What do you want for Wargame4

User avatar
Bullfrog
General
Posts: 5308
Joined: Sat 11 Aug 2012 23:48
Contact:

Re: What do you want for Wargame4

Postby Bullfrog » Tue 23 Feb 2016 08:32

XVII. The Icon on the task bar should start flashing when the game starts

XVIII. X64 bit processing.
Does not affiliate with members who post in #MakeAmericaGreatAgain
Image

Oktoberfest
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 987
Joined: Wed 23 Oct 2013 09:01
Contact:

Re: What do you want for Wargame4

Postby Oktoberfest » Tue 23 Feb 2016 14:12

European setting again. 1995 setting, so that the unicorns become less of unicorns.
No more trying to balance T-34 vs T90S, this is plain ridiculous. Make the availability of tanks related to the availability in the timeline.

If everybody has 30 "superheavies" available, it's more balanced than the coalitions having 2 or 4 or 6. Older tanks would be relegated in their real roles : Infantry support, fight against IFVs and a marginal ability to engage modern MBTs.
Less discrepancies in the infantry.
Damageable environment. A B-5 should leave a real hole in the ground.
Destroyable bridges, bridgelayers.

User avatar
kvasius
Command Sergeant Major
Posts: 303
Joined: Tue 22 Sep 2015 22:38
Location: Kiev, Ukraine
Contact:

Re: What do you want for Wargame4

Postby kvasius » Tue 23 Feb 2016 17:10

Oktoberfest wrote:European setting again. 1995 setting, so that the unicorns become less of unicorns.
No more trying to balance T-34 vs T90S, this is plain ridiculous. Make the availability of tanks related to the availability in the timeline.

If everybody has 30 "superheavies" available, it's more balanced than the coalitions having 2 or 4 or 6. Older tanks would be relegated in their real roles : Infantry support, fight against IFVs and a marginal ability to engage modern MBTs.
Less discrepancies in the infantry.
Damageable environment. A B-5 should leave a real hole in the ground.
Destroyable bridges, bridgelayers.


...and Put them on Vehicle tab so it would finally be useful.
Altho I feel like stopping the time period at 1990-1992 maybe? would be ideal.
All superOPbatshitcrazy protos would just die, and some crucial 90's units some countries NEED to be relevant are still ingame *looks at NSWP and CMW*


Or to hell with cold war and make it WW2. *inb4 everyone shouts "go play RUSE"*

User avatar
oneshot
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 94
Joined: Tue 1 Jul 2014 15:56
Location: Pearl Of The Orient
Contact:

Re: What do you want for Wargame4

Postby oneshot » Wed 24 Feb 2016 19:20

oneshot wrote:We all have heard that Wargame4 has been confirmed by Eugen, or it could be a hoax, but what if Wargame4 is currently work in progress, what would you want for Wargame4?

For me, climates and weathers are a good start: rain, snow, desert storms, fog? Just the essentials, like vehicles stuck more frequently, low visibility, weapons jammed. Elements like these are unexpected for players; it could occur randomly, or maybe the player could set it to "rain, or whatever climate" on the map settings.

If that sounds impossible, how about time: day and night? Most operations are done either day or night, like in Operation Desert Storm, Gulf War: M1A1 Abrams operated mainly night-time only; they had night vision, which had the element of surprise, and combining with hot desert climates, the Iraq tanks, mostly t72s, didn't stand a chance against M1A1 Abrams - their t72s lit up like Christmas trees because their tanks were heated up at day-time by hot desert sun; therefore, their tanks lit up when Abrams used night vision. Only 4 Abrams were destroyed due to teamkilling, I meant killed by friendlies, lol.

Write-down your dream features for Wargame4. This is purely conceptual and I hope Eugen could make a good, realistic game by listening to our opinions. IGN 10 out of 10

Why can't i edit this post? I'm done with wargame. I mean no one seems to care about wargame4... plus i have my own studies, and it keeps bothering me; my mind thinking about wargame4, about this thread. I am done. Whether this wargame4 is real or a hoax, im not going to post any more stupid ideas about wargame4, like I rather play wargame red dragon instead of reading comments and other threads. Hope Eugen makes wargame4 but i reckon not many players would wish for the game to release, i mean look at this thread, its at the bottom of page 2!!! People only care about the balances in RD: Longbow price nerf, More Chaparral A3 per card, Ban repeated quitters for 24 hours, etc

and if this gets locked, well... im just wasting my time writing nonsense to whom it my NOT care.
Shifu wrote:Download the replays and put them into C:\Users\YourUsername\Saved Games\EugenSystems\Wargame3 - then you can watch them from ingame.

urogard
Brigadier
Posts: 3062
Joined: Sun 4 May 2014 13:31
Contact:

Re: What do you want for Wargame4

Postby urogard » Thu 25 Feb 2016 14:20

Image

User avatar
derrickkolba
First Sergeant
Posts: 238
Joined: Thu 9 Feb 2012 16:14
Location: Iron curtain of Michigan
Contact:

Re: What do you want for Wargame4

Postby derrickkolba » Thu 25 Feb 2016 15:56

yes but in a ww2 setting.
Image

User avatar
KattiValk
General
Posts: 6320
Joined: Tue 19 Nov 2013 03:39
Location: Houston, Texas (CST)
Contact:

Re: What do you want for Wargame4

Postby KattiValk » Thu 25 Feb 2016 16:45

Just because your thread lost popularity does not mean no one cares about a new Wargame. There have been maaaaany threads about the exact same thing before this one, and each has stopped getting replies after a bit.

User avatar
Bullfrog
General
Posts: 5308
Joined: Sat 11 Aug 2012 23:48
Contact:

Re: What do you want for Wargame4

Postby Bullfrog » Thu 25 Feb 2016 17:20

To be fair, people have been making post about what they want. I posted 18 things for example. No reason for OP to get mad about the discussion dropping off, specially when he isn't really participating either.
Does not affiliate with members who post in #MakeAmericaGreatAgain
Image

User avatar
PzAz04Maus
Lieutenant
Posts: 1368
Joined: Sat 22 Mar 2014 01:42
Contact:

Re: What do you want for Wargame4

Postby PzAz04Maus » Fri 26 Feb 2016 00:12

1. Develop maneuver gameplay. Infiltration tactics should be important and not simply consist of parking things in jungles.

2. Develop terrain to support said maneuver gameplay.

3. Redevelop infantry movement so infantry can credibly have excellent tactical maneuverability most anywhere with cover, but poor strategic maneuverability. Vehicles should become more important, but they are marginalized because it takes so long to load/unload.

3a. as a corollary to 3, Simplify transport loading/unloading procedures. Infantry take way too long to sort themselves out and vehicles are extremely discriminatory about when they'll let infantry load. If infantry are within 100-200 meters, the vehicle should just stop immediately and vacuum those suckers up from any direction with a small delay if developers find it too cheesy. This forcing them to stand behind the vehicle for arbitrary and random amounts of time is ridiculous.

3b. Second corollary, decimated squads should be able to quickly run away from combat to be reorganized. Infantry should be quick to reconstitute, and it should be the enemy's problem that he didn't finish off the stragglers, and it'll still be a significant cost for the player to rebuild those decimated squads. As it is, it's easier for a tank to peek out of a forest, take a hit, run to a supply vehicle, then for an infantry squad to go down to 2-3 men and then try to break contact. This is backwards. If these proposals work as planned, a good player could the situation of constantly escaping infantry by setting up a cordon in the enemy's rear by infiltrating through the enemy with good terrain.

Nice to haves:

4. Infantry squads should be treated as spread out from the get-go. I expect this will be very complicated to code, but do try and see about giving infantry better.

5. The infantry size bonus isn't particularly useful when it's so small.

6. It would be nice to have an accuracy penalty based on the target's current speed.

7. Crew served infantry weapons. The biggest pain would be to know where to put them in a deck and giving them a niche.

Why can't i edit this post? I'm done with wargame. I mean no one seems to care about wargame4... plus i have my own studies, and it keeps bothering me; my mind thinking about wargame4, about this thread. I am done.

Did you just have a minor saltwater meltdown?

User avatar
wargamer1985
Brigadier
Posts: 3305
Joined: Sat 4 May 2013 00:36
Contact:

Re: What do you want for Wargame4

Postby wargamer1985 » Fri 26 Feb 2016 00:56

I.European setting (with rural areas and some very urban areas, for more varied combat)

II. much larger maps for greater maneuver warfare, or at least some better diversity in map scale

III. More and better free-flowing terrain (no perfectly flat plains, have some small inclines or declines)

IV. Enhanced engine for better model graphics, better effects, coaxial weapons, 5+ weapon limit etc.

V. Revamp aircraft to be a more singular, very powerful, but very expensive weapon that takes time to bring onto the field, but can loiter A LOT longer than currently.

VI. Enhanced infantry combat (troop carrier capacities, better infantry models and smaller city blocks, to promote maneuver warfare)

VII. Scale down naval warfare to littoral vessels, landing craft and other support craft, naval vessels should support the land game, not oppose it.

VIII. Multiple vehicle and aircraft loadouts, for example, if I had a MiG-29 that I wanted to use for Ground Attack I would use a Ground Attack MiG-29 (possibly symbolized by a different unit icon) and would chose it from a tab list of MiG-29s.

Just some of my thoughts, I am likely forgetting a lot but I think the next Wargame should return to its EE roots with the balance, planes and advantages in technology and experience learned by the game's sequels.
APPLY TO THE GLORIOUS CULT OF THE WARHAWK! LIBERATING NAZIS SINCE 1939!
Image

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 60 guests