|
I've been trying AGEOD's newest release 'Espana 1936', because I am such a complete loving nerd about the Spanish Civil War and will pretty happily devour anything remotely related to it. It seems pretty cool, albeit slightly confusing. The interface itself is fairly simple and intuitive once you figure it out, but I'm still not quite sure how my units' combat effectiveness is determined (to the point that the outcome of battles seems almost random), and I honestly do not like AGEOD's map system at all. I would prefer a more traditional hex-based map. Playing as the Republic, your main problem is that all of your units are a pretty much random clusterfuck scattered all over the country, with no coherent front lines and literally no army organization whatsoever; you have a few generals, but all but one of them are in a single stack in Madrid. Your army at the start is composed almost entirely of hastily-organized civilian militia and a few small battalions of 'armor', which is a nice way of saying 'civilian cars with metal plating haphazardly welded on'. AGEOD's games rely heavily on army structure and organization; all units which are not commanded by a general get a significant combat penalty, and you get significant bonuses from forming stacks into divisions, subordinating divisions to corps, corps to armies, etc. Because of this, not having enough generals to go around, and having no divisions, corps, or armies, is a huge loving disadvantage and makes the game significantly harder. All of this is quite realistic - the Republic's forces really were a total clusterfuck at the start of the war, there really weren't enough trained officers to go around, and the forces they did have really did consist of a random mess of armed civilians, police officers, and old reservists armed with an equally random mess of whatever weapons they could scrounge or steal. It makes for a challenging scenario, and it seems like it would be fun as hell even if you aren't as obsessed with the SCW as I am. However, it's making me wonder - are there any other games that have done it better? For that matter, does anyone know of any other SCW games, period? This is the only one I've been able to find so far, and it seems like a sadly underrepresented era in wargaming. Mister Bates fucked around with this message at 03:26 on Nov 1, 2013 |
#
¿
Nov 1, 2013 03:23
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 18:57 |
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:
I had noticed the Combat Power, it was just that it didn't seem to have any real relation to the effectiveness of a unit. You pointing out the fatigue and cohesion bars made me realize I had not, in fact, noticed those.  The reason battle results didn't seem to have any relation to combat power is because I wasn't paying attention to how tired or cohesive my units were. Units that were on paper absolute terrors were getting effortlessly shredded by comparatively weaker troops simply because they were too exhausted to fight effectively.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2013 23:45
|
|
|
Shelled out for the Squad Battles: Spanish Civil War game, and have found it pretty enjoyable so far. There don't seem to be many squad-level grognardy games out there, but this series is a pretty good example of one. My only real criticism is that there are basically no campaigns - there's just a bunch of unlinked scenarios, a few of which are designed to be played in sequence as a sort of pseudo-campaign. I like my strategy games to have a bit more structure than 'pick random scenario, shoot mans', but it's definitely not a deal breaker. It's also much cheaper than a Matrix Games product would have been. I particularly like how the game handles reaction fire - namely, a unit's reaction fire can be triggered by another unit's reaction fire, so battles eventually turn into a chaotic mess of everyone firing at everyone until the side with greater fire superiority builds up enough suppression to push the enemy's heads down and cause their fire to slacken.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2013 07:02
|
|
|
V for Vegas posted:Wow, you can own the ultimate edition for the bargain price of €2 989,00 Holy poo poo, that makes Matrix look like a pack of amateurs when it comes to ridiculous video game pricing. e: Also, that company's previous game is literally subtitled 'Les Grognards'. 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2013 07:01
|
|
|
Can anyone recommend any good grognardy historical games with unconventional settings? Basically, anything that isn't World War 1, World War 2, a fictional Cold-War-Turned-Hot scenario, or the American Civil War. Something you don't see modeled very often - the Chinese Civil War, or the Falklands War, or the Algerian revolution, or the 1871 revolution in France, or the Mexican-American war or whatever. Just anything that isn't a conflict I've already refought a billion times.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2014 03:59
|
|
|
Are any of the scenarios made for older versions of TOAW compatible with the Matrix Games release, or am I going to have to track down an old copy of Century of Warfare?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2014 16:51
