Lack of Diversity ruining the games immersion. (content)

OmikronAnubis
Sergeant
Posts: 78
Joined: Mon 27 Feb 2012 19:42
Contact:

Re: Lack of Diversity ruining the games immersion. (content)

Postby OmikronAnubis » Fri 3 May 2013 19:12

mvp7 wrote:Only thing regarding unit availability I just don't get is the complete lack of F-4 phantoms for west germany and UK... and lack of air superiority armaments for US.

I'm not saying there isn't a lot of units available in this game but the F-4 was very common and very important plane at the game's era (more so than many other planes in it), the low availability of it is pretty much the same as if the soviet armory had lacked the entire T-72 line of tanks and the explanation for that would have been "they already have T-55, T-62, T-64 and T-80 series, you can use them"

The model (and weapons used by it) are already in the game so there woudn't be much else to do than couple textures for other users I'd imagine.

edit. They would have especially important role in pre-80 and pre-70 decks.



Let's have a look at the pure numbers:

Airplane Units used in the german Bundeswehr
McDonnell Douglas F-4F „Phantom“ 175
Lockheed F-104G „Starfighter“ 586
Panavia Tornado IDS/RECCE 334
Dassault-Breguet/Dornier „Alpha Jet“ 175
Fiat G.91R/3 „Gina“ 294


So where the is my Fiat "Gina" in the 1975 deck from West germany???
Come on ladys. The Starfighter was used until the end of the cold war and while the Phantom of course was part of the german Bundeswehr it was neither used in highest number nor the only one used until the end of cold war. Where are the MIG-29 the NVA had? STOP crying, noone stole your lollipop.

And there are simple reasons for the phantom not beeing implemented. The developer decided it - as it seems - gameplaywise. West-Germany got some of the best (if not the best) tanks from nato and while counting as a minor nations it got therefor a very strong force at bottom. You can stand against T80's where denmark for example tries to explain their beloved russian friends, that their Leopard 1 are just ingame to be petted and not to harm their cute T80's. And while denmark got the F-16 they have to bomb T-80's with Starfigthers also.

Have you ever imagined that you are not the the whole german (or whichever) army all on your own? In Wargame you are part of the army, of course you are a major part, but you dont own the whole army all by yourself. You got some units and in this case, Phantoms are not part of your contract of employment. These starfighters are just fighting somewhere else if you want to be "west-german only". You can use them if you make a contract with the americans also, but then you will have less units aviable from germany because they're pissed that you dont like what they'd offered you.
This game and the whole deck-creation is about decissions. Yes, the two majors have the best balanced offer for you, but in my humble opinion its more challenging to not have everywhere the best unit. But you can feel free to use "the best of the best", then you'll just have not to much units at all. Or you stick with national decks where you have to decide and use your nations advantages as good as its possible and reduce the drawbacks as much as possible.

You don't got the Phantom. NVA got no Mig-29. Sounds fair to me to be honest. Would you like MIG-29 against your beloved Phantoms? I'm pretty sure you wouldnt. Decissions had to be made and if i look at the pure number it sounds more logical to me to implement the Starfighter instead of the Phantom to the germans airforce. As it seems Eugen intended to give germany just one fighter. I guess the reason was clearly illustrated. If you dont like, dont use national decks, or just use a nato deck with all german and add a Phantom in. Its there. You can use it. Noone will blame you. :roll:
Last edited by OpusTheFowl on Fri 3 May 2013 19:45, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Language

User avatar
I WUB PUGS
Lieutenant
Posts: 1225
Joined: Tue 30 Apr 2013 18:40
Location: Monterey California
Contact:

Re: Lack of Diversity ruining the games immersion. (content)

Postby I WUB PUGS » Fri 3 May 2013 19:21

Eisenengel wrote:
Commissar Fuklaw wrote:You can play as Canada - except you really can't, because you will get stomped into the ground by a USSR player.


Which would happen in reality too. The solution I've found to this problem is teamwork. Sure, not everyone has a group of people to play with, but maybe playing with your favorite country doesn't fit every scenario, and maybe using the bonuses isn't going to suit every situation. I have a buddy who uses a "NATO-ALLSTARS" deck and its just that. Its really expensive but once the points start rolling in, he can do it all while the rest of us focus on niches.

The Devs made it clear months ago that the only truly complete factions would be US and USSR. No one should be surprised that Canada can't go toe-to-toe with the USSR, but they can do a lot of damage in other ways.

My favorite deck is my French deck. It is almost entirely air assault for setting up forward tank traps. Well, turns out that T-80's can shrug off even the best ATGMs sometimes and if they role up too close, its game over for the ATGM crew. So I bomb the T80's with my Mirage III's. Nothing.

Whats the next logical step?: "Hey buddy (British deck), I need a Tornado with cluster bombs at the marker I just popped."

