And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

Hello,
Now that we've WinSPWW2 things can look "over", that is will there be future versions of the game ?
Although there's been a looong way since original SP and the first Camo efforts, there are still mcuh to do to approach "perfectness" if that is ever possible.

I would like to list here gameplay changes that I think would be much welcome. Even if the interface could be enhanced also (formations setup screen, roster ..) the changes would not have a big impact on the game.

Here is my list with priorities http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif
1/ Defensive fire enhancements ! This one is the most important IMHO, it's really sad to see how the units waste their def fire on useless targets - the range can be set but not anything else... I don't like the way SPWAW handle that, the process of "validating" each fire is painful and only helps the player vs the AI. What I suggest would be to be able to set different reaction ranges for different types of targets - lt unarmored vehicles, lt armor (HT and lt tanks), med-hvy armor, guns, infantry...
This should be settable in the scenario design si the IA would use whatever the designer set.

2/ More flexible/varied victory conditions : points multipliers for losses (to represent human waste or safekeep considerations), points for exiting units, "sudden death" conditions, cumulative points for objectives, ..

3/ Solution to the "smoke" problem, I really can"t understand why every squad and its mother can create impenetrable screens for a full hectare (4 hexes worth..). Even for artillery it should be toned down, smoke should only reduce visibility/give negative modifiers and not totally allow units to disappear

4/ A more sensible rout algorithm, with units going away from the enemy and not straight in a given direction.

5/ I don't know if it's even doable, but a "formation activation" system would be great. The idea is to have formations make an "activation check" according to leader quality an C&C status, with failed checks giving reduced movement allowance and/or fewer shots. even greater would be a real "initiative" system, at least for each player (ie having to play formations in a precise order rather than each unit as we want).

Well, that's my ideas, I hope some would share them or at least discuss them http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

1) Armoured Trains http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

2) An end to having to chase down every last pissant spaehtruppe, panzerbusche and scharfschutze, or their size 0/1 equivalents in other nations, to prevent them from snatching victory hexes moments before game end. All too often one of these "ghosts" snatches up a couple of hexes, usually deep in my end zone, then bang, the game ends. I wind up with a marginal or draw when all that's left of the enemy is two men and a dog.

PDF:
1) 4 target types with 4 possible weapon slots gives 16 possible range settings for each unit - that's a lot of overhead for both players and the game. Strip it to "soft" and "armoured" target types and it might be workable.

2)I agree, see my 2)above.

3)I agree that it is absurd that a few grenades completely block sight lines from the ground up to the "sky" though it's justifiable for the big guns. I see non-artillery smoke as more of a user initiated "break contact" device than actual smoke so I like the way it is handled now. I would accept a "go to ground" or "take cover from fire from that direction" button.

4) I agree

5) I disagree, while a nice piece of chrome, the current morale settings adequately handicap nations with poor command and control.

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

More Units! More Icons! More Scenarios!

(and refinement of the current game play systems; look at how they've added in reversing, and have been playing around with the infantry combat code)

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

Hello!

You may want to visit this thread and read my proposal. If you agree please make yourself heared. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

The link:
http://www.shrapnelcommunity.com/thr...o=&fpart=1

Artur.

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

What I want is to have option for faster sound, or some way ignoring secondary sounds for multiple shots - turns taking a lot of time now, while all the sounds for each shot played.

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

I'm with you here man ! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...es/biggrin.gif
In the last SPWinMBT game I played (solo scen as South Afr vs Angola) I was totally mad at seeing my guys wasting all their precious RPG/Zook ammo (can't remember what weapon exactly) on OP fire at enemy infantry at extreme weapon range ! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/mad.gif
Sure here I should have "disabled" the weapon but forgot to, http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif
But in a recent WinSPWW2 games I had my Tigers wasting their OP fire at petty and dangerless SMG infantry dangling around T-34s at 4-500m range so when the T-34s moved/fired the Tigers had no OP fire left..*That's* the real issue !

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams) *DELETED*
 

Post deleted by baggypants

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

Really like the VP idea, knowing the enemy is coming, but not exactly what their focus is.