|
|
|
I found a Grenada scenario for TOAW. I'm starting to wonder if there is any conflict in history that doesn't have a TOAW scenario or two.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2015 07:55
|
|
|
BulletHole posted:Christ. Riso posted:That flowchart is one of those things computers are supposed to automate, ugh. Filthy casuals! 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2015 18:42
|
|
|
Davin Valkri posted:3) Hind-Ps are loving BALLERINAS WHO DODGE EVERY MISSILE YOU CHUCK AT THEM I'VE SHOT AT YOU A HUNDRED TIMES JUST CRASH AND STOP ROLLING AROUND AND BLOWING UP MY TANKS AND SMOKING YOUR GODDAMN CUBAN CIGARS IN THE COCKPIT AAAAAAAA I could have told you number 3 from years spent playing Steel Panthers: MBT campaigns as the Mujahadeen. Fuuuuuuuck Soviet gunships.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2015 22:49
|
|
|
For the hell of it, I've been playing through a generated Spanish Civil War campaign in WinSPWW2 as the Republic, and I'm having a blast. The first mission was really touch-and-go, because I started the same month the Civil War kicked off, so my core force wasn't even an organized military unit, it was a loosely-structured band of armed civilians the game called a 'Multitud'. I had a small unit of WW1-vintage museum-piece tankettes as 'armor support' and four light mortars as an artillery section. Ended up desperately trying to hold this hill in the middle of a wheat field against a battalion-strength Nationalist infantry unit (composed of regular army, of course, because the game is an rear end in a top hat), while my green-as-grass militiamen shattered and ran for cover every time a bullet passed within fifty yards of their location, my mortars dropped shells everywhere except where the enemy was, my tanks consistently missed people standing in the open right next to them, and enemy artillery rained down with pinpoint accuracy on my defensive positions. I have no idea how I won, but I did, barely, with over half my force dead and the majority of my ammunition depleted. On the bright side, the people who lived through are battle-hardened as gently caress. Mission two went a lot better. I got enough points to upgrade my core forces a bit, replacing the mob of idiots with an organized CNT-FAI militia column, some Tiznaos (the iconic makeshift APCs made out of up-armored civilian cars), and a section of Hotchkiss HMGs. Brought along the tankettes too, because why not? The mission was a Meeting Engagement, which basically means there's three unclaimed victory points in neutral territory in the middle of the map at the start of the mission, and both sides are advancing towards each other to take them. I initially took all three points with no resistance, thanks to the speed of the APCs, and for some reason the AI poured almost all of its resources into pushing the center point. Could have been a repeat of the last mission - but this time I had machine guns, and soldiers with combat experience, and artillery, and fast-moving vehicles. Enfilade fire from a dozen Hotchkiss guns does scary things to massed infantry moving across open ground - after a few turns of that, the enemy mostly stopped trying to advance past the treeline. I couldn't actually dislodge them, their cover was too good and they were doing a good job of keeping me from actually advancing on their positions, but I had them locked down in one place. Then my howitzer batteries dropped a barrage directly on top of their heads, the machine gun batteries scored some lucky hits, and I mass-charged my infantry at them, all in the same turn. Then the guys fleeing all of that ran directly into the fields of fire of the tankettes, tiznaos, and recon troops I'd moved around behind them.  I ended up nearly wiping out a reinforced infantry battalion and only sustained 35 casualties.It's loving beautiful watching a determined enemy advance just melt in an instant when all the elements of a plan come together. It literally went from 'enemy holding their own, could go either way' to 'enemy decisively defeated' in a single turn. It's stuff like this that keeps me coming back to grog games. It took a lot of time to set up, but the feeling of satisfaction I got seeing those dumb bastards make a tactical withdrawal right into my prepared killzone is just not something you can get in any other game genre.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2015 08:44
|
|
|
Drone posted:I really need to spend more time with WinSPWW2/WinSPMBT. The games have full-featured scenario and campaign editors and fuckloads of premade campaigns and scenarios covering basically every war you can imagine, but they also have randomly generated battles and procedurally generated campaigns. Pick a start and end date, choose the participants in the war, the number of missions you want there to be in the campaign, the number of force-selection points you want to have, etc., and the game will put together a random campaign matching those parameters. You'll be given points to purchase a core force that will be persistent throughout the campaign, who will gain experience and can be upgraded as time goes on. The game's default map selection is even pretty smart about it - if you do a campaign with Republican Spain versus Nationalist Spain during the Spanish Civil War era, it will give you nothing but Spain maps, if you play SPMBT and generate a PLO vs. IDF campaign it will give you maps in places like the West Bank and Gaza (you can also override this and make it put you anywhere you want, if you want to play a campaign in which the USSR is duking it out with the Afghanis in Northern Canada or something). You can pick literally any four nations to be participants in a campaign with no restrictions, too - ever wanted to play Black Hawk Down from the side of the Somalians, you can do that, ever wanted to see what would happen if France, Germany, and Belgium invaded Switzerland, you can do that, ever wanted to see what would happen if Ugandan troops suddenly landed in force on the beaches of Virginia, you can do that. SPWW2 actually has two campaign generators - there's the default one, and then there's a Historical Campaign Generator, which has you picking a start date, choosing a country, and then the game taking you from your chosen start date all the way to the end of WW2 (or the end of your chosen country's participation in it). This includes the big nations like the UK and Germany and Japan, so you can fight Rommel in the desert or make Operation Market Garden succeed or capture Moscow for the Reich or whatever, but it also includes nations like Yugoslavia and Greece, if you've ever wanted to play a WW2 partisan/guerrilla campaign.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2015 16:33
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Steel Panthers is always good fun against a human opponent though, braindead or not. On that note, any takers for SPWW2 or MBT? I'd prefer something large, maybe an attack/defense instead of meeting engagement (I'm happy with either). A historical battle would also be fun, I haven't played most of the stock scenarios. Timeframe and participants don't matter, anything from Spanish Civil War to contemporary Ukraine conflict. I see in SPMBT there's also a 1968 US vs Nazis scenario which sounds intriguing... I've never done multiplayer before but I'm willing to give it a try, should be a different experience from scything down the AI human wave. I've got PMs and my info is on the OP spreadsheet as of now. Out of curiousity, are there any games that take place at Steel Panthers' scale (brigade-sized engagements or lower, with each unit counter representing a section of infantry or a single vehicle), with its level of OOB variety and nation choices, but with better AI? The games are good for their time but they're still ultimately games that were developed for computers running MS-DOS in the mid-1990s, so the AI does leave a lot to be desired sometimes.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2015 22:34
|
|
|
HisMajestyBOB posted:I've played a ton of Steel Panthers: World at War, but never played much of SP:WWII. What are the main differences? The combat engines are slightly different , with the biggest changes being that reaction fire rules are much different in SPWW2 and that artillery delays are calculated at the end of the turn instead of at the beginning like they are in SPWAW. There are a whole lot more nations to choose from in SPWW2 and generally a lot more variety in OOBs. Also, SPWW2 can be played in windowed mode and is generally a bit better optimized for modern computers. If those all sound like fairly minor differences, it's because they are, and which of the two games is 'better' is largely a matter of personal preference. I prefer SPWW2, myself, just because the larger number of nations and maps allows for more variety in the gameplay. Speaking of Steel Panthers, I just saw the AI accidentally do a smart thing. I'm not sure what algorithms I triggered to cause it to do this, but on my Arab-Israeli Wars campaign in SPMBT, the Israelis just turned both my flanks and moved in to hit my center from both sides, causing me to have to withdraw to save my experienced units (I'm playing with low build points, so I can't afford many replacements). Having seen the AI do a lot of dumb things in this game, I was kind of surprised to see it pull that off. It might just be a function of how scarily good the Israelis are - I did a short modern-era PLO vs. IDF campaign a short while ago, and for the entire duration, my policy whenever I saw approaching Merkava-4s was 'run, hide, pray they don't see you'. I only ever got consistent kills on them by luring them into close quarters and mass-charging them with dudes carrying satchel charges, none of my other anti-tank weapons could ever do anything more than immobilize them or sometimes knock out a main gun if I got super-lucky.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2015 08:38
|
|
|
