|
lol im gay
Baloogan fucked around with this message at 23:48 on Aug 14, 2016 |
#
?
May 14, 2013 01:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 18, 2024 20:28 |
|
|
V for Vegas posted:COG is $29.99. I think possibly it would have fared better if it had been an actual expansion and priced as such instead of standalone. I imagine a lot of people who owned the original didn't pick up emporer's edition.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2013 02:47
|
|
|
How long to destroyed German units freeze in War in the East? Does it lower their maximum possible morale or just gently caress the units over by having them build it back up? Also what are the differences between Steel Panthers World at War and World War II? Is it just preference or is one just better than the other? Also is 10 a good amount of support units for armies? I have all my armies outfitted with SU's and some great generals but I still hit my AP limit until I hosed up my OOB switching around an army and had to pay a bunch to fix it. Chump Farts fucked around with this message at 19:42 on May 14, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2013 19:37
|
|
|
Jakse posted:Also what are the differences between Steel Panthers World at War and World War II? Is it just preference or is one just better than the other? As best I can tell after the fact, SPWAW and SPWW2 are the result of a split in the devs who were working with the Steel Panthers 3 code - the basics are similar (squads and below, individual vehicles) but the way the mechanics function differ. WW2 has a much larger TO&E capability, IIRC, along with larger/more varied maps and more/prettier colours (I think). WAW has the MegaCampaigns, which are hardcoded mods, and (when I was I'm siure there's other differences (I seem to recall one or the other having much nastier splash damage, especially from napalm/heavy arty or bombers), but I disremember off the top of my head, and being at work means the NannyWall keeps me from bouncing over to the respective websites to look. My own personal choice would be WAW, but I also have MBT just because sometime you need to send a ridiculous Jun horde of North Koreans into a single USMC Abreams company, just to see the carnage. (Don't forget to buy some AAA.)
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2013 20:51
|
|
|
Zamboni Apocalypse posted:As best I can tell after the fact, SPWAW and SPWW2 are the result of a split in the devs who were working with the Steel Panthers 3 code - the basics are similar (squads and below, individual vehicles) but the way the mechanics function differ. They were always separate projects. SPWW2 and SPMBT are actually built on top of SP2, they started out by modifying the oob files and graphics before they got the source code from the ruins of SSI somehow. SPWW2 was always trying to be bit more realistic and as a result, infantry and support weapons are tougher and harder to detect. SPWAW is more focused on the armor, like the original, and they have bunch of prototype vehicles and other cool units that SPWW2 doesn't have. Neither of the games are obviously superior but personally I always liked SPWW2 more. Their map generator is wonderous nowadays, and it works really well with the generated WW2 campaign.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2013 02:53
|
|
|
Jakse posted:How long to destroyed German units freeze in War in the East? Does it lower their maximum possible morale or just gently caress the units over by having them build it back up? Whenever a German unit surrenders/shatters, it comes back the next turn on the western map edge, set to Refit mode, and set to Frozen for 6 turns. The rebuilt unit will have a morale ranging from: 50-60 in 1941 (National Morale this year is 75) 48-60 in 1942 (National Morale this year is 70) 47-60 in 1943 (National Morale this year is 65) 46-60 in 1944 (National Morale this year is 60) 45-57 in 1945 (National Morale this year is 55) Since the maximum amount of morale the unit will randomly spawn with is lower than the National Morale in 1941-1943, the unit should still gain something like 1-2 points of morale per turn as it rebuilds in Refit mode. However, it's still a potentially huge loss because well shepherded units are going to have much more than 70-75 morale in the first two summer campaigns. For your other question, I think 10 support units would be just at the limit of getting penalties for SU commitment. You should be aiming for about 6 SUs in an HQ. Note that construction units, which never particpate in combat, do not count against this limit, so you can stuff as many of those as you want into an HQ. Note that SUs directly attached to units, as in German Divisions or Soviet Corps, do not count against this limit, so you can have as many as 9 SUs in combat: 6 from the HQ and 3 from the direct-attachment.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2013 05:38