A (possible?) simple one: Have an extra command to do all rallying for a unit at once (like Shift+R), rather than 1-umpteen button presses per unit.

Playing an infantry campaign right now and spend equal to twice as much time per turn pressing R for the units as actually playing the turn.

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

Preferences -> Auto Rally On

The only problem is that it doesn't always rally units in the most efficient manner - e.g. you want to rally that lowly bazooka team next to the Tiger but the AI wastes the A0 rallies on the B0 REMF supressed by a few mortar rounds.

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

Would be great if it were at the beginning rather than end of turn. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif Dunno what most do, but unless a unit has nothing worth shooting at and nowhere to go, I rally at the start to make that turns action more effective.

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

More BLOOD !!! it would be very cool if like for the vehicle when an entire foot unit or just a sniper is wiped out there would be a corpse lying on the ground. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/stupid.gif
It could in my humble opinion greatly improve the climax of the game.

cheers

Vincent

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

What a surprising comment from "Dracula"...

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

I am a more selective with the rally key. Each unit can rally itself until it fails then it goes to its commander for the next set of rally attempts and so on up to A0. I don't always want to rally a particular unit down to 1 especially if I have other troops in need. So I might rally a couple of retreating infantry down to pinned to hold them in place, then rally an engineer just to the point where he can use a satchel or FT on the bunker in front - and if he smokes the bunker, go back to the infantry and rally them untill they can move back into the line. Then if I haven't tapped out the B0 and A0, rally a routed crew so I can move him into cover and save him for the next battle.

I don't think a rally all button would allow the same degree of finesse - But then I may be misreading you. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams) *DELETED*
 

Post deleted by baggypants

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

Exactly what I'm wishing for Baggy, just a second option. The current R method for those situations requiring a bit more scrutiny, and the all in one go for when you just need to get it done to get the turn rolling.

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

Third version in series WinSPWWI 1890-1930
We have not many games about Great War

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

I'll second this one too. We have fast artillery, fast direct fire would be useful too - especially when running AI vs AI playtests.

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

Lots of interesting but little known fights going on in Europe between 1918 and 1930. Push it back another 30 years, perhaps in another series, and one could cover the American Civil war, the Crimean war, the Franco Prussian war, The Russo-Japanese war, the Boer War and the colonial exploits of Great Britain and other European powers.

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

I don't think the SP game system will be very good at simulating anything before the 30's - ie when the squad wasn't the basic tactical unit on the battlefield, and with few or no vehicles ...
I'd prefer other game engines for that.

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

A single "squad" icon can hold up to 255 men to make an ACW double company or half-regiment. This gives prototypical density and basic unit size. C&C and cohesion wouldn't be quite the same.

The real deal breaker is the AI pick-lists. While a purpose designed pre-1900 engine will be better than extending the SP one, there is still a very valid case for SPWWI and a lesser one for actions in earlier periods with wide spread use of repeating arms.

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

The game "Age of Rifles" covers the period 1840-1914 quite well, so I don't think a SP is needed. The SP-series don't have formations like line and column, wich you need for pre-WW1 stuff.

Halstein.

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

Age of rifles goes to 1914.... SPWWII starts at 1930 16 year gap of cool stuff... WWI, Russian Revolution, Mexican Revolution, expansion of Poland, German Freikorps exploits, same in Austria. All sorts of mayhem to recreate :-)

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

That all is right but when we start SPWWI in the year where first Maxim HMG vere interduced we have battles in the modern type. I hear that the wars in South Africa in 1899 was the first modern war in the style like during all XX century (First use of barbe wire and HMG). Than we can see a Balkan wars were first aircrafts and truck were used. Than the Great war and first tanks and heavy bombers on battlefield and for end civil war in russia what was with all modern toys like armored cars , aircrafts , tanks and was high manoeuvrable war like WWII. We can see too in this version some battles in civil war in china in 1920-30 and rusian-japan fight in china 1929.