Nenonen and I have just kicked off a PBEM game of Steel Panthers: MBT. The game will be an attack by Nenonen's Ethiopian forces against my Eritrean defenders. If people are interested, I'll post updates on the game in this thread, behind spoiler-tags of course. Here's how things look at the start, Nenonen should most definitely not look at this until the battle is over. I'm defending a coastal city - although it would be a bit more accurate to say I'm defending a valley to the west of the city, since that's where most of the victory locations are. My forces consist of three rifle companies, a reinforced company of T-55s, and half a company of BRDMs with Sagger anti-tank missiles, plus several batteries of artillery and a couple snipers and Sagger missile teams. The ground looks open on the map, but a lot of it is actually rough terrain, which is excellent cover and concealment for infantry but massively impedes vehicle movement, leaving the valley as one of the only routes of advance (which works out, because that's also where most of the victory points are concentrated). However, the valley is a big, open, clear killzone in full view of anyone on either hill, which I'll be taking advantage of. I'm keeping my tanks and APCs out of the direct line of sight of anyone advancing towards the city, to avoid getting them murked at the beginning of the battle by missiles, and have tried to avoid placing too many units together in one place to minimize the effect of artillery barrages. There's one major deficiency in my setup, which is that I have no anti-air at all, but I'm hoping it doesn't end up being a problem. Screenshots I took during setup can be found here: http://imgur.com/a/2yzfn e: In non-spoilery news, have continued my Spanish Civil War campaign against the AI, and just watched a bunch of its units retreat into their own minefields and die (unless you specify a rally point, routed units will just move towards your starting line without concern for what is in the way, which in this case was a fuckload of land mines). The Nationalists have lost more troops to Nationalist land mines in this battle than I have. Mister Bates fucked around with this message at 07:06 on Jan 21, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2015 07:00
|
|
|
AceRimmer posted:For anyone that can't play without sound, there is a sound mod that make the annoying high-pitched PING more of a dull PWONG which is a bit better. To be fair to the AI, human-controlled units will do that as well, it's just the way the retreat code is set up. Routed units will either retreat towards their formation's designated rally point, or the edge of the map their side started from (if you didn't set a rally point). Since almost no one ever bothers to designate rally points, this means that if you manage to get behind enemy infantry units, and push them to retreat, they'll suicide-charge directly into your guns, whether they're human-controlled or AI-controlled. It's kind of dumb, really, the retreat code should have taken into account things like 'what direction is this unit being shot from?' and 'is the hex I'm about to retreat to the most dangerous place I could possibly be going?' I do like that I can exploit the retreat code to funnel enemy units into charnel-house killzones with overlapping fields of machine gun fire, I just don't like that fleeing units blindly charge towards their destination even if it means running directly at the unit they're retreating from in the first place. Seriously, someone needs to remake these games. I don't even need updated graphics and I'll live with the grog-as-gently caress user interface. Hell, you don't even need to give it modern screen resolutions, I'll tolerate 800x600. Keep the exact same game, but overhaul the AI to modern standards, make turn resolution faster, and include better sounds, and I will give you all my money.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2015 06:44
|
|
|
As our game gets underway, I though I'd ask: would people be interested in a pair of LP threads for the PBEM Nenonen and I have running, or would you rather it just stay in this thread? We're worried it might get a little annoying filling up the grog thread with spoiler-tags, but aren't sure if we have enough content to justify separate threads. He also suggested having a bit of goon participation in the game, if people are interested. We'd let people name unit commanders and formations, designate 'lucky' units, that sort of thing. This has also given me an idea for something to try after this game is over, if people are interested - namely, a Goons vs. AI Steel Panthers campaign, played in the LP forum. The posters select a core force for the campaign, I set up a series of randomized scenarios against the AI, the thread plans out each turn as a group (maybe having individual posters command individual units or formations, like in Grey Hunter's Combat Mission LPs), and I execute the orders. The AI in the Steel Panthers games is poor enough by modern standards that it will be possible for the hivemind to win, but it should still provide a challenge for whatever force they end up putting together. Mister Bates fucked around with this message at 22:04 on Jan 22, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2015 22:01
|
|
|