|
|
|
Still looking for people to play WITE with. Me and Jakse did two games that were pretty fun, but I am always up for more.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2013 23:29
|
|
|
You got a scenario in mind?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2013 01:05
|
|
|
ElBrak posted:Still looking for people to play WITE with. Me and Jakse did two games that were pretty fun, but I am always up for more. I'd be happy to play. I'm fine for both sides, and any scenario
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2013 01:09
|
|
|
Any scenario is fine, even the Grand Campaign. I mostly play the Soviets. Edit: 1.07.08, just downloaded and installed it. ElBrak fucked around with this message at 01:52 on May 16, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2013 01:43
|
|
|
ElBrak posted:Any scenario is fine, even the Grand Campaign. I mostly play the Soviets. I'd be interested in playing as the Germans in a Grand Campaign if you're up for it, what patch are you running?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2013 01:46
|
|
|
uPen posted:I'd be interested in playing as the Germans in a Grand Campaign if you're up for it, what patch are you running? If you were interested in playing more than one/Elbrak isn't interested, I'd be happy to play the soviets in one of the grand campaigns.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2013 02:34
|
|
|
Ya i'm still interested in playing you uPen, a Grand Campaign game would be fine.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2013 03:18
|
|
|
ElBrak posted:Ya i'm still interested in playing you uPen, a Grand Campaign game would be fine. Sent you an email.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2013 03:51
|
|
|
The Lost Battles comes out today for WiTE! It's on Matrix's site! Woo.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2013 15:36
|
|
|
The Flare Path, RPS' weekly wargame/simulation feature has a long interview with Iain McNeil, head of Slitherine Games. Highlights include the assertion that they have to price their games high so people push past the lovely UI because they want to wring some sort of fun from their purchase:quote:What happens when they hit a frustration point such as a badly explained feature or something they don’t understand? Ideally the game would be designed not to have these frustration points but invariably complex games do. In the case where the game was free or very cheap a significant % will give up and stop playing. They invested nothing so they lose nothing. That same person playing the same game which they had paid $25 for is much more likely to attempt to push through the frustration point because of their investment. They don’t want to feel it was wasted. So remember: Wargames are expensive because they love you so, so much.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 13:49
|
|
|
So, their excuse is that the price tag is in direct relation to how much of a broken mess the UI is? And this is supposed to somehow encourage people to purchase more expensive games? It would be fun if it weren't so sad. Someone get this man a marketing department.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 14:22
|
|
|
ArchangeI posted:The Flare Path, RPS' weekly wargame/simulation feature has a long interview with Iain McNeil, head of Slitherine Games. Highlights include the assertion that they have to price their games high so people push past the lovely UI because they want to wring some sort of fun from their purchase: It's odd that Slitherine is such an important developer/publisher right now, yet their boss sounds so completely out of touch. Tim basically throws down the gauntlet re: crappy interfaces and documentation, with a picture of breakout hit Unity of Command right there, and Ian's response is an anecdote . . . from Europe . . . about a game that looks like it has a pretty lovely interface.  'No, it has nothing to do with a high barrier to entry and total lack of outreach, it's just that we have a niche audience that can never grow beyond grey haired neckbeards.'