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

All sounds great when can I pre-order :-)

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

Yes and of course the game had CORPSES on the battlefield when a unit is destroyed http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...es/biggrin.gif

I want corpses for sp series !!! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/stupid.gif

Cheers

Vincent

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

Play the Great Battles ancients series if you want corpses. Men horses and Elephants - and they even float down stream if they get killed in a river. If things get too gory, there is even a "clear corpses" button - the Romano-Greek version of bulldozers and lime wagons.

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

Lol yes I know this game too but under xp its mission impossible to run it. Its not a question of gore but if you take for example Age of rifle or the Xcom series or even combat mission there are bodies of the fallen so why not in sp series ? After all we are not playing a mario game where the target flashes and then poof disapears http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif
The wrecks of the vehicules proove that this can be done also for "soft" target and we could even include a supression factor for units near corpses (the view of death always demoralize).

Cheers

Vincent

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

I'm beginning to wonder if your last name isn't Price... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

At ground scale, one body is 2 pixels, at vehicle scale, 13 so not much more than greasy smears.http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/Sick.gif

While an interesting piece of chrome for some, not too high on my wish list.

The morale effects of nearby unit destruction can, and may already, be built in to the code.

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

Selectable entry sides for north south battles rather than east west. I realize that the board direction is arbitrary, but the armoured trains look better when running east west.http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/eek.gif

It would also allow flank battles where one side attacks the others north-south defensive line from the bottom.

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

Rather childish query, if you want corpses you should find better than SP series. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif

Plus GB series works correctly under xp once you set it on Win95 compatibility mode. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/cool.gif

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

I have XP, and run Age of Rifles. Had to do a bit of hacking to make it work, but noting advanced. However, I think the SP-series could be pressed back to 1900, but not much further. Earlier formations were all important.

Halstein.

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

Rather childish query, if you want corpses you should find better than SP series.

Combat mission, Age of rifles and age of wonder etc... all these games have corpses so it makes them childish ? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif

As I say to patG its not about gore bur more for the "feeling" of a TRUE battle.

Cheers

Vincent

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

At ground scale, one body is 2 pixels, at vehicle scale, 13 so not much more than greasy smears.

Of course when I said corpses I think of "generic" corpses like one corpses to figure the distruction of an entire squad like in combat mission and of course not 12 corpses for a squad... here is a little sample (not my work) of what it could be looks like http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smile.gif

Cheers

Vincent

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

I'd like to see a Arid terrain type for the editor.

A mix of dead and green trees, Default hexes are like the bare earth ones (Perhaps a bit more grass?), Yellow high grass year round instead of just in the winter and muddy water which could also be used in the Jungle terrain setting because South-East Asia does not look that good when the Mekong Delta is bright blue instead of the color of mud.

Edit:
Also, Is a toggle for Engineer squads so they don't clear mines possible?

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

Sorry I'm a bit late for this, but your point number 3 isn't really a point as I see it. Let me explain. Sure it's nor accurate that the smoke is an inpenetrable shield but then again look at SPWAW if you're aware of it. In SPWAW it's truly pathetic, as the smoke, any "one" puff of smoke, that is, can last upwards beyond 8 TURNS!!! At least the timing of winSPWW2 smoke is very realistic. The accuracy that this smoke covers a spot for one turn or two at maximum length is truly a playing wonder compared to the aforementioned.

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

Well, that's smoke is totally ridiculous in SPWAW ain't an excuse for it being still overpowered in SPWin !
Talking about SPWAW I was just playing the Eagles MC and could assault a bunker 6 times a turn with an squad, pretty gamey isn't it ? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...es/biggrin.gif

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

Ah, good, I had not noticed the difference in the two assault treatments since you mentioned that.

It would seem the only way you could to some degree solve the smoke wall would be to have either smoke that sometimes failed or have a variety of smoke that would allow to be seen through, but would cut accuracy maybe 50%. If you really want to get technical you could perhaps make a new kind of smoke that was a visual wall (what we have now) but that could only be fired by certain ground units (smoke pots). I suppose with such a smoke it would have to be set off in the hex the unit is in, and it's duration would be somewhat longer than what we have now.

