|
Galaga Galaxian posted:I know people keep saying they want NWS to do a WW2 version, but I'd actually rather see an Age of Sail game like Rule the Waves. I'm still waiting for an honest to god successor for Fighting Steel; complete with NWS add on campaign. I want to be a German surface raider so bad I still play Great Naval Battles of The North Atlantic on DOSbox. Unfortunately Fighting Steel is hopelessly broken because of its 3D modeling and total incompatibility with modern directx.
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2015 21:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 22:20 |
|
|
Two questions, does anyone here play Flash Points Campaign's: Red Storm? I've been wanting to multiplayer this forever. Also, any news on Southern Storm's release? I suppose I can google that...
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2015 21:51
|
|
|
Galaga Galaxian posted:Look at all you bastards stuck in the trenches. (Except Nenonen, he's cool) To be an even bigger grognard than is implied by playing realism modded SH3--which I did--I was never satisfied with the game because... The game never included real merchant ships, particularly converted ocean liners. I got sick of sinking generic merchants and the maritime historian in me wanted to torpedo super liners and near retired ships I could actually identify. Plus, why not actually slap in real merchant vessels. Incidentally, this reminds me... I've always been sad a good WW1 subsim was never released, or at least a WW1 overhaul of SH3; that said, I know the British and French merchant navy of the WW1 era even better, so I'd have gotten even more irritated when historical ships didn't make an appearance. PS Someone not Storm Eagle remake Fighting Steel or Great Naval Battles of the North Atlantic please.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2015 22:06
|
|
|
I'm curious about WiTW. 1. How does the economy and production work? Is it similar to WiTP? 2. Given my last set of posts, how (if at all) is the Battle of the Atlantic handled? 3. Likewise, a lot of my personal "what iffs" involve alternative uses of the Axis surface navies. How does the naval war play generally? 4. Are Norway and western Finland ignored, or are they on the map?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
Drone posted:1.) The economy and production are more like WitE on the Soviet side. Basically impenetrable. My experience with WiTE is from a really long time ago. Does this mean you have zero control over priority of production? Honestly all that I really care about is the Axis side, because playing the overwhelmingly "you can't lose" Western allies or the post 1941 soviets is really boring for me. quote:2.) The Battle of the Atlantic is not at all modeled. The game is limited to summer of 1943 - August of 1945 (bumped back to 1942 with the Operation Torch expansion) with a heavy focus on the French and Italian theaters. You can still lose ships (in the form of amphibious convoys) to enemy sea interdiction and shore guns though, but there is no naval action aside from that. Yeah, but... spring and summer 1943 were the climax of the Battle of the Atlantic. May 1943 was the month Churchill said Great Britain came closest to losing the war; however, okay uboat warfare isn't really central to the game. I get it. quote:3.) There is absolutely no navy in the game, aside from Allied amphibious task forces ferrying troops from point A to point B. You can destroy U-Boat factories with your planes though, and this nets you VP as the Allies. What!? The Italians had enough of a surface fleet left to be a real risk to allied operations in the Mediterranean and the Tirpitz, by itself, as a fleet in-being tied up the allied navyand British air power. Churchill was friggen obsessed with Tirpitz and dedicated significant resources to kill her. I consider this incredibly lame. Especially considering when the add operation torch you've got the question about the Vichy navy and the Scharnhorst Gneisenau still in Brest threatening convoy traffic. Not to mention the Italian actions against Malta convoys and its potential, on paper, to seriously threaten amphibious operations in the Mediterranean. This is probably a huge deal breaker for me. Edit Also, in games of this scale bombing things for VPs only usually means there is no reason to do it, since VPs can be more efficiently gained through successful territorial gain. The reason you bomb things is that it makes the later easier. quote:4.) Southern Norway is on the very edge of the map. The northern boundary for the playable map is a line of latitude that runs through Stockholm. In the east the boundary goes to around the Black Sea coast (a few miles short of it, really), and in the West the boundary goes through the middle of Ireland/Spain. Does Norway at least have garrison requirements for the Axis side? ZombieLenin fucked around with this message at 21:51 on Oct 11, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2015 21:45
|
|
|
