 |
| |
|
|
Harry Tuttle
|
 |
of the Hoople Heads
Mar 2003
time: 00:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by CapTVK
/crazy ideas mode: on/
How to use those extra units slots in ToT: joker units
Not sure if this has been tried before but could we make some german units identical to others but that trigger different events? That's already done in RF. But what if we create a 2nd set of identical units that would create a different surprise event?
Let's say this joker unit is a German Hedgehog v2 that creates a group of SS mountain commandos in the Caucasus when destroyed. There would only be a few of those units scattered around but enough to keep you on your toes. They would be rare but when you take on a hedgehog you have to ask yourself the question: "Is this a regular or a joker?"
A different perspective on supplies: The great underground ocean railroad
The general consensus is that RF Redux should be a single map. I'm inclined to a single map as well. An underground map would complicate things. But I'm crazy ideas mode now so hear me out.  It's a different look on how to introduce long term effects of strategic choices.
What if we create an underground map that has three narrow long ocean tunnels going eastwards. One comes out behind Leningrad, one somewhere behind Moscow and one somewhere in the Caucasus. Meanwhile, back west we have one city filled with freight, high def/att land units etc... BUT we only have one ship with a limited capacity, movement and it is going to take at least 6 turns to reach the end of a tunnel. You can't build new freighters either, that tech has been removed. What's the best choice?
/crazy ideas mode: off/ |
I like the ideas, crazy yes, but workable, and entertaining. 
I can't remember if this is employed in the game, but here goes. I'd like to add one other crazy idea for consideration: Enemy Chameleon units
This could be an interesting display of resistance movements in Eastern Europe, beyond dedicated partisans.
Basically these units would be Russian units under Barbarian control. They'd look just like your units, have the same stats, but would be lost in the mess of battle. They'd attack with no warning and the only way you'd know they were enemy saboteurs would be to either find them or beat them in battle. They would require no extra unit space, just an event to create them.
The underlying historical fact to these units is that the SS did employ spies and saboteurs in the Eastern Front campaign. Also, after the Soviet retaking of areas once "liberated" by the Germans, local nationalistic resistance groups rose up and started employing guerilla warfare against the Soviets. The same goes for a few groups when the Germans rolled in to town.
These units could be a total surprise to the Soviet player.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Leonidas
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Field Marshal Klesh
Greetings.
As you just read above, I have accepted Fairline's invitation to lead the events and scenario modification of RF-TOT. I have been out of the loop for some time now, and let me say I spent a terribly enjoyable saturday learning all about the 'MGE on steroids' that is TOT. This really is a better version of civ! I will need the help of the community and some dedicated playtesters to see if these changes are indeed working to better the overall game.
Firstly, let me say that the individual events files for RF-MGE are in the order of 19kb. Nemo has each file virtually maxed out leaving no room for additions. ToT's events files can be significantly larger.... and I mean Sigfnificantly (capital S). This really allows for nearly anything we want added to be put in, and in a fully fleshed out way, not halfarsed.
What I would like to develop in this thread is a working list of prospective 'majour events' that happened on the Eastern Front, and see how many of them we could put into this game. From this list I can develop what new units can be added that will reflect certain historical niceties.
I have already completed new versions of a few of the majour events that were in RF-MGE, as well as creating a few new ones. The list is as follows:
- Opeartion Typhoon- Battle for Moscow
- Crimea Invasion
- Army Group A into Caucasus
- Army Groub B into Stalingrad both summer/winter events
- Opeartion Citadelle- Battle for Kursk
- Operation Spring Awakening- Lake Balaton, Hungary
In the events files that those go into, there still is PLENTY of room for various and sundry other things. Techumseh, you have always spoken the truth... ToT really is a godsend.
I want to develop more ideas like the above for majour events that took place in the war. I will find ways to work them in gamewise. Hopefully those ways test out okay and do the job. I have more ideas, but will hold them off for now to see what you gentlemen can come up with. I mean anything, lemme hear it. There is events room enough for all, really.
I have some ToT-specific game mechanics questions that I think are best left to a thread of their own.
I also need to know if we are using RF-MGE 1.4 or 1.5 as a basis for this? |
FMK:
Welcome back sir!
I definitely like your way of thinking. I have played every version of Red Front, and your approach is certainly in keeping with Nemo's vision for Red Front - ie he wanted an historically realistic East Front game.
In all those versions the Kursk event occurred with no problems.
In '41 the German push to Lenningrad, Moscow and Stalingrad should be massive. There should be a major chance that the Soviet player will lose all three cities. We must punish the player!
In '42, the Soviet player should be scrambling with just trying to stay alive.
Perhaps the opportunity of getting those elite Siberian divisions transferred east can depend on a percentage chance of Japanese involvement in the conflict. This way the scenario will play out differently every time. The player may get those divisions or he may not 
Historically, Stalin waited until he had Japanese guarantees that they would remain neutral, before he moved those Siberian divisions east.
Hitler, on the other hand, tried to get the Japanese to attack the Soviets from the east.
I think the player should NOT get supply units - he should get only armoured infantry units. I found supply units unbalanced the game. It must be up to the player to develop and build.
