XOOM

1.36 chat, June 25th 2016

35 posts in this topic

Being based in the UK, i'm gutted that i will miss the TOE changes - TS3 discussion. Seeing as it's due to start at 2am in the UK.

I'm hoping you will record it and put it on the forums so i can listen to it at a later time.

Just want to say i'm in favour of going back to all front line towns having supply but towns can only be capped after a AO has been place on that town. To stop soft caps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just listened to the entire chat. Very good listening. Good Stuff.

I like the changes coming. A note on variability.

The key here will be Campaign Start conditions. I would steer away from allowing any player base involvement in deciding the make up of the new brigades (Small, Medium and Large) at Campaign start or at all. I would encourage CRS to start creating hybrid Brigades for Allies and variable Brigades for Axis. The more differing but basically balanced Brigade templates for Small, Medium and Large the better. If you insist on Country specific Brigades (a bad idea from my point of view) be careful and have some variety between Brigades even still.

The most important thing will be that from Campaign to Campaign that the disposition or distribution of these varying Small, Medium and Large Brigades are different every time. High command and the player-base do not get to see the distribution of the forces until map start. If this Campaign Map Start distribution could be automated somewhat and the distribution was effectively random that would be the best scenario. Barring that CRS could start developing Campaign start scenarios that eventually could be rotated randomly once a large number is established. This would provide HC, Squad and Player Base Leadership with a fresh scenario each map from Campaign to Campaign.

This should resolve most of the stale map after map boredom. Since the maps should last longer that should give CRS plenty of time to get creative with the next Campaign's supply setup.

Edited by stonecomet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I just listened to the entire chat. Very good listening. Good Stuff.

I like the changes coming. A note on variability.

The key here will be Campaign Start conditions. I would steer away from allowing any player base involvement in deciding the make up of the new brigades (Small, Medium and Large) at Campaign start or at all. I would encourage CRS to start creating hybrid Brigades for Allies and variable Brigades for Axis. The more differing but basically balanced Brigade templates for Small, Medium and Large the better. If you insist on Country specific Brigades (a bad idea from my point of view) be careful and have some variety between Brigades even still.

The most important thing will be that from Campaign to Campaign that the disposition or distribution of these varying Small, Medium and Large Brigades are different every time. High command and the player-base do not get to see the distribution of the forces until map start. If this Campaign Map Start distribution could be automated somewhat and the distribution was effectively random that would be the best scenario. Barring that CRS could start developing Campaign start scenarios that eventually could be rotated randomly once a large number is established. This would provide HC, Squad and Player Base Leadership with a fresh scenario each map from Campaign to Campaign.

This should resolve most of the stale map after map boredom. Since the maps should last longer that should give CRS plenty of time to get creative with the next Campaign's supply setup.

High Command deployments aren't necessary when this comes into play. The current Campaign starting lines may be altered (from what they currently are), but initially probably won't to test and see how it goes.

Throughout this whole process we'll need to make some changes along the way with likely several key aspects, supply coming in, re-supply rates, movement timers, in this case starting lines, overstock % rates, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm looking forward to having more free time run missions with. Finally finished all the skills needed to fly Tech3 Destroyers and I can't wait to them out at long last. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm looking forward to having more free time run missions with. Finally finished all the skills needed to fly Tech3 Destroyers and I can't wait to them out at long last. :)

Wait you can _FLY_ tech 3 Destroyers!? Where can I get me one of those? Is this some kind of High Command perk? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there a summary anywhere or is anyone interested in the changes really expected to download a 1.5GB .wav file?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I just listened to the entire chat. Very good listening. Good Stuff.

I like the changes coming. A note on variability.

The key here will be Campaign Start conditions. I would steer away from allowing any player base involvement in deciding the make up of the new brigades (Small, Medium and Large) at Campaign start or at all. I would encourage CRS to start creating hybrid Brigades for Allies and variable Brigades for Axis. The more differing but basically balanced Brigade templates for Small, Medium and Large the better. If you insist on Country specific Brigades (a bad idea from my point of view) be careful and have some variety between Brigades even still.

The most important thing will be that from Campaign to Campaign that the disposition or distribution of these varying Small, Medium and Large Brigades are different every time. High command and the player-base do not get to see the distribution of the forces until map start. If this Campaign Map Start distribution could be automated somewhat and the distribution was effectively random that would be the best scenario. Barring that CRS could start developing Campaign start scenarios that eventually could be rotated randomly once a large number is established. This would provide HC, Squad and Player Base Leadership with a fresh scenario each map from Campaign to Campaign.

This should resolve most of the stale map after map boredom. Since the maps should last longer that should give CRS plenty of time to get creative with the next Campaign's supply setup.

From what I understand, there will be no variation as to the small/medium/large sized brigades. Antwerp will always have a large brigade, Schilde will always have a small brigade. That's where the staleness will come from, and that's why I'm advocating a hybrid system where we have movable, supplemental brigades available to both sides.