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

I'd like to see a % chance of an immobile vehicle effecting repairs if not in combat and due to bogging down not hits nothing is more annoying than having a vehicle bog down miles from anywhere and sit there doing nothing

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

You can see through smoke guys. If the visibility is high and you're close to it you can sometimes see through the smoke and not just the 'partial' dissolving smoke but full smoke hexes too.

Also, smoke is NOT an impenetrable screen. You can fire through it using area fire.

And concerning the smokepots Carles22 mentioned; why would these have to be set oof in a units own hex? A unit can use antitank mines, satchel charges, magnetic grenades, etc from adjacent hexes. These are hardly things you can throw 50 metres at a hard target. So if these can be used in an adjacent hex it only makes sense to have the same apply to 'smoke pots'. Which gives you exactly what the game has now. The real question is whether maybe too many (infantry type) units carry smoke and too much of it?

Narwan

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

Agreed Narwan, I think the simplest fix would be to just remove any smoke ability to infantry (except engineers/pioneers and so on).

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

Yes, well it's somehwat a bit silly to always assume that the weapon of choice can reach into the next hex, but that is how the game is designed it seems. It seems a stronger case could be made that the unit isn't always on the edge of two different hexes, and thereby shouldn't always be abel to pull that off. Also, since you don't throw smokepots in particular, even if you can reachinto the next hex with them, then the next turn should see them in that same hex, since they had to enter it to lay it down.

Figure this one out. Apparently the game plays to where the unit is on all six edges at the same time. How do I know that? Because the unit can use the range 1 weapon on any of those 6 bordering hexes. Apparently, the unit is in all six places at once but is never in the middle, which of course if it were would dis-allow the use of smokepots into other hexes, assuming there were smokepots. Foe some reason I always believed the unit was in the middle, and since some of the range 1 weapons are thrown beyond the mid-point of a hex, then they made it range 1 for that reason, but at the same time I knew they made it range 1 also for the sake of saying the unit was at the edge possibly. In reality, the only way it plays that makes any sense, is you have all the guys in the unit spread out throughout the hex, with at least all six edges covered. With that in mind if they went down to less than six men then apparently they shouldn't be able to use range 1 weapons on all 6 hexes therefore, but then I'm sure the game didn't get that technical about it. I guess that's roughly handled by units losing so many men that a point comes where all weapons aren't useable (unless a specific weapon is selected by the user for an attack).

I think I hurt my brain with all that thinking http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...es/Injured.gif

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

I'd like to see "fast shooting" option, the same as "fast artillery" which alraedy in game. With dozens of units on the screen, each shooting two or three weapons several times and some rounds ricochetting turn takes forever.

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

Turning animations down in the preferences panel can help speed things up.

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

a few long-time wishes...
1. smoke...
a.limit smoke "altitude"...e.g. smoke fired into a valley should not block visibility across the valley from hilltop to hilltop.
b. i agree with previous posters that the "infantry smoke" is way over the top. it should be used as e.g. a same-hex "break contact" tool

2. some kind of logical/reasonable retreat algorithm; the berserker "home-side dash" really inhibits maneuver particularly for para units, recce types etc. this would help the AI enormously too.
a. away from fire
b. into cover

3. a USABLE user-friendly waypoint system (maybe a "human only" version?) that permits reasonable/logical control and removes the necessity of moving every cotton pickin' unit "by hand". One can spend hours doing approach movement on large scenarios:

a. waypoints STAY where placed until reached
b. waypoints can be moved (to remove the necessity of deleting all waypoints and then redefining them)
c. no interaction with objective hexes; just move where ordered

a lot of other nifty stuff could be added (formation maintainance, road march specification etc.) but just the three points above would make life a lot simpler and gameplay faster.

4. my habitual complaints about artillery (indirect) fire:
a. the "scatter" is goofy; doesn't appear to have any relationship to distance from firing unit, doesn't appear to vary by weapon type (e.g. 50mm mortars with a 10 hex range should be able to pound a selected/registered hex AT WILL with MINIMAL deviation.), fire called reasonably close (5 or so hexes?) to the "spotting" unit should NOT have accuracy penalized for no LOS...one can HEAR where the stuff is falling...especially the "shorts"...lol.

