Kemco Games Forum Index Kemco Games
Kemco Games Forums
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Changes/improvements you'd like to see
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Kemco Games Forum Index -> Dai Senryaku VII Modern Military Tactics
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
cleveland



Joined: 11 Apr 2005
Posts: 13

PostPosted: Apr Mon 11, 2005 9:23 am    Post subject: Changes/improvements you'd like to see Reply with quote

This game is fantastic and I'm having a ball with it, however there are some things I'd like to see changed:

1) Units (especially infantry) in cities should be much to harder to kill. As it stands now just wail away on them with a coouple of long range artillery units and walk in. This to me doesn't seem realistic at all. Sure artillery should be used to soften up city defenses but after awhile the law of diminishing returns should kick in and you're going to have to assault the city directly. City fighting is tough work. I wish it was harder to take a city in this game. It would also increase the value of infantry.

2) I wouldn't mind seeing the 50 unit limit raised. China, for example, should be able to produce 50 infantry units alone. That's one populated country.

3) Is there strategic warfare in this game? I haven't played through all the scenarios but I haven't come across the ability to use your bombers to damage refineries etc. Make your opponent repair facilities. You'd probably have to raise the unit limit if this was an option.

4) Stacking. Maybe have the ability to stack two ground units in a hex to protect vulnerable units. Also combined arms tactics could be utilized.

Anyway, this is one of my favorite xbox games. I'm glad it finally made it over.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Adoug
Site Admin


Joined: 31 Oct 2003
Posts: 757
Location: Seatown

PostPosted: Apr Mon 11, 2005 9:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hey Cleveland, thanks for the post. I liked point #3 particularly. There is no way to damage refineries, etc in DVII, but I liked the idea as well as the rest. Glad to hear you enjoy it!
Twisted Evil
_________________
"The path to Knighthood is paved with strength and nobility, not LSD and sideburns." Black Knight from Family Guy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tyrannical



Joined: 04 Mar 2005
Posts: 51

PostPosted: Apr Mon 11, 2005 2:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think infantry, especially compared to other games are plenty tough already. Cities, especially friendly cities already offer protection, +15% defence and healing if you can't kick them out in one turn.

I'd like to see certain anti-air units, such as patriots be able to fire on any air unit that moves within range.

Maybe a fortification or sentry option, so that the defender gets first attack. Or an artillary can get a shot off on any unit that moves within range.

I'd also like certain units to be able to get more then one attack. Like maybe certain ships be allowed an anti-air attack (or two) pluss their main guns.
_________________
Red army much agressor!!!! They make big war on you. You blue army commander. You stop red army. You make all bases belong to you! Go Blue Army, Go for great justice!!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Slugs
Guest





PostPosted: Apr Sat 16, 2005 11:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would like to make some attacks simultaneously. Several units in the calculation at once would force the enemy to return fire differently and allow you to use combined arms. Perhaps just a suppression function where a unit that has been attacked alot is less able to return accurate fire.
Back to top
Iron Giant



Joined: 08 Mar 2005
Posts: 27

PostPosted: Apr Tue 19, 2005 8:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The real big change/addition I would like would be a real campain to play instead of just some missions that aren't really connected.

I'd love to see a stripped down Civilization type game to play that then triggers the current maps. You would have to build units and keep them alive to win.

The game needs politics, me thinks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SemperFi2382



Joined: 24 Feb 2005
Posts: 778
Location: Chicago Suburbs, IL USA

PostPosted: Apr Tue 19, 2005 10:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Iron Giant wrote:
The real big change/addition I would like would be a real campain to play instead of just some missions that aren't really connected.

I'd love to see a stripped down Civilization type game to play that then triggers the current maps. You would have to build units and keep them alive to win.

The game needs politics, me thinks.


A better campaign, yes.

Politics, no.

After all, this is a war game. Though I'd like to see some unit sharing, money sharing and resource sharing (like allowing allies to refuel rearm in your cities, airfields, etc).

