WW1 era

It's not easy creating an entire faction or era. Post your work and collaborate in this forum.

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Developers

rubber.piggy
Posts: 14
Joined: October 9th, 2006, 2:22 am
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Post by rubber.piggy » December 4th, 2006, 11:16 pm

Laying trenches in game would be a great functionality, but is it really useful?? What I mean is, surely they didn't dig trenches in the middle of a battle, and it would take many days right?? My understanding was that basically all the trenches were dug, and they then fought over who controlled which trenches.

I now profess my generally poor knowledge of WW1 and please smack me if I say something stupid.
"If at first you don't suceed, redefine sucess." - Anon

Njorhg
Posts: 4
Joined: October 25th, 2006, 12:03 pm

Post by Njorhg » December 5th, 2006, 1:40 pm

rubber.piggy wrote:Laying trenches in game would be a great functionality, but is it really useful?? What I mean is, surely they didn't dig trenches in the middle of a battle, and it would take many days right?? My understanding was that basically all the trenches were dug, and they then fought over who controlled which trenches.
Trenches were constantly reinforced and fought over particularily in the front lines they often switched sides.
There have been trenches that were fortified and had parapets against both sides too, due to how they switched between the Germans and the French.

But it doesn't take long to entrench, it is half a night's work or less.
It was the fancy trenches that took a while longer to construct...
Though the common "Spade->hole in the ground" method is still quite effective

rubber.piggy
Posts: 14
Joined: October 9th, 2006, 2:22 am
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Post by rubber.piggy » December 5th, 2006, 10:05 pm

Now that you say that it, it seems obvious that a unit of soldiers could entrench in a night. I must have been imagining 5 guys digging a hole :lol:
"If at first you don't suceed, redefine sucess." - Anon

Fiach Dubh
Posts: 381
Joined: December 2nd, 2006, 4:10 am
Location: Thar an scáthán

Post by Fiach Dubh » December 5th, 2006, 11:11 pm

Yanshee wrote:I had this idea, but don't know if it's a good or a dumb one, or if it's even possible: engineers would modify the terrain in game so they can dig trenches and drop barbed wire, they could also remove them.
You can do this, but it's incredibly awkward. Sapient seems to have some idea how, but I'd do it differently. My approach would be quite simplistic, whatever hex the Engineer unit ends its turn in becomes a trench, unless it's currently barbed wire (in which case it changes to grassland or whatever other terrain type seems most appropriate). Obviously, you can't dig a trench and shoot a rifle at the same time. The easiest way around this is not to give the Engineers any weapon that they can attack with (they do HAVE a weapon, which has WEAPON_SPECIAL_DEFENSIVE)

Code: Select all

#define WEAPON_SPECIAL_DEFENSIVE
[chance_to_hit]
id=defensive
name = _ "defensive"
description= _ "Defensive:
This weapon has no chance to hit when used offensively"
value=0
cumulative=yes
active_on=offense
[/chance_to_hit]
#enddef
This means that they can still defend themselves.

I have no idea how to change the terrain, but I know that it is possible (it would have to be coded as an event, not an ability, and written into the unit file or an external macro). To make it APPEAR to be an ability, give the unit ABILITY_ENGINEER:

Code: Select all

#define ABILITY_ENGINEER
id=engineer
name= _ "engineer"
description= _ "Engineer:
This unit has the ability to dig trenches and remove barbed wire."
#enddef
This doesn't actually do anything at all, but the game THINKS it is a working ability, so it will display the name and description. The actual effect is what I call a pseudoability (an event which provides the function of an ability which is impossible to code normally). I've been using a lot of these recently (see the Talamh thread in Faction/Era Contributions), and as far as I'm aware, I'm the only person that does.

To make this work, what you do is include {PSEUDOABILITY_ENGINEER} somewhere within the unit file (I put it between the description and the attack info, where abilities normally go)

DO NOT use [abilities] tags around it. This code will (in theory) link to a macro (in utils.cfg or wherever else you wanted to put it), which codes for the event that changes terrain.

You'd have to as somebody else how to actually code the terrain change, I suspect it would be rather complex.

Note that, in the current version of Wesnoth, there is NO WAY to choose to use an ability like this. Because of the way the game engine works, it has to happen automatically, or else it can't be made to happen at all.
Jetryl wrote:Normal people are like candy ravers. You look away for a moment and next thing you know they're spreading vaseline on your nipples and cooing like a pigeon.

battlesquid
Posts: 47
Joined: November 18th, 2006, 3:20 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway

Post by battlesquid » December 7th, 2006, 11:47 am

Oberstleutnant is actually a higher rank than Hauptmann (Captain)
You should study this page to get it right, but although Oberstleutnant sounds nice it's very unlikely rank for a combat unit. You should probably replace it with Fähnrich or Leutnant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Army_rank_insignia

Also I think you should add type to the german MGs, this page is a good reference (you don't MG42 because that wasn't used until 1942)

http://www.firstworldwar.com/weaponry/machineguns.htm

Also I think the last site could give you a lot of ideas in general about what weapons, vehicles, etc that were seen in this war.

