Whats next

JohnLikesEatingPaint
Specialist
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon 22 Dec 2014 05:58
Contact:

Whats next

Postby JohnLikesEatingPaint » Tue 31 Mar 2015 04:44

TLDN, Make better maps aimed for more balanced play, don't put so many prototypes in the game and don't make coalitions so powerful.


Hello, I'm making this post to talk about what is next to come and what can be done to make it great. I personally will not be getting AoA because I have never like base building games. Im sure that people who due will love it and it will be a great game for them. I'm here to talk about what I feel our good old friends at eugen should do for the next wargame. People have talked about a WW2 game, I like the idea of that but I'm not going to touch that and speak as if we know for a fact it will still be in the cold war era.

#1 Lets take the prototype time scale a little bit back. I loved how in ALB there where just a jew prototypes for each nation. like the US had the night hawk and AH-64 and that was really it, or how Russia had the SU-25T and the T-80U. In the current state I feel like the prototypes are end all or be all for players.

#2 Picking nations. In ALB you played as the US USSR or mixed. I loved that, many people would not agree but let me tell you why I feel its better then what we have now. Back in ALB we did not have one OP nation stomping the other (look at Euro Corps and USSR/NK). You had the US USSR or mixed. Mixed brought everyone's good gear out onto the field and was not a prototype spam like we see now. When was the last time you saw a T-62M or M60 Patton as a back bone tank force? Back in ALB because they would be able to fight the other nations tanks. The NATO mixed had the M1A1 and LEO 2A4 as there heavy tanks. The Pact mixed didnt have a really good heavy and had to use their great ATGMs to fight the heavy tanks.

#3 MAPS! Almost all of the maps in RD suck. I find myself playing paddy fields or bloody ridge only. They are the only ones that are some what equal on both sides. ALB maps where amazing. High Way to Oslo was the best map for 2v2s in game. Each side had a little different parts but for the most part where the same. You had the huge field on the Resupply side for tank battles then the forest for the inf battles. Then there was Bergen, nice huge city in the middle for the inf players and two huge fields for the tank players. It made everyone happy. Another huge thing with maps is naval. The maps where centered around naval and no one likes it. So in the next game have 4 maps for naval and thats it.

#4 Esports, as one who went the the ESL games for ALB it was a great time. Im in North America so I would get up at 5:00am to get on good game in with my teammate then go to the EU matches. It also made the game always changing due to people finding new ways to win because they could win money. It also showed how some maps could be played in ways never thought of.

What would you guys like to see in the next wargame?

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

Re: Whats next

Postby kvnrthr » Tue 31 Mar 2015 05:34

Maps need contour lines. The LOS system is frustrating for people because it is hard to see where your LOS is blocked and where it isn't unless you really zoom in to the relevant unit.

Engine desperately needs some features. For example HEAT and KE armor values need to be different, ERA needs to be modeled properly as well.

But most importantly!! Mod tools are desperately needed! Custom missions, custom units, all manner of changes should be possible. We need ways to make our own scenario battles, our own maps, and put in the units we want.

One only needs to see the example of MOWAS2. Released within a few months of W:RD, mods have allowed the introduction of great amounts of content; they have added Leopard 2, T-90, BMP-3 into what started off as a WW2 game. They have very well-made custom campaigns too. Imagine if this amount of flexibility was possible in Wargame modding, if we could really use the engine!
Hoping for a better next-gen Wargame and new engine in a few years...
One can dream ;_;

bobjoeharris
Warrant Officer
Posts: 464
Joined: Tue 12 Mar 2013 04:51
Contact:

Re: Whats next

Postby bobjoeharris » Tue 31 Mar 2015 05:59

I completely agree, and I know people who would agree with you too.

I wish mediums like t55s t62s, cheiftains and m60s were as good as leopard 1s as all of these tanks were the backbone of their nation. I don't even play this game anymore
I am [LCol] 'Harris' In ALB and RD, and 'Lt Col. Harris; in EE
bobjoeharris wrote:fighting for dry, colorless landscapes with boring grey houses, as dry napalm is dropped to further dry up the land, all while the silent ships watch from the silent sea :(

JohnLikesEatingPaint
Specialist
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon 22 Dec 2014 05:58
Contact:

Re: Whats next

Postby JohnLikesEatingPaint » Tue 31 Mar 2015 06:11

bobjoeharris wrote:I completely agree, and I know people who would agree with you too.