uPen posted:This would be pointless, it would just be a resting place for shattered Eastern front units. Norway being on the map at all is an artifact of the projection they're using, it not part of the game. Right, except Hitler had a hardon for the idea that the allies would attack Norway and dedicated valuable men, naval power, earmarked costal defense resources, etc to defending Norway. Personally, if you are going to have a garrison requirement at all for the Axis, in the Western Front, it seems only natural to include Norway (or just cut it off the map). Depending on how the turn structure goes, with the addition of operation torch, Italy should be in the war more than 12 turns. And while it turns out the Italian navy remained loyal to the king after the Armistice, it did not necessarily turn out that way--given some of the Italian armed forces defected to the Italian Social Republic. Also, the armistice itself was not a sure thing on either side. Not only did it require a coup within the fascist leadership, the Allies thought very seriously of rejecting it altogether. If I'm a more paradox minded version of Gary Grigsby, and believed in the use of events to flesh out the full possibilities of the war, I might have chosen to model that. Even given the historical outcome the Germans tried very hard to neutralize the Italian fleet after the armistice (thus the sinking of the Roma) and to capture what was left of the Vichy fleet at Tulon during operation Lila--which was part of the German occupation of Vichy post operation husky. As it turned out operation Lila failed and the French were able to scuttle their ships, but this was a close fought thing that was won because of a few minutes delay on the prt of the Germans.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2015 15:01
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:Command: Northern Inferno is out today. First time I've been on the dev team for a game with a release! Wish I could get into this game. I used to love harpoon, but I must be getting old because I really don't have the patience to manually edit load outs of aircraft when literally every munition type and plane configuration is available. Similarly I don't really want to get into telling pilots exactly what altitude to fly at, or to hand walk air-to-air refueling. About the most advanced I can go these days is Naval War Arctic Circle detail. I'm ashamed to admit dropping $80 on command and not being able to make it 15 minutes before I got too frustrated. That was maybe 5 months ago, and I've never launched the game again. I have some of the same problems in War in the Pacific. Honesty I've played 10x the War Plan Orange as I have WiTP. I'm not super excited about the time period covered in War Plan Orange, but you know what? I don't have to micro manage pilots teeth brushing and altitudes of CAPs. So if your listening someone out there, can we make something that simulates an air war at a more abstract level? I want to just be able to say, "you guys need to go bomb that, those guys will provide air cover for you, and the other guys will refuel you half way there" and it gets done. Having to micromanage flying in a non-flying simulator really hurts my fun.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
Pharnakes posted:I think someone a few days ago said you could in theory but command has no modelling of plunging fire, so battleships would be a bit weird. Someone should fix that! Also someone should remake Fighting Steel that includes a campaign mode a la NWS's Fighting Steel project--and while you're doing this please include damage control management. I'd also sign up for a Edit Had to add the graphics requirement there since there are a number of 2D products out there.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2015 15:32
|
|
|
gfanikf posted:So I went to Matrix's forums to look up new Command Scenarios.....and The Operational Art of War IV is being made? Well, I mean it isn't impossible. Just really, really unlikely.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2015 22:41
|
|
|
Pimpmust posted:Anyone know what the password is for the Fulda Frontier of Freedom scenario in Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm? Yay! Another Red Storm player! To answer your question: I have no idea. Have you tried the Slithirine forums? Also the scenario designer is, weirdly, really good at responding to questions on the steam forums.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2015 00:49
|
|
|
unicr0n posted:What game is this? I'm new to groggames and I like the art style of this one. Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm. The game covers a hypothetical war between NATO and the Warsaw Pact around 1986. There are a few campaigns, which aren't dynamic at all, just missions strung together that take into account losses from previous missions, and lots of scenarios. Troops from the United States, Soviet Union, Great Britain and FRG are represented in some fashion. Currently the developers claim to be working on "Southern Storm," which will add the Republic of France and the GDR. It's a turn based game, and I enjoy it; however it does have some serious issues--see our discussions here about artillery, tactical withdrawal, and the relative strength of Soviet air power.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2015 16:07
|
|
|
Pharnakes posted:Double post because gently caress it, DC:B is now available on Matrix for £34.99 I'm shocked I knew nothing about these games until this thread. This particular title looks really interesting, not $80 interesting, but really interesting nonetheless. How does DCB compare to the other DC titles? For example, would purchasing one of the cheaper previous titles give me a good idea of how DCB plays? On a related note, just reading about how this game works makes me think that it would be a good engine for a Great War game. I know those don't sell well, but I've found myself thinking for awhile that the GW titles out there really do not capture how important the personality and battlefield command styles of Great War generals were... Particularly when it came to their willingness to deviate from battle plans/accepted doctrine in the face of trench warfare offensives AND dealing with armies on the verge of mutiny in 1916-18.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 25, 2015 15:19
