Order of Battle: Pacific has now an official release date

Started by Boggit, April 12, 2015, 09:37:59 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

JudgeDredd

Well I bought Panzer Corps when it was released and whilst I enjoyed the trip down memory lane, it was very simplistic. Once you worked out how and where to move the equipment you needed, it was a no-brainer. Added to that was the lack of manoeuvrability - mainly forced on the player by time limits in scenarios.

This looks similar. It sounds like it's go more depth. But as it looks very similar, I can only imagine it's going to have similar constraints.
Alba gu' brath

Boggit

Quote from: JudgeDredd on April 21, 2015, 01:16:38 PM
Well I bought Panzer Corps when it was released and whilst I enjoyed the trip down memory lane, it was very simplistic. Once you worked out how and where to move the equipment you needed, it was a no-brainer. Added to that was the lack of manoeuvrability - mainly forced on the player by time limits in scenarios.

This looks similar. It sounds like it's go more depth. But as it looks very similar, I can only imagine it's going to have similar constraints.
FWIW, in your shoes I'd wait and see what the reaction is. I thought it went a bit further than Panzer Korps, but clearly there are similarities. I wouldn't describe it as a grog game, but more of a lighter beer and pretzels type game. I think there will be challenges, especially with amphibious ops. If you look at it as a grog game, I think you'll be disappointed - it's not War in the West or CM:BS. If you look at it for what it is you may enjoy it as a departure from the usual WW2 game. :)
The most shocking fact about war is that its victims and its instruments are individual human beings, and that these individual beings are condemned by the monstrous conventions of politics to murder or be murdered in quarrels not their own. Aldous Huxley

Foul Temptress! (Mirth replying to Gus) ;)

On a good day, our legislature has the prestige of a drunk urinating on a wall at 4am and getting most of it on his shoe. On a good day  ::) Steelgrave

It's kind of silly to investigate whether or not a Clinton is lying. That's sort of like investigating why the sky is blue. Banzai_Cat

bbmike

"My life is spent in one long effort to escape from the commonplace of existence."
-Sherlock Holmes

"You know, just once I'd like to meet an alien menace that wasn't immune to bullets."
-Brigadier Lethbridge-Stewart

"There's a horror movie called Alien? That's really offensive. No wonder everyone keeps invading you!"
-The Doctor

"Before Man goes to the stars he should learn how to live on Earth."
-Clifford D. Simak

Adherbal

QuoteWell I bought Panzer Corps when it was released and whilst I enjoyed the trip down memory lane, it was very simplistic. Once you worked out how and where to move the equipment you needed, it was a no-brainer.

As Boggit said, this certainly isn't a West in the Pacific/East/... style game but more closely to Panzer General. However we did add a lot more detailed combat mechanics and a supply system which can be very punishing: the AI is very eager to cut your units off supply if it gets the chance.

There will be another Twitch TV session on Slitherine's channel tomorrow. If you are curious about the gameplay you should certainly tune in.

And finally, the next unit preview featuring US Raider Marines and some of its special abilities:
http://www.the-artistocrats.com/9-unit-preview-raider-marines/

jomni

Quote from: JudgeDredd on April 21, 2015, 01:16:38 PM
Well I bought Panzer Corps when it was released and whilst I enjoyed the trip down memory lane, it was very simplistic. Once you worked out how and where to move the equipment you needed, it was a no-brainer. Added to that was the lack of manoeuvrability - mainly forced on the player by time limits in scenarios.

This looks similar. It sounds like it's go more depth. But as it looks very similar, I can only imagine it's going to have similar constraints.

The turn limits are mostly longer in this one.

glen55

Quote from: JudgeDredd on April 21, 2015, 01:16:38 PM
Well I bought Panzer Corps when it was released and whilst I enjoyed the trip down memory lane, it was very simplistic. Once you worked out how and where to move the equipment you needed, it was a no-brainer. Added to that was the lack of manoeuvrability - mainly forced on the player by time limits in scenarios.

This looks similar. It sounds like it's go more depth. But as it looks very similar, I can only imagine it's going to have similar constraints.

Particularly agree on the PzC time limits, which gave you little option but to move your units their full movement allowance forward every turn.  If you vary from that formula more than a couple of times in a game, you can't get the top victory condition.  That's not the way I like to fight my battles.
Things are more like they are now than they have ever been before.
  - Dwight D. Eisenhower

Adherbal

We tried to be more generous with the turn limits, instead adding secondary objectives if you manage to achieve things quickly. The latter will provide useful bonuses, but are not required to complete the missions.

JudgeDredd

I'm not sure. I am not a huge fan of turn limits. I used to think "meh" about them because I took the view "It's a military operation...they want you to complete it by day x and time y"

However, it became very obviously a game thing. If the AI is competent enough and the maps and scenarios are well designed, then I tend to think there shouldn't be a limit. I should lose because the AI managed to force a heavy toll whichever route I took - or me on the AI.