Kursk: this can happen either if the Soviet player takes Kursk or it happens around the historical timeline. Perhaps this event can be random? Even so, NO defenses or extra units should be given to the player. It is up to the player to prepare or not.
Battle for Berlin: This should be a tough and costly fight. The Soviets were bled white fighting to Berlin. There were even King Tiger tanks (the 503rd) in Berlin that destroyed many Soviet tanks.
Allies: there should be more pressure from Allies for Berlin: ground forces; bombing, etc. Perhaps Allied pressure on Berlin could be randomized? Sometimes the pressure could be greater than others? Maybe have a special "Patton" unit?
I think the Soviet player should be pressed to the maximum in this scenario, with a great chance he will lose. I think every loophole should be eliminated, and every opportunity given to help the AI.
In particular I would like to see the fighting for Stalingrad be very desperate. The player should see Axis troops in the Caucasus, perhaps even threatening the oil fields.
We could even have other special units: "Guderian", etc. . .
Cheers!
Last edited by Leonidas on 06-12-2004 at 03:59
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Leonidas
|
|
Colwyn mentioned that he would have a final version finished soon, so perhaps we could start with v1.5?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CapTVK
|
 |
Voorburg, the Netherlands, Europe
Jan 1970
time: 05:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Harry Tuttle
I like the ideas, crazy yes, but workable, and entertaining.
I can't remember if this is employed in the game, but here goes. I'd like to add one other crazy idea for consideration: Enemy Chameleon units
This could be an interesting display of resistance movements in Eastern Europe, beyond dedicated partisans.
Basically these units would be Russian units under Barbarian control. They'd look just like your units, have the same stats, but would be lost in the mess of battle. They'd attack with no warning and the only way you'd know they were enemy saboteurs would be to either find them or beat them in battle. They would require no extra unit space, just an event to create them.
The underlying historical fact to these units is that the SS did employ spies and saboteurs in the Eastern Front campaign. Also, after the Soviet retaking of areas once "liberated" by the Germans, local nationalistic resistance groups rose up and started employing guerilla warfare against the Soviets. The same goes for a few groups when the Germans rolled in to town.
These units could be a total surprise to the Soviet player. |
That's isn't such bad idea either.
More importantly it could lead to a short moment of moral contemplation for the player. At the start those "Barbs" would be mostly attacking German forces. When things start to turn around and you're pushing for Warsaw and Berlin they would also start attacking YOUR troops. Now what!? They were your "allies", but now they're becoming your problem.
I wonder if you could make an event that gives Warsaw to the barbs (Polish resistance army) around 44/45.
At that point it becomes a moral dilemma.
Would be interesting to see how a player would react. Would he plough through or a make an effort to go around it?
Coming back to the crazy ideas issue. Coming up with ideas is always fun. But there's also the issue of finding a problem to fit with our solutions. 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
techumseh
|
 |
of the frozen North.
Apr 1999
time: 22:16
|
|
@Agricola
The Soviets had 3 old battleships, 10 cruisers, 77 destroyers and 279 subs. Of these, 2 cruisers of the Maxim Gorky class (not Kirov class, my bad) were launched during the war; the "Kalinin" in April '43, and the "Kaganovich" in Oct '43. I don't know where. Sorry.
In August '41, the Baltic fleet evacuated it's base at Tallinin. Over 50 of 200 ships (mostly transports) were lost due to mines. With the limited forces of the Kriegsmarine facing the British, the Germans relied heavily on mines to neutralize the Baltic fleet.
Only the Black sea fleet retained some freedom to conduct offensive operations. I think my "major" operation and your "small" one are pretty much the same, the attempt to prevent the fall of Sevastapol. On Dec 29-31, 1941 the Black Sea fleet landed 40,000 men in the Crimea in a Force 5 gale and -20C temperatures. Tanks, artillery and motor transport were also brought ashore. The fall of Sevastapol was delayed until the following summer.
Here's some links for the Soviet Navy:
http://uboat.net/allies/warships/listing.html?navy=USSR
http://www.winterwar.com/Numbers/SUnavy.htm
@Fairline
I think any lend lease program without the P-39 is no lend lease program worthy of the name. Just what are we gonna do with the extra units slots anyway? Besides, we could use a great looking Airacobra, don't you think?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
AGRICOLA
|
|
Canadian bush & Florida
Feb 2003
time: 00:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by FMK
I also need to know if we are using RF-MGE 1.4 or 1.5 as a basis for this? |
Using 1.5 would save you a lot of work. Also, as fairline has asked for and been offered Colwyn's go ahead, it might be the best way to proceed.
quote:
Originally posted by Colwyn
Yes I'm happy to get involved with this, I'm sorry but Ive been away a little bit and still have to post the very final RF1.5 based on some final tweaks and reporting from Agricola.
