Page 1 of 2

How deep and complex will be the new Dynamic Campaign?

Posted: Fri 27 Jul 2018 21:44
by nigo_BR
IMHO the new Dynamic Campaign needs to be deep and complex. Because there's a "gap" in WW2 games with that thematic/scheme.

If Eugen makes a shallow/streamlined dynamic campaign like "Wargame ALB" or "Company of Heroes 2 Ardennes Assault" will be a total failure. Nobody asking about a simple dynamic campaign like these games have, but instead theres a demand for deep and complex WW2 Dynamic Campaign like Total War series demonstrated all these years.

People want replayability, a lot of strategic and tactical choices, smart stratregic AI and FUN. Only deep and complex campaign will provide that.

Re: How deep and complex will be the new Dynamic Campaign?

Posted: Fri 27 Jul 2018 23:26
by Mike
nigo_BR wrote:IMHO the new Dynamic Campaign needs to be deep and complex. Because there's a "gap" in WW2 games with that thematic/scheme.

If Eugen makes a shallow/streamlined dynamic campaign like "Wargame ALB" or "Company of Heroes 2 Ardennes Assault" will be a total failure. Nobody asking about a simple dynamic campaign like these games have, but instead theres a demand for deep and complex WW2 Dynamic Campaign like Total War series demonstrated all these years.

People want replayability, a lot of strategic and tactical choices, smart stratregic AI and FUN. Only deep and complex campaign will provide that.


Have you heard of Hearts of Iron? :P

Re: How deep and complex will be the new Dynamic Campaign?

Posted: Fri 27 Jul 2018 23:35
by nigo_BR
Mike wrote:Have you heard of Hearts of Iron? :P


Yes. I play HoI series and mods since 2006. ;)

I expect more from Eugen this time. I made a proposal months ago about a Dynamic Campaign in Paradox Forums:

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/in ... t-23909608

Re: How deep and complex will be the new Dynamic Campaign?

Posted: Sat 28 Jul 2018 00:55
by Hob_Gadling
I feel stupid for asking this, but will there be times in the campaign when the best move is not to bump at the other guy with all your armies?

Because that's what made ALB campaign at launch such a great one. Often, even when you were under time pressure, it was better to not attack enemy army directly but instead make a positional move. And when you did attack you wanted to make sure you were gaining from the attack, not just whacking a few units. Unfortunately it was patched to support Just Attacking.

Incidentally this is also why Total War strategic level was terrible. Always push your doomstack into enemy doomstacks, always form more doomstacks to push into other doomstacks. There was never a time when not attacking made sense outside sieges (where you still wanted to attack if you were the defender because attrition ate up your doomstack). To be fair I stopped playing somewhere around Napoleon, so maybe it has changed.

Re: How deep and complex will be the new Dynamic Campaign?

Posted: Sat 28 Jul 2018 17:04
by Guggy
As someone who's complaining ruined that aspect of the ALB campaign, Hob is absolutely right.

Re: How deep and complex will be the new Dynamic Campaign?

Posted: Sat 28 Jul 2018 18:47
by KattiValk
If you're looking for HOI style strategic elements, the ALB and RD campaigns were honestly fairly close to the mark. Their issues lay in how the battles were sort of rushing units at each other and the AI just being garbage at pretty much everything, plus the scale was much smaller than HOI, meaning you ended up fighting on essentially a tiny handful of maps, instead of a wide front.

Re: How deep and complex will be the new Dynamic Campaign?

Posted: Sat 28 Jul 2018 18:56
by RoyalColor
Unity of Command

Re: How deep and complex will be the new Dynamic Campaign?

Posted: Sat 28 Jul 2018 19:45
by nigo_BR
I'm looking for Supplies and logistics management to prevent doomstacks.

Im looking for encirclaments battles, sieges, some frontal assaults, true defensive battles with divisions in dig position, counterattacks, cmbushs, delay the opponent to give better map position, tactical withdrawal and breakthrough battles.

They have a lot of options to make the game deep and complex.

Re: How deep and complex will be the new Dynamic Campaign?

Posted: Sat 28 Jul 2018 20:02
by molnibalage
nigo_BR wrote:IMHO the new Dynamic Campaign needs to be deep and complex. Because there's a "gap" in WW2 games with that thematic/scheme.

If Eugen makes a shallow/streamlined dynamic campaign like "Wargame ALB" or "Company of Heroes 2 Ardennes Assault" will be a total failure. Nobody asking about a simple dynamic campaign like these games have, but instead theres a demand for deep and complex WW2 Dynamic Campaign like Total War series demonstrated all these years.

People want replayability, a lot of strategic and tactical choices, smart stratregic AI and FUN. Only deep and complex campaign will provide that.


Will be Dny. Camp? Where is this info?

Re: How deep and complex will be the new Dynamic Campaign?

Posted: Sat 28 Jul 2018 21:12
by Hob_Gadling
nigo_BR wrote:I'm looking for Supplies and logistics management to prevent doomstacks.


Bet you dollars to doughnuts the campaign is modeled after Close Combat 4 and 5 (ie. much like WAB and WRD). Armies are heavily abstracted lumps, map design doesn't allow flashy maneuver and the whole thing is mostly pushing stacks into each other. It's apparently very hard to design the sort of map that allows pocketing enemy troops unless you do a hex map and I'm certain Eugen isn't planning on that.

WAB 2nd campaign was pretty much the best attempt of this game style I've ever seen because you could do amphibious landings, airdrops, push with armored units and still you only had a few units to move. No busywork, every move counts, every tactical battle in the campaign is meaningful and you get to choose from several viable plans depending whether you want to reach Stockholm or settle for Oslo and Copenhagen. It was even great as defender because you could try several plans ranging from delaying actions to counter-attacks to Fortress Oslo. Too bad the supply and morale rules were changed in a patch.

I used to play a boardgame called Red Storm Rising back in the day. That one had a pretty nicely designed map that allowed breakthroughs, airdrops and forced players to look after their supply lines without being overly tedious or math-heavy. Looking at it again, the key seems to be sharp corners and irregular map squares combined with clever river fording rules. Feel free to steal the idea, it works surprisingly well.

Incidentally, I think campaign in this sort of game should mainly exist to provide interesting tactical battles. It shouldn't take too much micromanagement to play the strategic part. Player choices should mostly be meaningful and the types of battles played dependent on their actions on strategic level. I read your post on Paradox forums and it sounds like you'd enjoy something from Gary Grigsby. Try War in the East, that should be right up your alley.