So as I've got older, I've been less and less impressed with time limits...especially once which are overly tight.
Alba gu' brath

Steelgrave

#23
Quote from: JudgeDredd on April 22, 2015, 12:30:17 AM
I'm not sure. I am not a huge fan of turn limits. I used to think "meh" about them because I took the view "It's a military operation...they want you to complete it by day x and time y"

Well, you guys DID produce Monty. He didn't like turn limits either   ;D


Adherbal

QuoteHowever, it became very obviously a game thing. If the AI is competent enough and the maps and scenarios are well designed, then I tend to think there shouldn't be a limit. I should lose because the AI managed to force a heavy toll whichever route I took - or me on the AI.

The main reason is the next scenario in the campaign starts at a specific date. If the date in the previous scenario exceeds that you can buy new equipment which suddenly isn't available any more at the start of the next mission.

Surtur

Hi all,

We will be playing the game live tonight, so you can see the game in action yourselves and fire away any questions at the devs/producer. So feel free to join us at www.twitch.tv/slitherinegroup

Cheers,

Surtur
"Gentlemen, You Can't Fight in Here. This is the War Room!"

FarAway Sooner

Quote from: Adherbal on April 22, 2015, 06:27:16 AM
QuoteHowever, it became very obviously a game thing. If the AI is competent enough and the maps and scenarios are well designed, then I tend to think there shouldn't be a limit. I should lose because the AI managed to force a heavy toll whichever route I took - or me on the AI.

The main reason is the next scenario in the campaign starts at a specific date. If the date in the previous scenario exceeds that you can buy new equipment which suddenly isn't available any more at the start of the next mission.

I hear you, but that's still a "game thing".  If the Allies had won a battle a month earlier, the next battle might have started a month earlier, with or without the appropriate equipment.

For me, it starts to strain the sense of immersion.  More tellingly, it also creates a repetitiveness of play style that I find disengaging after having played a number of similar titles the same way.  I'm all for creating a mechanic whereby players get rewarded for winning a scenario quickly (e.g., "Prestige Points"), but there need to be other ways to get those same rewards (e.g., by taking fewer casualties) and the need to win a scenario quickly shouldn't be the primary gating factor in terms of whether you win or lose the war.

That's a standard gaming convention these days, but it makes for less interesting game play than some other styles might.

Boggit

Quote from: JudgeDredd on April 22, 2015, 12:30:17 AM
I'm not sure. I am not a huge fan of turn limits. I used to think "meh" about them because I took the view "It's a military operation...they want you to complete it by day x and time y"

However, it became very obviously a game thing. If the AI is competent enough and the maps and scenarios are well designed, then I tend to think there shouldn't be a limit. I should lose because the AI managed to force a heavy toll whichever route I took - or me on the AI.

So as I've got older, I've been less and less impressed with time limits...especially once which are overly tight.
+1

This is almost exactly my view. I find them an artificial consideration for the most part that means you have less time for recon and manoeuvre. I do make an exception for turn limits on occasion, having regard to specifically time dependent operations e.g. a commando operation where you have to hit the target but exfiltrate to transport to get away before the enemy responds, or something like an air raid where it is in and out (fuel considerations etc), but that's about it.
The most shocking fact about war is that its victims and its instruments are individual human beings, and that these individual beings are condemned by the monstrous conventions of politics to murder or be murdered in quarrels not their own. Aldous Huxley

Foul Temptress! (Mirth replying to Gus) ;)

On a good day, our legislature has the prestige of a drunk urinating on a wall at 4am and getting most of it on his shoe. On a good day  ::) Steelgrave

It's kind of silly to investigate whether or not a Clinton is lying. That's sort of like investigating why the sky is blue. Banzai_Cat

Boggit

Quote from: Adherbal on April 21, 2015, 06:43:55 PM
We tried to be more generous with the turn limits, instead adding secondary objectives if you manage to achieve things quickly. The latter will provide useful bonuses, but are not required to complete the missions.
For the reasons I've mentioned I'm not a great fan of time limits, but it does make sense if you are going to use them to be on the generous side. I like the idea of adding secondary objectives.  O0

One other innovation if you must use time limits is to randomise the end turn by a couple of turns to keep players guessing. It can avoid some gamey play if you don't know it is the last turn.
The most shocking fact about war is that its victims and its instruments are individual human beings, and that these individual beings are condemned by the monstrous conventions of politics to murder or be murdered in quarrels not their own. Aldous Huxley

Foul Temptress! (Mirth replying to Gus) ;)

On a good day, our legislature has the prestige of a drunk urinating on a wall at 4am and getting most of it on his shoe. On a good day  ::) Steelgrave

It's kind of silly to investigate whether or not a Clinton is lying. That's sort of like investigating why the sky is blue. Banzai_Cat

Gusington

I do know this: in BA2 Kursk, the time limit of the second German mission has been driving me bug nutty. Twice I was a hair's breadth from winning and twice because time ran out I did not get the win...no other reason. So after nerdraging I caught my breath and lowered the difficulty just to move on.


слава Україна!

We can't live under the threat of a c*nt because he's threatening nuclear Armageddon.

-JudgeDredd