European Escalation

User avatar
Flieger
Lieutenant General
Posts: 4294
Joined: Fri 15 Mar 2013 19:44
Contact:

Re: European Escalation

Postby Flieger » Fri 20 Mar 2015 15:53

EE started Wargame for me, so there is a lot nostalgia involved. But I think ALB and RD, despite their unnecessary flaws, are still far better games.

What EE has going for it, is the optics indeed. I also do not know why, but it looks more realistic although its graphics are objectively worse.
The timeframe and the very limited prototype count are great, too. (I said it before and say it again: going to Asia was a grave mistake, as it required the extension of the timeframe into what is almost modern time with all its woes).

User avatar
Gronank
Colonel
Posts: 2510
Joined: Tue 8 Nov 2011 23:40
Contact:

Re: European Escalation

Postby Gronank » Fri 20 Mar 2015 16:58

I think that European escalation was a good start but that the series since has deviated from what I would have liked to see. Essentially, the series has developed into too much unit porn. It has become games about selecting units, not about using them in thematically appropriate ways.

Also, the map design. I think the basic problem with the maps is that they have grown "too interesting". The maps in WEE was a field, few hills and a couple of forests. The maps didn't dictate how they were played. Compare with later maps with impassible mountains and rivers. While undoubtedly interesting to look at, they weren't very interesting to play because of the specialness of the features dictated too much the best way to play them.

But I think that this leaves room for another wargame down the line. A game where you pick "the tank" instead of choosing one of 15 but where the game variety instead comes from more "scenario" type game play rather than generic meeting engagements. Oh, and I don't care if the maps are thoroughly devoid of any artistic value, as long as they don't makes the players choices for them. The maps could be fractals for what I care.
Image
That would make a nice "broken woodlands" map á la fulda gap, wouldn't it?
Image

Iris
Brigadier
Posts: 3421
Joined: Tue 14 May 2013 00:41

Re: European Escalation

Postby Iris » Fri 20 Mar 2015 18:14

Killertomato wrote:
- salvo reloading time before shooting at anything (i.e unit need to pause for a reload + aiming period -0.2 s-), no more idiotic kiting, you 've got to think through before commiting your units cause they could get destroy aeons before being able to shoot.


I've always wondered why Eugen didn't make engagement times different, as well as acc, stabs, AP and range.

Mr. Ivan Boroff IV in his T-80UM will be able to engage more quickly than Mr. Ivan Boroff I in his T-34/85.


Mr. Ivan Boroff IV in his T-80UM is actually able to engage targets more quickly than Mr. Ivan Boroff I in his T-34/85. Boroff I is able to rotate his turret at the speed of 0.5235988 Eugen Values, but Boroff IV can rotate his turret at the speed of 0.8726646 Eugen values. Also because of Boroff IV's superior training he can rotate his turret at the speed of 1.04719752 Eugen Values.

This means that Boroff IV in his T-80UM is 1.9999998x faster at turning his turret to engage capitalist dogs than his great-grandfather in the T-34.

Also Eugen it is absolutely criminal and completely unacceptable that the AMX-30B from 1971 rotates his turret 24.99%-45% faster than an M1A2 from 1992. I have outed your disgusting French bias lies and treachery.
Image

(All the values I just mentioned are actually in the game files, and the M1A2 is probably an oversight/flavor instead of an actual case of documented French bias because all tanks in his class have the same rotation speed except him.)

kanesoban
Sergeant Major of the Army
Posts: 356
Joined: Sun 2 Jun 2013 16:12
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Contact:

Re: European Escalation

Postby kanesoban » Sat 21 Mar 2015 00:53

Gronank wrote:I think that European escalation was a good start but that the series since has deviated from what I would have liked to see. Essentially, the series has developed into too much unit porn. It has become games about selecting units, not about using them in thematically appropriate ways.

Also, the map design. I think the basic problem with the maps is that they have grown "too interesting". The maps in WEE was a field, few hills and a couple of forests. The maps didn't dictate how they were played. Compare with later maps with impassible mountains and rivers. While undoubtedly interesting to look at, they weren't very interesting to play because of the specialness of the features dictated too much the best way to play them.

But I think that this leaves room for another wargame down the line. A game where you pick "the tank" instead of choosing one of 15 but where the game variety instead comes from more "scenario" type game play rather than generic meeting engagements. Oh, and I don't care if the maps are thoroughly devoid of any artistic value, as long as they don't makes the players choices for them. The maps could be fractals for what I care.
That would make a nice "broken woodlands" map á la fulda gap, wouldn't it?


+1

User avatar
D-M
Posts: 8710
Joined: Sat 23 Jul 2011 11:10
Contact:

Re: European Escalation

Postby D-M » Sat 21 Mar 2015 01:08

Killertomato wrote:
- attacking moral was useful, routing your ennemies with a barrage and a lot of gun was a valid strategy


IMO this was the only bad thing about EE. You couldn't do real attacks because your tanks always ended up out of control if you tried.


