Future Wargame sequel request.

Kangamangus
Corporal
Posts: 34
Joined: Thu 26 Jun 2014 17:36
Contact:

Future Wargame sequel request.

Postby Kangamangus » Wed 15 Jun 2016 08:12

I'm not sure if there are plans on setting or era, but I think a time period from 1990-2001 (Global War on Terror), could be very interesting. Hell, maybe even 1985-2010, cover conflicts in Latin America and the Russian wars in Chechnya and Georgia. Add African and Middle Eastern conflicts into the equation. I would also like to see the traditional REDFOR and BLUFOR factions not be as rigid and dictating gameplay. A scenario based on Russian and NATO troops working together in Kosovo, for example, could be a fresh change. The ability to play as Pact or NATO nations on the same side could be interesting. Plausible, after the fall of the Berlin Wall and Eastern European nations siding with NATO. International peace keeping missions could allow a number of Pact and NATO countries to work together.

Edited to add possible date inclusions.

User avatar
steppewolf
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 750
Joined: Mon 26 Aug 2013 10:38
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Contact:

Re: Future Wargame sequel request.

Postby steppewolf » Wed 15 Jun 2016 09:25

Most of the conflicts you mention might still be resurrected which may be an issue for Eugen as they avoid to go into areas who are still contentious between countries/territories (e.g. Middle East, Taiwan)

Also those were mostly low intensity conflicts. Kosovo or Chechnya won't have planes, SPGs, tanks and generally stuff for modern mechanized war so why you'd bother with such conflict? Wargame has a different time set, it's about Cold War and an alternate history so mixing Blufor with Redfor might create unbalance.

Kangamangus
Corporal
Posts: 34
Joined: Thu 26 Jun 2014 17:36
Contact:

Re: Future Wargame sequel request.

Postby Kangamangus » Thu 16 Jun 2016 10:03

No doubt, but shaking things up COULD be a fresh thing. You could still keep a solid BLUFOR-REDFOR setting, even for ranked.

Maybe some of those conflicts were low-intensity, but in fictional and alternate history, who's to say some of the factions didn't grow, rise, or gain momentum? What if Chechen separatists were joined by large portions of the Russian military? With the 'what ifs', you have a lot more options available.

I do understand the political sensitivity issue, but Eugen didn't let that affect the story for Act of Aggression.

User avatar
molnibalage
General
Posts: 6490
Joined: Thu 1 Aug 2013 22:54
Location: Hungary
Contact:

Re: Future Wargame sequel request.

Postby molnibalage » Thu 16 Jun 2016 10:57

Kangamangus wrote:I'm not sure if there are plans on setting or era, but I think a time period from 1990-2001 (Global War on Terror), could be very interesting.

It would be totally boring. In war of terror how many mechanized brigade or regiment fought against simily units? WG models massive non nuclear wars. So for it the best timeframe is Cold War. One of the biggest error in WG:RD was the era extension even up to later than 2000 units for aircraft instead using era tags as for infantry...

Hell, maybe even 1985-2010, cover conflicts in Latin America and the Russian wars in Chechnya and Georgia.

See above. Cold War is the best playground.

User avatar
James Gastovski
Master Sergeant
Posts: 158
Joined: Thu 14 Jan 2016 14:42
Contact:

Re: Future Wargame sequel request.

Postby James Gastovski » Fri 24 Jun 2016 10:18

I would prefer to go back in time instead of forward. WW2 would be cool, 1955-1965 cold war would be even cooler.
“With her as our commander in chief, our international relations will not be reduced to a business transaction. Our armed forces will not become an instrument of torture, and they will not be ordered to engage in murder or other illegal activities.”

User avatar
molnibalage
General
Posts: 6490
Joined: Thu 1 Aug 2013 22:54
Location: Hungary
Contact:

Re: Future Wargame sequel request.

Postby molnibalage » Fri 24 Jun 2016 10:55

James Gastovski wrote:I would prefer to go back in time instead of forward. WW2 would be cool, 1955-1965 cold war would be even cooler.

In case WW2 it would be totally over modeled the environment. In WW2 you did not had such deep radio connectino and as fast recon update what you can see in WG:RD.

ALB choosed perfectly the tiemframe. This is what was screwed by RD combining with insane modeling values.

User avatar
James Gastovski
Master Sergeant
Posts: 158
Joined: Thu 14 Jan 2016 14:42
Contact:

Re: Future Wargame sequel request.

Postby James Gastovski » Fri 24 Jun 2016 11:41

Well to that point, I'd be perfectly fine with another 1980s Wargame, but if it actually really stayed to the 1980s and kept an authentic cold war feel.

What we have now is a shapeless, souless mess of a lot of irrelevant countries with overpowered rosters full of stuff from the late 90s or even early 2000s.
“With her as our commander in chief, our international relations will not be reduced to a business transaction. Our armed forces will not become an instrument of torture, and they will not be ordered to engage in murder or other illegal activities.”

Kangamangus
Corporal
Posts: 34
Joined: Thu 26 Jun 2014 17:36
Contact:

Re: Future Wargame sequel request.

Postby Kangamangus » Thu 6 Oct 2016 09:59

molnibalage wrote:
Kangamangus wrote:I'm not sure if there are plans on setting or era, but I think a time period from 1990-2001 (Global War on Terror), could be very interesting.

It would be totally boring. In war of terror how many mechanized brigade or regiment fought against simily units? WG models massive non nuclear wars. So for it the best timeframe is Cold War. One of the biggest error in WG:RD was the era extension even up to later than 2000 units for aircraft instead using era tags as for infantry...

Hell, maybe even 1985-2010, cover conflicts in Latin America and the Russian wars in Chechnya and Georgia.

See above. Cold War is the best playground.



Except there were never massive conventional battles between many of the nations involved. The campaign scenarios were still based on 'what ifs.' Your lack of imagination is handicapping potential variety and fresh gameplay.

User avatar
steppewolf
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 750
Joined: Mon 26 Aug 2013 10:38
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Contact:

Re: Future Wargame sequel request.

Postby steppewolf » Thu 6 Oct 2016 10:27

Kangamangus wrote:Your lack of imagination is handicapping potential variety and fresh gameplay.


This is one of the most laughable things I read here. How the heck you can fit an engine based on mechanized warfare into war of terror with hunting individuals in caves beats me. Play a first person shooter if you lack the imagination to observe that current engine doesn't fit to what you suggest.

James Gastovski wrote:Well to that point, I'd be perfectly fine with another 1980s Wargame, but if it actually really stayed to the 1980s and kept an authentic cold war feel.


This !

User avatar
molnibalage
General
Posts: 6490
Joined: Thu 1 Aug 2013 22:54
Location: Hungary
Contact:

Re: Future Wargame sequel request.

Postby molnibalage » Thu 6 Oct 2016 10:46

steppewolf wrote:
Kangamangus wrote:Your lack of imagination is handicapping potential variety and fresh gameplay.


This is one of the most laughable things I read here. How the heck you can fit an engine based on mechanized warfare into war of terror with hunting individuals in caves beats me. Play a first person shooter if you lack the imagination to observe that current engine doesn't fit to what you suggest.


Exaclty.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest