Search for realistic and combative gameplay

Kagemusha
Private First-Class
Posts: 6
Joined: Sun 22 Oct 2017 12:22
Contact:

Search for realistic and combative gameplay

Postby Kagemusha » Mon 23 Oct 2017 11:15

Hello,

We are a dozen players who play and share our opinions with as many players as we meet on Steel division. We love the game and that's why we offer solutions to well-argued critics.
We do not know all the arbitrations that could be done dev to highlight a particular character from the battlefield but some of them seem to us to prejudice the realism claimed the game.

Why several fashion? We are three ... as much as divide the community.

Why the conquest mode conditions the reinforcements to conquered territory ?? total contradiction:

1) Because an advancing army encounters more difficulty getting reinforcements and controlling its lines of communication. So the bonus should go back to the one who loses ground;

2) When did the Allies land, did they have ground? When did the Germans conquer the East have a reinforcement advantage? No, no correlation justifies this choice which breaks the dynamism of the contrattaques, the very accuracy of the game.

Solution: only one mode "Battle of Normandy" with conditioning of the victory in the field, the deck conditions the reinforcements = less stuffing more attention to his units which the least things in Normandy, whether German, British , Canadian and American (to a lesser extent) it was a glaring concern. Other effect = less dispersed community = more party + players.

Management of the "veterans" bonus ***?

1) One confuses the morale, held with the fire and the performances of shots. The German divisions were in recomposition, experienced executives but not all men.

2) The allies during the Battle of Normandy will achieve a good level of experience while in front the veteran troops disappear to give way to the blues.

Solution: Differentiate performance bonus bonus morale that conditions the withdrawal, holding fire. "Braced" decks can not combine the performance effect of command units. More realistic effect, the command acts on the organization, to keep the men on the fire but not of the marksmanship.
Other ideas can be added but here our will is to aim at the performance of a magnificent game but whose gameplay seems to satisfy no one, neither the "funs" nor the "histo".

It is a google traduction of french message, i hope he get good :D

Kagemusha
Private First-Class
Posts: 6
Joined: Sun 22 Oct 2017 12:22
Contact:

Re: Search for realistic and combative gameplay

Postby Kagemusha » Mon 23 Oct 2017 11:17

Another remark and proposal:

Note :

I had the surprise (unpleasant) to hear a player on our team say "stop, we win, we stop attacking, we let them do" ... In "conquest" mode as in "Destruction" mode indeed, we can read the score live. This attitude breaks the ground dynamics.

In the descriptions of battle, squads, divisions, reconnaissance group etc ... could very well be trained beyond their objective, see next. He estimated the situation according to the radio returns or the precipitate retreat of their men, in any case, the score did not display as for a match.

Proposal:

- Do not show the score anymore.
- The visual message announcing that a team reached a percentage of points could be replaced by an audio message of the type "general congratulations, your troops are close to the goal" or something of the kind In any case, that we move away from the spirit of football match to get closer to the action perceived on the ground.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: mbetts and 2 guests