These movable brigades can be vastly simplified from what we have now (just one brigade type instead of the inf/armored/HQ setup), they will have less supply than a small-sized town, likely no top-tier armor supply, and we can have as few as needed. We can get rid of the whole division setup as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First off, mad props to the new team!! Its awesome to see the game developing once again, thanks for all the hard work, again well done.

Listened to the chat and love the fact we are returning to a town based supply system.

Interdiction......Resupply moving once again from rear line towns. Lov'in it.

Just my two cents:

I like the fact (like it was back in the day) that AB's should help determine the amount of supply a town had. Attacking Antwerp with lets say Schilde alone would have been just about impossible.

Is it at all possible and/or are you guys taking into consideration possibly having each AB add a certin percentage of supply to the list.

Ex. A town has 4 AB's. Each AB would add lets say 10 or 20% of a standard AB list to its supply. Meaning that town would have a supply list 40 0r 80% larger.

Just curious because it was a pretty neat factor and definitely added to the strategic level of the game.

Leading me to my next question.

Is the supply in these multiple AB towns going to draw from a central pool or will they maintain different supply levels?

Keep up the great work!!!!!

eZ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
From what I understand, there will be no variation as to the small/medium/large sized brigades. Antwerp will always have a large brigade, Schilde will always have a small brigade. That's where the staleness will come from, and that's why I'm advocating a hybrid system where we have movable, supplemental brigades available to both sides.

These movable brigades can be vastly simplified from what we have now (just one brigade type instead of the inf/armored/HQ setup), they will have less supply than a small-sized town, likely no top-tier armor supply, and we can have as few as needed. We can get rid of the whole division setup as well.

I think this is where overstocking or the amount you can over stock should take some serious concideration. If my side owns Ant and Schilde and the other side needs schilde to hit twerp...we should be able to over stock schilde prior to the enemy attacking. AND of course that supply should stay there indefinitely.....I'd like to see AB's determine or help determin the size of the lists each town has...again based on the amount of AB's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is the supply in these multiple AB towns going to draw from a central pool or will they maintain different supply levels?

From what I gathered yesterday (and it should have been in the recording), the idea is that each town will have it's own brigade associated with it that will be automatically placed by SYSTEM as towns are captured.

This brigade will always be the same. So Antwerp will always have a "large" class of brigade.

All ABs will draw supply from this central pool. There will not be individual AB supply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AND of course that supply should stay there indefinitely

That's an interesting point, since I'm pretty sure the supply will NOT stay there indefinitely due to the weekly server resets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
From what I understand, there will be no variation as to the small/medium/large sized brigades. Antwerp will always have a large brigade, Schilde will always have a small brigade. That's where the staleness will come from, and that's why I'm advocating a hybrid system where we have movable, supplemental brigades available to both sides.

These movable brigades can be vastly simplified from what we have now (just one brigade type instead of the inf/armored/HQ setup), they will have less supply than a small-sized town, likely no top-tier armor supply, and we can have as few as needed. We can get rid of the whole division setup as well.

I understand that there will be a Small, Medium and Large Brigade system. What I'm saying is they do not all have to match completely they could be weighted differently with some with greater armor supply or less and slightly different Infantry distribution creating Engineer Small, Medium and Large and Infantry Small, Medium and Large and within Infantry Brigades you would have Riflemen, Automatic and Anti tank versions all Small, Medium and Large versions. These would then "Strategically" be placed by CRS across the map. As for Allies all those will have to be blended brigades with say 60% French 40% British and then and then adjust those when the Americans come in to 70% American and 20% French and 10% British.

You could then create different starting conditions. I understand that to begin we get Small, Medium and Large. This is just a suggestion to improve variability with this model.

One map might have a "Large Motorized Infantry Brigade" in Antwerp. That means that for the duration of that campaign an Axis and Allied version of the Large Motorized Infantry Brigade will be available when Antwerp is on or near the front. The next Map a "Large Armored Brigade might be present for the duration of a Campaign. By varying the type and location of these Small, Medium and Large Brigades you create a great variety of starting conditions and variety of play both strategically and tactically.

That's all that I really meant. I agree that removing the human element from supply size and distribution and allowing the game developers/managers set the conditions for each new campaign. Which can be done creatively.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I understand that there will be a Small, Medium and Large Brigade system. What I'm saying is they do not all have to match completely they could be weighted differently with some with greater armor supply or less and slightly different Infantry distribution creating Engineer Small, Medium and Large and Infantry Small, Medium and Large and within Infantry Brigades you would have Riflemen, Automatic and Anti tank versions all Small, Medium and Large versions. These would then "Strategically" be placed by CRS across the map. As for Allies all those will have to be blended brigades with say 60% French 40% British and then and then adjust those when the Americans come in to 70% American and 20% French and 10% British.

You could then create different starting conditions. I understand that to begin we get Small, Medium and Large. This is just a suggestion to improve variability with this model.

