 4:23:56 PM

grant1pa

Posts: 8
Joined: 10/26/2013
Status: offline

That's exactly what I would like to see. For those of us more "seasoned" (meaning...old), it affords an opportunity to explore this genre into the times we lived through.

One additional note. Being weened on the old board and chit games and an avid student of military history, I'd love to see this engine adapted to the rich historical background of the Arab/Israeli conflicts.

Thanks for a great diversion to the trials and travails of day to day life!

Tom

quote:

One thing we would like to do is possibly do the scenario set in different time frames. Do nothing to them but replace the current equipment structures and see how the different time periods would play out.

For example, A Time To Dance in 1960, 1965, 1975, 1982, 1985, etc. and the same for the rest of the scenarios.

The list of things this engine could do is limited only by our time and the communities willingness to support it.

(in reply to tide1530)

Post #: 85

RE: The Direction of the FPC series - 11/5/2013 3:34:09 AM

bluth

Posts: 21
Joined: 10/27/2013
Status: offline

Definitly Vietnam, the scale seems perfect for it

(in reply to grant1pa)

Post #: 86

RE: The Direction of the FPC series - 11/6/2013 2:19:41 AM

governato

Posts: 1079
Joined: 5/6/2011
From: Seattle, WA
Status: offline

My preference would go for

- 1973 Yom Kippur War

- East Front Summer '41

- France 1940

They 'd all highlight the importance of C&C and coordination between the various branches.

Btw, Summer 1941 in Russia was not an one sided fight, the Red Army counterattacks in the AGS and AGC sectors were intense and did not work out only because of lack of unit cohesion and poor tank tactics. All three scenarios would put the players
in the classic 'I am sure I can do better than those poor sods', to discover that it wasn't actually that easy with no air cover, or radios or if your Division HQ had suddenly been strafed...

And of course, playing the IDF side on the Golan Heights would be pretty epic.

Great game with a lot of potential!

(in reply to bluth)

Post #: 87

RE: The Direction of the FPC series - 11/6/2013 10:49:28 AM

Hexagon

Posts: 1133
Joined: 6/14/2009
Status: offline

I prefer to see a historical module with the wars in middle east... for me is better join in same title 67-73 wars to have all the options in nations and situations (we have both sides in attack and in defense) and as DLCs i think in Lebanon 1982+ the 1956 war (here we have a WWII war with France and UK to) but here all depends what want do on target... i refer to module price and size, if they release middle east module for lets see 20 euros with only one of the main wars (1967 or 1973) and DLCs of 15... but again, here they need take a decision like if we need Flashpoint to install the new modules or any module is stand alone.

Other point is they here can play with what if scens/campaigns... i think in soviet or/and USA intervention, this is an interesting thing i find in Tiller title for middle east, is a way to add more value to the module.

After release the historical modern module... maybe i prefer see more modern modules exploring Flashpoint situations in other fronts, i think in a "Dragon rise" module with China attacking Taiwan, Japan and Korea for example or a Module covering the Nato South front... what do Turkey, Greece... we can see them fighting together WP or one of them join to WP and the old enemies fight again

But this is all a castle in the air, first we need see some patches to fix game and see the first DLC, if i dont remember bad add East Germany, Poland, France and... Canada?

(in reply to governato)

Post #: 88

RE: The Direction of the FPC series - 11/6/2013 10:08:03 PM

Dorb

Posts: 371
Joined: 10/8/2013
From: Ohio
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Radagy

Six Days War and Kippur War above all. Then Korea, Falklands, Iran-Iraq.
Desert Storm could too much unbalanced. I wonder if this engine could support Vietnam War without a substantial makeup.
Interest in hypotetical future wars (US vs. rest of the world... Russia, China, Iran and so on. ) just to test brand new gear.
Absolutely no interest in hypothetical past wars, apart from NATO-WP.
Last and least, a WWII add on would be welcome.

Ditto!
I agree with every word.

(in reply to Radagy)

Post #: 89

RE: The Direction of the FPC series - 11/6/2013 10:11:47 PM

wodin

Posts: 10762
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: offline

@Radagy Vietnam has been discussed and I'm sure we will see it as the developers like the idea. We would need Heli insertions as a new feature. Plus actual men counted as casualties as it was all about the bodycount from the US side. Even if it's just chrome multiplying the dead Inf subunits by 30 (platoon size) and then giving the score at the end.

< Message edited by wodin -- 11/6/2013 11:13:16 PM >

_____________________________

My website

https://www.awargamersneedfulthings.co.uk/

(in reply to Dorb)

Post #: 90