spww2 warzone (ideas for the nextgen)

[Souljah]

Hi everyone reading this! I'm a big fan of this game, and I'm thinking about things, what could improve the gameplay. I'm not try to tell what the guys at C.W should do... but maybe they think them through. At the begining of a battle, there should be an option. We could change the game scale from big(frontline for example) to small(knockout the AA for example). I think there should be no big work with that, but the veterans at C.W. know this more than I.

1. - Speacial Ops

The game could simulate infiltration, longreckon etc.. For example: The german Brandenburg commandos or the British SAS. At the deployment screen the player could decide where he wants this units to start behind enemy lines.

2. - Special orders

Irregular units (like engineering units, commandos etc.) should have some ability at their disposal. Like destroying bulidings, bridges etc. I think this feature would add some nem aspect to the game. There could be small scale missions like "destroy the targetbuilding" or "Knock out the AAguns" or something like that. This gamemode would be played with a smaller army (like paratroops, marines etc.)

3. - Control the air space

The game could simulate the airspace at the battlescene. At the start of a battle, the player could change, who controls the airspace. This means, who got more airpower and whos airstrike will arrive more chance.

I hope you will understand what I try to say, but my grammer is not so good

[Imp]

1) More suited to scenerio design or PBEM as huge amount of work vs AI. Every nation would need another pick list well 2 actually depending on whether its the target or infiltrator.

2) Bridges in this game> firstly all can support heavy armour so if any change most tanks should not be able to use wooden ones which we shall assume are "light bridges" not wooden. Satchel charges can already destroy them though its a bit hit & miss but it should be its a specialist job. Bridges really require charges to be placed carefully on the structure to take it down, a job which takes considerable time before retiring to a safe distance & pressing the plunger.
The AI would not know the diffrence between destroy & capture for buildings etc. For PBEM set building or whatever as objective turn off your units satchel charges so he does not use them & use against the building on a turn you start stationary to it, easy enough for other player to verify can have a rule 2 used in a hex is destroyed even if isnt. If know the other player can do better with rule where by eng retires to 4 hexes away after visiting & blows.

3) Already done if set to XXX for both sides only diffrence it simulated it before arrive over the battle so thats the air you can have. Again can have own rules as in use as normal or if that side has air supperiority has flights on call rather than assigned to you. These want a quick turn around to rearm & go out so can only be used for 2 passes which must happen within 4 turns of each other

[Souljah]

The mission type games would be directed in a new system.

I guess abilitys would improve the game in a positive way. The battlefield cries out for Speacial Ops! Units like Skorzenys commando were a big threat at the battlefield (the player should be able, to disguise his commandos, which would be interesting in PBEM games)

Aircombat:

I was thinking about the idea I had sometime ago. When a player buys bombers, his/hers enemy could buy fighter planes to dogfight (they would be like offmap artilery) I know the game concentrates on groundfighting, but it would be awesome, to be able to organize the airoffensive

PreCombat intelligence:

The players could get some reports (its accuracy will be decided as the players sets the value) before the battle, about enemy positions

I almost forgot... COMMANDING UNITS! Like commandcars, commanders etc. This would give the player the ability, to create his own companys (specialy good for people, who wants to have an irregular army)

I don't understand the picklist what do you mean by that? I think the list which is currently in the game is perfect. The player should decide which units suits the job he been assigned to.

If I generate a campaign, it should make a random decision about the missiontype. I only started with meeting engagements. A randomizer should be implented

[PatG]

1) Special Ops

Already dealt with in the Scenario Editor. VP values for hexes and units can be adjusted to simulate all kinds of interesting missions. I believe the Bruneval Raid is in one scenario and an SAS airfiled raid would be simple to set up.

2) Special Orders

See above. Take your flak guns and increase their point value so high so that destroying them determines the out come of the game. Buildings and bridges are a little more abstract but again put a stack of very high value VP hexes on the target and controlling it becomes the focus of the game.

3) Sorry but no. If I want to play an air game then that is what I will do.

Pre-Combat Intelligence.

You already have this. Meeting engagement - both forces about equal. Assault - assaulter 3x more units but defender dug in. As for more detailed intelligence, player experience and the encyclopedia come into it. Fighting the early war Japanese you are going to be faced with lots of tough to kill infantry with crap tanks so leave your AT guns at home and stock up on arty.

[Souljah]

Originally Posted by PatG

1) Special Ops

Already dealt with in the Scenario Editor. VP values for hexes and units can be adjusted to simulate all kinds of interesting missions. I believe the Bruneval Raid is in one scenario and an SAS airfiled raid would be simple to set up.

