Wargame: Red Dragon

Started by Jarhead0331, March 29, 2014, 10:52:07 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

undercovergeek

What restrictions pray tell?

Nefaro

Quote from: Jarhead0331 on October 05, 2016, 12:10:03 PM
Quote from: undercovergeek on October 05, 2016, 11:53:44 AM
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on October 05, 2016, 11:30:04 AM
Quote from: JasonPratt on October 05, 2016, 11:20:54 AM
And would many of the complaints be null if playing the campaign game instead of mp?

I avoid the campaigns. I think they are brutally difficult and pretty superficial. For me, skirmish is where it is at.

Agree with JH - build a deck and go skirmish, 'soldiers' for grown ups

undercover raises a good point. Deck building is half the fun. Play a few games with stock decks, find out what your play style is and then knock yourself out pouring through the OOBs to construct a deck that suits your strategies. I'm a defensive player overall, so I like having enough armor and mechanized infantry to quickly seize objectives, consolidate a defense and hold, while advancing further when possible. I also like having some airmobile infantry for emergencies or vertical envelopment. Finally, having enough supply and logistics is critical, as is anti-air, rotary and fixed wing support. I save just enough points for a few artillery pieces, but since I'm usually on the defense for most of the game, its difficult to maximize arty effectiveness on an enemy who is usually on the offense and highly mobile.

I agree with JH and UCG.

Building your force (aka "deck") is half the fun.  Trying it out on an angry foe is the other half.

From what I experienced of it in W:ALB, the campaign meta-game isn't all that great.  Rather thin, compared to something like a TW grand campaign.  More like a quick & dirty way to tied battles together.  Better than having no such campaign for territory, but not anything to write home about either. 

I've done more skirmish battles than campaign battles, using various decks I mixed & matched.  That's where a fair bit of the strategy comes from - building the decks and seeing how you fare with each incarnation.  Then adjusting, or making new ones, in between battles.  :) 

AchillesLastStand

Quote from: undercovergeek on October 05, 2016, 04:11:19 PM
What restrictions pray tell?

If you build a general deck you are restricted to 5 selections per type{armor, inf, etc} If i want to make a deck with 8 slots of inf as well as the best armor i cant do it.
Of course if you want to build a specialized deck if gives you bonuses for the selected unit types but cripples you in other areas.
If memory serves correct it wasnt this way in EE or ALB.

undercovergeek

Same as alb - brimming with confidence I went to build a paratroop only army - no tanks, no support, no helicopters - I don't think I'd stand a chance against an armoured assault

jomni

#259
OOB is very restricted in Red Dragon. because the camapign is now different. Each unit is actually very specialised. Armour, infantry, artillery.  I have had battles where I defeated the Armour in a previous battle and end up battling just artillery in the next.  You get benefit of combined arms by stacking Armour, infantry, air and arty in one province.  Unlike before when you have a task force

republic

Is there a Groghead group that plays this regularly?  Would anyone be interested in setting something up?

I played Airland Battle a lot on the big maps, but had another kid and seemed to have completely missed Red Dragon while it was popular.  I've tried playing with the faceless hoards but they leave the game as soon as something doesn't go their way, or I get Zerg rushed before I know what is going on.

I'm US Central Time and can play after 8:00 generally.  I'd say my skill level has fallen to 'Skillful Novice' lol

AchillesLastStand

Quote from: republic on October 14, 2016, 07:22:39 AM
Is there a Groghead group that plays this regularly?  Would anyone be interested in setting something up?

I played Airland Battle a lot on the big maps, but had another kid and seemed to have completely missed Red Dragon while it was popular.  I've tried playing with the faceless hoards but they leave the game as soon as something doesn't go their way, or I get Zerg rushed before I know what is going on.

I'm US Central Time and can play after 8:00 generally.  I'd say my skill level has fallen to 'Skillful Novice' lol


Yep, me and a buddy took like a year break and have recently started playing again. Shoot me a pm for steam ID if interested.

jomni


HoodedHorseJoe

Communications Director
Hooded Horse

We are a publisher of indie games with strategic and tactical depth. 28 projects and counting, come check out our portfolio on Steam, GOG, and the Epic Games Store!

You may have seen me around in previous roles such as editor of Wargamer.com and Strategy Gamer.

AchillesLastStand

Really wish they would have done a WW2 Wargame instead of Act of Aggression. It would have sold like hotcakes and gotten much better reviews.

sandman2575

Quote from: AchillesLastStand on December 13, 2016, 02:57:16 PM
Really wish they would have done a WW2 Wargame instead of Act of Aggression. It would have sold like hotcakes and gotten much better reviews.

I would buy that in a heartbeat.

Nefaro

Quote from: AchillesLastStand on December 13, 2016, 02:57:16 PM
Really wish they would have done a WW2 Wargame instead of Act of Aggression. It would have sold like hotcakes and gotten much better reviews.

Looked like yet another Typical RTS from the 2000s, from what I recall.  Dunno if changing the theme, to the same as most of the others in the genre, would've made it stand out.  :cowboy:

Jarhead0331

Quote from: Nefaro on December 14, 2016, 07:40:22 PM
Quote from: AchillesLastStand on December 13, 2016, 02:57:16 PM
Really wish they would have done a WW2 Wargame instead of Act of Aggression. It would have sold like hotcakes and gotten much better reviews.

Looked like yet another Typical RTS from the 2000s, from what I recall.  Dunno if changing the theme, to the same as most of the others in the genre, would've made it stand out.  :cowboy:

This is hardly a typical RTS from the 2000s. You are missing out. Fantastic series.
Grogheads Uber Alles
Semper Grog
"No beast is more alpha than JH." Gusington, 10/23/18


Nefaro

Quote from: Jarhead0331 on December 14, 2016, 08:13:55 PM
Quote from: Nefaro on December 14, 2016, 07:40:22 PM
Quote from: AchillesLastStand on December 13, 2016, 02:57:16 PM
Really wish they would have done a WW2 Wargame instead of Act of Aggression. It would have sold like hotcakes and gotten much better reviews.

Looked like yet another Typical RTS from the 2000s, from what I recall.  Dunno if changing the theme, to the same as most of the others in the genre, would've made it stand out.  :cowboy:

This is hardly a typical RTS from the 2000s. You are missing out. Fantastic series.


He was speaking of the old Act Of Aggresion RTS games.  I guess these devs were involved with that series before the Wargame series.

And, yes, the Wargame series is great!    O0


jomni

#269
Act of War (2005) is the original title before Wargame.  It was very good. Not typical as Jarhead stated.
The latest iteration after Wargame is Act of Aggression (2015).