|
Rockopolis posted:Here's a weird question. Are there any like, industrial engineering grog games? Like, Build more "IL-2s before Stalin has you shot" / "T-34s before the Germans crash through the factory gates" kind of thing? I would love a factory management game like this, planning production lines and managing resources and labor. I’m not sure it exists. I sketched out rules for a board game along those lines but haven’t mocked it up because I’m still bouncing back and forth about how complex it should be.
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 15:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 06:06 |
|
|
is there a grog game about the Vietnam War from the side of the Vietnamese? or any similar insurgencyRockopolis posted:Here's a weird question. Are there any like, industrial engineering grog games? Like, Build more "IL-2s before Stalin has you shot" / "T-34s before the Germans crash through the factory gates" kind of thing? Factorio? There was this one "educational" game about developing Five Year Plans in the USSR where you have to strike a balance between not killing too many people as you industrialize, and also needing to industrialize in order to have an army to beat the Germans with in 1941 There's this one Railroad Tycoon 2 scenario where you need to haul troops across Russia to resist the invasion and it's about managing trains as your rail network slowly gets bombed out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 15:12
|
|
|
Rockopolis posted:Here's a weird question. Are there any like, industrial engineering grog games? Like, Build more "IL-2s before Stalin has you shot" / "T-34s before the Germans crash through the factory gates" kind of thing? I'm currently reading Wages of Destruction and I'd love to see a game like that. It'd be rather depressing to have a slider bar for calories per day per employee and then watch your mortality rate dip up and down while productivity changes. You could probably make a game like that right in Excel.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 15:25
|
|
|
I still say a game where u do bids on manufacturing contracts in ww2 then try to cut as many corners as possible would own hard. The failure state is ur workers go on strike and the Wagner act immediately has u lose control in favor of a workers council while u get charged with treason. Agean90 fucked around with this message at 15:32 on Jul 11, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 15:30
|
|
|
Agean90 posted:I still say a game where u do bids on manufacturing contracts in ww2 then try to cut as many corners as possible would own hard. You could probably pull off a pretty simple game that was like RTW without the battle elements. Basically a video game version of Triggerhappypilot’s Germany LP.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 15:34
|
|
|
Agean90 posted:I still say a game where u do bids on manufacturing contracts in ww2 then try to cut as many corners as possible would own hard.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 15:46
|
|
|
Rockopolis posted:Here's a weird question. Are there any like, industrial engineering grog games? Like, Build more "IL-2s before Stalin has you shot" / "T-34s before the Germans crash through the factory gates" kind of thing? Factorio isn't grog but it's really, really good.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 16:10
|
|
|
I'll have to take a look at Factorio, then. War-Factorio, the clicker-game with leaderboards monitored by the NKVD!
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 16:23
|
|
|
Wasn't there that one called Land Doctrine or something where you had to design tanks/doctrine for not-WW2.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 16:29
|
|
|
Yeah but it was kinda iffy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 16:30
|
|
|
the Vietnam 65 game is as much about maintaining and managing a logistics route as it is fighting the VC/NVA. I imagine the Afghanistan 11 game is similar.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 16:39
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:the Vietnam 65 game is as much about maintaining and managing a logistics route as it is fighting the VC/NVA. I imagine the Afghanistan 11 game is similar. In the Afghanistan game if you move a unit out of supply, do you get to spend a billion dollars to instantly keep it in supply, and then continue to do this every turn?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 16:43
|
|
|
Factorio is grog sperg and you can literally make train networks that deliver raw materials to assembly lines of tanks and also you can have train railguns.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 16:48
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:the Vietnam 65 game is as much about maintaining and managing a logistics route as it is fighting the VC/NVA. I imagine the Afghanistan 11 game is similar. Afghan 11 is a significant step up in mechanics from Vietnam 65, qualitatively. It still has that logistics feel to it. Saros posted:Wasn't there that one called Land Doctrine or something where you had to design tanks/doctrine for not-WW2. I don't know if you'll ever really be able to make that game well. I played Land Doctrine but it was kinda trash. I would like a Rule the Waves with a randomized world map/national statuses, though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 16:57
|
|
|
Rockopolis posted:I'll have to take a look at Factorio, then. It was nice knowing you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 18:03
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:It was nice knowing you. Factorio rules but it's insanely frustrating for me because I'm terrible at thinking ahead. ...which is also why I'm bad at grog games.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 18:21
|
|
|