I will do so in the next week. |
The bugs that I reported to him were very minor so that I'll stick my neck out and suggest that you can safely use the version available for downloading on his RF 1.5 thread.
quote:
Originally posted by FMK
With further review, I believe I can eliminate the June 1941 'ghost' turn. This can only be a positive, right?.. are there any negative implications to doing this?
|
I see the change as giving players a slight break, moreso in 1.5 than in 1.4. I just tried starting both scens to see what the Germans do during their partial turn. As relatively few German units are active in 1.4, the damage to the Soviets is moderate. However, the modifications to 1.5 have activated many more German units with the result that the Soviets take a heavy beating. It's as if the Germans have 2 full turns before the Soviets can do anything.
Do eliminate the ghost turn. The only downside would be that the Soviets might be able to save a few more units, thereby decreasing the number of spawned German units.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
fairline
|
 |
of the wing
Sep 2002
time: 05:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by techumseh
I think any lend lease program without the P-39 is no lend lease program worthy of the name. Just what are we gonna do with the extra units slots anyway?
|
You're quite right of course. I knew that the Russians used them a lot and scored a phenomenal number of kills with Aircobras, but I've done a bit of research on lend-lease to the USSR and discovered that they received thousands of the things, and as Curt says, the King Cobra successor. Apparently, around 1/6 - 1/5 of all combat aircraft used by the USSR were lend-lease types (P-39s, P-63, P-40 and Hurricane being the most common fighters). Around 20% of bombers were lend-lease as well, with the A-20 and B-25 being the most popular.
More geeky facts: the Alaska-Siberia route was the main aircraft delivery route from Sept. 42 onwards, surplanting Murmansk and Iran (which continued to supply Brit aircraft types). If we do include lend-lease a/c then this needs to be reflected.
quote:
Besides, we could use a great looking Airacobra, don't you think? |
Now who would be needing that then? 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Field Marshal Klesh
|
 |
Klesh Marshal Field
Jan 2000
time: 00:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by AGRICOLA
Using 1.5 would save you a lot of work. Also, as fairline has asked for and been offered Colwyn's go ahead, it might be the best way to proceed.
|
Okay.
quote:
The bugs that I reported to him were very minor so that I'll stick my neck out and suggest that you can safely use the version available for downloading on his RF 1.5 thread.
|
Righto.
quote:
I see the change as giving players a slight break, moreso in 1.5 than in 1.4. I just tried starting both scens to see what the Germans do during their partial turn. As relatively few German units are active in 1.4, the damage to the Soviets is moderate. However, the modifications to 1.5 have activated many more German units with the result that the Soviets take a heavy beating. It's as if the Germans have 2 full turns before the Soviets can do anything.
Do eliminate the ghost turn. The only downside would be that the Soviets might be able to save a few more units, thereby decreasing the number of spawned German units. |
Since the 'ghost' turn is more an effect of using MGE for the design, I do thin it should be eliminated. Any concurrent loss of German strength can be adjusted with ease if it ends up presenting a problem.
quote:
Originally posted by N35t0r
AFAIK, the ghost turn is created because the Soviets go before the Germans in the turn order, and new Sovier troops (Read: Partisans in the Pripet) are created, which still have to move.
Fixing it would either mean removing those partisan-creating events (easy, but affects gameplay), or reversing the turn order (impossible AFAIK without re-doing the scen.) |
Yes sir, you are correct about the former, but with regards to the latter I believe you must shed the constraints of MGE and think in the freeing format of ToT. Removing the ghost turn then becomes easy as pie!
I have continued working on developing out a few more majour events. I have completed the encirclement & seige of Leningrad, as well as early events for the Finns.
I still need people to come up with various historical majour events that would need scripting. Just start brainstorming a list and we'll hash out whats worth it and save discussion for later. We just need ideas for now.
One thing I realized. If you look at a detailed map of the ostfront in the late war, many many cities were declared Festung or fortress cities. I thought this would be a great little thing to pop up:
"Hitler decides to fight to the last man in cities that he declares Festungs or "Fortresses"...
Or somesuch and then as the player advances, cities before his armies suddenly beef up their resistance after receiving supplies following Festung designation.
Seems like a really fun way to hep up the lategame and give you something to occupy your mind, right? Well, the thing is they declared even smaller towns than we have on the map Festungs, so pretty much every city you see would've been 'lucky' enough to be declared a Festung.
I think the idea still works, but I dont think we need to Festung-asize every German city. Thoughts?
Thats all for now.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
fairline
|
|
of the wing
Sep 2002
time: 05:16
|
|
Regarding the Kursk event - I think Agricola had already ststed this, but I don't see why there can't be a trigger on a number of cities across the front which when liberated by the Russians in '43 cause a 'Kursk' event. Just needs to be renamed Citadel to make it generic, I guess. No doubt FMK has got something special up his sleeve for this!
Forcing the player to deal with events-generated LAH and Das Reich units, Elefants and Panthers would reduce the speed with which the Soviets advance to Poland, no matter where on the Front this occurs.
Rob: another couple for your list of major battles: the Kharkov pocket and the defence of the Seelow Heights in front of Berlin may be worthy of inclusion.
Last edited by fairline on 06-12-2004 at 22:30
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:16.
Apolyton Time is 00:16. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
06-12-2004 03:46
|