Tactical Combat?

[JeanNYGUARD]

Just want to ask ... do you think Paradox will ever incorporate Tactical Combat to their awesome games (especially HOI and Vicky2)?



I dont know if you ever played Liberty or Death by Koei for The Genesis system. It was a great game. It was like Vicky but much more basic. One thing it did have was a tactical system. The beautiful thing about their tactical system.. battles didnt last long... it was sinple but effective.

Imagine combining that tactical system with Vicky2 or HOI?

ENDLESS HRS of Gameplay

 

[Zelvik]

Hell no, please not. The level of abstraction that would be needed to make it worthwhile would make it completly worthless at the same time. Whats the point of a mini game mechanic in a grand strategy game, that totaly breaks the immersion of the player? If you want tactical combat, how about playing the total war series?

 

[Andrelvis]

Were it turnbased, I could see it being possible, but as the game is in real-time, I don't think it is.

 

[JeanNYGUARD]

Hell no, please not. The level of abstraction that would be needed to make it worthwhile would make it completly worthless at the same time. Whats the point of a mini game mechanic in a grand strategy game, that totaly breaks the immersion of the player? If you want tactical combat, how about playing the total war series?

No offense to TW fans but ... eh.

I play it on occassion, but its in no way as immersive as HOI or Vicky. When I play Empire TW... I play it for maybe a hr or two (Multiplayer and Singleplayer) and get tired of it. I then go on with life lol. Paradox games (HOI, Vicky) I play for 3 - 6 hrs in a day... then plan strategies when Im doing real world things. Invade here, defend this, etc.

Go Paradox!

 

[unmerged(36774)]

This has been discussed before I think. And the answer is still NO.

 

[HMS Enterprize]

No offense to TW fans but ... eh.

I play it on occassion, but its in no way as immersive as HOI or Vicky. When I play Empire TW... I play it for maybe a hr or two (Multiplayer and Singleplayer) and get tired of it. I then go on with life lol. Paradox games (HOI, Vicky) I play for 3 - 6 hrs in a day... then plan strategies when Im doing real world things. Invade here, defend this, etc.

Go Paradox!

Maybe this speaks more to the lacklustre state of the TW franchise rather than the concept of tactical battles itself no?

I for one would think it would be cool to have tactical battles, as much as I love PI games, sometimes it does get a little tedious watching a set of numbers decreasing as you men take casualties. Plus the PI system doesnt really take into account those spectacular battles where you can pull a stunning coup de grace or suffer some out-of-the-blue setback that ruins your army...

Perhaps a AGEODs ACW type system would be more feasible, ie other factors that can hinder/help a player, to simulate those really bad Union leaders at the start of the ACW etc etc.

The only other real issue with tac battles is how to incorporate an essentially turn based medium with that of a real time one like PI games...

 

[unmerged(15623)]

Maybe this speaks more to the lacklustre state of the TW franchise rather than the concept of tactical battles itself no?

Pretty much. I have spent countless of hours playing BreakAway Games' tactical wargames, and those focus only one single battles. The two original CA games showed promise, but then detoriated into bulk crap, more or less.

You can never really get the same satisfaction from playing the shallow TW games that you get from fighting a fierce delaying action against superior force waiting for reinforcements that need 2 hours to arrive, or fighting a swirling cavalry melee by the holvels and orchards of Moravia where the freshest horse rules the day and getting charged after a forced march means getting slaughtered (unlike TW games where everyone is running here and there most of the time, and getting from one flank to another needs 3 seconds). Or rolling up an entire russian brigade (of 4000 men), sans a battallion with a well placed impetious charge by 300 French Dragoons.


IMO, truly satisfying tactical battles need a game in their own right. If Paradox ever makes a TB game (which would allow tactical battles in MP) I think something akin the simplistic yet fun system of RTKXI would be the best.

(Edit) Which might actually be something what OP was recommending as well. Both are KOEI games and that particular style of tactical combat is relatively common in Japanese tactical games.

 

[Negru Voda]

No offense to TW fans but ... eh.

I play it on occassion, but its in no way as immersive as HOI or Vicky. When I play Empire TW... I play it for maybe a hr or two (Multiplayer and Singleplayer) and get tired of it. I then go on with life lol. Paradox games (HOI, Vicky) I play for 3 - 6 hrs in a day... then plan strategies when Im doing real world things. Invade here, defend this, etc.

Go Paradox!

I played Empire TW.. and wondered: Who would want to play a game that you can immediately conquer France just by building up a large stack and pounding Paris... Seriously.. a single-province-France?

I feel like Rome TW might have been the peak of the TW series, or Medieval 2.. (Shogun was also good fun, but the Grand Strategy AI was just... umm... irrational is the only word)

 

[HMS Enterprize]

Pretty much. I have spent countless of hours playing BreakAway Games' tactical wargames, and those focus only one single battles. The two original CA games showed promise, but then detoriated into bulk crap, more or less.

Indeed. I lost many a day to Shogun TW (as a strategy game newb) and even more to Medieval 1 (ahh those were the days). Rome was ok, and Medieval 2 was ok (after some serious modding).

I would be more than happy with tac battles ala Medieval 1 in a PI game. The graphics werent great (then neither are a lot of PI games anyways so not really a huge problem). It was fun and not overtly complex. Two ingredients for a good tac battle IMHO.

 

[telesien]

Indeed. I lost many a day to Shogun TW (as a strategy game newb) and even more to Medieval 1 (ahh those were the days). Rome was ok, and Medieval 2 was ok (after some serious modding).

I would be more than happy with tac battles ala Medieval 1 in a PI game. The graphics werent great (then neither are a lot of PI games anyways so not really a huge problem). It was fun and not overtly complex. Two ingredients for a good tac battle IMHO.