Minor update on the PBEM game so far, spoilers: Haven't made contact yet; the first few turns have consisted of Nenonen dropping heavy artillery bombardments on an empty patch of desert, the abandoned police HQ (which is now ruined and on fire), and a few unoccupied houses. However, I have already suffered a setback. After seeing his artillery units drop a huge smokescreen in the area I assume he is going to advance, I moved a unit of ATGM-armed light armor into more beneficial positions to counter any movements from that direction, and one of them got stuck in a ditch en route and immobilized.  Should have invested in tracked APCs instead of wheeled.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2015 00:31
|
|
|
Koesj posted:In my WitP game intel is now showing all three KB carriers I encountered off of Canton Is. as probably sunk on 11-13 Feb 194, and I'm 99% sure on at least 2 of those Pretty sure that's a bug, given that 194 is ~1,800 years before the game can even start. Maybe they fell through a time hole?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2015 16:48
|
|
|
PBEM update time! We've got contact; as the fighting is about to kick off proper, now seems like a good time to see if anyone would like to pick a lucky unit! It was Nenonen's idea originally; basically, I'll post my command roster below, and you can pick a formation, leader, or individual unit to rename; I will give regular updates on that unit's progress and/or horrible death. Roster: here Update: We've sighted a single enemy scout unit (specifically, a technical truck carrying a light infantry team) near the very northern edge of the map, right near where the enemy was dropping smoke earlier. It is also, not coincidentally, the same area where I just dropped a whole lot of artillery. I didn't really expect them to come that way, as the rough terrain will seriously impede vehicle movement and also provides great cover and concealment for defenders; consequently, the only unit I had in position there was a single sniper who I couldn't find anywhere else to place (now supported by a BRDM). I'm currently redeploying infantry and armor to counter, but most of my units are remaining in position in case this is a feint. e: Also, the enemy has pummeled the gently caress out of the Police HQ, which would worry me were it not completely abandoned. http://i.imgur.com/HFX0I4Y.jpg Mister Bates fucked around with this message at 19:04 on Jan 26, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2015 18:56
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Stop wasting your Saggers from maximum range, Bates. Let me drive a little closer - say, to 400 meters so you can be guaranteed of never missing! Doh! I set the wrong maximum range on those.  I don't like ATGM reaction fire in general, the AI has a tendency to blow all my missiles shooting at, for example, trucks.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2015 22:13
|
|
|
Anyone got any advice for a new WITE player? I've had it for a while but am just now giving it a try. I read over some of the tutorials on the Matrix forums, and have mostly got the basics of the interface figured out. Airbases, aircraft, and the air war in general are still confusing as hell to me, and I'm still not always entirely sure how things like construction, entrenchment, unit refitting and replacement, etc. work. I don't really know how factories and industrial production work or which type of factories I should prioritize moving. I've also got no idea how I'm supposed to supply all these partisans forming up in the enemy's rear, although I know that I can.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2017 08:29
|
|
|
Is there any point to evacuating Heavy Industry? Every other factory type has an immediately obvious war-critical use, but Heavy Industry is both extremely large and of unclear function.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2017 20:45
|
|
|
I've been looking at some of the Graviteam games and, while the website is terrible, the games themselves look really intriguing. I like the turn-based dynamic campaign system, and I really like some of the scenarios on offer, like the one about the Sino-Soviet border conflict and the one in which you're commanding Cuban and Angolan forces fighting the South Africans in the 1980s. However, I've also got the impression from the few mentions of Graviteam's games I've seen that they may not be very good. My question is: do you think they're worth the asking price? Why or why not? Is there anything that's particularly stand-out good or bad about them I should keep in mind before dropping a big chunk of change on them? e: also, thanks for the WITE advice, I'm slowly but surely getting this game figured out. Mister Bates fucked around with this message at 09:15 on Aug 19, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2017 09:10
|
|
|
Hooper seems pretty unbalanced too just because of how vastly superior the Ratel is to almost anything the Angolan army can field, but at least there it just looks challenging and interesting (really looking forward to figuring out how I can beat a bunch of those things using BTR-60s and T-55s).