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 14:23
|
|
|
lol im gay
Baloogan fucked around with this message at 23:35 on Sep 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 14:30
|
|
|
Myoclonic Jerk posted:It's odd that Slitherine is such an important developer/publisher right now, yet their boss sounds so completely out of touch. Also worth noting is that the anecdote in question is from one of their forum posters. Said forum poster also argued that fewer than 1% of the general gaming population were potential wargamers, and that gaming magazines in the '80s provided the same level of visibility that Steam does now. To be honest, though, to a certain degree I have to wonder how much of the problem is how they define "wargames." It feels like they use a very narrow, very strict and frankly very grognardy definition of wargames where it isn't a proper wargame unless you need Excel to make sense of the statistics it's throwing at you. Taken that way, then yeah, wargames are certainly a tiny niche that's not likely to expand much. But if you try to argue that, you'd also have to argue that things like Panzer General, Close Combat, Combat Mission, and Unity of Command aren't wargames, and where would you be then? Other than CEO of Slitherine, that is. Edit: Just poked back through the forums thread the article linked, and found this quote from a Slitherine guy: quote:For the niche vs. non-niche discussion... you can design a wargame to be less of a niche game. UOC is a great example, as is Panzer Corps. These wargames will sell to far more people than a War in the Pacific. They will still not sell nearly as many copies as a fully mainstream game. The fact is that while most people in the world understand and would be happy to play "Tetris", far fewer are interested in refighting WWII on the Eastern Front, regardless of how well you do the interface and how well you streamline the complexity. These games will also not address the need and interest many wargamers have for more hard-core games like War in the Pacific or Steel Panthers, or ones that focus on less popular subjects, like the Seven Years War or the campaigns of Alexander the Great. As stated earlier, wargaming is a healthy niche but it is a niche and wargames come in all shapes and sizes that cater to larger or smaller segments of that niche. What friggin' planet is this guy living on where he thinks that people do not want to play games about World War 2's Eastern Front? Also note the idea of "Well, it's not going to be as popular as mainstream games so we should never take any cues from them ever." Tomn fucked around with this message at 15:44 on May 17, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 15:31
|
|
|
Glad to know I was right about them banking on sunk cost. Also I'm doing a DC lp soon with one shots and what not but can anyone explain combat better than guesstimate stacking numbers, look at type of unit and terrain, then try for divisional and concentric bonus? Reading the manual breaks down individual units rolling dice with a table but gently caress if I could even attempt to explain that in a way that makes sense (if I even get it at all). Alchenar's thoughts a few pages ago are about all that really makes sense.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 16:19
|
|
|
I'd love if someone did something like War in The East and gave it a UI I could understand. Hell, the barest of graphics like Hearts of Iron has, and BAMN, you've got a really deep, complex game that non-greybeard grognard people might play! What a miracle! Anyone who is so painfully dumb as to say 'WE MAKE PEOPLE PAY MORE SO THEY'LL LEARN TO DEAL WITH OUR TERRIBLE UI' really should not have a job making games.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 16:20
|
|
|
MohawkSatan posted:I'd love if someone did something like War in The East and gave it a UI I could understand. Hell, the barest of graphics like Hearts of Iron has, and BAMN, you've got a really deep, complex game that non-greybeard grognard people might play! What a miracle! Anyone who is so painfully dumb as to say 'WE MAKE PEOPLE PAY MORE SO THEY'LL LEARN TO DEAL WITH OUR TERRIBLE UI' really should not have a job making games. Have you played Unity of Command? It's not nearly as complex, but it still requires you to master concepts such as supply, exploiting armored breakthroughs, maintaining a continuous line, and never trusting Axis Minors to do anything important. Regarding the graphics, I kind of wish UoC had NATO counters. After constantly staring at WotE LPs, I feel like I could soak in more information with them than with UoC's bobbleheads. I think the intuitiveness of the UI is much more important than how nice the on-map graphics look.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 16:54
|
|
|
So not one picked up WitE expansion Lost Battles? It's only 15 bucks and they are great scenarios. Why so much price talk in this thread? Last thread we actually talked about games. 
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 16:59
|
|
|
Is there any likelihood of Matrix putting up these current and popular (popular within the 10 people that play wargames, that is) games up for sale? The fact that they put up Uncommon Valor over WitP, let alone Admiral's Edition, and even then with such small discounts for such old games, makes me feel that games like Decisive Campaigns or WitE are not going to go up anytime soon.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 17:28
|
|
|
This article in US Army Armor School's magazine, Filling in the Blanks: Leveraging Simulations to Provide Tactical Experience by LTC Dale Spurlin, LTC Steven Scholtz and MAJ James Valentine sounds like they either really enjoy playing Combat Mission Shock Force, or are preparing for an invasion of Syria. IIRC there was a specially tailored version of Close Combat used by USMC but these guys are using the off the shelf game and argue that quote:the U.S. Army has long used simulations for training purposes. However, most commercial off-the-shelf simulations have been overlooked, and CMSF provides an inexpensive, easy-to-learn method of teaching basic tactical fundamentals. There you have it: inexpensive, easy to learn. Even the pros value those qualities.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 18:16