>>>>in the short term why not have (in addition to the "artillery effectiveness" preference) an artillery ACCURACY preference so the user can tighten up scatter/drift if desired?<<<<<

my guess is artillery is the way it is to "protect" the AI from "human advantage".

5. a reasonable "extra ammo" purchase/resupply routine. these ammo units with infinite supplies of every caliber/type of ammo are the pits, maybe:

a. purchase ammo "containers" with fixed number of rounds for warhead size and type (e.g. 50 rounds, size 3, HE). these "containers" would be transportable and could be "dropped off" where required. separate "types" would cure the problem e.g. of tanks having to fill up on HE before getting any AP rounds. "no sir, i know those T-34's are rolling down on us but i can't give you any AP until you have the HE ammo topped off first."

b. reload fexibility by weapon slot. 2 tube mortar units (with both tubes obviously within less than 50yds/m of each other) must have tube 1 completely reloaded before tube 2 gets any ammo?

c. units should reload faster BUT can't fire and reload simultaneously. (if the crew is humping ammo from a truck/container who is firing the weapon?)

there is a big difference bewteen dropping off cases of ammo for say mortar crews as opposed to stowing ammo aboard a tank. reload speed should be also dependant on unit class. faster for infantry/arty and slower for vehicles.

one selects a "reload" option (costs you all your "shots") for your unit and then specify (if ammo resupply is close enough) size, type, number of rounds (maybe in increments defined by warhead size? the larger the WH the smaller the number of rounds) and weapon slot to be reloaded. [might be more workable codewise to require the selection of the "ammo container" unit first and then "direct" resupply to the appropriate (warhead size/type) adjacent firing unit. whatever.]

6. air units; specify target area and target type (leg, emplacement/structure, vehicle) and let the pilots do their thing.

7. lastly (but definitely not least)...lethality. the "infantry toughness" preference helps some but it's still way out of hand. the casualties inflicted by rifle fire (especially bolt-action types) are ludicrous. the big casualty producers were by far fragmentation and automatic weapons fire. infantry moves slowly, in cover and moves adjacent to an enemy unit and suffers 40% casualties before it can get off a shot? (it plays like the squad is advancing line abreast a la the napoleonic era rather than short rushes by individuals/small groups using benefit of cover.) the "infantry toughness" preference (as far as i can tell) makes infantry "tougher" against everything. infantry needs to be much more susceptible to frag (especially in the open) and much LESS vulnerable to small arms fire. historically the way infantry units got shot to pieces was to get pinned in the open and then mortared/shelled.

it seems to me the "tank" portion (vehicle vs. vehicle) of the game is pretty good. i think it's fairly clear that's what the original design was aimed at and the rest of the stuff (infantry, arty etc.) was kind of shoe-horned in as an extra. the camo guys have done marvellously well given what they had to start with and an uncompensated, volunteer force. (princes among men!) if not a single change is made ever again it's still a damn fine effort and only the "continuous improvement" addicts like me out there would push for more.

the AI is a whole different subject. significant improvement there would likely entail a ground-up redesign and changes to much more than just the AI portion of the code.

best,
vic

Re: And now ? (WinSP dreams)
 

Infantry smoke should only put out a thin cloud on the first turn, and a thick(er) one the second. Then thin, then gone. And yeah, a smoke height would be nice. Then again...

Real height. Level 1, 5, 20, etc... I now it's aggregate, but if AP loses Pen from distance, and all these angles are taken into account, can't hex height and slope be standardized? This would allow for tree/building height, more accurate movement uphill (Want to go from level 0 to level 50 in 2 hexes? Too steep, try another path.), etc. etc.

Units' placement, like everything, is an aggregate. The unit could be anywhere in the hex. If you need to pin down exactly where it is, try Combat Mission. I guess I should say that to myself on the above.

And yes, planes need a crapload of work. At least the option to target area or unit, and if it can't find a unit then don't fire.