Feature: Strategic Layer

[pipfromslitherine]

Having a higher level layer which allows the player to carry over units and make resource and other decisions is something which we think could add a lot to the game.

The actual design for the strategic layer is still very much work in progress, but would probably include some kind of resources of ownership bonuses, key strategic points that needed to be captured, and allocation of reinforcements. So this is an area ripe for cool ideas!

The ability to generate random campaigns is also something that could add greatly to replay value. Even MP campaigns, if we could make it work!

[stevenbird]

The idea of a grand, strategic level campaign is good and allows for good possibilities. However, i hope that each individual mission can still be selected too. Even though the market garden campaign was very good and the overall campaign layer logical, i still missed the option of choosing to play any mission as and when. Hope such an option is still to be present in future.

Steve

[pipfromslitherine]

I think there will definitely be campaigns which are 'mission based' verses campaign based. As you prove, there is a desire for both types of play.

Cheers

Pip

[stevenbird]

Thanks for the update. Either way i know it'll be a great game and i have full confidence. BA in any form is news to rejoice!

Steve

[k9mike]

+1...I am so stoked about this game...hope it doesn't take too long to produce...

[Granfali]

Ohhh mate, this will be best feature of all

[Granfali]

Please, let the strategic layer to be completely moddable by players, so that we can create our own campaigns adding maps, customized battle groups, etc. I think that point would greatly enrich the game.

And think about the possibility that there are more than two strategic players. Everyone just knowing where and how their units are. That strategic cooperative mode would be the icing on the cake ...

[pipfromslitherine]

The details of the strategy layer are still very much work in progress. But it is safe to assume that I will be attempting to make it as scriptable and moddable as possible .

We will be using the forums for the design process, so hopefully we can ensure it makes as many people happy as possible!

Cheers

Pip

[Granfali]

You might think in a linear strategic system too, as in Close Combat 2. Each operation is a connected system of scenarios (maps).

Some of the operations are linked. In every operation, if you beat the enemy on one map, you move onto the second map. If you win, you move onto the third, and so on. The forces carry over, subject to "historical" reinforcement levels on a "daily" basis. The enemy will counterattack when they get an infusion of forces.

This sort of campaigns could be easier to codify. Just to give more ideas...

49085TOJGLWJMG0O9QRTJX1.gif (16.72 KiB) Viewed 8310 times

[sage3]

Here's an idea I had to help create campaign continuity between missions:

The player can be awarded special, single use 'cards' if they make certain achievements. When played, these could have a variety of benefits, such as, bring in a single artillery or air-strike; rallying and bringing back to full strength a wounded unit; provide a single extra attack for a unit; replenish a unit's ammo; drop an AT mine... and so on. Nothing very powerful, but enough to provide some incentive for players to go the extra mile and try to make achievements. This becomes more interesting, IMO, if the player has a core force they are bringing across missions, i.e. should I: 1) Conserve my core force and not try for a particular achievement or 2) Take a risk (with a small reward) and go for an achievement.

That said, I'd really like to see an operational level between missions that has the player have to make choices about resources, reinforcements, rest etc...

[Celeborn]

Some of my fondest tactical memories are playing ASL campaign games, esp Red Barricades, where knowing you will have to fight tomorrow makes for much more realistic decisionmaking. I would pay a *lot* for a game with good team vs team play and historical campaign games.

[pipfromslitherine]

Some of my fondest tactical memories are playing ASL campaign games, esp Red Barricades, where knowing you will have to fight tomorrow makes for much more realistic decisionmaking. I would pay a *lot* for a game with good team vs team play and historical campaign games.

We would definitely be aiming for a system which allowed for customised campaigns, where people could be as historical or not as they please.

Cheers

Pip

[Granfali]

We would definitely be aiming for a system which allowed for customised campaigns, where people could be as historical or not as they please.

Cheers

Pip

Nice Pip, but what sort of customised campaigns? as now in BA1? strategic map layer (as GJS'44 campaign)? linear system (upper image I posted)???
I would love second option!!!

[pipfromslitherine]

Honestly the strategic layer is still in the design phase. We have a lot of options about the scope of it, whether it should be local or a web-based solution, etc. But we will give info as we make it up!

Cheers

Pip

[Gerry4321]

Any update on this?

Gerry

[IainMcNeil]

We haven't spent any time on it yet unfortunately. When we do we'd like to find a way to integrate it to the PBEM system so we want something that might work across multiple games.

[Granfali]

When we do we'd like to find a way to integrate it to the PBEM system so we want something that might work across multiple games.

Excellent!!!

[Skanvak]

I would really like a strategic layer. So I support this move. I have quite enjoy Market Garden.

For the map, I have something against random map. I rather have the approach of Total War where each square of the map translate into a a map. And the state of the map should be kept too so a map can evolve during the campaign (building behing destroyed, fortification added). The main idea would be a Town intact at the begining and in ruin during later battle.

The real question is are we spêaking of an operational layer or a strategic layer. In an operational layer you don't need production in a strategic layer you need production.

My best bet for an operational scenario yuou can do is Stalingrad. The town would be entirely mapped (and the map could evolved) and then divided in sector of playable size. Each side will have the historical unit set at the starting position and will have historical reinforcement. From my point of view, units should be in the same sector and exact controlled territory (and no man's land memorized). Then both player simultaneously plot move and decided the sector they want to activate (understand fight inside). For me the Operational turn should be simultaneous (though it can be I go You go).

I wonder how we plot heavy bombing?

Ah, and supply should be managed at the operational level. I see supply as point used to activate sector and put unit in combat ready situation. If you don't have enough supply then the unsupplied unit should have problem in the tactical module. Lastly, the supply point stockpiled should be materialized so has to create tactical objective.