|
|
|
Ghost of Mussolini posted:Is there any likelihood of Matrix putting up these current and popular (popular within the 10 people that play wargames, that is) games up for sale? The fact that they put up Uncommon Valor over WitP, let alone Admiral's Edition, and even then with such small discounts for such old games, makes me feel that games like Decisive Campaigns or WitE are not going to go up anytime soon. I feel like I'm getting my money's worth from Decisive Campaigns, but only because I've roped goons into running campaigns with me.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 18:45
|
|
|
Quixzlizx posted:Have you played Unity of Command? It's not nearly as complex, but it still requires you to master concepts such as supply, exploiting armored breakthroughs, maintaining a continuous line, and never trusting Axis Minors to do anything important. I've looked into it, and I'm planning on getting it as soon as I've got the money to spare.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 20:01
|
|
|
Quixzlizx posted:Regarding the graphics, I kind of wish UoC had NATO counters. After constantly staring at WotE LPs, I feel like I could soak in more information with them than with UoC's bobbleheads. I think the intuitiveness of the UI is much more important than how nice the on-map graphics look. I'm 90% sure that there's a mod, endorsed by the devs even, that converts the sprites to NATO counters. I just happen to be a dirty ol' casual that prefers sprites, is all. And Unity of Command is really the best and the thread could alternatively be titled "Grognard Games Megathread - start with Unity of Command" Necroneocon posted:So not one picked up WitE expansion Lost Battles? It's only 15 bucks and they are great scenarios. I held off until the weekend because I don't have that much free time anymore, and getting sucked back into WITE is just going to piss off Alchenar that I'm not doing my turns fast enough. The scenarios look fantastic though and I'm looking forward to sinking my teeth into Uranus.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2013 23:51
|
|
|
I wasn't really going to get lost battles after getting burned on Don to the Danube (the scenarios are mostly pretty bad/cut off too early) but after looking over a few and reading an aar I think I'm going to be getting it this weekend too 
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2013 00:17
|
|
|
uPen posted:I wasn't really going to get lost battles after getting burned on Don to the Danube (the scenarios are mostly pretty bad/cut off too early) but after looking over a few and reading an aar I think I'm going to be getting it this weekend too Yeah I didn't get Don to the Danube after Three Moves Ahead's review of it where they did say that most of the scenarios end before you get to the real meat, but the date range and turn length of Lost Battles all but guarantees both sides get to have fun
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2013 00:24
|
|
|
Necroneocon posted:So not one picked up WitE expansion Lost Battles? It's only 15 bucks and they are great scenarios. The thread title is reminding everyone of game prices over and over I guess.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2013 09:06
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:The thread title is reminding everyone of game prices over and over I guess. It's probably more bad timing, really, between RPS coverage of the issue and recent Matrix Games responses.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2013 11:37
|
|
|
One game that was goddamn worth 120bux was War in the Pacific AE. That is as far as I'm concerned the best game ever made.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2013 12:41
|
|
|
Really needs a UI overhaul though.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2013 12:42
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:Really needs a UI overhaul though. That applies to 99% of all wargames.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2013 12:55
|
|
|
Never in a million years is WitP worth that much. It is a game that's much better when other people are playing it.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2013 14:05
|
|
|
Strategic Command WW1 The Great War 1914-1918: Breakthrough! (phew) expansion is really worth the admission for the Russian Civil War campaign alone. There are also a few other rare gems, such as the East Africa campaign or First Balkan War scenario.  (thanks for including the Comoros archipelago!!!  ) Then there are also new WW1 campaigns that focus on west or east front, with new maps. There are also some modest engine improvements, nothing radical but helpful anyway, like how you can setup some of your forces the way you like at the start of some campaigns. This might increase PBEM replayability when turn 1 isn't always the same. But I had to wipe my eyes though when I saw in the scenario list...  JUTLAND  Uhm, I don't mind simple, Panzer General like modelling of naval units in a game where the focus is on the land campaigns. But why this, whyyyyyy???
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2013 15:16
|
|
|
Those isometric tiles are such a loving eyesore, why couldn't they just stick to the simple 2d hex grid that the original Strategic Command used.
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2013 16:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 18, 2024 20:28 |
|
|
Obfuscation posted:Those isometric tiles are such a loving eyesore, why couldn't they just stick to the simple 2d hex grid that the original Strategic Command used. Civilization 2 marks the future of strategic gaming  (hexes really would be better)
|
|
#
?
May 18, 2013 16:23
|
|