Don't abandon single player after release

[MarineCorps]

Love Wargames and all but RD has only had 1 campaign released for single player post release and all the updates and new content have gone for MP, which doesn't do me me good as I enjoy playing single player. SO I'm hoping eugen won't forgot about SP post release with steel divisions.

EDIT: for clarity

 

[Mendeth]

Forgive me if I'm wrong - I haven't played RD for a while - but aren't all multiplayer maps available in singleplayer skirmish too?

 

[Ragga]

Forgive me if I'm wrong - I haven't played RD for a while - but aren't all multiplayer maps available in singleplayer skirmish too?

YES...

But I think he is refering to a Campaign.... which I feel Paradox will be the main support for that - considering how they are masters at Grand Campaigns

 

[sargken]

Agreed

 

[D Inqu]

Wargame series could have been the perfect engine to do all sorts of Cold war conflicts (wars in the Gulf, Indo-Pakistani, Balkan, Post-Soviet etc.). It still feels so bad all this potenial was never used.

I really hope this does not repeat for this game.

 

[hellfish6]

Please. please, please don't forget those of us who have no interest in multiplayer. I'm not in college anymore - I don't have the time to play any game long enough to play against all those that (lucky for them) do. I just wanna sit with my scotch and kill things, not ragequit.

 

[Guggy]

Single player is great. Please keep it properly supported

 

[Raventhefuhrer]

The problem is the Wargame campaign was never well-made or very satisfying and dynamic campaigns of that sort rarely are. When you get down to it, Red Dragon's campaigns were just a glorified procession of skirmishes, with awkward groups of units, against an awful AI.

Interestingly enough, the best Wargame campaign was also the least ambitious - European Escalation had a set-piece campaign that offered some replayability and dynamism in the form of a persistent battlegroup, and interesting missions/side objectives that could be completed different ways.

As far as I'm concerned, trying to recreate a Red Dragon style campaign for Steel Division is a huge mistake. Wargame, and by extension Steel Division should have an ironclad focus on multiplayer.

 

[Guggy]

EE's was the best probably, but I really liked ALBs authentic TOEs for most units featured.

For this game, I'd say ALB style but for the love of God please get some set style battles in there, sort of like the W:EE mission!

Allowing the player to experience historical set piece battles is something that can be appreciated by all

 

[UltimateIdiot]

Historical set piece battles I wouldn't mind, although I would prefer a dynamic campaign AI. Or atleast battles challenging enough that the campaign is replayable. And multiplayer campaign, please. Normandy is a great place to implement it due to the massive scale of things.

 

[Fonz]

Given how RD and ALB went I don't think single player will be getting too much attention. The complexity of these games just doesn't allow for good (non-scripted, minimal cheating) AI without dedicating a disproportionate amount of effort from Eugen.

 

[UltimateIdiot]

Given how RD and ALB went I don't think single player will be getting too much attention. The complexity of these games just doesn't allow for good (non-scripted, minimal cheating) AI without dedicating a disproportionate amount of effort from Eugen.

Well with the removal of a bunch of unit-types, the game should be less complex. You might well end up being right, but I can dream, damnit!

 

[Andyana]

Definitely agree with this post. W:RD could have been so much more than it was, at least for me. I almost never touched multiplayer and found the single-player campaigns in the Wargame series have gone downhill since the first one, which had some great scenarios. A shame, as a lot of the set-up for the campaigns was great and promised some really interesting Cold War hotspots. Multiplayer co-op could have saved it (everything's better with a mate) but for some reason this wasn't included. Really hope co-op campaign finds its way into Steel Division.

 

[hellfish6]

ALB's dynamic campaign was excellent. Each major unit had it's own units and capabilities and gameplay style. I really missed that in Red Dragon, which was literally just a bunch of poorly made skirmishes strung together and called a campaign. I remember what ruined the game for me was playing the Hong Kong scenario on Korean terrain that looked more like desert than anything near Hong Kong. With such uninteresting, uninspired campaigns you're stuck with multiplayer - and I'm sure everyone has experienced the absolutely toxic multiplayer population the Wargame series has at one point or another...

