Re: Coop Campaign in Red Dragon Message par tornadofck » Dim 1 Juin 2014 21:10 Yup - the WAB way was the way to go - when you played coop you would always debate over skype or teamspeak as to how the units should move on the campaign map. Re: Coop Campaign in Red Dragon Message par tornadofck » Dim 1 Juin 2014 21:10 Yup - the WAB way was the way to go - when you played coop you would always debate over skype or teamspeak as to how the units should move on the campaign map. This is a guide for the single player campaigns for Wargame: Red dragon. As the battle progression may vary each time you play it the strategies would be quite vague. This guide will outline the. In Wargame Red Dragon, you are engaged in a large-scale conflict where Western forces clash against the Communist bloc. 1991: the two blocs confront each other in a new theater of war, Asia, joined by various other countries: Japan, China, North Korea, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand. It is one of the most powerful naval units that can be deployed, only one Udaloy can be deployed per player in multiplayer, although the campaign Climb Mount Narodnaia gives the player 4 in the Kuznetsov task force.
Before I start I will say that this thread was inspired by the thread created by Killajules viewtopic.php?f=155&t=55623While I do not entirely agree with his points, I do like the general idea behind his thread, basically 'what went wrong' and what needs to be learned
tl:dr Please read it, I would really appreciate it.
I know not everyone enjoys the campaign and many of you really only play the Multiplayer mode of the Wargame series.
However, I am one who does enjoy campaign, however the Campaigns of Red Dragon were most definitely the worst of the Wargame series so far, relatively speaking.
So if you do not play campaign at all and don't really care about it, than feel free to ignore this thread.
Of the three campaign modes in the Wargame trilogy, I will ignore the one from European Escalation, as it is very different from Airland Battle and Red Dragon, and I feel that the dynamic campaign has great potential, but was done very poorly in Red Dragon.
To start, I will say that the one plus of Red Dragon's campaigns over ALB are their diversity. Diversity was the primary failure of ALB's campaign mode along with lack of auto resolve. The five different scenarios in Red Dragon in terms of setting and story are very good, so I hope that they keep that trend for the next title.
Also the AI I found challenging, so I don't have many complaints there.
However, pretty much everything else is handled poorly. So here are the things in Red Dragon's campaigns that I feel were done poorly and need to be done differently in the next title:
NOTE: these are in no particular order
1) Auto Resolving: This is pretty simple. The addition of the Auto Resolve button in Red Dragon was a much welcome addition over ALB, but it should have come with some clear and easy way to understand projection of how the battle is likely, on paper, going to turn out if you auto resolve. Obviously the projection can be wrong, but this should be there to quickly make the decision on whether to auto resolve or not.
2) Battle group pieces:In the next Wargame title, please do not divide up the different parts of a unit to be bought separately!
ALB worked great with each piece on the campaign map being a complete deck capable of fighting on it's own. My reasoning behind why dividing the battle groups does not work is more thoroughly laid out in a different part of this post.
HOWEVER, this dividing of units does work for aircraft squadrons, being able to re assign planes to different sectors, so that should remain. But otherwise, give us complete battle groups like in ALB and don't leave us stuck without artillery or air defense.
This is also the case with naval groups, it is unfair and makes no sense for you to charge a lot for a carrier group, but charge more to get any aircraft.
3) Opportunities for Amphibious landings: This is a relatively minor issue, but I just wanted to say it. I think it is safe to say that many of us are not satisfied with Naval Combat in Red Dragon. Dedicated naval actions are not very fun or well made in my opinion.
However, amphibious operations, where one side is on land and the other is attacking from the sea, is great fun! The only really clear opportunity for this to be done is in Busan Pocket with the landing of the US marines near Seoul in a repeat of the famous Inchon landing. That is one of the best moments of Red Dragon campaign for me.
It is just a shame that there are so few opportunities to do that, and I will also say that there should have been a skirmish/multiplayer mode for this type of operation as well.
However, if this is expanded upon, we must also have better naval gunfire support from ships (mainly Destroyers and Frigates), as they are currently limited to line of sight firing and therefore cannot do much to support the marines.
4)Campaign sides: Please, in the next Wargame, please allow us to play as ether side in Campaign mode. The diversity I mentioned earlier is held back by being limited to one side in the campaign. I think it would have been very fun to play as the USSR in Bear Vs Dragon, and it would have definitely been fun to play as the Japanese in Climb Mount Narodnaya. I think the most interesting opportunity for a challenge would be to play as North Korea in Busan Pocket.
5)Political Points and Reinforcements: This is the primary issue with Red Dragon's campaigns, and the previously mentioned issues could be put up with if this one was done right.
First thing that must change: Do not charge us political points for units that are being sent to us!!!
This is absolutely unfair and crazy to do. This is most clear in Second Korean War, but is a major issue in all 5 campaigns.
Take Second Korean War, you are commander of the Allied forces in Korea and the surrounding area, and must hold back the enemy onslaught until help arrives. But you charge us for ALL The help that arrives. It is very frustrating for the commander of the French Naval task force to say that we have arrived and are at your disposal, but costs me nearly all my points to get the Foch battle group when I am in desperate need for ground troops in South Korea. And when I spend everything on the Foch, I only then get the ability to buy it's badly needed marines and aircraft.
This is also a major problem in Pearl of the Orient, as I am already in a very poor position, I desperately need the Canadians and ANZACs that are being SENT TO ME!!!! Don't charge me for them!!!
Wargame Red Dragon Multiplayer Campaign
Paying political points should be used for units that your superiors has not allocated to you, like some reserve special forces regiment or something like that. You should also bring back the 'strikes' category from ALB, with abilities to get recon and special strikes, those things you should spend political points on.
Second thing that must change: Do not charge us for units that have to already be in the theater of operations.
This is mainly an issue in Busan Pocket and Second Korean War with regard to the South Korean Forces. Why am I being denied badly needed units that have to be right there in my battle area like in Busan pocket? There is no off map territory for these South Korean forces to be, I am IN South Korea!!! This is just unfair and makes no sense.
Third thing that must change: Do not give us understrength forces at the outset of a campaign!!
This is mainly an issue in the campaigns where you are attacking, such as Bear Vs Dragon, but is also a major issue at the beginning of Second Korean War.
In Bear Vs Dragon, we should have more starting forces available to launch our attack into the USSR.
In Second Korean War, we should have had more starting forces in South Korea, particularly on the DMZ and we should have had at least ONE US battle group there, as US troops have been stationed there since 1950!!
Wargame Red Dragon Multiplayer Campaign Xbox 360
Wargame Red Dragon Multiplayer Campaign Ps4
I do understand the lack of US forces in the Busan Pocket campaign until the marines arrive, because the intro cutscene strongly implies that the US forces in Korea, stuck in their barracks, were thrashed at the outset of the conflict, and any survivors in the Busan Pocket would not be as large and coherent as their South Korean comrades.So those are my thoughts on the lessons that need to be learned from Red Dragon's campaigns.
Wargame Red Dragon Multiplayer Campaign Hack
Please share your thoughts!!