Sometimes I wonder why on earth people want diplomacy in a WAR game. War is after all diplomatic options have failed. Rolling Eyes
_________________

"The Object is not to die for your country, but to make the other poor bastard die for his." - General Patton
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
bisl



Joined: 18 Apr 2005
Posts: 11

PostPosted: Apr Tue 19, 2005 1:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As a matter of gameplay (and perhaps a slight deviation from realism) I would like to see production outside the 5 hex radius of the capital. Perhaps there could be some restriction to it, like a per-turn income penalty to use a factory or city as a production site, but I think it would add another good dynamic to capturing territory besides just income.
In several games I've played with my friends so far, we've been production limited the entire game, such that resources don't even really matter, and most battles end up in stalemates because it's far easier to defend closer to your capital than it is to attack far away. It's just because the defending units have less distance to travel to get to the battlefield.
In my opinion, it would detract from the amount of games that end in a solitary chopper unloading a pair of special forces to cap the capitol. Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
SemperFi2382



Joined: 24 Feb 2005
Posts: 778
Location: Chicago Suburbs, IL USA

PostPosted: Apr Tue 19, 2005 7:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't think I've ever had that sort of stalemate. Even going straight for the capitol with helos loaded with infantry is no easy feat. (relatively)

I personally think it makes for a more interesting game this way. There seems to be more of a feeling of desperation as the enemy closes in on your only source of production.

However, being able to produce from an airfield or factory (why you can't build from them at all is a mystery) would make for a different sort of game. First, say you can only produce 1 Air Unit per turn, but you are facing an opponent that can make 3 (As in the map Fire Prarie (sp?)). Now, assuming you captured an airfield, you could even out your disadvantage.

Unfortunately, this would also mess with certain scenario balances. Some armies would have too much advantage or disadvantage with this same system.

I'd like to see a more robust editor or set of options that we could "toggle" such things on and off per scenario. (Like allied supply sharing Wink )
_________________

"The Object is not to die for your country, but to make the other poor bastard die for his." - General Patton
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
bisl



Joined: 18 Apr 2005
Posts: 11

PostPosted: Apr Wed 20, 2005 1:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I assume someone has already tried this, but I was thinking about trying to put neutral capitols to be captured so that maybe you could build around two capitols...but from the mission play I'm going to assume they become normal cities when you capture them.


Also, something else I would like to see--I would like to see a way of dropping special forces from a moving plane so that you could empty out a plane in one turn the same way you can a helo or carrier. Right now I feel like the drop ability is somewhat underutilized simply because you lose the turn, AND you can't drop more than one unit since the first one necessarily plugs the drop point.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
SemperFi2382



Joined: 24 Feb 2005
Posts: 778
Location: Chicago Suburbs, IL USA

PostPosted: Apr Wed 20, 2005 2:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

bisl wrote:
Also, something else I would like to see--I would like to see a way of dropping special forces from a moving plane so that you could empty out a plane in one turn the same way you can a helo or carrier. Right now I feel like the drop ability is somewhat underutilized simply because you lose the turn, AND you can't drop more than one unit since the first one necessarily plugs the drop point.


The problem with that is the fact that isn't "wholly" realistic. A carrier can launch all of it's aircraft in a short period of time. Paratroopers though take time when they land to "organize" and they would be slightly scattered so they'd take up that whole zone.

However, I do see that you should be able to drop both infantry units at once, say in a line. Though dropping paratroopers takes time as planes have to slow down, possibly make more than 1 pass and maintain formation. This could account for the inability to do a "line" of paratroopers. I usually arrive at the Drop Zone, drop 1 and drop the next one on the next turn.

I use paratroopers a lot in various tactics, so how they work now really doesn't bother me as they work how I expected them to.