 

[hellfish6]

The problem is the Wargame campaign was never well-made or very satisfying and dynamic campaigns of that sort rarely are. When you get down to it, Red Dragon's campaigns were just a glorified procession of skirmishes, with awkward groups of units, against an awful AI.

Interestingly enough, the best Wargame campaign was also the least ambitious - European Escalation had a set-piece campaign that offered some replayability and dynamism in the form of a persistent battlegroup, and interesting missions/side objectives that could be completed different ways.

As far as I'm concerned, trying to recreate a Red Dragon style campaign for Steel Division is a huge mistake. Wargame, and by extension Steel Division should have an ironclad focus on multiplayer.

So you're saying give up on single player and focus totally on multiplayer?

 

[Andyana]

ALB's dynamic campaign was excellent. Each major unit had it's own units and capabilities and gameplay style. I really missed that in Red Dragon, which was literally just a bunch of poorly made skirmishes strung together and called a campaign. I remember what ruined the game for me was playing the Hong Kong scenario on Korean terrain that looked more like desert than anything near Hong Kong. With such uninteresting, uninspired campaigns you're stuck with multiplayer - and I'm sure everyone has experienced the absolutely toxic multiplayer population the Wargame series has at one point or another...

Me and my mate must have played ALB to death, in so many ways. Great campaign.

 

[Raventhefuhrer]

So you're saying give up on single player and focus totally on multiplayer?

In a sense, yeah. The Wargame franchise was fundamentally geared towards multiplayer, and Steel Division should be too. The fact of the matter was Red Dragon's (and to a lesser extent, Airland Battle's) campaigns were not well realized, or fun and engaging. So I don't want to throw good money after bad, and waste resources that could be better spent elsewhere. In other words, I don't want them to try and develop an even larger or more ambitious campaign because it's not compounding what I already feel are bad ideas.

My preference would be that they focus on an engaging multiplayer experience, and perhaps take some time to create a well-made but modest campaign in the European Escalation style with a series of set missions that may have changing circumstances depending on performance in previous missions.

Obviously I don't expect Steel Division to have NO campaign at all, because I know there are a good chunk of buyers who have no interest in multiplayer and just want to play single player, and Eugen can't miss out on that pool of potential sales.

 

[GermanPower]

The problem is the Wargame campaign was never well-made or very satisfying and dynamic campaigns of that sort rarely are. When you get down to it, Red Dragon's campaigns were just a glorified procession of skirmishes, with awkward groups of units, against an awful AI.

Interestingly enough, the best Wargame campaign was also the least ambitious - European Escalation had a set-piece campaign that offered some replayability and dynamism in the form of a persistent battlegroup, and interesting missions/side objectives that could be completed different ways.

As far as I'm concerned, trying to recreate a Red Dragon style campaign for Steel Division is a huge mistake. Wargame, and by extension Steel Division should have an ironclad focus on multiplayer.

I think letting players hotjoin as the AI or enemies would be a good system to weave it into the game. The Wargame campaign was a good idea it was just never enough and always seemed rather boring against a incompetent AI. Multiplayer campaigns would be a excellent idea.

 

[Raventhefuhrer]

I could see the possibility of a head to head campaign against a friend where you both sit down and play the opposing sides of the missions. I'm not certain a hotjoin feature where random players drop into your campaign to take charge of one battle, and then leave, is a great idea. That feature was in Total War: Shogun 2 and wasn't repeated in any of the subsequent games, presumably for a good reason.

I'd be concerned of other players joining with a mission of either cheesing or trolling me. Plus there's a whole host of connectivity issues, viability of getting queued up and put into a battle where you control an army of militia vs. the 2nd SS Panzer Division, and so on.

 

[Tankhunter__]

Wargame: European Escalation had a great but very difficult set of campaigns, and even got one more(For a total of 5) for FLC alongside the Conquest mode. EE's Conquest mode is still the best Wargame mode IMO.