This is the third and final piece in our interview series for the new incarnation of The Operational Art of War 3 by Matrix Games. In this interview, we sit down with Daniel McBride (Scenario Research and Design Manager) to get a look at what went into the scenario aspect of the game. He discusses some new features, as well as potential new directions for TOAW 3 after its initial release.
Subscribe Today
1. Hello Daniel, thanks for your time. Can you give a little background about yourself and how you became interested in creating scenarios for The Operational Art of War in the first place?
My pleasure Brian.
I was working in Egypt and went back there with a copy of TOAW. I was visiting the battlefield at El Alamein on my motorcycle and thought I might try out the scenario editor to see how well I could duplicate the map and battle. The rest is history. Before that I was a board gamer from the days of the original Drang nach Osten (which went on to become part of the Europa series®). I was involved in researching and designing variants for John Schettler’s Winterstorm board game series before I moved into TOAW.
2. Starting at the beginning here, what were your first thoughts when you heard Matrix Games had acquired the rights to TOAW?
I was cautious as I knew the issue of whether Norm could work on it, or whether someone new could be found who could master the program, would be key, and would likely be very problematic. I admired Matrix taking the risk and in effect giving the game the vote of confidence it needed to finally get on track again developmentally. With Ralph Tricky arriving as head programmer my caution turned into pleasure and anticipation within a matter of weeks.
3. You are listed in the official credits as the Scenario Research and Design Manager; Can you share a little of how you came to be involved with the TOAW 3 project, and what was your primary mission for this release?
It was my initiative years ago when I was on staff at WHQ that got Norm Koger and Take-2 talking again, raising the hopes of TOAW again moving forward. I don’t mean to say I was some sort of dynamic negotiator—I just sparked things and got them moving a bit. I had to get back into other work and passed the project off to others; they did well in seeing it through to the patch, even though it had to be withdrawn finally. I was more or less always waiting in the wings to get involved with TOAW and scenario design is my proper area (not acting as a go-between for NK and a corporation!).
Our primary task was to cull the best scenarios available on the net, get permission from the designers to include them, and to upgrade them to TOAW 3, and this we accomplished. We had also hoped to assist designers to develop scenarios to also be included but, with limited exceptions, did not have the time for that finally.
4. The wish lists of veterans of the TOAW series travels far and wide with things people want to see included in the new version of TOAW. What are some of wishes you have for the new game as a scenario designer and what (if any) of those are going to show up in this first release?
From my point of view this first release is a shakedown cruise that has everything working, with some key areas improved, all in preparation for some long-term development. Players that know my work will understand that I did not want to redo some of my larger scenarios until I see what improvements can be made down the road as it affects the whole play test equation. Certainly Ralph’s tweaking-up of the PO (Programmed Opponent) is key in this release. More available supply points, events, and other items noted, are all important improvements. I have a very long wish list and will spare you that now until we can see what is feasible and what is not. Obviously some sort of an improved naval dynamic is important to look at down the road…
5. People may be expecting a host of brand new scenarios for TOAW 3, utilizing the new editor features and options, but it appears the scenarios included in the first release of TOAW 3 are more of a sampling of the best community-made efforts. Can you explain this decision vs. paying designers to produce new material as has been done on past TOAW releases?
David Heath made that decision and I have to say I agree given the time constraints involved in this project. There was simply not time to set up a full-blown development group attempting to produce an array of “gold” scenarios, fully play tested. Equally important from my point of view is the issue that this should not be undertaken until the new release has demonstrated it has strong community support (which I personally believe will be forthcoming) and has had the program developed with some key changes that will profoundly affect scenario design. The short answer is that it would have been premature to attempt anything beyond what we accomplished which was, incidentally, a necessary foundation for TOAW 3 to be built upon, and a huge amount of work.
[continued on next page]
Pages: 1 2
Help Armchair General by bookmarking to
