How's the scenario design for OOB Marine?

[Rood]

I'm gonna be lazy
But since I pretty much agree with everything Stephen1024 (2 posts above) has said I have nothing more to add.

I do think that air combat in regards to fighter versus bomber the bomber is doing a bit too much damage (and not taking enough). But maybe that's just me, I do like it that when a fighter is at low strength it's harder to destroy.

[Stephen1024]

Stephen1024 edits text Rood owes me 1 million haha

Sorry just couldn't resist it.

Have fun Rood

[BiteNibbleChomp]

I'm gonna be lazy
But since I pretty much agree with everything Stephen1024 (2 posts above) has said I have nothing more to add.

I do think that air combat in regards to fighter versus bomber the bomber is doing a bit too much damage (and not taking enough). But maybe that's just me, I do like it that when a fighter is at low strength it's harder to destroy.

I usually see 3/1. Would prefer 3/0, but it isn't a BIG problem. (Unlike subs! I rarely see any better than 0/0.)

- BNC

[Mojko]

I have just finished US Marines campaign. I must say it was ok, but I liked the Morning sun campaign much more. Most of the missions were really all about making a successful landing with infantry and recover efficiency. Once you have several units with high efficiency on the ground the enemy simply plays for time. Looking forward to the Winter war DLC

[Rood]

I'm gonna be lazy
But since I pretty much agree with everything Stephen1024 (2 posts above) has said I have nothing more to add.

I do think that air combat in regards to fighter versus bomber the bomber is doing a bit too much damage (and not taking enough). But maybe that's just me, I do like it that when a fighter is at low strength it's harder to destroy.

I usually see 3/1. Would prefer 3/0, but it isn't a BIG problem. (Unlike subs! I rarely see any better than 0/0.)

- BNC

Since the latest patches this has very much improved so now I can say that I totally agree with Stephen1024, including the 1 million that I owe him

[rad]

The intelligence and integrity the Artistocrats team are applying to OOB is self evident from their responsiveness to this and so many other threads - OOB cannot be "all things to all men", yet by any reckoning it is THE break-out wargame - moving the genre by virtue of innovation significantly ahead of PzC, only rivalled (in my opinion) by Unity of Command in the WWII context, the latter having ceased new game output in recent times. OOB Marines surely is, by the nature of the island based context, a narrower canvas than prior OOB modules, as such it invokes an ugly "slug-fest" of grinding attrition, which is surely a close reflection of the historical reality ?

[simcc]

I have to revisit this post after I completed OOB marine.

First off at adherbal, it's a great improvement in terms of scenarios design. No more long walk to battle issue as there are so many enemies and well emplacement makes every turn action pack and not boring which is great, no body likes a slow walking flank and battle.

Further improvement that is needed in scenarios as my comment below.
Choices and consequences - give players either or situation like so this get more air power and do that get more ground deployment and players can't achieve both so they have to choose. It's makes the game more interesting and also players can revisit the game to take different path. Also make those auxiliary troops more valuable if there is consequences ie auxiliary units will carry forward to the next scenarios eg ships and enemy have ships to attack your auxiliary so players will have to decide to send some core planes to help or leave them to their fate as this will be a long term gain that players will have to decide.
Supply and flanking - OOB really shines on supply and scenarios should be design with that in mind ie cut enemy supply leads to early victory and reward and enemy should focus on cutting your supply especially during beach landing. I have never seen any enemy trying to attack my supply ship. It will make very interesting play as players will again have to decide to I protect my landing zone with AA vs kamikaze planes etc. There is a few maps that have good flanking options but some maps there are no flanking options at all which is strange, it's more like head on battle. Also I hope that scenarios can include enemy mass bombers that target to destroy your supply and forcing me to decide on more defensive planes actions or offensive actions. I think AI should be more aggressive in focusing on supply attack. Seabees and engineers can repair supply but I never needed that at all which I think it's lacking.
Shorter scenarios - developers should look into shorter scenarios as some are so long that it need an hour to complete which sometimes I don't have the time to complete it and I hate leaving it halfway as I won't remember my plans of attack the next day. Maybe scenarios can be put into part 1-2 options like imo Jiwa part 1 south invasion and imo Jiwa part 2 finish the conquest etc. I think scenarios with 20-25 turns is great choice.

