Author Topic: Scenarios with Tanks? (Read 4196 times)

Arlo · « **Reply #15 on:** October 21, 2004, 06:23:22 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Wotan

One thing I think that would make events more interesting is Hatred.

Too much back slapping and congratulations. Bring back the Hate...

Hehe .. DoK ... you reading this?

p.s. I agree that getting more planes and vehicles to enhance historical settings would help.

Furious · « **Reply #16 on:** October 21, 2004, 06:29:13 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Arlo
... maybe HT will see the sudden apparent disinterest in historical events and decide that TOD isn't really worth the time, effort or money.

Don't agree at all with you.

I like a lot of "ging-ging" action in the MA, but look forward to the structured elements of TOD.

The difference between TOD and a scenario will be that I won't have to set aside a specific amount of time on my weekend to play. I can wait until after my kids have gone to bed, put on my leather chaps or silk scarf and sign up for and fly a mission.

Arlo · « **Reply #17 on:** October 21, 2004, 06:44:56 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Furious
Don't agree at all with you.

I like a lot of "ging-ging" action in the MA, but look forward to the structured elements of TOD.

The difference between TOD and a scenario will be that I won't have to set aside a specific amount of time on my weekend to play. I can wait until after my kids have gone to bed, put on my leather chaps or silk scarf and sign up for and fly a mission.

We all know the differences. We also know the differences between events, the CT and the MA.

So basically ... you and who else? Everyone else seems perfectly happy with the MA and could care less about structure, history, scenarios (or TOD) and/or immersion. At least it sure seems that way. See what I mean on perception based on lack of interest?

Furious · « **Reply #18 on:** October 21, 2004, 07:23:24 PM »

I guess I just don't equate a lack of interest in scenarios with a lack of interest in TOD. That's all.

AW=B17= · « **Reply #19 on:** November 13, 2004, 12:06:28 AM »

Here's my take on it.....

While the game mechanics and comms are outstanding, the lack of physical chat rooms / OC's / breifing rooms tends to fly in the face of the type of cameraderie that a scenario fosters (or should foster)

I know I used to love the 45 minutes in the (locked) breifing room with my bomb groups as much as the missions. THAT's where people bonded and became "real". Global chat vanished and behind those doors only the group(s) counted.

I think the slow growth of the scenario community here is in part because those "human tools" are missing. Yes, the radio comms are even better than AW - but only if you're thinking like a nerd with 0's and 1's. Sometimes less is more.... and surely BOTH would be the balls.

-W

Flossy · « **Reply #20 on:** November 13, 2004, 05:16:57 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by AW=B17=
I know I used to love the 45 minutes in the (locked) breifing room with my bomb groups as much as the missions. THAT's where people bonded and became "real". Global chat vanished and behind those doors only the group(s) counted.

I couldn't agree more. I was just saying this very thing in the CM forum a couple of days ago. That first 45 minutes of so before a frame started was as much part of AW scenarios as the actual flying was. The Briefing Rooms added so much to the atmosphere and feeling that you really were on a very important mission. All the banter that went on between our group members, who were usually a mix of players from each of the three countries, was a great way of getting to know players that were normally 'enemies' in the general arenas. I never get the same feeling of participation here as I did in AW.....

AW=B17= · « **Reply #21 on:** November 13, 2004, 06:52:19 AM »

Sometimes, when you think past the "functionality", less can be more.

Those closed rooms added the "crunch time" atmosphere and 1000 other human nuances that AH does not yet seem to fully "get".

And if you wanna speak to realism, while the all-pervasive radio might be great comms for the MA, it's *not* realistic for scenario play. The /anns were great for one way orders from command - and just like RL there was no responding to those, just discussion with the group in the room at the time.

And those rooms got used very little in AW when compared to thier all-pervasive use in scenarios. That helped make the scenario "different" or "special" etc etc.

It may take years of lobbying to get some of the chat-rooms back... keep up the good fight.

-W

ROC · « **Reply #22 on:** November 13, 2004, 09:50:29 AM »

It's worth the lobbying effort. Although I do understand the strong desire for this game to "not" be AW, there were a great many things about AW that just lent itself to be more in tune with building on the core community.

The hard part is figuring out what was really physically better on the FE, and which is just a longing for familiarity.

Still, the briefing rooms were huge, from a scenario junkies point of view.

And so as not to hijack the thread, tank runs are a fantastic element to scenarios. I have been in 2, and both were very enjoyable.

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #23 on:** November 13, 2004, 09:53:47 PM »

Hate (tm) is one of the reasons I wanted this thing running 8 missions or more.

It takes 2 or 3 missions for everyone to learn their jobs and the enemy's tendencies. Then the middle missions each side usually scores one major victory ("those %$#!ing bastards"). Then the last third the Survivors battle it out to the bitter end. You really need that "7-game playoff series" feel to build Hate. With only 4 missions it's just barely not a learning experience anymore by the time it's over.