What is the scope of RTW? Are you just controlling the navy while the rest of the country is abstracted? Does territory change hands? How does a war end?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 18:45
|
|
|
Stairmaster posted:Was there anything stopping people from making angled flight decks in the thirties Like uPen said, imagination and need. The actual slanted deck we know of today came out as the result of a study done by the Royal Navy between 1944 and 1945, these kinds of decks along with steam catapults were recommended features for the next generation of aircraft carriers which were expected to carry heavier jet aircraft. The thing with slanted decks too is that they play hell with the seaworthiness of a ship, you have to do a lot of internal redesign to offset the weight of all the extra decking on the rear and side of the ship to ensure the carrier can still sail in rough weather. You also have to consider that at this time carriers were still pretty experimental, even though some very forward thinking military officials in multiple countries could see the potential in carrier based operations, they had to overcome an not insignificant amount of political and doctrinal inertia to get to where they were for the operations that did occur. Even then, we were still doing a ton of optimizations and tweaks to the system on a micro level to just get some efficiency out of the carrier we did have. Then you also have to consider the Washington Naval treaty, which still limited carrier tonnage as well. So even if the slanted deck concept came into being, likely it would have come with the trade off of adding more tonnage to carrier, possibly reducing the number of carrier a country could build prewar. Even with the war raging, going for the comparatively tried and true straight deck would make far more sense than shifting deck construction halfway. Come the end of the war though, new advances in aviation, combine with lessons learned would allow this design to come through.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 18:52
|
|
|
Flavius Aetass posted:What is the scope of RTW? Are you just controlling the navy while the rest of the country is abstracted? Does territory change hands? You're in charge of the navy, so your influence on non-naval policy is limited. Random events give you the opportunity to raise or lower tensions with any given nation, but you're not the one with the big red Declare War button on your desk. Territories can change hands, but it requires your political superiors to not make peace before you've actually beaten the enemy. The player does get to decide which territories to take though. Flavius Aetass posted:How does a war end? In bloody revolution after you've starved your enemies by choking their overseas trade.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 19:06
|
|
|
You can influence territories changing hands a bit by deploying more ships abroad, or accepting an event that cuts your budget a bit to help the Army, but its otherwise out of your hands. Also, you can take them when winning a war.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 19:12
|
|
|
quote:The below was written (verbatim and unedited) by one of our Beta Team members testing the latest (Alpha 10.0) RTW2 test version. This was the team-members first carrier strike, and the text is his AAR of / reaction to the event:
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 22:42
|
|
|
A game covering the rise of the German heavy industry and MIC say 1878 1918 would be soo my poo poo. I doubt it's anyone else's poo poo though sadly 
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 22:44
|
|
|
Wow, that's rad. I hope you can actually see the planes whenever RTW2 comes out, though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2018 22:52
|
|
|
Rockopolis posted:Here's a weird question. Are there any like, industrial engineering grog games? Like, Build more "IL-2s before Stalin has you shot" / "T-34s before the Germans crash through the factory gates" kind of thing? GearCity sounds like it might fit the bill. I dunno if it would count as true grog since it only peripherally touches on war stuff, but otherwise it checks a lot of boxes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2018 00:05
|
|
|
Taintrunner posted:Wow, that's rad. I hope you can actually see the planes whenever RTW2 comes out, though. I dunno I kind of feel like being able to see individual planes would clutter things too much and if you can't directly interact with them anyway then what's the point?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2018 00:11
|
|
|
Rockopolis posted:Here's a weird question. Are there any like, industrial engineering grog games? Like, Build more "IL-2s before Stalin has you shot" / "T-34s before the Germans crash through the factory gates" kind of thing? Its been awhile since i played thats basically what the new hearts of iron felt like to me but its very surface level stuff and not very grog. E: alao not war related and ive never tried it but cities in motion 2 is supposed to be a good business sim and seems kinda grog. DogonCrook fucked around with this message at 01:17 on Jul 12, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2018 01:07
|
|
|
Pharnakes posted:I dunno I kind of feel like being able to see individual planes would clutter things too much and if you can't directly interact with them anyway then what's the point? Seeing individual planes makes sense to me in 1925 when it’s like the above and you’re launching three planes at a time, but when it’s 1942 and there are potentially 100+ aircraft involved, maybe just one icon per group would be okay.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2018 01:14
|
|
|
