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: Operational vs Strategic vs Tactical

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> RE: Operational vs Strategic vs Tactical Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Operational vs Strategic vs Tactical - 1/9/2005 11:11:41 AM   
max_h

 

Posts: 187
Joined: 10/18/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sarge

Here is screen shot of the game that would wreck all of our social interaction








estimated playing time: 10 years!

(in reply to Sarge)
Post #: 31
RE: Operational vs Strategic vs Tactical - 1/9/2005 8:28:41 PM   
Reiryc

 

Posts: 4991
Joined: 1/5/2001
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: EricGuitarJames

It would be great RB. We discussed adding a campaign 'feature' to the next of the AA series but we ran into a couple of problems. Firstly, the sheer computing power required to run a campaign in 'real-time' is absolutely enormous! Secondly, although you can have a series of 'linked' battles as a way of getting around this, it makes it very linear and, imho, very unrealistic in the context of WW2. I know for others this is less of a problem.

I agree with what you say about CM, nowadays I only play online where the interaction with a good opponent is almost as much fun as the gameplay itself.


Just have a mission tree branch. It's still a bit linear, but the idea is that depending on how you did in the current battle, it determines which battle you go to next. Sort of like how cc1 did it.

_____________________________


(in reply to EricGuitarJames)
Post #: 32
RE: Operational vs Strategic vs Tactical - 1/10/2005 3:10:32 AM   
hank

 

Posts: 623
Joined: 8/24/2003
From: west tn
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe 98

In spite of the joke, I have had a dream for years.

In playing a operational game such as BIN ot TAOW or Avalon Hill's - Crusader/Stalingrad/America Invades. In each hex there is a battle and the outcome is based on a whole series of variables.

Imagine instead, you are transported to a game of Close Combat to play out the result at a tactical level, then transported back to the operational level.

In paractical terms, it would take waaaay tooooo long just to to play the campaign. Has anybody completed a PBEM game of the WITP campaign scenario?


I guess I would answer that question originally posted like this:

I play PzCampaigns, both modern battles (Fulda Gap) and WWII (Smolensk). I also play Battles in Normandy. How would you describe these two games?

I think BiN would be Operational/Strategic and PzC would be grand tactical ... IMHO. Is that the way you see it?

But, the reason I included Joe's comment is because that's my dream too. I would like to play a BiN type of game to make my decisions and commands; then hit a button to zoom into a view like you get with Rome Total War to watch the battle unfold. That would be awesome. ... and have the control to rotate, zoom, pan like in the old game, Ground Control, to see what's happening. I don't really want to be forced to command every battalion or company; I would rather the AI do the detailed work ... sort of how Highway to the Reich is ... which I also play.

For me that would be the ultimate war game.

hank

(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 33
RE: Operational vs Strategic vs Tactical - 1/10/2005 3:32:15 AM   
bostonrpgmania


Posts: 271
Joined: 9/14/2003
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: hank



But, the reason I included Joe's comment is because that's my dream too. I would like to play a BiN type of game to make my decisions and commands; then hit a button to zoom into a view like you get with Rome Total War to watch the battle unfold. That would be awesome. ... and have the control to rotate, zoom, pan like in the old game, Ground Control, to see what's happening. I don't really want to be forced to command every battalion or company; I would rather the AI do the detailed work ... sort of how Highway to the Reich is ... which I also play.

For me that would be the ultimate war game.

hank


Absolutely agreed

(in reply to hank)
Post #: 34
RE: Operational vs Strategic vs Tactical - 1/10/2005 3:35:56 AM   
Veldor


Posts: 1531
Joined: 12/29/2002
From: King's Landing
Status: offline
I've always felt you should be able to control meals in WiTP. Reward the best pilots with fancy feasts and extra shore leave. A little female companionship.

I'd also like to see the effect a machine gun jam might have had in that grand strategic game.

Isn't there a point where too much detail just ruins the game? I think too many wargames have already exceeded that threshold. If it ultimately cannot have an effect on the outcome of the game or the decisions made or strategies chosen/planned then why include it at all?

A combined Tactical/Operational/Strategic game would be just that for sure. A lot of pointless extra detail and complexity for no real benefit. Any perceived additional realism would be just that, a total illusion.

And likely far too many other elements, A.I. for one, would suffer enormously in such a game model.

It would be.. utterly unplayable.

_____________________________


(in reply to hank)
Post #: 35
RE: Operational vs Strategic vs Tactical - 1/10/2005 3:40:30 AM   
KG Erwin


Posts: 8981
Joined: 7/25/2000
From: Cross Lanes WV USA
Status: offline
Now, if one were to combine an operational -level game such as Korsun Pocket or TAO with tactical combat like CM or SPWaW, then this is closer to doable. The individual combats could be scaled-down proportionately to the forces involved in the tactical combat, a variation on the Rome/Medieval Total War system. In other words, a Panzer Regiment would be only a platoon for tactical resolution. It would still be abstract, but possible.

_____________________________


(in reply to hank)
Post #: 36
RE: Operational vs Strategic vs Tactical - 1/10/2005 3:49:55 AM   
Veldor


Posts: 1531
Joined: 12/29/2002
From: King's Landing
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

Now, if one were to combine an operational -level game such as Korsun Pocket or TAO with tactical combat like CM or SPWaW, then this is closer to doable. The individual combats could be scaled-down proportionately to the forces involved in the tactical combat, a variation on the Rome/Medieval Total War system. In other words, a Panzer Regiment would be only a platoon for tactical resolution. It would still be abstract, but possible.


Yeah but because of the abstraction you still wouldn't really be adding any realism. Just a different mechanic for combat resolution. In many cases it would probably unbalance the game entirely. Basically think quickly of the Axis & Allies RTS or even the old Archon, if your good enough at the lowest level of play, you can totally suck at the strategic portion, because you'll still win the tactical battles.

This doesn't mean games like this can't work. Just in my opinion you have to be careful that your not creating more of a "gimic" than anything else.

_____________________________


(in reply to KG Erwin)
Post #: 37
RE: Operational vs Strategic vs Tactical - 1/10/2005 1:50:20 PM   
Pippin


Posts: 1233
Joined: 11/9/2002
Status: offline
quote:

Basically think quickly of the Axis & Allies RTS


YUK! That A&A rts is not A&A by any means. I am not sure what they were thinking when someone came up with that title/idea.

_____________________________

Nelson stood on deck and observed as the last of the Spanish fleets sank below the waves…

(in reply to Veldor)
Post #: 38
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> RE: Operational vs Strategic vs Tactical Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





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
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.719