Recent posts

#1

Computer Gaming / Re: Headquarters: World War II

Last post by al_infierno - Today at 12:16:00 AM

It would make more sense as a board game, for sure, where you have a strict economy of how to track things like tank damage. The mechanic makes a lot more sense with infantry squads if you think of the "revive" as being reinforcements. The abstractions there can be more easily explained, like a solid single sniper round destroying a whole infantry squad because it kills the leader and everybody else scatters.

#2

Computer Gaming / Re: Headquarters: World War II

Last post by Grimnirsson - Today at 12:08:52 AM

Pete and al, thanks for the reply.

It's an odd system for sure, but I think it works as an abstraction.

Very odd indeed, I mean what's the point? If you have a tank and it has the typical armor, weapon etc. values why using a crew at all - if you can magically revive them anyway? That's not an abstraction that's nonsense in the WW2 setting.

And just read this here about the terrain features, I mean what the heck???

the fact that after a while you realize everything on the map pretty much means nothing. You can move into and out from ANY kind of obstacle from any angle without much happening, but more so - you can actually shoot trough it all. In other words.. Yes. An enemy gun can absolutely sit behind 6 blocks of houses and (magically) shoot a straight shot at you. Which is reflected in a bit of retardedness like mortars shooting OUT of houses etc

I don't know if I can swallow these odd design decisions.

#3

Computer Gaming / Re: Headquarters: World War II

Last post by Skoop - Yesterday at 08:58:44 PM

I played the beta and the system just didn't grab me.  They should have taken the nice graphics and bolted it onto second front's gameplay, that would sound like a banger.

#4

Computer Gaming / Re: Headquarters: World War II

Last post by al_infierno - Yesterday at 12:33:24 PM

I watched a German review video and the guy said the tanks don't have armor value, penetration factors etc. but are wholly dependent on the life points of their crew, so if they got hit inside the tank gets weaker...is that correct? I mean it sounds silly...

Sort of.  As Pete pointed out, armor values are indeed a thing.  But yes, a tank's health is tracked by its living crewmates.  A critical penetrating shot kills everyone outright and destroys the tank, whereas a glancing blow might kill the commander, gunner, etc. and weaken the tank's ability to fight back.  You can "repair" the tank by using a cooldown ability to revive the crewmates.

It's an odd system for sure, but I think it works as an abstraction.

#5

Computer Gaming / Re: Headquarters: World War II

Last post by Pete Dero - Yesterday at 12:29:50 PM

I watched a German review video and the guy said the tanks don't have armor value, penetration factors etc. but are wholly dependent on the life points of their crew, so if they got hit inside the tank gets weaker...is that correct? I mean it sounds silly...

Not according to the manual (p. 79-80):

ARMOR FACING - FRONT, SIDE, BACK, AND TOP ARMOR

Most armored vehicles have 4 armor values:

� Front armor (usually the strongest)
� Side armor (usually not so good)
� Back armor (usually rather weak)
� Top armor (usually the weakest)

Each value indicates how much armor the unit has if attacked exactly from that direction - front, side, or back. However, in most situations, the attack would come at a certain angle, so it would be something inbetween the front and side or side and back armor, and the exact value 80 will depend on the precise angle. The resulting value is an Adjusted armor value.

ADJUSTED ARMOR
The Adjusted armor value indicates how much armor the unit has when an enemy attack hits two or more armor values, taking into account the Attack and Elevation angles.

Example:
The unit has 100 Front armor, 60 Side armor, 40 Back armor, and 10 Top armor.
If it is attacked at an Attack angle of 45 degrees, it will use 50% of its
Front armor and 50% of its side armor, so in the end it will have 80 armor.

Example 2:
The situation is the same as above, but the attacker is situated on a hill and has an Elevation angle of 30 degrees - meaning it is firing from above.
This means that the 80 armor from the example above (a combination of Front and Side) is further adjusted by Top armor as well. So, the result will be between 10 (Top armor) and 80 (Front/Side armor) and will depend on the Elevation angle.

#6

Computer Gaming / Re: Headquarters: World War II

Last post by Grimnirsson - Yesterday at 11:37:31 AM

I watched a German review video and the guy said the tanks don't have armor value, penetration factors etc. but are wholly dependent on the life points of their crew, so if they got hit inside the tank gets weaker...is that correct? I mean it sounds silly...

#7

Computer Gaming / Re: Campaign Series Vietnam

Last post by Jason Petho - April 14, 2024, 10:49:30 PM

I spent the first part of the stream showing you the steps I would use to add a new unit based on an existing unit in the game. A requested unit was a medivac helicopter for Vietnam, so we added a 1 Strength Point medivac helicopter to the game. Of course, there are no mechanics involved and have any forum of use will have to be Lua scripted, but at least the unit is there to test things out! After that we dived into the 4th test of the Khe Sanh Village scenario. It's fascinating how every time we play, it's different every time. I've come to the conclusion that the eastern landing zones are way too hot.

#8

Computer Gaming / Re: Burden of Command Announce...

Last post by Grim.Reaper - April 14, 2024, 11:51:03 AM

Major announcement would actually be a release date:)

First announcement 7 years ago so hopefully at some point.

[MAJOR ANNOUNCEMENT:]

#9

Computer Gaming / Re: Burden of Command Announce...

Last post by Tripoli - April 14, 2024, 11:45:29 AM

MAJOR ANNOUNCEMENT:
We have implemented footnotes in Burden of Command!!! 

(Yes, I am a history geek  )

#10

Computer Gaming / Re: Imperator Rome is not dead...

Last post by rwenstrup - April 14, 2024, 08:35:10 AM

Thx for your response!