Not saying your idea sucks, but from my experience in the military, the current way the paratroopers are modeled seems pretty realistic to me.
_________________

"The Object is not to die for your country, but to make the other poor bastard die for his." - General Patton
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
bisl



Joined: 18 Apr 2005
Posts: 11

PostPosted: Apr Wed 20, 2005 3:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, whereas you bring military experience to the table in this discussion, I bring 100% pure and accurate knowledge obtained from movies and other entertainment! So yeah, if you think it's accurate I'll take your word for it. I was actually trying to describe the line thing that you were talking about in my original idea when I was talking about dropping them from a "moving" plane. So at least I feel good that you were thinking the same thing.

oh, also--is mid-air refuel a highly advanced thing? I ask since most countries (as far as I can tell--I haven't played them all yet) don't seem to have stratotanker equivalents. Given that we are confined to the 5-hex radius for building units, such that we can't build planes at other airports, it gets to be somewhat difficult to maintain much of an airforce since you can't build and refuel on the same turn. So when your buddy flies in with like 5 backfires all chillin out in high air, things look pretty bad because you can't throw too many planes at him...just a thought.

One thing I did like about Advance wars was the notion of a capture taking time--for instance, a city has 20 capture points, and when a unit tries to capture that city, the unit removes as many capture points as it has subunits. So a full infantry unit takes two turns to capture a city, more if he was initially damaged or gets shot between turns. If the capturing unit leaves the space on which the city lies, capture must start over.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
bisl



Joined: 18 Apr 2005
Posts: 11

PostPosted: Apr Wed 20, 2005 3:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oh, also in the menuing system when browsing units, I would like to see the L and R triggers go from the unit you're looking at to the previous/next, respectively. For people who are learning it would work wonders for comparing similar units to pick out their differences.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
SemperFi2382



Joined: 24 Feb 2005
Posts: 778
Location: Chicago Suburbs, IL USA

PostPosted: Apr Wed 20, 2005 4:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Aerial refueling is fairly complicated. It takes both highly skilled pilots and a fair amount of technology. So, yes there are only a few countries that have access to aerial refueling technology.

As for having low air unit production vs a country with high air unit production, both sides have advantages and disadvantages. With many units in the air, fuel management is one of your key priorities. Sure you can get 5 bombers into enemy airspace easily, but they can only be there for a short time if they don't spend huge amount of time "hopscotching" from airfield to airfield. A good commander can use this to the "air" commander's disadvantage. However, having air superiority creating havok in the enemies long supply trains to the front can be a crippling tactic of done properly. The only steadfast defense is interlocking SAMs with a good range and a handful of high quality Interceptors.

I did enjoy the "long" capture times in Advance Wars as MOUT (Military Operations in Urban Terrian) is a slow process. Imagine trying to take a hostile city in the time frame that the game provides. (Visualize New York city falling in maybe a few hours to a single infantry unit...not very realistic.)

It makes me wonder just how much "time" each turn is supposed to represent. Then people would say a tank cannot be built in one turn. To that I'd say it's more like "requisition". The price you pay is a "deployment" cost. Like say, the cost of bringing these units to the battlefield. (If you've ever played People's General you'd kind if understand the system.)

...Lol, so easy to spend a lot of time talking wargames. Twisted Evil
_________________

"The Object is not to die for your country, but to make the other poor bastard die for his." - General Patton
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
DeviousPENGUIN



Joined: 25 Feb 2005
Posts: 54
Location: Pittsburgh PA

PostPosted: Apr Thu 21, 2005 3:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
The problem with that is the fact that isn't "wholly" realistic. A carrier can launch all of it's aircraft in a short period of time. Paratroopers though take time when they land to "organize" and they would be slightly scattered so they'd take up that whole zone.


Yes and this accounts for the fact that they are unable to take an action on the turn they are dropped. The transport aircraft flys them there and they should be able to drop all of them as the plane is moving.
_________________
Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cleveland



Joined: 11 Apr 2005
Posts: 13

PostPosted: Apr Thu 21, 2005 7:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I like the idea of moving a production city outside the 5 hex radius. You could do it this way:

Moving a production city would take a turn so if you start the game with 4 cities moving one would mean you'd have only three for a turn. The moved production city would have to trace supply along a road back to the capital city so a tenuous supply line would exist subject to interdiction. Of course the upside is production closer to the front but it means a more vulnerable production city.

I really enjoy games with decision making as the main hook- this one has it in spades.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Kemco Games Forum Index -> Dai Senryaku VII Modern Military Tactics All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 1 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group