Other things that I think can make the game better
1. Transport mode - make a difference like track, halftrack, wheels etc like PzC. Marine have better option with those amphibious landing vehicle and I think transport should play more role.
2. Train - jumping off a train in the middle of the map is strange.
3. Teleporting units - slow retreat or fallback is better and make it a point for players to protect the retreat so it won't be boring ie transfer command over to players and add objective to retreat those ship to exit point by x number of turns and enemy will attack it etc.
4. Tunnels - enemy should be able to PPP out of it so making it a priority to be destroyed rather than just another feature there for you to slowly kill it.
5. Para planes - haven't you realise it's ridiculous to charge 20rp for a plabe single use and its vulnerable? Cmon its just too expensive to use that.
6. Recon - can't see concealed enemy? What kind of recon is that? It should be their ability to spot so it makes them more valuable but limit it for example only can see unit below or above x number of entrenchment.
7. Supply drop - purchase supply drop option by air. If game is design that supply is critical then this option should be great for players as they will decide to spend some RP to get supply drop in or risk low supply and lower efficiency. It also help that para troopers or flanking unit more usable.
8. Heroes - I think following PzC would be great as units can be customized. I think heroes is PzC strong point.

Looking forward to winter war please do not delay it again and also faction specialization. If you guys manage to link all the campaign like PzC GC style it will be superb. Also another thing where is the skins? Why no more development in that area?

Thx again

[levince55]

"1. Every battle feels like 1942 over and over where you have fight with limited resources and supplies. Even into 1945."

I disagree. I had more than 2000 ressources at Okinawa, equipement fully upgraded. My US army had become almighty after Tarawa.

[adherbal]

1. Transport mode - make a difference like track, halftrack, wheels etc like PzC. Marine have better option with those amphibious landing vehicle and I think transport should play more role.

The game has already wheel and track types (among others). Perhaps these can be differentiated a bit more though. But IIRC PzC units can move more hexes per turn in general so there's not that much room to differentiate between the transport type movement ranges in OOB.

2. Train - jumping off a train in the middle of the map is strange.

This is only possible for infantry. Which seems logical to me?

3. Teleporting units - slow retreat or fallback is better and make it a point for players to protect the retreat so it won't be boring ie transfer command over to players and add objective to retreat those ship to exit point by x number of turns and enemy will attack it etc.

You mean AI controlled support units leaving the map etc? This is used fairly rarely. I'm not sure which case(s) you are referring to specifically, but in general we try to avoid forcing the player to move several units for several turns without any form of combat.

5. Para planes - haven't you realise it's ridiculous to charge 20rp for a plabe single use and its vulnerable? Cmon its just too expensive to use that.

Paratroopers are getting some changes in the upcoming update(s). For one they will carry a limited stash of "fuel" which allow them to perform on full efficiency even when cut from supply. This makes them able to drop behind enemy lines more effectively provided they can capture a supply source before the "fuel" runs out.

6. Recon - can't see concealed enemy? What kind of recon is that? It should be their ability to spot so it makes them more valuable but limit it for example only can see unit below or above x number of entrenchment.

You mean recon aircraft or ground units? Perhaps we can allow recon aircraft a limited ability to spot adjacent concealed units, but I don't make to make it too easy to detect these. They already got a +1 LOS boost recently, combined with their cheap cost and ability to move in and out of danger in the same turn already make them very useful units IMO.

7. Supply drop - purchase supply drop option by air. If game is design that supply is critical then this option should be great for players as they will decide to spend some RP to get supply drop in or risk low supply and lower efficiency. It also help that para troopers or flanking unit more usable.

Something like this is on the "wish list". It would certainly be needed to represent the "air bridges" used on the Eastern Front.

8. Heroes - I think following PzC would be great as units can be customized. I think heroes is PzC strong point.

We're planning to allow some more "exciting" bonuses such as reducing supply cost, adding range or movement points etc. It's still fairly low on the priority list however.

Also another thing where is the skins? Why no more development in that area?

It got broken due to improvements to the unit rendering code. The way it worked previously was pretty inefficient, so we're hoping to bring it back in a more efficient manner soon. Hopefully in time for Winter War, so you can have proper winter paint on your vehicles