dhhd
Posts: 45
Joined: 1/24/2016 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: JW I think it would be very interesting to do a game of this type where you could take on the role of an army group commander with not only superiors and subordinates but other army group commanders controlled by the AI. You would have to argue for your share of support, operate within your boundaries, or not, and succeed or fail based on the mission objectives given by your boss. And you might lose the game suddenly at any point by being relieved for failure to accomplish your mission. I know this would be more complex as far as programming, because you might encounter something like an order to immediately advance on Moscow as commander of AGC while AGS has lagged behind and your southern flank is completely exposed. Or you might be sitting at Smolensk with an open door to Moscow and be told to defend in place. What do you do? Ignore the orders? Reconnaissance in force? Etc. Or take on the role of Bradley or Montgomery in the West. Etc. It would be obviously much more complex to design but would be really fascinating to play. That would be very interesting. Arguing over resources, having to strike a balance between your force doing the important stuff (have to get those promotions and glory in the history books, after all) and your force getting ground down by doing too much important stuff, etc. Pretending you didn't get orders ("what's that, sir? I'm sorry, you're breaking up. You want us to pull back? I can't hear you, there's lots of static. Confirm, we are pulling back" [make static noise for a minute, hang up]). Being able to harangue staff officers into getting what you want in the short term, but they dislike you afterwards and you only have so much goodwill to burn. Having a heart attack because you're a general in his 50s or 60s who's been working 20-hour days and living on cigarettes (more than one German general had a heart attack during the war, and one or two died).
|