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2017 07:51
|
|
|
There's a TOAW III Grenada scenario floating around, I've never actually won it but I like to see how long I can hold out against the full force of the US military with 300 police officers and a half-dozen APCs. There's also a pretty good hypothetical scenario in which the IRA attempts to launch a conventional war against the British government; playing the IRA side is brutally hard (your troops are outnumbered, disorganized, inexperienced, and have minimal antitank firepower) but it's a fun challenge. Managed to sink a British aircraft carrier during one attempt, that was badass. Mister Bates fucked around with this message at 08:25 on Aug 20, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2017 08:23
|
|
|
The most recent expansions allow you to play as a pirate clan, too, which is a pretty unique experience for a 4X (raid civilian shipping and isolated stations for loot! Extort poor empires for cash! Smuggle contraband! Establish criminal networks on other people's planets! Perform mercenary contracts! Board and capture ships you want! Build hidden tourist resort bases and watch your illegal space casinos rapidly become your primary source of income! Give no shits about actually building colonies or controlling territory!). It's an interesting twist on the usual expand-and-conquer gameplay because you don't actually want to cripple your enemies or wipe them out. They're your primary source of income, so you want to let them expand and grow, while preventing them from becoming so powerful that they start refusing to pay your protection money or stop you from swooping in and stealing their poo poo every once in a while. It's a bit like tending a garden of people who hate you. It's certainly rough around the edges, and most of the individual mechanics are done better by other games (I'm also not a huge fan of the art or the species selection, and I hate the government options and the morality scale which makes some species either inherently good or inherently evil), but it's one of the only 4x games I've ever seen that features a fully dynamic, living world ticking away in the background. Building anything takes resources, and those resources have to be mined by industry, and then shipped from where they were mined to where they need to go. Colonists, immigrants, refugees, workers on space stations, and, eventually, tourists, all need passenger ships to transport them from their home to their destination, and back again. Trade goods and luxury items need to be shipped to market for your people to consume them. All of this is handled by a fleet of civilian ships and stations, which the civilians build themselves (initially by using idle time on state shipyards, although the civilians can eventually build privately-owned shipyards). It's really fun to watch your empire's economy grow and your homeworld turn into a thriving trade hub with civilian ships from a dozen species waiting at its spacedock. It also makes things like commerce raiding and naval blockades both possible and useful (no resources for the enemy to build ships and weapons means no ships and weapons), and allows for the aforementioned pirate gameplay.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2017 18:47
|
|
|
Yeah, the lack of internal politics is a huge turn-off, and the government system is extremely simplistic (particularly given that some races are just inherently good or inherently evil, so for the purposes of their interactions with other races it doesn't even really matter what government type they have; you can have an evil democracy fighting a good military dictatorship, for example).
