Next Achtung Panzer DLC- 1969 China/USSR border conflict

Started by Silent Disapproval Robot, June 12, 2013, 05:30:20 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6
User actions

Dolan50

#45
June 17, 2013, 08:17:40 PM
A Corporate Executive,a Democrat and a Republican walk into a room.The CEO walks in first and notices 10 cookies on a plate and pockets 9 of them,then turns to the Republican and whispers in his ear  and says "The Democrat is trying to steal your cookie".

Dolan50

#46
June 17, 2013, 08:18:18 PM
A Corporate Executive,a Democrat and a Republican walk into a room.The CEO walks in first and notices 10 cookies on a plate and pockets 9 of them,then turns to the Republican and whispers in his ear  and says "The Democrat is trying to steal your cookie".

Dolan50

#47
June 17, 2013, 08:19:07 PM
A Corporate Executive,a Democrat and a Republican walk into a room.The CEO walks in first and notices 10 cookies on a plate and pockets 9 of them,then turns to the Republican and whispers in his ear  and says "The Democrat is trying to steal your cookie".

Dolan50

#48
June 17, 2013, 08:19:54 PM
A Corporate Executive,a Democrat and a Republican walk into a room.The CEO walks in first and notices 10 cookies on a plate and pockets 9 of them,then turns to the Republican and whispers in his ear  and says "The Democrat is trying to steal your cookie".

Dolan50

#49
June 17, 2013, 08:20:31 PM
A Corporate Executive,a Democrat and a Republican walk into a room.The CEO walks in first and notices 10 cookies on a plate and pockets 9 of them,then turns to the Republican and whispers in his ear  and says "The Democrat is trying to steal your cookie".

Dolan50

#50
June 17, 2013, 08:35:08 PM
Not sure how I feel about this DLC :-\

The force mix is small and so is the map.
I think if any GTOS modern DLC needed a hypothetical theme,this conflict qualifies and could certainly use it to make it more appealing.

Hell if they wanted to add Chinese and hills,Korea 1950 would have been a better choice in my opinion.

If the price is low I'll probably purchase it,but don't see getting much playability out of it.
A Corporate Executive,a Democrat and a Republican walk into a room.The CEO walks in first and notices 10 cookies on a plate and pockets 9 of them,then turns to the Republican and whispers in his ear  and says "The Democrat is trying to steal your cookie".

Silent Disapproval Robot

#51
June 17, 2013, 08:58:25 PM
Yeah, it seems a little too limited in scope for me.  Infantry only PLA just seems so anti-climactic.

mikeck

#52
June 17, 2013, 09:34:07 PM
Seems like the developers only want to produce scenarios with soviet forces (which is fine) outside of Afghanistan, the soviets weren't involved in a lot of conventional conflicts. I would like to see them do a few more hypotheticals like limited NATO/Wp conflict in 1970s or something. The sino-Russian "conflict" seems like a reach
"A government large enough to give you everything you want is strong enough to take everything you have."--Thomas Jefferson

Dolan50

#53
June 17, 2013, 10:26:52 PM
QuoteSeems like the developers only want to produce scenarios with soviet forces (which is fine) outside of Afghanistan, the soviets weren't involved in a lot of conventional conflicts

The Russians have been fighting in around Chechnya since the mid 1990's.
And actually lost the 1st war against Chechnya 1994-96.And not too long ago invaded Georgia.Plus they also still have some on going conflicts in that region.
Which is nothing new for the Russians since they have had problems with that region since the Napoleonic era.

Graviteam said they won't touch a NATO vs WP or Arab vs Israeli type conflicts. >:( :(

Andrey mentioned something about a Chaco war(made me want to puke).
India vs Pakistan maybe or something about revisting Angola for some earlier Operations that took place before Hooper.

As far as I'm concerned if that's the best they want to offer for modern combat then I'd rather they channel their limited resources back to the WW2 Russian front.
A Corporate Executive,a Democrat and a Republican walk into a room.The CEO walks in first and notices 10 cookies on a plate and pockets 9 of them,then turns to the Republican and whispers in his ear  and says "The Democrat is trying to steal your cookie".

Dolan50

#54
June 17, 2013, 10:39:53 PM
I think modern conventional wars probably wouldn't model well with this game.
Here is a link to the Leavenworth papers E-book about Russian-Soviet unconventional wars in the Caucasus,Central Asia and Afghanistan.222 pages.


http://www.scribd.com/doc/131744116/Leavenworth-Papers-No-20-Russian-Soviet-Unconventional-Wars-in-the-Caucasus-Central-Asia-and-Afghanistan
A Corporate Executive,a Democrat and a Republican walk into a room.The CEO walks in first and notices 10 cookies on a plate and pockets 9 of them,then turns to the Republican and whispers in his ear  and says "The Democrat is trying to steal your cookie".