One map might have a "Large Motorized Infantry Brigade" in Antwerp. That means that for the duration of that campaign an Axis and Allied version of the Large Motorized Infantry Brigade will be available when Antwerp is on or near the front. The next Map a "Large Armored Brigade might be present for the duration of a Campaign. By varying the type and location of these Small, Medium and Large Brigades you create a great variety of starting conditions and variety of play both strategically and tactically.

That's all that I really meant. I agree that removing the human element from supply size and distribution and allowing the game developers/managers set the conditions for each new campaign. Which can be done creatively.

I do like this idea.

But if Xoom dislikes the current system of having to do deployments manually every campaign (where he doesn't even have to think about placement, since that is done for him by the CinCs), I think this idea is dead in the water. He's probably not going to want to put his time into creating a new campaign dynamic for every campaign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
From what I gathered yesterday (and it should have been in the recording), the idea is that each town will have it's own brigade associated with it that will be automatically placed by SYSTEM as towns are captured.

This brigade will always be the same. So Antwerp will always have a "large" class of brigade.

All ABs will draw supply from this central pool. There will not be individual AB supply.

While I'm sure I could live with it...but....the small, medium, large thing...im not ordering a value meal..lol...Reims and Antwerp supersize. I just think that's sounds too generic for a game like ours.

Let alone the strategic level of game play it opens up when and if AB's could be the factor determining the size of the initial lists.....heck maybe they could even help determine the supply rate....a 4 AB towns supply might take a bit longer then lets say a single AB town. Just kickin it out there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
While I'm sure I could live with it...but....the small, medium, large thing...im not ordering a value meal..lol...Reims and Antwerp supersize. I just think that's sounds too generic for a game like ours.

Absolutely. This is my biggest fear with the new system. The game will become too bland and generic if everything is the same every map.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad ya liked that :P

I just think the AB's could be a huge part of the supply formula . Along with even possibly effecting movement, resupply and maybe a hold timer as well. Larger cities would take longer to move into, while single AB towns wouldn't.

I think some of our largest towns like Twerp and Reims that have 3 town AB's and an AF AB for a total of 4 AB's should be reflected in the size of the initial supply list. We have three, two and single AB towns. Hence the supersize (4th Needed) supply list. A fourth size.

Like it did back in the day, once the front approached a larger (***cough*** supersized) city it darn well better have multiple links to match the defenders supply. In fact I think each AB had an independent list. Which I personally liked but don't think it would go over all that well today. A central draw from a pool will.

I'm really liking the whole idea of falling back to a town based supply system in one way, shape or form,

Keep up the great work you guys are nail'in it!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm open to a lot of this...except this interdiction stuff. I do not see the appeal. It's one thing to drive stuff a long way to get into a fight. It's another to spend one's day doing it just to overstock towns. Not an aspect of the game I even want to think about. :cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's another to spend one's day doing it just to overstock towns.

nobody is asking anyone to spend their time driving stuff up from the rear all day. you could do this, but thats your choice.

remember; or maybe you don't remember -- back in the old days there was a different eb and flow to the fights. your squad showing up with a column of 20 tanks all at once many times did in fact seal the deal.

it sounds almost like you're expecting to require '3 brigades worth' of supply to take a town as is the case now where supply gets shuffled about until someone makes a mistake with the shuffle or you out attrit the other side and take the town.

in this new system, that sometimes will be the case - too - however if you time that tank column right all you may need is that additional 10-20 tanks all arriving in unison to take said town. 5 tanks all showing up at once could do it too.

also, working on an idea to make overstock never suck and be a real strategic element that it's never been before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think Quincannon was apart of the community when this was in play. It's an important role and I'm confident it will be used by attackers, and frustrate re-suppliers too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think Quincannon was apart of the community when this was in play. It's an important role and I'm confident it will be used by attackers, and frustrate re-suppliers too.

a dynamic we didn't have then that you're working on though is really interesting.

hardened PPOs, defensive --- perhaps deployed on high ground ;-) --- spitting out ATGs from back line towns. now that tank column of 20 may not be such a huge momentum shift.

really hoping in the not too distant future PPOs become; for lack of a better description - the way we conduct all battles.

get rid of FBS, or turn FBS into the mother of all PPOs perhaps controlled by HC and place-able anywhere (to some extent) and then hardened PPOs become 'infantrys' main force projection points.

towns then really just become set and setting for fights but capturing open ground, so you can place news FBS and HPPOs, becomes significantly more necessary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forward Bases are terrain, we're not going to tinker with that stuff quite yet, we've got enough on the plate at the moment :). But in time when we start diving into the terrain, we'd be very interested in FB's being PPO's, and in this case High Command would be perfect for that. This is a long ways out and when we approach it, we may find we may not be able to do it however, so don't get too excited by this because it is a very unknown area for us yet.

Finding ways to make High Command more valuable in terms of game play is something I am very interested in discussing. I think the people who are in HC are good for the game and when we relieve the burden from their shoulders, they can start to cultivate better community relations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.