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2017 01:13
|
|
|
I gambled on Mius Front, spent a couple of hours losing the tutorial missions over and over (why a basic 'how to issue unit commands' tutorial has an antitank gun concealed in an enfilade position and zeroed in on your units is completely loving baffling me), gave up on them, started a proper campaign, and accidentally played until 4:30 in the morning on a work night. I'm going to call this campaign a loss and start over tomorrow (at around 4:10 AM I made a poor decision that resulted in the near-annihilation of my main tank formation for zero gain), but my overall impression of the game so far is extremely positive.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2017 10:39
|
|
|
I'm getting some decently-sized and exciting fights even at the platoon scale, although I've also had a couple of battles which were over half an hour of nothing much happening, and one which was just an enemy radio/signal detachment blundering into my concealed main defensive line while stringing wire and subsequently getting pureed. The artillery plotting system takes some getting used to but I'm starting to get it figured out, just drove off a massive infantry assault on a village with a timely shrapnel barrage. Figuring out where to place your starting artillery reference points always feels like one of the most important decisions in a battle. Selecting a new target means you either need to put up with slow and dangerously-inaccurate fire, or waste minutes taking ranging shots to tighten up the accuracy, by which point the battle may have already been decided. I've lost fights because I misjudged the enemy's avenue of approach and concentrated my artillery in the wrong place. I love how all the corpses and debris from previous battles remain persistent throughout the campaign, it's great to be able to see the carnage on the field after the battle lines have moved back and forth across it for hours and hours.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2017 06:11
|
|
|
Do the standalone campaign expansions for CMANO allow you to play as both sides or are you locked into one side for each campaign?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2017 20:10
|
|
|
If you could only buy one Decisive Campaigns game which one would it be? e: whoops, guess I should read the posts directly above mine Mister Bates fucked around with this message at 21:19 on Dec 29, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2017 21:17
|
|
|
the Rule the Waves website might well be the most Web 1.0 thing I've ever seen, it literally looks like a scam and then you have to wait for someone to manually process the order I guess?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2018 19:55
|
|
|
I caved and bought it immediately after making that post, just waiting for someone to get around to giving me the thing now Is there a similar game for designing airplanes? Rule the Skies or something like that? I know Land Doctrine does something similar for tanks, and I really want to like Land Doctrine, but I just couldn't get into it
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2018 01:18
|
|
|
so, uh, is there some option hidden somewhere that lets me resize these windows? the game isn't really playable this way
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2018 16:13
|
|
|
Pharnakes posted:That's very weird, it should be just a normal windows window. You're running the latest patches and everything I take it? Are there additional patches that have to be downloaded? I just downloaded the installer for the first time yesterday, and got my registration key today. uPen posted:What resolution are you running at and do you have forced scaling turned on? 1360 x 768 at 125% scaling. Lowering it to the default 100% scaling both makes the text too small for me to use the computer without squinting and also still leaves the bottom of the ship design window hidden under the taskbar. I'm going to try increasing the screen resolution and seeing if that does the trick. e: yeah, sadly it looks like this game is simply unplayable on the living room television, I'll have to throw it on my laptop. Hope that registration key works for multiple installs. Mister Bates fucked around with this message at 16:58 on Jun 12, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2018 16:54
|
|
|
I am now one of the 0.1% of Field of Glory II players on Steam to have the 'Spartacus' achievement (win a battle against Romans with a slave revolt army).  It was touch and go - not only are your troops extremely low quality, they're very unmaneuverable and your formations are slow to shift. You need to make careful use of the terrain, plan your positioning and facing carefully, focus your forces on weak points in the enemy lines, and make good use of flanking. Your elite units can just about go one-on-one with raw legionaries on open ground, but with any other matchup, you're going to have to start figuring out ways to stack the deck in your favor. Now to do a campaign. 
Mister Bates fucked around with this message at 00:47 on Jun 18, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2018 00:41
|
|
|
Rebel Slaves campaign is definitely FoGII in challenge mode, your troops are poo poo and can't do poo poo about poo poo. You have limited light infantry, no cavalry to speak of, and your units are slow and unmaneuverable in addition to being poor at fighting basically everything. I managed to win two campaign battles with them and then two attempts at the third have ended in two one-sided routs - in the second attempt I didn't even manage to rout a single enemy unit before losing. You are especially bad at handling Celtic warbands of any kind - the campaign rolled a battle with Galatians, and their units are so huge numerically that they completely nullified the slaves' one advantage of numbers. You can do okay against the Romans by taking advantage of their relatively small force size, but when the enemy both has superior quality and outnumbers you two to one, there's not very much you can do. Also, a bit annoyed that I generated a campaign with Romans as the opponent and only one of my three campaign battles has been against Romans