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:
That's boring. Think of all the rapey/genocidey decisions you won't be able to make. Edit. Seriously some people need loving help. I just read the thread on the official forums where some people are bitching that the Geneva Convention is defaulted as "on." Because, you know, people being uncomfortable reenacting war crimes is PC drivel. Also included: someone literally snickering because they weren't allowed to use swastika counters for a game at a gamin convention in Germany... ZombieLenin fucked around with this message at 02:47 on Nov 30, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2015 02:19
|
|
|
I broke down and bought DC: B and since I'm new to their series I have a few questions: 1. How are political points calculated? I know I get some every turn, but the amount seems variable. 2. How, playing as the Germans, do you manage your political points? I've managed to run myself out of them to the point that I've got tons of decisions I can't make every turn, and I'm pretty universally hated as a result. 3. Since I'm new to this particular game engine I don't think I've ironed the most efficient way to encircle. Should I be going for small encirclements or should I be attempting Kiev style giant pockets? 4. How critical is the card play? I Haven't, obviously, figured out how to balance my PP use generally.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2015 22:18
|
|
|
Playing DC: Barbarossa has brought back memories of table top European Theatre of operations, and an alternate ruleset that allowed World War 3 to start immediately after the fall of Berlin. So I bring you this question, does a grognard game like this exist--a game that covers WW3 in Europe in 1945?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2015 20:25
|
|
|
gohuskies posted:Oh dear me. Well, good luck, you're braver than I! Even the Allied campaign is more than I can honestly really chew. Get WITP Tracker, you'll need it. I have the same problem universally. I just cant play the allies in grognard games (the exception being the USSR.) Actually, it's really just the US I cannot enjoy playing... Because I've got no problem playing the UK or France in pre-1942 WW2 games or Great War games. I think it has something to do with a subconscious desire to see if I can change history, and not just win sooner as the United States. When I really think about it the US has such a huge advantage it's just really boring for me to ROFL stomp Japan/Axis. I mean even a terrible half assed attempt at WITP as the allies means victory is a forgone conclusion. It's only a matter of seeing how much sooner you can reach historical milestones than they happened in reality. ZombieLenin fucked around with this message at 00:58 on Dec 13, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2015 00:54
|
|
|
DC: B  So far, after about restarts, I have found it impossible to even approximate historical outcomes. Also literally everyone but Hitler and Goables hates me. Speaking of which, why on Earth does Hitler like me so much? It's mid-August I've failed to take his objective, and by every conceivable measure, and especially the "war is over in 6 months," I've failed. ZombieLenin fucked around with this message at 15:09 on Dec 15, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2015 14:49
|
|
|
Wait, have I had you over to my house before or something?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2015 00:26
|
|
|
Generation Internet posted:I've generally been reading all the AARs and new player guides that I can, which has had the side effect of making me eternally grateful for how much better this forum is than the Matrix one. A loooot of the AAR posts on there are really hard to parse because of the wholesale copy/pasting of combat logs with a minimum of commentary, as people have pointed out here before. Which, by the way, makes Operation Glacier so far ahead of anything else I've seen so far I don't think I can come up with a sufficiently hysterical metaphor to compare it to the Matrix grogs. Umm... On my Matrix profile under "my games" at Matrix there is literally a link to download everything I've ever purchased except maybe 3 games from 6 years ago.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2015 05:51
|
|
|
ZekeNY posted:I bought WITP the day it was released, and I'm still always discovering new little things buried in it somewhere. I think my favorite was when I was looking through PT boat commanders, and came across Q. McHale Is Taratupa on the map too?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2015 18:16
|
|
|
Happy Hedonist posted:A new John Tiller game was released today. I just got an email about it. Here. I would like John Tiller games if the AI wasn't so loving dumb. The single player scenarios are usually pretty drat awful. Not to date myself, but the new John Tiller game reminds me a lot of V for Victory.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2015 22:09
|
|
|
I just broke down and bought War in the East. I'm just dicking around with the interface and manual and noticed a production mode. Is there any way to effect the types of equipment being produced a la War in the Pacific, or is just information letting me know what, and how much is being, produced?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2015 22:27
