Stealth or Strategy Missions?

[Instinct]

What do you prefer, classical Stealth missions with a group of specialists behind enemy lines, or do you prefer being a commander of dozen of squads and fight big battles?

Vote and give a statement please!

[Tigerkiller]

For me it would have to be strategy missions, although I wouldn't mind what number of forces that I would have. I just like major fighting Fronts, with the screeching of planes fighting and bombing in the air, Artillery raining down shells on every position, large platoons of tanks fighting it out, and large scores of Infantry facing off against each other. I'd love to see just one mission like that. I wouldn't mind playing a stealth mission either, as long as I was controlling one soldier.

P.S In the poll screen, you've spelt Strategy wrong. Just spell-checking.

[Instinct]

Yes strategy missions will be sort of what you described.

[Mushroomcar]

I prefer a mix of the two, an hard big battle with not so many troops. Although you should be able to flank them and get them one by one, that's more my style. But i don't like the stealth like in the "radar" or the "rochefort" mission, it's too dark in radar, chaos if you make something wrong, if the alarm goes off. More like the "return the documents" and the "clerf" mission, there are open areas, you can choose by many tactics and it's a more open and you don't have to sneak as much as in the "radar" mission. It's fine with fields and cities though.

[wilhelm]

I like stategy but a lone sniper mission or saboteur mission or both would be nice. For instance a German misson to blow pegasus bridge after the allies capture it. Or for the allies the assasination of Hitler at the Eagles nest I think these would make for some interesting gameplay . Aw heres another suggestion how about a Michael whittmans last fight at Villers bocage or Ernst barkmans day long fight with the allies . by the way my mention of a pegasus bridge sabateur mission is that this time you control the sabateurs after the initial charges fail to drop the bridge and you must sneak back with scouts silently
kill allied guards and place charges and blow the bridge

[Wasteland Warrior]

I'd prefer both, altho I will say large battles with lots of troops don't work very well in FoW. Large battles really show how weak the AI is, and as such, I think smaller squad-to-squad, specialist missions are much better suited to FoW. I also detest chaotic clickfests, and the larger the battles, the more troops there are, the more FoW becomes a chaotic clickfest. Having said that, if the AI were improved drastically, then large battles would not be such clickfests. There are already some ridiculously chaotic moments in the game, I'd rather NOT make the entire FoW2 this way. If I want to play a chaotic clickfest RTS with hundreds of units, I'll play AC, Cossacks, SW:EaW, WiC, or Supreme Commander! I like that FoW does NOT play like these other games.

I think the true strength of FoW is the LOD and the larger the battlefield, the lower the LOD has to be. I think the ONLY way to play FoW and enjoy it is to take control at the individual unit level and so less chaotic, stealthier missions work best, IMO. I don't think it has to be one or the other - stealth or strategy. I think single/dual squad missions can have both stealth and strategy elements, as well as tactical elements. While there are some strategic and tactical elements in the current FoW, I would love to see this expanded and improved in FoW2. I think it's cool that in most missions there are other things going on that the player has no control over - makes the player feel like a larger war is going on. However, I think it's ridiculous that most missions end up being my squad or squads against hundreds, sometimes even thousands, of enemies. Even tho it's kinda fun to see that my 3 guys killed 300+ enemies and destroyed 100+ enemy vehicles, this makes FoW very arcade-like, which isn't my cup of tea. If I want to blow away hundreds of enemies, I'll play an FPS!

So I guess my vote would be - Please do NOT make FoW2 a chaotic clickfest with hundreds of troops executing very weak AI routines. Take what you already have and fix and make that better. Just my opinion....of course

[HANSPETER]

I think both. But in this "strategic" missions there musn't be 10x10x10........ soldiers! I think missions like in Soldiers HOWWII are good. You could add some misions with many soldiers, but:
1) we couldn't manage all of them, just takin control of a small group of big forces.
2) Big forces shouldn't be SO BIG, because it will be no pleasure of playing when hundreds of soldiers on map are running shooting everywhere. It's not athmosphere of this game.

[Slapping Penguin]

^^^^^ WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG.

Simple, this game is awesome with massive, massive battles.

I like controlling med sized forces too! Big stradgey battles please! !!!!

[Latdonine]

Both that would make everyone happy and u could have combination maps also like u have huge army at the front line and some troops behind enemy lines

[Wasteland Warrior]

^^^^^ WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG.

Simple, this game is awesome with massive, massive battles.

I like controlling med sized forces too! Big stradgey battles please! !!!!

I could NOT disagree with you more. The strength of FoW is most certainly NOT massive, massive battles. Larger battles really show the limitations of FoW and the larger the battles, the more of a clickfest it becomes. Simple - larger battles = less LOD and less LOD makes FoW just another exercise in frustration. You want to play a clickfest with lots of units - play any of the many available build-recruit-rush RTSs or if you just like killing lots of enemies - play an FPS. I'm all for more strategy and tactical options, but massive battles is not the way to accomplish this.

Having said that, some serious improvements to the AI might facilitate massive battles, but again, I really think FoW shines brightest when dealing with smaller squads. The gameplay of FoW is different from almost every other RTS out there and I would hate to see FoW2 turn into a massive battle clickfest, like those many other mindless RTSs. Besides, massive battles in FoW are nothing more than fire until the last man is standing - not much strategy to that. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree I think making FoW a massive battle RTS would require too many changes that would ruin what is already there. I guess we'll see.....