-budd-

#55
June 17, 2013, 10:51:28 PM
I haven't picked up any of the modern stuff, the terrain seems uninteresting. I may pick them up sooner or later for the force mix in quick battles, but i'm still playing the campaigns. I like my battles better in some kind of context.
Enjoy when you can, and endure when you must.  ~Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Be Yourself; Everyone Else is Taken ~Oscar Wilde

*I'm in the Wargamer middle ground*
I don't buy all the wargames I want, I just buy more than I need.

Dolan50

#56
June 17, 2013, 11:16:34 PM Last Edit: June 17, 2013, 11:33:05 PM by Dolan50
QuoteI haven't picked up any of the modern stuff, the terrain seems uninteresting. I may pick them up sooner or later for the force mix in quick battles, but i'm still playing the campaigns.

I'm more of a Quick Battle(QB) player.I like the campaigns too,but some of the larger ones kind of detract from some of the aspects of the game I prefer most. Which is-I like to get down to ground level with the camera and follow some of the little fire fights without worrying the rest of the battle is going to go to hell in a hand basket if I don't get back to the big picture soon enough.

With the large battles during some of these campaigns I have to keep the camera above the battles and be more of a force manger which takes away some of the immersiveness(is that a word :P) I get from the smaller battles.

With QBs I can design the type of battle and force mix I feel most comfortable with that gives me a more balanced battle that allows me to spend just as much time watching the battles as I do managing them.
A Corporate Executive,a Democrat and a Republican walk into a room.The CEO walks in first and notices 10 cookies on a plate and pockets 9 of them,then turns to the Republican and whispers in his ear  and says "The Democrat is trying to steal your cookie".

-budd-

#57
June 17, 2013, 11:25:26 PM
I play with limited battle radius 1]. because i don't have a powerhouse PC 2]. i don't want to miss to much :)



Enjoy when you can, and endure when you must.  ~Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Be Yourself; Everyone Else is Taken ~Oscar Wilde

*I'm in the Wargamer middle ground*
I don't buy all the wargames I want, I just buy more than I need.

Silent Disapproval Robot

#58
June 21, 2013, 12:24:28 AM
I've been following the discussions between the lead developer, Andrey, and a user named Rostov on the Graviteam and SimHQ forums and it has been quite interesting.  It's obvious that Graviteam is a small dev studio and doesn't see a huge profit so Andrey ends up not only being the lead developer but also the chief cook and bottle washer of the operation.  As one finds in a lot of these small development teams, the lead developer may be a whiz at programming but people skills aren't his strong suit.  Andrey can be quite prickly at times.  On the one hand, I respect Andrey's vision to build a wargaming franchise that refuses to cover the same ground that 100s of others have covered in the past and instead look at lesser known conflicts.  On the other hand, you'd think he'd be a bit more flexible and attempt to meet consumer demand, if only to generate enough capital to ensure that he and his team can continue to bring out the kind of DLC they want to.

Rostov has given Andrey and his team a lot of really in depth information regarding the Chinese PLA yet even he says that the DLC as planned looks kind of dull but Andrey refuses to budge and won't consider adding in extra units to allow for a greater "what if" kind of scenario depicting a larger scale conflict between the PRC and USSR.  And he gets downright mad when people suggest a Western Front WWII game.  (A lot of APOS fans have been asking for a Brit/Canadian/Pole campaign focusing of the Falaise Gap).

I want to continue supporting the series, but I just can't bring myself to shell out for what I see as a very limited PLA vs. USSR border guards scenario with less units involved in the entire campaign than one would typically find in a single battle in other APOS DLC.

And the suggestion that the next DLC will be the Chaco War?  Seriously? I had to Google it just to see what the hell it was.  Call me a conformist, but I would also much prefer a Falaise Gap DLC than some obscure 1930s border war between  Bolivia and Paraguay.

Dolan50

#59
June 21, 2013, 07:30:15 AM


50 % Discounts - game & ALL DLCs
Period discounts - from June,21 to June,24 at Gamersgate.

http://www.graviteam.ua/home/news/44-discounts-june-2013.html
A Corporate Executive,a Democrat and a Republican walk into a room.The CEO walks in first and notices 10 cookies on a plate and pockets 9 of them,then turns to the Republican and whispers in his ear  and says "The Democrat is trying to steal your cookie".
Print
Go Up Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6
User actions