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2018 05:41
|
|
|
aphid_licker posted:I can't decide between Pike n Shot and Field of Glory 2. Does one work better than the other or do I just go by which era I prefer? Field of Glory II is newer and more refined, the tactical battles are the better of the two. Pike and Shot has the better campaign system, though, FoG2's is a bit simplified. So far my biggest criticism of FoG2 is the sound, there's a grand total of one sound effect recorded for every action and it gets really annoying hearing the same stock 'sword clash' sound thirty times per turn Mister Bates fucked around with this message at 16:49 on Jun 18, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2018 16:44
|
|
|
Tetraptous posted:GearCity is pretty awesome. At present, detailed military production is limited to engines (for ships, tanks, and aircraft) and pickup trucks and vans, since they use the same systems as civilian auto production, which is the focus of the game. All other war production is abstracted, and AFAIK, your production has no impact on the course of the war. Gearcity is very good (if you're into classic DOS games and the history of video game development, the early 1990s game Detroit, which Gearcity is a direct 1:1 remake of, is worth checking out too), and lets you play around with all kinds of unconventional things if you want to, including engine types that were either never used in automobiles or only rarely used in automobiles, which is fun. I'm trying to build as many vehicles with radial or rotary engines as possible just to see how far I can get with them (I've got a pretty solid line of five-cylinder rotary-engine sedans right now) - as an added bonus, when military contracts for aircraft engines roll around, I can frequently just plop one of my heavy-duty truck engines in there and call it good. You can also play around with steam engines if you want to see just how far you can push the steam car, electric engines starting from 1900, and gas turbine engines later. It's definitely a grog game, though - the UI is very bad and there is almost no documentation whatsoever. The manual was supposed to be ready 'very soon' as of almost three years ago and is still not out. The official wiki is more or less a blank page. There's no tooltips and no information on what most of the options do. It's a game that involves a lot of experimentation and trial-and-error.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2018 01:45
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 18:57 |
|
|
BUG JUG posted:I will have to look up Detroit, because I've been failing miserably at GearCity (my R&D eats up all my money, and I generally just get out one lovely cheap truck model and never recoup my research costs), but this is totally my thing. Just wanna build trucks for the German army suddenly mysteriously ordering hundreds of trucks and engines. some hints: - take out a line of credit immediately, IPO within your first couple months, and either take out a huge loan or issue a huge bond. the starting cash goes quickly - buy back all your outstanding stock as soon as you're in a comfortable enough financial position to do so - start in London or New York; whichever one you start in, open a factory in the other ASAP - upgrade your first factory immediately, early game factory tech assembles cars very slowly (no assembly lines yet) so you need all the production lines you can get in order to turn a profit - reuse as many parts in different vehicle models as possible. it's very easy to make a starting engine, chassis, and gearbox that will work just fine in a sedan, touring car, pickup truck, and van, for example - they won't be the best possible vehicles in their class, but they'll be serviceable, and you'll save a fuckload on research costs - military contracts are your friend, seek them out aggressively. it is trivially easy to build a truck which will satisfy almost any military order through 1910 in 1901, for dirt cheap, and make bank on it. - civilian contracts, conversely, are mostly not worth it except as a little bit of bonus income. if you've got extra vehicles lying around or some idle production lines you aren't using it's occasionally worth it, but for the most part don't bother. the one exception is racing contracts, who frequently place orders for your highest-end sports cars and will pay out the rear end for them. snap up those racing teams (these teams actually exist as entities in the game world and it's kind of satisfying seeing half the racing teams in your favorite series using cars you sold them, too). - cheaper vehicles are almost always better, because more people can afford them, which means you sell more of them, which means you paradoxically make more money by selling cars for less. the only exception is when production is a bottleneck, which is only an issue in the very early game, during WW2 when your factories are mostly bombed out or redirected to the war effort, and when you're trying to squeeze that last bit of efficiency out of a line - all vehicles in the early 1900s are awful, even the best and most expensive model you can possibly make will still suck, so for your first few models you should absolutely skimp on quality in order to drop the price down as low as possible. a general early game rule of thumb is to make the absolute shittiest possible component you can that still technically fulfills your design requirements. - parts get cheaper the longer you manufacture them, and periodically performing a Major Modification on a part will keep it competitive in quality for years even as the price drops, thus allowing you to eventually make some perfectly serviceable cars using last-generation tech for dirt cheap - make sure you set a price for your vehicle and tell your dealerships to start distributing them - that doesn't happen automatically so if you forget to do this your factories will be pumping out a bunch of cars and then sending them straight to storage
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2018 05:30
|
|