 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
Tigey
|
|
Arguments about the start-up logistics and realism aside (which in the spirit of the first AE, can be put aside for the sake of fun), my only 2 cents, is to advise that you don't make Germany too much of an "invulnerable" overwhelmingly superior invading superpower, as you've sorta been hinting at. At the start of the scenario, this sort of portrayal is fine, probably even desireable from a sense of "fun" perspective:up:, However, as the game progresses, a number of plausability problems would plague a scenario with such an overwhelming enemy...
I'm talking mainly from experience in playing Red Alert 2, which had a rather similar sort of scenario (a less than wholly serious scenario of the overwhelmingly powerful USSR invading the US). Suspension of disbelief is certainly possible at the start, indeed, is a good thing in helping to envision such a daring and overwhelming invasion:up:, with the player as the embattled underdog.
Now that's fine in the early game, where you're fighting desperately against overwhelming odds to hold the line: However, the problem begins to appear as the game begins to progress, and you gradually begin to take back territory, and expel the invaders, you get a sense of stalemate, similar to that of the Battle of Britain/Pelenor Fields: Yes, you've survived a huge attack, but you haven't actually "won the war", and have suffered huge damage and losses. This situation would probably not be a very satisfying conclusion for most players.
The sheer fact is, that even if an invaded US, that has just fought desperately for it's survival, managed to pull through, it would be in no position to launch any kind of counterattack across the Atlantic to "win" the war. At most, a megapowerful Germany might offer a truce on it's own terms. Chances are it would simply try again next year with even more powerful super luftwaffe weapons. The only plausible "satisfying" conclusion for players (ie: with the consequences of the player's repulsion of the invasion being the winning the of war, not just the battle), would be for the player to abstractly develop "superweapons" or something (like in AE 1 with the Amerika Bomber), but that didn't feel very plausible in Red Alert 2...
Edit: I'm sure this doesn't make any sense, but it's Friday night, and if you're coherent at this hour, than you've had a boring night
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Harry Tuttle
|
 |
of the Hoople Heads
Mar 2003
time: 00:16
|
|
Ah yes, the suspension of disbelief.  I watched "The Transporter 2" last night and I have to tell you I wish I had a better sense of it. Don't go see the movie, it's very bad...
@ Steph: Anyways, as we know, the scenario has a bit of the fantastic thrown in. Mainly, because, it's so out there in realism (Nazi's surviving WWII, invading America, the occult).
So, in order for there to be a good stomping war in another place besides the same European battlefield, as we've seen in every other German WWII scenario, we have to give a little bit of faith in Doenitz after 1941. Also, we have to stop thinking of the US Navy as being an unstoppable juggernaut. Sure, they won some major engagements in the Pacific war, but nonetheless these battles were decided by very narrow means. And who's to say, that at the Battle of Rio DeJaneiro in March of 1947, the US Admiral in charge didn't screw up?
As for the coups in South America, we saw in the intial mission that the coups did involve fighting between the Nazis/Fascists guerillas and the Allies. It was a covert operation, so yes, the Allies did know about the problem and did try to solve it.
As for the aircraft involved, I think you're right in the regard to the BF109Ts. They were obsolete by this time. I think the German stock fighter would be another design besides the Ta183 in 1950 as development into jets had a number of designs out there, but that's neither here nor there for this scenario.
@Tigey: Since this is the second installment of the series there will be a sense of "stalemate" once you do finally defeat the Germans in North America, but that's only because the game won't warrant a huge world map that's playable to the extent of taking the fight back to Europe. The third part of the series, which will involve the British, will cover the "End Game". AEII will be a slugfest, focusing on strategy for the player.
I don't agree with the idea that their wouldn't be a counterattack after North America. The Allies would need to end the fight, once and for all, because, as you said, the Nazis would still be around to try again. Take the Russians for example. Did the Soviets get the Germans on the run and then say: "Well, we're in Warsaw, they're just about defeated, let's forget this war and sue for peace." No, they took it to the Germans and wiped the Nazis off the map.
Trust me, the third installment will give the player the chance to counterattack in a very meaningful way. 
Let's just remember that this is a fun scenario with plenty of realism thrown in for historical accuracy. It's gonna have a whole bunch of neat stuff in it that you would read only in comic books. It's entertainment after all!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Tigey
|
|
quote:
@Tigey: Since this is the second installment of the series there will be a sense of "stalemate" once you do finally defeat the Germans in North America, but that's only because the game won't warrant a huge world map that's playable to the extent of taking the fight back to Europe. The third part of the series, which will involve the British, will cover the "End Game". AEII will be a slugfest, focusing on strategy for the player.