I think the Devs have done a good enough job of addressing what certain countries were good at during the Cold War. Its true that most NATO nations had specialties and only a handful could field complete forces, and only the US could do it with substantial numbers. The same goes for PACT.

So thanks Eugen, you've modeled the period better than I could have hoped and I'm sure it will get better!
Image

User avatar
Bonk
Master Sergeant
Posts: 189
Joined: Wed 3 Apr 2013 17:32
Contact:

Re: Lack of Diversity ruining the games immersion. (content)

Postby Bonk » Sat 4 May 2013 02:08

i think a part of the problem is that because of the maps being limited to a set amount of players (no 4 v 4 on highway for example) everybody needs to hold their own line on the big maps (or needs to fight alone against his opponent on 1v1 of course)

so what do they want? allround armys so they can defeat whatever gets thrown at them. sure you could combine arms and have 1 player guard 2 flanks with his heavy tanks while another complements them with his powerfull
infantry. but its hard to do without teamspeak or at least some cups of coffee :D

so everybody wants their favorite country to perform well in all aspects

i think thats why i enjoy 10v 10 so much atm ... it gives me the chance to play something aside from the us and soviet allround forces because there is always somebody fighting alongside you

(thats why i mostly played 4v4 on small maps back in W:EE .. i just like to specialize :) )
Image

User avatar
Gryphon
Master Sergeant
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon 27 Feb 2012 16:10
Contact:

Re: Lack of Diversity ruining the games immersion. (content)

Postby Gryphon » Sat 4 May 2013 03:26

Burius wrote:I kind of understand why people want the individual nation armies to be more fleshed out but if Eugen did that wouldn't most armies be fairly similar in how they play?

From a game play perspective designing the nation specific decks with strengths and weaknesses is a cool idea. Some nations are better at some things and it makes for more diversity of play styles.

If Eugen did some copy/paste/edit of units and loadouts to flesh out some nation armies it would defeat the purpose of having being able to limit your deck to a specific nation in exchange for the extra slots.

Again, I understand why people want it, but it goes against a major portion of the game design in building decks. Hypothetically if we had all of these units Eugen might as well throw national decks out the window and call everything Nato or Pact and just have a tick box to select what flag you want on your units.

I for one thing Eugen has done a fantastic job of taking something that people were clamoring for in Wargame EE, "We want to be able to play as nation X without needing to fill in major gaps with units from other countries," and designing interesting national armies and a deck system that lets you do that while not going so far as to have each nation mostly similar except for a couple unique pieces of hardware. (Total War series comes to mind as an example)


It's a cool idea, but sadly, it's only an idea. People will never play certain combinations unless they are truly masochistic (In all fairness, I'm one of those people). One drawback of this however is that most people will either go for super decks or mixed decks and the flavour of the month will become some weird mixed deck that is good at everything. I would have liked more restrictions on the mixed uberdecks and more freedom for the minors. I mean, they can have strengths and weaknesses, but leaving a country without any half-decent AA is not a weakness, it's a crippling hit. Strengths and weaknesses in a game like this need to be subtle; this is not starcraft, you can't balance reality, and you shouldn't.

People are still not able to properly play some national decks because of this, so while they did a good job, they could have done an even better job. Maybe they could have even selected one or two aircraft per nation as their "national icons" (just like the tanks and infantry) and give them additional loadouts for the sacrifice of some units like the delfin and starfighter (which is, in all fairness, junk). The F-4 Phantom II is one of the planes I miss the most for WGermany though, and would have loved some air to air loadouts with the venerable sparrow as well as air to ground action. I mean, if you're going to do a game about the cold war, at least have the cold war icons well represented. I couldn't give a rats behind about another prototype BMP-T, Paladin (1991!!! on the info sheet) or T-80UK.
Image

d00mduck101
Sergeant
Posts: 50
Joined: Tue 23 Apr 2013 16:38
Contact:

Re: Lack of Diversity ruining the games immersion. (content)

Postby d00mduck101 » Sat 4 May 2013 04:49

diana olympos wrote:Strangely there is no french wanting ground attack jets, but we still lacking it...

Seems that once again french guys are the smarter across the board...

:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:


not so smart with your economy :P
Image glorious Chieftain master-race

User avatar
Killertomato
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon 9 Jul 2012 02:46
Contact:

Re: Lack of Diversity ruining the games immersion. (content)

Postby Killertomato » Sat 4 May 2013 05:11

I agree that there are plenty of units as-is, but no F-4F for the FRG and no F-4M for the UK are absurd decisions.

Out-of-timeline and failed prototypes like the Kpz-70 and the KA-50 are in the game while two nations' primary air superiority fighters are omitted? It's a bit like allowing the US to have Super M60s but not M1A1s...
orcbuster wrote:USSR gets prototype marsupials, why would you need moose when you got stuff with kickers like that AND transport capability? And I'm not even gonna START on the french Marsupilami, I don't even think thats a real animal! Why no trolls for Norway?