Oh yes. Give mu CK strategy with TW tactics and you won't hear about me for a month

 

[Celdur]

Dam, it would be orgasmic to have Victoria 2 with tactical battles like the
Total War games.

 

[pizi]

Oh yes. Give mu CK strategy with TW tactics and you won't hear about me for a month

Now that would be awesome

 

[King]

If we ever decide to start doing tactical games, we will probably look at tactical combat.

 

[Alex_brunius]

One thing that might not be tactical combat (as you envision it) but still would be pretty darn cool is to have divisions/brigades/ships move around regardless off province borders in real time. So that its possible to move anywhere.

Imagine a game where you could actually paint attack arrows in any way you like (for example on a touchscreen) and where divisions do combat through spheres of influence instead. Think of it like each division HQ is surronded by a mass or fluid and combat breaks out when this comes into contact with enemy.

This would mean that no front is ever static and devoid of combat but instead dynamic and fluid. Without actually going down to far into tactical level (which I think is bad due too how much it would slow games of this grand scale down).

Now such a game would be truly revolutionary.

 

[Snaggleooo]

Tactical battle on this scale would be too overwhelming. Everyone's seen some of the AAR's from HoI3 and there's single province battles with 700,000 combatants. Not gonna lie, it'd be bloody awesome, but it would reduce your computer to a steaming heap. That's one of the things that really got me about the Total War games. I couldn't give a flying rats about individual character models; give me 20 five-hundred man blocks to move around. At least it would give a slightly rough approximation of the sort of armies used. A 2000 man army is about the max you can put on the field in TA games; Leipzig had 400,000, Rossbach 70,000, even Hattin in 1187 AD had 50,000. If you ever do go into tactical battles Paradox, please don't give us pathetically small armies (mind you, I'd prefer you keep up the good work with Grand Stategy anyway).

 

[Snaggleooo]

One thing that might not be tactical combat (as you envision it) but still would be pretty darn cool is to have divisions/brigades/ships move around regardless off province borders in real time. So that its possible to move anywhere.

Imagine a game where you could actually paint attack arrows in any way you like (for example on a touchscreen) and where divisions do combat through spheres of influence instead. Think of it like each division HQ is surronded by a mass or fluid and combat breaks out when this comes into contact with enemy.

This would mean that no front is ever static and devoid of combat but instead dynamic and fluid. Without actually going down to far into tactical level (which I think is bad due too how much it would slow games of this grand scale down).

Now such a game would be truly revolutionary.

+1
This is my wish for HoI4; a map without provinces and divisions (or brigades) having a zone of control around them where they'd fight when contacted with an enemy.

 

[unity100]

im against this. im fed up with having to cope up with 12 separate AI controlled units running about in the current paradox games i play even at this state. i dont want more tiredom in that front.

 

[Filou]

The tactical AI would need to be able to match the human, otherwise SP would be even more one-sided than it is now.
We can currently win wars with less tropps than the AI by better using ours, usually it means concentrate your forces to win against a spread out AI. Now immagine if on top of that you could go in specifc battles with less troops and come out victorious.

Anyways, I can't imagine playing HoI as Germany or Soviets and have to play every single battle out, even at a brigade level. Nor could I cope with a WWI level of troop activity if I had to fight out all battles to take a provinces.
Anyways, Vicky is about socio-economics. Warfare is only a means to those ends.

One thing that might not be tactical combat (as you envision it) but still would be pretty darn cool is to have divisions/brigades/ships move around regardless off province borders in real time. So that its possible to move anywhere.
[snip]
Now such a game would be truly revolutionary.

A game called Road to Moscow was designed that way a few years back.
http://pc.ign.com/articles/131/131163p1.html
Sadly it never got completed.

 

[unmerged(63310)]

Eh... there are already so many tactical combat games- probably poor choice for Paradox to enter that heavy competition unless they come up with totally ground breaking take on it which is always a danger if your marketing budget isn't big enough to get people to take a new outside take like that seriously.

Look at M&B- probably the most logical and well done FPM(m= melee) so far and there was a market for such games but it was completely over looked by most consumers for very long. Especially amaxing given the niche M&B met with people who don't want to join a MMG and pay monthly fee and is more oriented to classic RPG where the fate of the world is in your hands rather than just being 1 of 1,000s.

If Paradox were ever to do a tactical combat game I hope it would be humorous... think historical heads of state or something in a MMA style mob battle though I guess that could be a small game- maybe just an app.

Either leverage that weird scandinavian humor with even Johan doing 3 different characters or more seriously re-thinking a genre like the Homeworld started to- I think Paradox might be able to do a good job with something like that. Blend of Homeworld, Space Control, and EU3 in space.

 

[Meanmanturbo]

Eh... there are already so many tactical combat games- probably poor choice for Paradox to enter that heavy competition unless they come up with totally ground breaking take on it which is always a danger if your marketing budget isn't big enough to get people to take a new outside take like that seriously.

Look at M&B- probably the most logical and well done FPM(m= melee) so far and there was a market for such games but it was completely over looked by most consumers for very long. Especially amaxing given the niche M&B met with people who don't want to join a MMG and pay monthly fee and is more oriented to classic RPG where the fate of the world is in your hands rather than just being 1 of 1,000s.

If Paradox were ever to do a tactical combat game I hope it would be humorous... think historical heads of state or something in a MMA style mob battle though I guess that could be a small game- maybe just an app.

Either leverage that weird scandinavian humor with even Johan doing 3 different characters or more seriously re-thinking a genre like the Homeworld started to- I think Paradox might be able to do a good job with something like that. Blend of Homeworld, Space Control, and EU3 in space.

Im still holding out for my Crusader Kings/Mount & Blade/Patrician 3 combination. The ultimate medieval experience