|
|
|
Riso posted:The game is indeed only showing you the toys. There is no way to affect their production or distribution. I have it and have been playing it pretty much non-stop since release. I keep wanting to carry on after January 1942, so really it's DCB's fault I blew $54 on another Gary Grisby title.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 25, 2015 01:29
|
|
|
LordPants posted:How long does it take to get to the end of game in DCB? Not that that's a problem for a game with replayability I guess. Playing about few hours a day after work--half assed while I also play world of tanks, about 2 days. Maybe start to finish 6 or 7 hours.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 25, 2015 01:45
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:The super silly thing is that it's possible I share an office with some of the people working on gender integration in the armed forces gently caress those people (not the ones you work with, the other ones in that loving thread). Really. Their worldview cannot die, with them, fast enough. ZombieLenin fucked around with this message at 02:44 on Dec 25, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Dec 25, 2015 02:38
|
|
|
philosoraptor posted:Great user name/post combo! I got no farther than the first page, and I could not loving stop myself.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2015 00:11
|
|
|
LordPants posted:Welp first game as Allies in WitW and a Major Axis Victory. You know, you've got to have win conditions in a game, but the same historical results, in July instead of May, does not really ring in my ears as a Major Axis victory. Still hanging on in 1946 seems a better fit for that label. Llyranor posted:How is the DC:B AI? Game worth playing singleplayer on both sides, or is it mostly for PBEM? You know the Soviet AI seems pretty good, and linked with hosed German logistics, winning isn't easy. Now the German AI, oth, seems pretty weak. Don't expect the computer to try to do large encirclements of you as a soviet player. ZombieLenin fucked around with this message at 02:06 on Dec 27, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2015 02:03
|
|
|
Another War In The East question: So since I have no control over production (why can't you allow me to be able to prioritize not crappy equipment) what is the point of capturing factories or strategic bombing? Is this just a victory point thing? On a side note, and I've probably said it before, it's really annoying to me when games model strategic bombing and make the only game effect "points" you score at the end.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 28, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:As a Soviet player, you spend your Admin Points to produce an on-map counter, and then the automated production system fills up that counter with Stuff. You can't control whether the factories are producing T-70s or T-34s to serve as Stuff Filler, but if the Germans capture your factories, then you either can't build T-34s even if they're otherwise available, or worst case you can't build any tanks period. So as the German player it's merely a denial of resources thing? I.e. You can't capture the factories in Kiev before they are evacuated and have them switch over to producing German equipment at some point?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2015 16:25
|
|
|
Drone posted:The war for the Germans is a matter of speed. The war for the Russians is a matter of attrition and sheer numbers. Production should not be among your worries as a German player - you've got the whole over greater Germany pumping out arms and armor for you. Instead, you need to be focused on preventing the Russians from being able to develop that same luxury. You are absolutely correct, and I am not really complaining. But in keeping with the grognard spirit of the thread I want my simulation down to the useless minutia! I want my factory in Kiev spitting out ME109 frames after I've owned it for a year drat it! Then when I'm losing the war and getting my rear end kicked in 1944 (who am I kidding I'd stop before this unless playing a human) I want to have to destroy the factory before the Russians retake the city. Why else would you buy a Grisby title!?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2015 19:46
|
|
|
Do Not Resuscitate posted:I've never understood why HOI wasn't turned-based. Doesn't everyone pause it and pretty much play it that way anyway? Yes. Me stopping the game every 2 seconds to chase a few partisans across the vast Russian steppes so much more fun too.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2015 23:35
|
|
|
pthighs posted:You've uncovered a niche ripe for exploitation in the grognard genre: Gary Grigsby's Wartime Factory Manager The Germans would definitely buy this.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2015 00:05
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:A freeware game called Stalin's Dilemma made by a college professor for educational purposes. It's a quite entertaining solitaire mini-simulation, worth a try if you don't mind 1990's Visual Basic interface. Do you get paranoia as time goes on so that all the workers and such start showing up as Trotskyiates?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2015 23:21
|
|
|