SnakeTheFox
Sergeant First-Class
Posts: 124
Joined: Tue 30 Apr 2013 21:54
Contact:

Re: Lack of Diversity ruining the games immersion. (content)

Postby SnakeTheFox » Sat 4 May 2013 05:36

I don't think it takes a degree in rocket brain surgery to figure out that implementing certain units is not a difficult task. It would literally be national marking textures sprayed on an already existing unit, and maybe some new camo. Give me the files in a format 3DMax accepts and I can do the F4 Phantom in 15 minutes.

So people ask "Why not just use a non-specialized NATO deck if you want x-unit?"

A: Because this is a wargame. This is not Company of Heroes. This is not Starcraft. This is a game that attempts to, within limits and a few balance concessions, provide a simulation of a tactical warfare in a late twentieth century Europe. And when you run around with a mixed bag of units, you're throwing that out the window.

So when you've got major nations like the US, who have multiple retextures and versions of the same model that differ only mildly, and then claim that you just "don't have time" to add other units to other nations, ones they honestly need if they're to be a balanced even semi-realistically portrayed fighting force, I just kind of shake my head a little, in total confusion. Should not more effort be assigned to bringing all nations up to a realistic level, before the US/Soviets get yet another unit that requires a brand new model and statistics, and that balance and realism wise they don't even need (e.g. the Kpz/Mbt-70 or Ka-50 mentioned above)?

This game is really great and I can agree with people that say there's already a lot in this game, but I don't see that as a valid justification for stifling the desire for balanced or period-appropriate units to be created; especially when it's so easy to accomplish as a simple national texture. I hope those opinions are just those of a few errant and misguided Marshals on this forum, and don't represent to actual stance of Eugen.

User avatar
Mikeboy
General
Posts: 5354
Joined: Sat 27 Apr 2013 21:59
Location: Democratic People's Republic of Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: Lack of Diversity ruining the games immersion. (content)

Postby Mikeboy » Sat 4 May 2013 05:41

agroq wrote:And why don't you select the model you want without having care of the nation, then imagine that it is a model of the nation you want to play...
700 unit is well enought nope?


That was perfectly fine in EE, it's what I did to get the British to be as close as possible to what they had (and filled roles that there weren't British units for) but a massive part of ALB is the new deck system with nation specific decks. Honestly I think the national decks are prettymuch great at the moment for everything except planes. The NATO countries that aren't the US, Sweden and France along with East Germany are simply lacking enough planes to make them viable.

This issue doubles if you're using Category B and C decks.

KillaJules
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 507
Joined: Sat 5 Nov 2011 03:20
Contact:

Re: Lack of Diversity ruining the games immersion. (content)

Postby KillaJules » Sat 4 May 2013 05:56

Burius wrote:I kind of understand why people want the individual nation armies to be more fleshed out but if Eugen did that wouldn't most armies be fairly similar in how they play?

From a game play perspective designing the nation specific decks with strengths and weaknesses is a cool idea. Some nations are better at some things and it makes for more diversity of play styles.


No.

Having factions that are actually worth playing is more important than uniqueness.

The number of units in WALB is fantastic, easily more than enough. That isn't the issue here. Eugen could have had 'only' half as many units in wargame and it would still be good. The issue is that certain missing units needlessly cripple certain factions.

The SEPECAT Jaguar already has RAF markings in-game so why on Earth isn't it available to the UK?

Why isn't the HAWK more widely available to NATO? Doing so does not require any new models to be made and implemented, it would not require units to be repainted or rebalanced, so why not make the HAWK more widely available?

It is simply wrong to say "800 units should be enough" if certain vital roles are not covered. A faction could have a million infantry units but this wouldn't compensate for a complete lack of anti tank weaponry. You cannot simply make do with what you have if an entire aspect of your force is missing.

Why go to the trouble of making purely national decks possible and why go to the trouble of modelling units if you will restrict their access which screws over the lesser factions?


If Eugen still will not consider this, then at the very least give the Marder Roland 2 much higher availability and give the Roland 2 missile longer range against planes.

User avatar
Gryphon
Master Sergeant
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon 27 Feb 2012 16:10
Contact:

Re: Lack of Diversity ruining the games immersion. (content)

Postby Gryphon » Sat 4 May 2013 12:09

Heck, at this stage I'd even pay for a DLC called "Cold War Icons", where one or two aircraft per nation are selected as their "national cold war icons". These aircraft then receive up to 3-6 different load-out options. And voila, you've got yourself flavour.

The Russians would have the MiG-23/Su-22 or something, the Germans their F-4 and Tornado, the US would also have the F-4 and A-10 maybe. Regardless, THIS would add flavour. The load-outs can be so that one nation still doesn't excel in everything, but man, it would give great options to play with.

I would even more than gladly help researching this stuff.
Image

Return to “Wargame : AirLand Battle”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests