Quantcast

Realistic Scenario Design Contest

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
9 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Realistic Scenario Design Contest

RogerCooper
Axis & Allies is a historical game but not realistic one. With the TripleA engine, free of the constraints of a commercial board game has the tools to be more realistic. Therefore I am sponsoring a scenario design contest with the following rules.

1.     A prize of $100 will be given to the person who designs the most realistic scenario for World War Two using the TripleA Engine. In addition, I will buy you lunch if you are in the NY Metropolitan area.

2. The scenario must be playable by the AI.

3. The scenario must cover the entire world (excluding the polar regions) without the use of inset maps or other discontinuities.

4. The scenario must not have no more than 750 areas. Do not feel obliged to create a new map.

5. The game can start at any reasonable point, although a good treatment of the early war years would be appreciated.

6.     Submissions must be made by July 4. I will pick a winner based upon my own subjective criteria.

7.     Individual nations should not have more than 20 units types to build.

There are types of realism I am looking for Strategic Realism, Operational Realism and Tactical Realism

Strategic realism covers the realities of producting & maintaining units. A&A ignores this in a variety of ways. There is no cost for maintaining units. Captured areas are worth full value to their captor. Economic values do not reflect the real importance of areas. The starting forces are arbitrary in size and placement.

Operational realism means that the forces can do what they were really capable of. In A&A, operations can be conducted as easily in interior Asia as in Europe. In A&A, the Pacific is little wider than the Atlantic. On the other hand, the ability to move forces quickly by sea or rail is ignored in A&A. The importance of weather on the Russian front is ignored by A&A.

Tactical realism means that forces interrelate with each other in realistic ways. In A&A the Attacker can fight endless rounds of combat, while in reality offensives often bogged down. Air units are important in A&A but not in the way they were important in the real war.

Keep in mind the difference between decisions and features. For example, the Fall of France was the result of poorly planned operations by the Allies. This could be a decision, allowing the player to make or avoid the same mistake, or a feature by just weakening the Allies. Both are realistic, just be explicit about in your notes.

Please be creative and keep it simple. Post your comments and scenarios here.




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Realistic Scenario Design Contest

captaincrunch
sounds really cool and sounds like finding someone to add more abilities and breakdown/endurance stat type stuff and triggers etc. but definitely this game modding ability is capable. Interesting idea to pass onto other gamers and hopefully this game and its community grows and I'm sure there will be takers for this ... just need to put in the effort for this idea but a cool one. Brings to mind a boardgame called Squadleader that I think tried to be very realistic on a Hexagon-style map but TripleA is the most advanced right now I think
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Realistic Scenario Design Contest

RogerCooper
Squad Leader is a tactical game so it is not the best model. Some games that to recreate all of WW2 in a more realistic game include World in Flames(ADG), Blitz(ADG), Global War (SPI), Global War 1939 (HBG), Blitz General, WW2: The Wargame, The World at War (Xeno Games). The last 3 games are essentially A&A variants and suffer from many of the same problems as A&A.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Realistic Scenario Design Contest

m3tan
In reply to this post by RogerCooper
I'd love to submit an entry, but is this going to require developing additional code to enable some of the features you're suggesting?

Has someone created a resource listing all the parameters that can be enabled to create custom games and rules?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Realistic Scenario Design Contest

Zim Xero
Primary source: the Pact of Steel .xml file in the Games folder.
Secondary source: searching these forums for specific solutions/clarifications
Alternate source: the changelog, if you can find one that is readable
'thats the way it is' makes it neither desireable nor inevitable
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Realistic Scenario Design Contest

RogerCooper
In reply to this post by m3tan
m3tan wrote
I'd love to submit an entry, but is this going to require developing additional code to enable some of the features you're suggesting?
I think that the game has plenty of features to do what is needed. Just make the best use of the tools available.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Realistic Scenario Design Contest

RogerCooper
Here is some data from the Correlates of War database which may help guide designers,
http://axisandallies.wikia.com/wiki/Correlates_of_War

Note that the Axis starts with about 43.5% of the world's military but only about 20% of world's economy.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Realistic Scenario Design Contest

m3tan
In reply to this post by RogerCooper
I'm much better versed on what AAA can and can't do now that I've had a few weeks to tinker with the XML. I'm on board with all your contest parameters except this one:
RogerCooper wrote
3. The scenario must cover the entire world (excluding the polar regions) without the use of inset maps or other discontinuities.
A global map doesn't easily lend itself to realistic scenario design. 95% of the fighting occurred in 20% of the globe. If you don't want panzers in India, the territories should really be drawn to scale. Unless France, Germany, and Spain are one area each, the map will consist of hundreds of territories (90% of which will never be used). I'm not interested in creating a map that large. If France, Germany, and Spain are one territory each, you're eliminating almost all the meaningful operational decision making. The game devolves to number crunching production and placement of units (basically stock edition A&A).

My suggestion is a map that covers Europe, North Africa, Coastal Asia, and the Pacific in sufficient detail to allow for meaningful operational action. The US can be represented as an abstract off map territory. Central/South America, Central/Southern Africa, and Central Asia can be ignored completely. There was realistically ZERO chance of any meaningful fighting occurring in those theaters. If it did, somebody has already been resoundingly beaten... The handful of off map theaters such as Dakar, Ethiopia, Madagascar etc.. that could/did have fighting can be handled by off-map boxes.

Your thoughts?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Realistic Scenario Design Contest

RogerCooper
I think that discontinuous maps (such as the Great War map) are really ugly. You can deal with the less interesting parts of the world by subtly altering the scales. The Big World map does this well.

In a board game, you need to distort the map to make if fit. In a computer game, this is a less of an issue as you can quickly move over uninteresting areas of the world.

It is worth noting that the some areas you mentioned did have some fighting and could plausibly have had more fighting. For example, Peron in Argentina was pro-Axis and the US actually had a plan for invading Brazil if it sided with the Axis.
Loading...