This is very much a "conceptual" idea, so they will be obvious things to be worked out.
However, I do realize that I am fairly new to Paradox games, so if this is an over discussed topic, then please give the courtesy of your patience.
My thoughts is amalgamation of sports management games and the rules sets of common miniature war games.
By the far the most popular "battle simulation" game is what Creative Assembly in the Total War series. There are obvious drawbacks. One is an uncharacteristic level of micromanagement. An omnipresence on the battlefield. This is true in a miniature wargaming scenario as well. There is a limitation on how many units can actually control. Perhaps the largest issue is human intuition. Like in console games full control mean you can maneuver your units to maximize their efficiency. The AI often cannot keep up.
Paradox games offer less control, but what you have is battle at the most superficial level. Battle are often won by masterful maneuvering of your armies. Many battle are won or lost even before contact is even made.
What I suggest is something that is in between that may prove to be "more realistic" than the micromanaging of a Total War game and the virtual non-existent controls of a Paradox game.
The basic of my idea
Obvious there is a "battle screen." What you know of the disposition, size, composition of the enemy comes exclusively from your scouts. Moreover, what you know of the terrain comes from the characters own personal knowledge of the terrain (local territory) and what has been mapped previously or scouted. Ideally, what "you" see would be based on your personal position and your sight lines.
Command
Based on the available information, you must determine where to maneuver your men. As I indicated above, you do not command individual regiments or battalions, but you command the generals. Communication is the key to the battle field. As a commander of the army you would have "effective Command range." This is based on skill and experience of the commander. Another factor can be reputation of the commander or the opinion of the subordinate commanders under your command.
The actual commands is something that would need to be worked out. Ideally, clicking on the map and having a text pop up giving directions. (e.g. click on a "high elevation point" and having the text, take the hill). If successful, and he is outside of your effective command, then the commander would then act on his own. Factors/ personality traits would determine what he may or may not do. Communication would still be possible, but the likelihood the orders would be understood or even received are very low. You can also move closer, but this may put you at risk. It is also important to note that senior subordinates outside of the command structure can order subordinates who is also outside your command effective range. An example of this is the Battle of Blenheim (Clérambault ordering reserves into the village with Tallard's consent or knowledge).
Battle Objectives: The attacker would have to victory conditions in order to win the battle. This could include controlling a par of the battlefield that would make defense unattainable.
Review: You will have a battle map but it will be entirely based on "your characters" personal knowledge and scouting reports which may or may not be accurate. This will be updated, but it would be contingent on the skills of the scouts and subordinate commanders.
Conclusion. I realized this is only a basic sketch and I am not really aware of the limitations here. However, I think this format is for more realistic than current titles devoted to combat.
Please share your thoughts.
However, I do realize that I am fairly new to Paradox games, so if this is an over discussed topic, then please give the courtesy of your patience.
My thoughts is amalgamation of sports management games and the rules sets of common miniature war games.
By the far the most popular "battle simulation" game is what Creative Assembly in the Total War series. There are obvious drawbacks. One is an uncharacteristic level of micromanagement. An omnipresence on the battlefield. This is true in a miniature wargaming scenario as well. There is a limitation on how many units can actually control. Perhaps the largest issue is human intuition. Like in console games full control mean you can maneuver your units to maximize their efficiency. The AI often cannot keep up.
Paradox games offer less control, but what you have is battle at the most superficial level. Battle are often won by masterful maneuvering of your armies. Many battle are won or lost even before contact is even made.
What I suggest is something that is in between that may prove to be "more realistic" than the micromanaging of a Total War game and the virtual non-existent controls of a Paradox game.
The basic of my idea
Obvious there is a "battle screen." What you know of the disposition, size, composition of the enemy comes exclusively from your scouts. Moreover, what you know of the terrain comes from the characters own personal knowledge of the terrain (local territory) and what has been mapped previously or scouted. Ideally, what "you" see would be based on your personal position and your sight lines.
Command
Based on the available information, you must determine where to maneuver your men. As I indicated above, you do not command individual regiments or battalions, but you command the generals. Communication is the key to the battle field. As a commander of the army you would have "effective Command range." This is based on skill and experience of the commander. Another factor can be reputation of the commander or the opinion of the subordinate commanders under your command.
The actual commands is something that would need to be worked out. Ideally, clicking on the map and having a text pop up giving directions. (e.g. click on a "high elevation point" and having the text, take the hill). If successful, and he is outside of your effective command, then the commander would then act on his own. Factors/ personality traits would determine what he may or may not do. Communication would still be possible, but the likelihood the orders would be understood or even received are very low. You can also move closer, but this may put you at risk. It is also important to note that senior subordinates outside of the command structure can order subordinates who is also outside your command effective range. An example of this is the Battle of Blenheim (Clérambault ordering reserves into the village with Tallard's consent or knowledge).
Battle Objectives: The attacker would have to victory conditions in order to win the battle. This could include controlling a par of the battlefield that would make defense unattainable.
Review: You will have a battle map but it will be entirely based on "your characters" personal knowledge and scouting reports which may or may not be accurate. This will be updated, but it would be contingent on the skills of the scouts and subordinate commanders.
Conclusion. I realized this is only a basic sketch and I am not really aware of the limitations here. However, I think this format is for more realistic than current titles devoted to combat.
Please share your thoughts.
- 2
- 1