DogonCrook posted:Its been awhile since i played thats basically what the new hearts of iron felt like to me but its very surface level stuff and not very grog. CiM2 has a wealth of problems that prevent me from recommending it, chief among them a lack of clarity. You'll fail to make a profitable network unless you look up a guide.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2018 01:23
|
|
|
CiM1, on the other hand, is a pretty great, if dated, game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2018 01:33
|
|
|
Bold Robot posted:GearCity sounds like it might fit the bill. I dunno if it would count as true grog since it only peripherally touches on war stuff, but otherwise it checks a lot of boxes. GearCity is pretty awesome. At present, detailed military production is limited to engines (for ships, tanks, and aircraft) and pickup trucks and vans, since they use the same systems as civilian auto production, which is the focus of the game. All other war production is abstracted, and AFAIK, your production has no impact on the course of the war. The game can get really micromangey. There are now some auto-tools to help you, but especially as your company grows there’s always a ton of things to do each turn if you want to optimize profit. I usually get a bit overwhelmed at a certain point. Still, it’s pretty awesome, and the developer does a great job interacting with the community and incorporating good suggestions into future updates. I think a lot of people following this thread would enjoy it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2018 02:27
|
|
|
Tetraptous posted:GearCity is pretty awesome. At present, detailed military production is limited to engines (for ships, tanks, and aircraft) and pickup trucks and vans, since they use the same systems as civilian auto production, which is the focus of the game. All other war production is abstracted, and AFAIK, your production has no impact on the course of the war. Yeah I played it a few months ago and would second this recommendation. I agree with basically everything in this post. I did find it got overwhelming at a certain point, and the game was not awesome about giving feedback on why stuff was selling or not selling. Setting prices for cars is also kind of a pain. But that’s standard grog stuff, it’s a good game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2018 02:53
|
|
|
I checked the NWS forum for more on the screenshot and carrier talk: Both carriers involved were 12,500t converted CAs making 28 kts max, they retained their 5” belt and that limits their plane capacity. One carried 6 fighters and 6 torpedo bombers and the other carried 6 fighters, 3 torpedo bombers, and 3 floatplane scouts. The visual aspect of planes hasn’t been finalized yet; right now they appear as small pips on the map but they’re pursuing a better solution that’s easy to get information from.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2018 03:35
|
|
|
Pirate Radar posted:I would love a factory management game like this, planning production lines and managing resources and labor. I’m not sure it exists. I sketched out rules for a board game along those lines but haven’t mocked it up because I’m still bouncing back and forth about how complex it should be. Would it be anything like Kanban?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2018 04:00
|
|
|
The moral of this story is don't build a carrier less than 20k tons
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2018 04:52
|
|
|
Stairmaster posted:The moral of this story is don't build a carrier less than 20k tons I checked some historical carriers for comparison and it’s a super terrible complement even for its displacement, but it’s hard to make a specific comparison since as far as I know there was never a CA->CVL conversion of that kind historically. E: I wrote “comparison” twice and then decided to throw in a third, apparently. Pirate Radar fucked around with this message at 09:38 on Jul 12, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2018 05:04
|
|
|
Yeah that is pretty terrible. Hermes was about that weight and she carried 20 planes on a 3" belt albeit she was obviously designed as a carrier. And of course they might be some terrible Furious style half assed conversion. Pharnakes fucked around with this message at 09:38 on Jul 12, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2018 09:36
|
|
|
PerniciousKnid posted:Would it be anything like Kanban? I wasn’t aiming for something like that, more along the lines of “gather resources, play blueprint cards, don’t let the labor counter drop into the STRIKE space”
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2018 09:40
|
|
|
Actualy looking at that again I would say a capacity of 12 is quite resonable. I'd somehow got it in my head they only carried 6, which would have been terrible. BUt if you compare to Hermes they have 60% of the capacity on the same or slightly higher displacement, but they aren't designed as carriers, have a 5" rather than a 3" belt, are 3 knots faster and have 4 turrets with presumably at least double 5" in each. That last one is really going to eat up the tonnage compensating for the asymmetrical weight on a hull not designed for that. Plus also as CAs these ships are presumably 10 or even 15 years old in 1925 and unless they were re engined during conversion they are going to be having huge engineering spaces to get that speed on such a small hull.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2018 09:47
|
|
|
Pharnakes posted:Actualy looking at that again I would say a capacity of 12 is quite resonable. I'd somehow got it in my head they only carried 6, which would have been terrible.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2018 09:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 06:06 |
|
|
These are different than the Italian carriers we saw the other day, so I don’t think they retained gun armament.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2018 10:00
|
|