I wish mediums like t55s t62s, cheiftains and m60s were as good as leopard 1s as all of these tanks were the backbone of their nation. I don't even play this game anymore

Me as well, none of my friends do...(its hitman ;) )

Kastev
Command Sergeant Major
Posts: 344
Joined: Thu 30 Jan 2014 20:46
Contact:

Re: Whats next

Postby Kastev » Tue 31 Mar 2015 06:36

The problem with modability in a game like Wargame with such a small community, is that inevitably the community will not agree on every single change. So you'll have servers dedicated to one mod, and others dedicated to others, and it divides an already small community, making the game die

As for what's next, I don't think we'll see any new maps, content or anything for Wargame. Ever.

Maybe after AoA gets released, but I still doubt it. Madmat has said that they have 0-1 people working on Wargame: RD right now, with everyone else working on AoA. Wargame is probably a dead game sadly, despite how unique it is in comparison with other RTS like games

Sadly, I won't be buying AoA myself as it seems that it will be an RTS with base building. I hate base building so much. That's why games like Wargame appealed to me in the first place...

User avatar
frostypooky
Lieutenant General
Posts: 4334
Joined: Thu 1 Aug 2013 14:12
Contact:

Re: Whats next

Postby frostypooky » Tue 31 Mar 2015 07:01

Kastev wrote:The problem with modability in a game like Wargame with such a small community, is that inevitably the community will not agree on every single change. So you'll have servers dedicated to one mod, and others dedicated to others, and it divides an already small community, making the game die


on the contrary, everyone that played NWN after its heyday, eg when it was sub-1k players, was pretty much on the same page with mods... enthusiasts will stick together...

User avatar
CandyMan
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2017
Joined: Sat 11 May 2013 01:24
Contact:

Re: Whats next

Postby CandyMan » Tue 31 Mar 2015 07:25

JohnLikesEatingPaint wrote: I loved how in ALB there where just a jew prototypes for each nation.



:lol:
Image
Your standard pinko Commie swine...
Rabidnid wrote:NK has a veritable cornucopia of mediocrity to choose from when it comes to inexpensive vehicular recon!

User avatar
DoubleDown
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 622
Joined: Mon 6 May 2013 21:14
Location: Eastern US
Contact:

Re: Whats next

Postby DoubleDown » Tue 31 Mar 2015 08:04

kvnrthr wrote:Maps need contour lines. The LOS system is frustrating for people because it is hard to see where your LOS is blocked and where it isn't unless you really zoom in to the relevant unit.

Definitely this. I love maps like A Maze because of the more realistic contouring, but I understand why people wouldn't be fond of it with the current lack of LOS reference. A faded topographic overlay would go a long way towards fixing this issue.
Image

APSinc
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 555
Joined: Wed 3 Sep 2014 09:56
Contact:

Re: Whats next

Postby APSinc » Tue 31 Mar 2015 08:28

You forgot to mention the borked deck system.

In ALB I thought that it made a lot of sense. Everyone's units were of equal availability (that is, all regulars/shock/elite units for every nation, even Denmark, had the same availability--ignore the fact that these distinctions aren't in ALB please).

However, US and USSR got least number of activation points, while smaller nations had more AP than larger ones. This makes sense (in a way), because the smaller nations would likely have needed to bring more of their equipment to the fight, while US/USSR would be fighting a more limited engagement and thus their equipment would be more specialized. Also, 9 slots, which meant you had room for the less than stellar equipment. I think we can all agree that minmaxing is neither realistic, nor beneficial to gameplay, despite its necessity in the current META.

It doesn't really make sense that ANZAC has a larger presence on the battlefield than the US, but this is the case with the way the game currently rewards playing minors.

Sure with coalitions it is harder to balance out AP, and the current approach is an easy do, but it is a lazy one (no offense) and tbh ends up making Era Decks (for all the attention paid to the unit selection) essentially useless, especially when some nations (like Denmark) have so little equipment to choose from in an Era deck that the points just end up being wasted.

User avatar
Mike
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 12407
Joined: Thu 20 Feb 2014 01:09
Location: Virginia, United States of America
Contact:

Re: Whats next

Postby Mike » Tue 31 Mar 2015 09:00

CandyMan wrote:
JohnLikesEatingPaint wrote: I loved how in ALB there where just a jew prototypes for each nation.



:lol:

Beat me to it :lol:
Image
Courtesy of KattiValk

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 69 guests