Baudin posted:Grognard.txt Messing around with war in the East--plus I was just thinking about wanting a video game like this a few weeks ago--makes me excited about this prospect for two reasons. 1. I remember being a young man playing European Theatre of Operations and there being an optional rule set that allowed for fighting between the Soviets and the Allies to break out after certain conditions in Germany were met (basically as soon as the German player loses). This sounds fun as a computer game to me. 2. I've always wanted to play an Eastern Front game where a Soviet first strike scenario could be modded in. That seems sort of possible for War in the East; however, the map needs to go a little farther West to make it really interesting.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2015 15:07
|
|
|
I really wish War in The East was more easily moddable. I can think of a dozen mods/scenarios that are just too difficult, or impossible. Like something as simple as a scenario that uses the original Barbarossa start date of May 15th cannot be done. Nor really a 1942 start date either (since the surprise bonus is hard coded). Speaking of which, the Matrix forums are pretty sparse on player made scenarios. Are these archived/posted anywhere else?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2016 18:53
|
|
|
Can someone explain to me moving airbases in War in the East? Do you literally just move the air base units wherever? Maybe I'm just too used to games where airplanes need airfields and their accompanying support to operate.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2016 21:08
|
|
|
I have another War in The East question. Two really. Why the gently caress does Army Group North, with the Baltic rail network, need 3 independent CBs while in Army Group Center I've got to re-gauge railway at a snails pace with one? I assume there is some "historical" explanation. Second, because I only skimmed the manual, what's up with all of the CBs dropped by HQs all over the place?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2016 15:26
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:The independent RR units are historical AFAIK. You can re-task them across different army groups, but you can't double up and have two RR units advance across the same rail line simultaneously for twice the distance covered. I will have to check, but I'm fairly sure you can "double up" in the Baltic rail zone. I'm at work, but I believe I did expedite the linking of Konnisberg to Riga this way. I've got a few general:strategy question: assume Im playing the grand campaign--yeah I tend to not take the small scenario first approach but just jump in the deep end. 1. For how many turns do you continue the war against Soviet airfields? I've found playing around that there are some seriously demolished returns by turn 3. 2. Is it useful at all to bomb rail yards in cities? I'd like to interdict Soviet supplies, but it seems sort of useless up front. 3. Is there any benefit at all to using bomb unit? Or should I just let the AI handle ground support? 4. Maybe it's me, but it seems like through the first 4 turns (farthest I've gotten) the Soviet AI is ridiculously passive. I've seen no evidence at all of the Soviet AI trying to avoid, or break out of, encirclement. It is seems so passive I kind of wonder if I messed up my settings somehow.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
uPen posted:1. 1-2 turns, 1 is probably enough. Yeah, leaders... After "playing" the first 3 or 4 turns of Barbarossa a bunch of times over 10 hours I haven't even thought about leaders yet. Oh, Gary Grigsby, how would I war game without you?  I will say one thing for the game. At least I don't need to monitor what my pilots are wearing to bed, or how often they brush their teeth. That, for me, is a significant improvement. Edit Is there a way to disband/form new HQs? I'm a little confused and troubled by the plethora of one division HQs I seem to encounter. Seems like attaching those divisions to other corps HQs would be a lot more efficient. ZombieLenin fucked around with this message at 00:00 on Jan 6, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2016 23:55
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 22:20 |
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Encircled units are extremely weak in WITE and breakouts will almost never happen on their own. Keep going. It gets tougher. You're right! I take it back. I've got a lot to learn apparently. I took the campaign to July 14th and was completely halted on multiple defensive lines by the Soviets. Quick follow up question(s). After moving airfields the Luftwaffe seems significantly less effective. 1. Do I need to keep the air force within a certain # of hexes from the railhead? If so, it's a damned if you do damned if you don't situation in as much as keeping the airbases within 5 hexes or so of the rail heads keeps a lot of air missions at extreme range. 1a. I just noticed "enable night missions;" however clicking on it, I can not actually run any. 2. Is there some secret to keeping Panzer groups in supply? For example, I can capture Minsk and secure the bridges across the Dnepr, but then the Panzers just sit and don't have enough fuel to do jack until the infantry catches up. This gives the Soviets enough time to be annoying. 2b. When stockpiling supplies for HQs, do I need to turn this on for all the subordinate HQs, or does it suffice to turn it on for just the main army HQ?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2016 17:09
|
|