Next DLC pool

[Ruggs225]

Really hope there is some DLc news soon. Didnt purchase bulge, maybe will at xmas when on sale.

I like being able to keep cores going for a while, so the Bulge DLC is just too short and then the core is done.

Also still highly annoyed no Pacific dlc. A huge void that needs to be fixed even if it is a brand new game.

Playing OOB now and while it is ok, it is way to short and doesnt have a grand campaign for the Pacific side.

[rafstaff]

Pacific japan and north afrika for germany and italy would be awesome for me

[DefiantXYX]

Why are so many people asking for an italy campaign?
I think losing all the time vs. inferior enemys could get boring with the time. And how should this work? You play with an green army all the time? A 5 star italian unit with 3 heroes would be more ahistoric than AO 1946!

[Retributarr]

Why are so many people asking for an italy campaign?
I think losing all the time vs. inferior enemys could get boring with the time. And how should this work? You play with an green army all the time? A 5 star italian unit with 3 heroes would be more ahistoric than AO 1946!

"quote=Defiant" Why are so many people asking for an italy campaign?

WHY???... because some of us think that we could do a much-better job of that effort!. Mussolini "Bungled-It!!!"... he was "An-Idiot!".
Replaying poorly chosen and poorly prepared forces in conjunction with badly timed battles would be very difficult to salvage into victories. However!... if the player can choose where and when and how to apply his forces... then victory is not so uncertain!.

[Tassadar]

Why are so many people asking for an italy campaign?
I think losing all the time vs. inferior enemys could get boring with the time.

It can be made fun and engaging, both in a historical and fictional branch. Back in Panzer Corps 1, Uhu and nikivdd made a Italian Campaign DLC that for me is by far the best campaign I have ever played, DLC or not: https://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=32748

It branches out only at the end with just that little fictional bit sprinkled in to make the ahistorical path fun (as usual not realistic at all, but it's something that in fictional paths is a must to accept), while also being interesting on the defensive side. It could work just would require not getting too extended. I'd see it as either a long 30 mission branching path (like the mod from Panzer Corps 1) or a two part DLC split around 1942.

And how should this work? You play with an green army all the time? A 5 star italian unit with 3 heroes would be more ahistoric than AO 1946!

You can simply slow down experience gained by modifiers in the editor, it was done for AO series. Just adjusting the multiplier so that units gain exp at 60% of the normal pace they normally would in a comparable campaign length and that's fine. I am sure you can reduce the hero drops as well if you'd really have to.

[DefiantXYX]

WHY???... because some of us think that we could do a much-better job of that effort!. Mussolini "Bungled-It!!!"... he was "An-Idiot!".

Sure, but that could lead to another ahistorical DLC.

[rafstaff]

But why anybody use as argument against this campaign that it will be ahistorical? In 40axis you had sea lion operation and for me it was awesome and i dont remember anyone saying anything wrong about that, 44 has also ahistorical way and also great for me, so it can be done great, just need a good solution and story. Also it could be nice to see italians kicking some british troops and winning not loosing every time like in most of games

[Patrick Ward]

Why are so many people asking for an italy campaign?
I think losing all the time vs. inferior enemys could get boring with the time. And how should this work? You play with an green army all the time? A 5 star italian unit with 3 heroes would be more ahistoric than AO 1946!

"quote=Defiant" Why are so many people asking for an italy campaign?

WHY???... because some of us think that we could do a much-better job of that effort!. Mussolini "Bungled-It!!!"... he was "An-Idiot!".
Replaying poorly chosen and poorly prepared forces in conjunction with badly timed battles would be very difficult to salvage into victories. However!... if the player can choose where and when and how to apply his forces... then victory is not so uncertain!.

This is actually a good point.

Many years back I was involved with another company who produced a game about El Alamein. We quickly discovered that making a game solely about the battle would mostly give you historical results because equipment and environment was fixed and competent generals always made the best move. It was boring and more of a simulation than a game.

The solution was to take the start date a month or so back and make the game about the deployment, defence creation, supply, interdicton and when, where and how to attack or counter attack. Thats where the important and defining decisions were made. Thats were we could introduce reasonable and justifiable variability.

Pat

[adiekmann]

WHY???... because some of us think that we could do a much-better job of that effort!. Mussolini "Bungled-It!!!"... he was "An-Idiot!".

Sure, but that could lead to another ahistorical DLC.

Some ahistorical content is fun and still plausible when not overdone while adding fresh and new approaches to scenario design. I enjoy that.

In a new Africa campaign for instance, is it totally unreasonable or unimaginable that the Axis withdrew from North Africa in early 1943 instead of doubling down? If German and Italian forces were withdrawn to Italy instead, how would that have affected the later invasions of Sicily and Italy? Yes, it is ahistorical, but not pure fantasy.

[Bee1976]

But why anybody use as argument against this campaign that it will be ahistorical?

I wouldnt say anybody. Some of the best missions in AO series are ahistorical missions and fights. So i dont mind if a DLC goes ahistrocial. as long as it offers challenge, fun and a nice story im in. I can accept that a lot of people prefer to play histrocial stuff, and as long there is an option to play the game histrocial if the player wants it, i dont see a problem. Or if a DLC is labelled as ahistoric like 1946. If i remember correctly Marco said that 1946 was really successful. So ppl seem to want ahistorical content aswell.
I enjoyed 1946, it got some flaws, but it got some real funny missions and i dont regret spending the money on it.

[DefiantXYX]

But why anybody use as argument against this campaign that it will be ahistorical? In 40axis you had sea lion operation and for me it was awesome and i dont remember anyone saying anything wrong about that

You got a point there, indeed operation sea lion belongs to my top10 scenarios. The scearios are great, I like the idea how you win every battle but you still have to retreat. Beside the fact that I lose my navy, although I didnt lose a single ship

But I would say sealion is something like semi-ahistorical. It never happened, but everyone knows it and has some imagination how it could have happened, if you are somehow interested in WW2. And you can just skip it, its only a small part in a historical campaign.
You cant compare this to "we steal an us atomic bomb und throw it on russia" and "we kill hitler and stalin and germany und russia are good friends again" or "manstein dies in 1946 and there is noone to replace him".