2) Special Orders

See above. Take your flak guns and increase their point value so high so that destroying them determines the out come of the game. Buildings and bridges are a little more abstract but again put a stack of very high value VP hexes on the target and controlling it becomes the focus of the game.

3) Sorry but no. If I want to play an air game then that is what I will do.

Pre-Combat Intelligence.

You already have this. Meeting engagement - both forces about equal. Assault - assaulter 3x more units but defender dug in. As for more detailed intelligence, player experience and the encyclopedia come into it. Fighting the early war Japanese you are going to be faced with lots of tough to kill infantry with crap tanks so leave your AT guns at home and stock up on arty.

I guess the pilots should eject when they get shot down (at least they can try)

[Imp]

I guess the pilots should eject when they get shot down (at least they can try)

Think about the effect on the game, helos very very rare anyone survives a landing & is able to walk away. Plane assume he has a good eject & landing you now have 1 man with a pistol whats he going to do. At least normal crews have a few men for you to try & save & in a campaign sort of important but you cant have planes in your core.

I understand your desire for Spec Ops & the game designers are introducing new stuff that will be useful for but still realy need to do in PBEM or setup in the editor.

[PatG]

Originally Posted by Imp

Think about the effect on the game, helos very very rare anyone survives a landing & is able to walk away. Plane assume he has a good eject & landing you now have 1 man with a pistol whats he going to do. At least normal crews have a few men for you to try & save & in a campaign sort of important but you cant have planes in your core.

I understand your desire for Spec Ops & the game designers are introducing new stuff that will be useful for but still realy need to do in PBEM or setup in the editor.

The problem with spec ops is they really have to be setup in the editor. As for the ejecting pilot scenario, I can see setting up a Bridges at Toko Ri type game fairly easily but it would be in the context of just those few men fighting. I can't see the AI being able to do that in a larger game.

[Marek_Tucan]

Originally Posted by Imp

Plane assume he has a good eject & landing you now have 1 man with a pistol whats he going to do.

What's he going to do? Put his hands up in the air

Besides he lands God-only-knows-where, as his first reaction is usually to try to hold the plane in the air and try to get back behind his lines, and even if it's not possible, plane shot down at altitude can crash-land mayn kilometers away and the same applies for the parachuting pilot. Sometimes it may take hours and hundreds of kilometers for the plane to be abandoned. Moreover even if it is a low-level strike, the plane flies a while, if possible - because pilot wants to gain some altitude to bail out.

If there was anything I would change in the air strike section, it would be "attack profile" - to be similar to Helo ops, IE you can choose between a high-level (relatively) approach (better spotting, targeting etc. - or rather to say, current level) and low-level approach where the aircraft can be partially hidden from AAA by terrain, but OTOH there would be worse spoting, targeting and maybe a chance of crash, plus say more opportunities for light AAA. But this would be mostly useful in MBT, as it would be a way to avoid SAMs, and anyway would be too much coding for too little gain so not gonna happen

(oops... seems I have a literary streak this evening So many words...)

[Souljah]

What about the engenieers ability to remove obstacles? Could we make to be able to decide to remove something or not? It's really annoying, that my man is sitting in a trenchline, before them lays a big field of mines, and my soldier clears a way for the attacker I wish this would be fixed

And for the air... I think controlling the airspace is vital for the ground units... So I think development of the airfight is necessary. And for the bailing out... bombers don't run with only one pilot... they are also a crew.

Don't get me wrong, I don't want to be smarter than any of you. I just want to make this game as real as it can get

[Imp]

Agree clearing your own stuff is a problem but this is a very old game, pretty sure if it could be fixed it would have been. The AI on occasion clears its own stuff but you know to leave a one hex space so they dont so not realy a problem for you. Mines & wire are better placed a few hexes away from your troops so they are dealing with when you open up. Alternativly stager a bit with gaps & place your units to engage just after pass through. Now routing units run into them great fun.

Most people do not use bombers very often okay you could argue Stukas Sturmovicks etc 2 men but as said whats the point adds nothing to game play they would try & hide till can make ther way back or surrender.

This is a ground combat game as said previosly air is dealt with abstractly when set to XXX or by you if set number allowed, the games flexible like that its your call.
You want it to be real how often do you think air is intercepted over the battlefield?
WW1 no radar & yes can happen but WW2 they get engaged on the way to or from there strike most times dictated by best intercept vector or shot at by ground units at the target area, thats exactly what the game models which is far more realistic than your idea.