I don't agree with the idea that their wouldn't be a counterattack after North America. The Allies would need to end the fight, once and for all, because, as you said, the Nazis would still be around to try again. Take the Russians for example. Did the Soviets get the Germans on the run and then say: "Well, we're in Warsaw, they're just about defeated, let's forget this war and sue for peace." No, they took it to the Germans and wiped the Nazis off the map. |
Ah, I didn't realise there would be a part 3 (yay! btw). That's fine then, my main concern was that you'd create a fantastic scenario, and because of the "story limitations" or whatever, the ending would either be somehow unsatisfying for the player (ie: stalemate, with no end in sight), or some implausible victory, with events appearing at the end claiming a US that has few allies and has had the tar whipped out of it by the invasion, miraculously rebuilt its fleets and armies offscreen, and somehow lead an invasion of Europe... Probably overreacted a bit, and with a part 3, that's virtually a moot point...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sarsstock
|
|
Say Harry, I remember before the crash you had comisioned me to come up with some shield designs for generic Central American nations and such, as well as a shield for the invading Germans. Now in the end I believe you went with a shield of your own for the Germans, but did you need any of those redone in the button shield format as the Mexican shields you had asked me to make?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Sarsstock
|
|
Well Harry I will get right on that unit shield request. I will use some of the designs you originally posted for AE2 in making the German silver and black button shields. As for the Americans I will try to make up as many historical division shields as possible, are there any specific ones you might need? 101st and 82nd airborne perhaps? I'm also finally making headway on that title screen I promised about a year ago, I'll submit two different versions for you to consider.
Now finally I have a question about armored trains and rail guns. Specifically, will there be any? A nation such as America with such a vast rail network could make good use of hundreds of militarized armored locomotive I would think.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Tigey
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Harry Tuttle
@Tech: There's a huge swath of land that I added to include "off the map" cities for extra bonuses for the game. It's currently holding about 30 intermediary cities for the dynamic food routes that I formed. My main concern is that the human or computer will start scouting out this territory and sit on the very fragile city food production tiles next to the intermediary cities. A disruption would create a famine in the cities, eventually cutting the food route. So I want to keep everything and anything away from these intermediary cities.
The Germans are a good bet for starting off, but how can I eliminate the problem where the scenario is started and 15 minutes of enemy AI movement ensues?
? |
I can't remember what you decided format-wise, but if you are doing it in ToT, one method might be to literally take them "off the map". You can "Import" additional maps during the game in ToT. It shouldn't prove too difficult to replicate those cities onto the new map, and restricting the use of natural teleporting abilities and "portal" construction should make them literally unreachable, even by nasty AI tricks. Later, if you want to limit the flow of food (say the mid-west farming region is captured), you could use events to change the terrain around these cities (or you could use it so simply wipe them off the face of the map), to cut the routes... Another benefit of doing this, is you can fill up that map with dummy cities if need be, to reach the 255 limit which stops new ones being founded, if you don't reach that figure on the main map...
This has the advantage of not polluting the pretty main map with silly cities (like "Berlin" on one square in the middle of the Atlantic), and making the food/trade cities unreachable, but makes for a probably ugly secondary map...
Last edited by Tigey on 06-09-2005 at 04:57
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sarsstock
|
|
Harry, I tried sending the first of the two title versions your way at "harrytuttle@civilization2.net" but I don't think it was able to handle the attatchment size on account I got a delivery failiure notification.
Is there an alternate e-mail you can be reached at perhaps? PM it to me if possible and you can review to the title when you have the change.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sarsstock
|
|
Believe me I wouldn't want to do that to ol'Harry. If you want to e-mail me the address Harry you can use one of my dummy accounts at Indesigner_4@hotmail.com.
Also Harry I thought I had heard once that it was indeed possible in ToT to make a unit that is only capable of travelling on certain types of terrain, which would be ideal for an armored train and or rail gun. This could be just another ToT myth however as I don't recall ever seeing it myself.
Does anyone out there know the definate answer to this question?
Last edited by Sarsstock on 07-09-2005 at 01:00
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Sarsstock
|
|
Here is the first of what will hopefully be two titles for Atomic Eagle 2, I say hopefully because its taken me quite a while to come up with this concept along. This title highlights the looming threat of Nazi occupation over the resiliant Americans below, and is based on an actual propaganada poster from the war.
Harry suggested I post this on the AE2 thread so here she be...
**edit**
The final ToT title version has been reposted further down the thread.
Last edited by Sarsstock on 10-09-2005 at 07:01
|
|
| |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
03-09-2005 05:07
|