ROC · « **Reply #24 on:** November 13, 2004, 10:19:47 PM »

Well Dok, we pull off a Peal Harbor, and these guys will be hooked

Full compliment of moving CVs ohhhh myyyyohmy

From Peal through Midway, theres 8 frames of hate brewing

detch01 · « **Reply #25 on:** November 14, 2004, 12:47:29 AM »

ROC, Dok - I'll come back for PH

. Lemme know when on BW.

Cheers,
asw

AW=B17= · « **Reply #26 on:** November 14, 2004, 12:50:50 AM »

And you're 100% absolutely correct. I could not agree more. Somewhere in the later end of AW the scenario output increased from a couple mega-events per year to the "scenario of the month club". This mentality seems to have crossed seamlessly in AH with another "special event" around every corner.

Aside from the fact that the core talent can't keep giving 100% over and over again - I personally feel (and made my feelings known loud and clear way back then) that the very abundance of these type of little events "cheapens" the genre as a whole. Alas (tm BB) there are always a few scenario junkies that can't give it a rest - ever.

So.... If you *really* wanna show them what it was supposed to be all about, wha tit used to be all about, then design a "Mega-Event" on *your* terms and schedule it to start in late Sept 2005 or mid-january 2006. (IMHO the "after Labor Day" or the "After the holidays" doldrums is prime time for a body count.

The bad news is you have to wait a long time to get the idea to fruition. The good news is that you get almost a year to market it, build the terrain, generate interst, and get that "buzz" going. You can bill it as "something the likes of which has never been seen" because the fact is 90% of the AH peeps have never seen it.

Plus that far out, scheduling is a snap.

Once you design the ulimate "mega scenario" - you get to define the rest of them as "mini scenarios" - and *you* define the genre, as opposed to the current genre defing your event.

-W

PS: Speaking of a 7 game series... "How 'bout those Red Sox?"

Quote

Originally posted by DoKGonZo
Hate (tm) is one of the reasons I wanted this thing running 8 missions or more.

It takes 2 or 3 missions for everyone to learn their jobs and the enemy's tendencies. Then the middle missions each side usually scores one major victory ("those %$#!ing bastards"). Then the last third the Survivors battle it out to the bitter end. You really need that "7-game playoff series" feel to build Hate. With only 4 missions it's just barely not a learning experience anymore by the time it's over.

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #27 on:** November 14, 2004, 01:27:29 AM »

This event had to be run now because due to my rather ... uh ... uncertain life situation I don't even know where I may end up living 3 months from now. It was either now or possibly never.

One of the reasons I backed away from scenarios in WB was the push towards "Lites" ... scenario-a-month. They just didn't see what I was trying to do and I didn't feel like fighting about it.

Simply put, though, when I design an event the place and planes are the brushes to paint the event with - not the centerpiece. I look to capture the atmosphere of a desperate defense, an onslaught attack, or whatever - and to make sure people learn the jobs entailed in accomplishing the tasks at hand - MA techniques will usually get you killed. It's a pretty different approach - but it works.

AW=B17= · « **Reply #28 on:** November 14, 2004, 11:50:56 AM »

One think you can't simulate with a "scenario lite" is combat fatigue. We learned this well with RM and (too)Longbow with 2 sets of 8 frames. While it felt too long then (perhaps should have been 2 sets of 6) it did a few things that other scenarios couldn't do, and made the history books as one of the great ones, right alongside Squabblecanal.

I don't mean for my remarks to disparage or upset the fine CM team here that works real hard to grind out the events. I think you saw how helpfull they can be.

That said... if you find the time and lifestyle to put on a mega event, I think it would do just fine as long as it got the proper "run-up" marketing wise. I know I'd rather pay for an account all year to participate in 2 big events than a bunch of little ones. They become a drain after a while except for the most rabid scenario junkies.

Also, this community is evolving a bit differently...... in AW the aftershocks of the 4Q, the Gunfighters etc etc.... continued to define the core mindset. Here the AW's entered into a melting-pot and it's different. Building a scenario community takes time, and building a team dedicated to "mega-scenarios" will prolly take even longer. I don't think the two types of events are mutually exclusive. But they need to see an "old school" scenario to really "get it".

Cod knows the tools here are awesome.... and despite some of us whining for a few private briefing rooms... there is a lot more that this game can do for a scenario build than AW ever could.

-W

-W

DoKGonZo · « **Reply #29 on:** November 14, 2004, 11:58:57 AM »

Agreed ... we have the tools and staff we only wished for in the past.

But it's almost like we need to restart the education process. And that takes a lot of time and community support. And it'll probably require some corporate support from HTC to provide incentives for the MA-entrenched players to try something different.