Looking forward to see more of your units :)

Yanshee
Posts: 34
Joined: December 13th, 2005, 7:49 pm
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Contact:

Post by Yanshee » December 8th, 2006, 11:17 am

battlesquid wrote:Oberstleutnant is actually a higher rank than Hauptmann (Captain)
You should study this page to get it right, but although Oberstleutnant sounds nice it's very unlikely rank for a combat unit. You should probably replace it with Fähnrich or Leutnant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Army_rank_insignia
Thanks for the link, it is really helpful ! :)
I see that the oberleutnant rank exist (between leutnant and hauptmann, I think I'll use this one instead, as I first used it, what do you think ?

@Flach Dubh: thanks for the tips, I'll see that when I'll begin coding things ! :wink:

I'm posting a new try at the german evotree, it's not finished, as I at least have still to complete the artillery part. Little comments about it:
- I searched a bit for sturmsoldat and sturmtrupper, and I mostly see sturmtrupp and sturmtruppen(I suppose it's the plural form), so I think I'll call the unit sturmtrupp...
- I still have to change the Oberstleutnant rank in oberleutnant or leutnant, I'm waiting your opinions...
- I forgot to mention that the minenwerfer is a kind of trench mortar
- still have to find the artillery level 2 and 3...

All comments and ideas are really welcome ! :wink:
Attachments
Germany evolution tree
Germany evolution tree
Germantree.png (18.29 KiB) Viewed 3434 times

battlesquid
Posts: 47
Joined: November 18th, 2006, 3:20 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway

Post by battlesquid » December 11th, 2006, 12:25 pm

Yanshee wrote: Thanks for the link, it is really helpful ! :)
I see that the oberleutnant rank exist (between leutnant and hauptmann, I think I'll use this one instead, as I first used it, what do you think ?
If you must use the oberleutnant you should make that the top rank, and have leutnant as stage 2. But again, if you want realism you should skip the oberleutnant rank entirely.

Consider the following scenario:
A soldier could do well and be promoted to sergeant (Feldwebel -> stage 2) and later on even lieutenant (Leutnant -> stage 3).

While ober "sounds german" and may seem appealing I advice against using that because that makes me think "if there's a oberleutnant rank, shouldn't there be a leutnant rank as well?" If you decide you want to use leutnant as stage 2 and oberleutnant as stage 3, then it's one hell of a jump in ranks from private (Soldat) as stage 1 to leutnant on the next stage.
- I searched a bit for sturmsoldat and sturmtrupper, and I mostly see sturmtrupp and sturmtruppen(I suppose it's the plural form), so I think I'll call the unit sturmtrupp...
The german stormtroopers (aka shock troops) were called Sturmmann:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturmmann

If you need more info about these units (attack types etc) read
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stormtrooper

Also you should not use plural I think, because you only upgrade one unit at a time.

martenzo
Posts: 564
Joined: August 8th, 2004, 9:01 am
Location: Northern Europe, Estonia, Kardla

Post by martenzo » December 11th, 2006, 4:23 pm

I noticed a small mistake in the german names: You havew oberstleutnant Which could only mean Liutenant Colonel, which is considerably higher than a Hauptmann (captain), I think you meant Oberleutnant.

Also, is the art still there for the old crappy canyon? If it is, it could work well as a trench (with minor modifications, of course)
me: Welcome to the real world. If everyone says your art and opinions suck, it's because they DO suck. Even if you're too damned proud/stupid/both to realize it.
danny_california: yep keep telling fairy tales.

Yanshee
Posts: 34
Joined: December 13th, 2005, 7:49 pm
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Contact:

Post by Yanshee » December 12th, 2006, 12:00 pm

battlesquid wrote:If you must use the oberleutnant you should make that the top rank, and have leutnant as stage 2. But again, if you want realism you should skip the oberleutnant rank entirely

So you think it's better to have Leutnant>Hauptmann ? Sorry I only understood partially what you meant, but it seems a really interesting proposition so if you could re-explain it in another way, that would be great ! (sorry my mind is a bit slow today... :wink: )

In the art thread, we've been speaking about a name for the era. I choosed "Storm of Steel", but I'm not sure anymore if it's a good idea, as some people seems to find it a bit "strange". So I thought about other names, and I'd like your opinions about it...
- Frontline 1917
- Battleground Europa
- No Man's Land
Well, that's it, and if you have propositions, I'm all aware ! :wink:

battlesquid
Posts: 47
Joined: November 18th, 2006, 3:20 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway

Post by battlesquid » December 12th, 2006, 6:18 pm

Considering you will only have 3 stages, I suggest you use
Soldat -> Feldwebel -> Leutnant

If you had 4 levels though;
Soldat -> Feldwebel -> Fähnrich -> Leutnant
or
Soldat -> Feldwebel -> Leutnant -> Captain

To further explain what I have said regarding the rank Oberleutnant, consider the following to show why I think it's inappropriate:

Some german ranks:
* 21 Hauptmann
20 Obstleutnant
* 19 Leutnant
18 Oberfähnrich
* 17 Fähnrich
* 16 Fahnenjunker
- (some more ranks)
* 10 Feldwebel
- (some more ranks)
6 Oberstabsgefreiter
5 Stabsgefreiter
4 Hauptgefreiter
3 Obergefreiter
* 2 Gefreiter
* 1 Soldat (Soldier)

The above list shows some of the german army ranks. The ranks marked with * are ranks that are "clean", and you should only use those. You don't want to use Ober-, Haupt-, etc -ranks because they are too specific when you can only choose 3 ranks.
When you can only have 3 ranks, you would want to select them with even steps. You don't want this selection

1 -> 19 -> 20
or
1 -> 2 -> 21

but rather

1 -> 10 -> 17
or
1 -> 10 -> 19

Also any rank above captain is unlikely to participate in combat (Major and higher), but you probably already knew that.

Hopefully that will be clearer for you to understand :)

The name "Storm of Steel" is not bad at all, what comes to mind first is really world war, with bullets and mortar shells raining down - a storm of steel. No Man's Land is also good, but I would advise against names like Frontline 1917 or Battleground Europa, because that sounds a lot like other war games (
History Line: 1914-1918 , High Command: Europe 1939-1945, Front Lines, etc) and frankly the names don't stick out from the crowd of war games made earlier. Take a look at this extensive list http://www.the-underdogs.info/genre.php?id=11 of war games to know what to not call the campaign.
If you know already that your WW1 campaign will be mainly on trench terrain, why not call the campaign "Trench warfare" or "Trenches of The Great War"? I know at least that would make the name stick out from the crowd. Note, however, if you decide to use trench in the campaign name, you are obligating yourself to make trenches a central part of the game, but you would have to use that anyway because WW1 was mainly trench warfare.

edit: a simpler name straight to the point would be "Trenches"
Don't fear the pixels...

K4tz
Posts: 16
Joined: December 3rd, 2006, 4:16 pm
Location: Engrand

Post by K4tz » December 14th, 2006, 9:06 pm

Well if you do this, heres some random advice I feel like giving:

Machine gunners must own. They were what replaced having hundreds of men clump together. These guys were the whole reason trench warefare existed in the first place. Make the game revolve around em :)

catwhowalksbyhimself
Posts: 411
Joined: January 23rd, 2006, 8:28 am

Post by catwhowalksbyhimself » December 15th, 2006, 6:23 am

Sometimes, historical accuracy must be sacrificed somewhat for gameplay. Having one single unit far better than any others would not make for a lot of fun.

kshinji
Posts: 649
Joined: December 21st, 2005, 7:24 pm
Location: Gdansk, Poland

Post by kshinji » December 15th, 2006, 12:58 pm

:geek:
Last edited by kshinji on November 9th, 2010, 1:06 am, edited 1 time in total.
User:Kshinji
Probably there's no point for me posting here, but i'll raise my PC to 1337 before leaving again ;P -- just kidding.

Yanshee
Posts: 34
Joined: December 13th, 2005, 7:49 pm
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Contact:

Post by Yanshee » December 18th, 2006, 11:51 am

Thanks Battlequid for the explanations about german ranks, it is much clearer now ! :wink:
About the name, I've been torturing myself about it, and I think I'll stick with Storm of Steel, as I think it does sound good, it is also the title of a book about ww1, and I like the acronym (SoS) :P

Now about the machine gunners, I agree they should be important, but I would like to try to make every unit useful and balanced. Anyway, I still haven't any characteristics for my units, if some of you have some advices/ideas about it, they are welcome ! :wink: I will also have to change the attack types like cold, drain, holy,... So if you also have ideas for the attack types, they're welcome too... :P

User avatar
Maeglin Dubh
Moderator Emeritus
Posts: 1154
Joined: November 16th, 2005, 8:38 pm
Location: Valley of the Shadow of Death
Contact:

Post by Maeglin Dubh » December 18th, 2006, 3:09 pm

Gas
Solid
Explosive

Simplicity could be helpful. If you really want, you could split Solid up into Firearm and Hand Weapons, or even the traditional Impact, Blade, Pierce.
Cuyo Quiz wrote:I really should push for Temuchin's brainstorming with all my might someday, when the skies are cloudy, the winds dance and the light is free to roam over the soil along the fog.

Post Reply