Jump to content

Home

Weather: Should it affect the troops?


Recommended Posts

I'm curious on what you think because I think weather should be a factor in the next GB. Think of it, a white dust resembling snow covers your visibility to the ground and infantry's accuracy drops considerably, flashes of light can resemble lightning, occasionally striking one of your buildings, mechs, or aircraft damaging/ disabling the unit. Something that resembles rain, lightsabers won't work, etc...it would be pretty cool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 64
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I agree with pbguy. I like the idea of storms, and their effects should be that all units have their speed, weapons range and weapons power cut down, and i would also like to see things like lightning that could damage buildings and mechs, and fry infantry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think so too. Weather is a definitely a part of Star Wars - the blizzard on Hoth and the sandstorm on Tatooine, for example - so I'd like to see some aspect of it in SWGB2.

 

I think movement and LOS would be reduced for all units. However, certain units would be immune - for example the Empire could build specialist troopers (Snowtroopers/Sandtroopers) who are unaffected by weather, though perhaps not as good as normal Stormtroopers in clear weather.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We should just put in an option for everything, then we can make our own games :rolleyes:

 

On second thought maybe weather would be bad. If you make the effect too significant then games can hinge on it, which would be bad. On the other hand if the effects are not very significant, there is no point in having it. So I've changed my stance to "indifferent" on this topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Um...you guys do realise that weather affects combat is real life dont you?

 

Of course weather should effect combat. It would make the game more challenging and random, and it would also add to realism is that storms happen, whether you want them to or not, and you just have to be good enough to overcome it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's always difficult to use the concept of "realism" when the setting is entirely fictional. However, real combat has always been affected by the weather and this CAN affect the outcome. Being a good general is about reacting to changing circumstances and overcoming random difficulties. You should be able to cope with things like the weather ruining your plans. We already have wild animals in SWGB and these can really screw up your plans for you if they attack your workers in T1.

 

Remember that bad weather can be used to your advantage as well. eg the Ardennes offensive when the Germans relied on bad weather to ground the allied air forces.

 

Different terrain also has advantages and disadvantages. You might find you have to use different strategies depending on whether the map is open or closed in by trees or rocks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you're right. This is probably very obvious, but computer games do not, cannot and should not be a true representation of the reality of war. Even if a totally accurate simulation of war was technically possible, it wouldn't be much fun to play.

 

Also the concept of fairness is very important to games. In a fair game all players start on an equal footing and it is down to the skill of the players to make a difference. Another obvious point is that this never happens in real wars. No two states ever have the same resources, population size, geographical area or level of economic or technological development, and the differences hardly ever balance each other out. This can make defeat almost inevitable (eg Germany against USA and USSR in WWII, also english and american civil wars), although it can sometimes be overcome thorugh a combination of skill and luck (eg Prussia in the seven years war). It could be suggested that some people would enjoy the chance to prove their superior skill by overcoming unequal odds and adverse circumstances such as weather, but other people clearly want a straightforward fair game without random problems getting in their way.

 

Although an option to turn weather on and off seems like a good compromise, this leads into a wider issue about SWGB2 (if it ever appears): how complicated should it be? People who have been playing it a long time want to see more civs, more units, more technology to research, more options, generally more of everything. But if everything every fan wants gets put in, it will make the game too inaccessible to newbies as it will be difficult to learn how to play it with all the extra stuff going on, especially if you haven't played SWGB before. It isn't in LA's interests to make a game that has a very narrow fanbase, and it isn;t really in any of our itnerests either, as we need new people coming in to keep the game alive. On the other hand, if there isn't enough to keep the old fans intersted, that's also bad. Oh, it's all so complicated.... Doesn't Jerry have a final thought that could sort it all out for us???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We don't want this to be a game of dices.

If such random difficulties came in the course of a battle(unlike a surprise counter-attack) it will piss us off. You can't prepare yourself for so many circumstances... And the course of a battle(or a game) might turn just because of that even if you prepare yourself. We don't want our army get sucked up in a Tatooine Sandstorm or frozen to death by a Hoth Snowstorm or even wiped out by a meteor shower(possible!!!)...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There could be an early warning system. Like is a sandstorm was coming, the computer would announce it and place a timer on how long you have to get your troops and workers in buildings unless you have the right type of trooper (i.e. Sandtrooper, Snowtrooper). Besides, how would it affect vehicles outside of the possibility of sand or frozen gears? The idea of turning ot on and off is a good one. Newbies need to learn how to play the game and for those who skip the tutorials, don't need to be placed into a position of a potential Meteor Shower and doesn't know what to do. Maybe a tutorial should explain it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

luke - welcome to the reality of war. However what we're talking about here is not killing troops, just disrupting their weapons, LOS etc for a small time.

 

Again i say it will add to realism and give all players something new to play with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

That's a great idea. It adds a whole new idea and sense of thinking to the game. Also, does elevation play a part in the game? It doesn't seem to.

 

Although, I can see why people are against it, that is why it should be optional. Like all visible etc. I used to play on All Visible, all the time. Then I played it properly, and was overwhelmed and unprepared through lack of experience. I've learned to handle it pretty well since then.

 

On the Gameplay>Realism issue. Definetly so. If they included the option of soldier morale in the game, it would end up very one-sided. A drop in morale would lead to a downward spiral. You have to limit some things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...