Except it goes both way, you could attack quite easily, just stun/rout the defence and keep your force mobile to avoid arty. Now, it's just an useless feature.
Image

User avatar
Gronank
Colonel
Posts: 2510
Joined: Tue 8 Nov 2011 23:40
Contact:

Re: European Escalation

Postby Gronank » Sat 21 Mar 2015 03:39

THe routing mechanic was one thing of WEE that made it a lot less exciting because it killed off units too quickly. You're losing the fight and want to pull back, well you can't because your units are routing which apparently, in french, means that they stand perfectly still and gets slaughtered.

It is a good idea to have the combat efficiency be a function of stress sustained and let units under enough stress be entirely useless, but don't take away the players control of the unit or else all you've achieved is to introduce another way units die.

There are some things I would change about the morale system, I would make the morale state a function of the momentary severity of incoming fire rather than the accumulated history of fire. It would be balanced so that two infantry squads shooting at each other would take ages to kill each other because of suppression but an infantry squad with some support would quickly kill an unsupported squad.
Image

User avatar
The W:AB Noob
Lieutenant General
Posts: 4538
Joined: Fri 12 Jul 2013 22:29
Location: United States, Central Time Zone
Contact:

Re: European Escalation

Postby The W:AB Noob » Sun 22 Mar 2015 07:20

Maps definitely were great in W:EE. I think that what made them so good is that they were expansive and there was so much room and terrain outside even the furthest of capture zones. This allowed for flanking, which also was not stopped by instant napalm/bombers. While W:EE had the best maps, campaigns, and realism effect, I think that Airland Battle and Red Dragon were better game-play wise. It's a lot more balanced (though not always realistic) and has national decks, reverse, supply off options, etc.
W:RD Sandbox Mod 5.4.2, the Final and Ultimate Patch Click -> Image

User avatar
JBravo
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2419
Joined: Thu 17 May 2012 16:07
Location: Plymouth Rock
Contact:

Re: European Escalation

Postby JBravo » Tue 21 Apr 2015 00:01

EE with a modified deck system, minus planes and naval would be perfect to me.

To elaborate on the deck system - I loved that you could buy an entire family of units rather than single units. I think you should be able to buy a single unit from a family for (for example) 5 points, but each additional unit from that family would be (for example) 1 point. I also love that you can buy units with veterancy in RD and ALB.

I know some people like the hard limit of 5 cards per category in deck creation, most hate it and prefer the ALB system. I actually like the hard limit system in order to promote deck specializations and prevent unspecialized decks from becoming too flexible, but I do feel there is a good middle ground between ALB and RD.

But since this is all hypothetical with the chances of anything happening are likely imaginary, I think I'll stop there.
Image

User avatar
Vulcan 607
Major-General
Posts: 3845
Joined: Mon 31 Mar 2014 20:40
Location: Malton
Contact:

Re: European Escalation

Postby Vulcan 607 » Tue 21 Apr 2015 00:07

I have to say I preferred arty in EE the way it blanketed an area was always great. (You won't have Alsace Lorraine all the m110s firing in a Soviet deployment zone utter carnage)

User avatar
kvnrthr
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 518
Joined: Mon 10 Sep 2012 13:29
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
Contact:

Re: European Escalation

Postby kvnrthr » Tue 21 Apr 2015 04:54

Gronank wrote:I think that European escalation was a good start but that the series since has deviated from what I would have liked to see. Essentially, the series has developed into too much unit porn. It has become games about selecting units, not about using them in thematically appropriate ways.

Also, the map design. I think the basic problem with the maps is that they have grown "too interesting". The maps in WEE was a field, few hills and a couple of forests. The maps didn't dictate how they were played. Compare with later maps with impassible mountains and rivers. While undoubtedly interesting to look at, they weren't very interesting to play because of the specialness of the features dictated too much the best way to play them.

But I think that this leaves room for another wargame down the line. A game where you pick "the tank" instead of choosing one of 15 but where the game variety instead comes from more "scenario" type game play rather than generic meeting engagements. Oh, and I don't care if the maps are thoroughly devoid of any artistic value, as long as they don't makes the players choices for them. The maps could be fractals for what I care.
Spoiler : :
Image

That would make a nice "broken woodlands" map á la fulda gap, wouldn't it?


+1+1+1+1

You're absolutely right, the enjoyment of Wargames come not from unit porn but the variety of battles and scenarios.

Have you seen Flashpoint Campaigns? They have a lot of unit variety as well (since units are hexes, they just need to input numbers for the stats) but have a full-fledged scenario editor. Balance can be decided by scenarios rather than individual units.
Last edited by kvnrthr on Tue 21 Apr 2015 04:54, edited 1 time in total.
Hoping for a better next-gen Wargame and new engine in a few years...
One can dream ;_;

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests