Phases in SD

[Fade2Gray]

If you add in the ability to create a bunch of restrictions and adjustments to settings, you are going to create a bunch of lobbies that go way off into the deep end for cheese. Supreme Commander, both the first one (with the expansion) and even more so the second one, were really really bad about this. Some examples...

30 minutes no rush no air no naval no arty no nukes map is Straight to the PointSeton's Clutch.

Or worse yet, SupCom2 with 30min NR no air and the host is, of course, Cybran. Magnetron spam everywhere.

Those games are nothing but cancer and horrible cheese, do you guys really want this? SupCom2, IMO, died a lot faster than the original because of that.

[orcbuster]

I'm becoming more and more inclined toward the "less is more" approach to game design and thus tend to favour more tightly enforced restrictions.

[Selkares]

I'd go with one setting imposed by the game and no change possible.
If not we'll end up with a game that hosts 50 different settins in 50 different lobbies and none that fit everyone, not a good idea

[raventhefuhrer]

If you add in the ability to create a bunch of restrictions and adjustments to settings, you are going to create a bunch of lobbies that go way off into the deep end for cheese.

I'm not sure if you meant to disagree or agree with me, Orcbuster, etc. But I basically feel the same way. Wargame suffered immeasurable harm from allowing too much choice in lobby settings, game types, etc. To the point that there never was really a standardized game mode, and the community split into a million pieces.

'I like tactical games!'
'No destruction is better!'
'10v10 master race!'
'No! Conquest master race!'
'You're all just pubstompers!'

And so on. New players could never find their footing, so they tended to infest 10v10's for low-engagement, 'junk food games' that are fun for a few times but they never graduated to more wholesome lobbies. If I was a new person playing Wargame for the first time, I'd have no idea what the proper settings for a match were supposed to be, or how the game is supposed to play. So I either go into a shit-fest 10v10 and wonder why the game is so imbalanced and spastic, or I join a destruction match and play an inferior game mode.

[Fade2Gray]

If you add in the ability to create a bunch of restrictions and adjustments to settings, you are going to create a bunch of lobbies that go way off into the deep end for cheese.

I'm not sure if you meant to disagree or agree with me, Orcbuster, etc.

I figured it was pretty obvious that I agree with you.

Unless we have a major increase in the player base, having a huge variety of options isn't going to help much.

[raventhefuhrer]

Excellent

[DrRansom]

Madmat, do we have confirmation on different armies receiving lower / higher incomes in the different phases? I only ask as that might cause some upsetness in players of the lighter battlegroups.

The phase idea is one of the several great design decisions which are appearing in this game. (Surrendering, Front Line as opposed to a control zone, command units for off-map support are others). I'd really like to see these improvements get added back into a Cold War game.

It also means that Red Dragon will die pretty quickly after Steel Division is released.

As for match design flexibility, after the chaos that is Red Dragon matchmaking, I'm all for restricted options.

[Nathan des Lessings]

But please reduce the amount of 10 vs 10 games.
They simply take a huge number of players out of the "normal" gameplay. So you usually wait much too long for usual games.

[raventhefuhrer]

They definitely need to find some way to get control of 10v10s. The quality of the gameplay is demonstrably less than the smaller game scenarios, but many people prefer 10v10s because they're easier to fill up and are maybe less pressure. But the end effect is that Wargame, which should be a deep and engaging strategy game, is filled with people only playing low quality 'junk food' 10v10 games, and they never graduate to the smaller games.

So new players get the game, go into 10v10s. Have fun for a few matches but don't see anything worth staying for.
Older players either stack 10v10 lobbies, or they can't find games and slowly fade away.
I could probably list twenty players who, since ALB have left Wargame because they're fed up with a variety of things. Now with Steel Division they have a chance to make a good impression and get some of those people back so I hope Eugen is putting some thought into a matchmaker, or just some way to end the lobbysim and make smaller matches the more common game mode.

[[EUG]MadMat]

Madmat, do we have confirmation on different armies receiving lower / higher incomes in the different phases

Look at the battlegroup screen screenshot among the new ones released today (the one with the French TD and a sailor as commander).
Top left corner, you'll see the division's "chart", summing up its income in the different phases. Every division has a different one depending on its TO&E & playstyle.