there's a lot of interest here, is there a really good reason for not making a forum for this game yet? there are other forums that haven't had a post for days... It would at least serve as a place for those of us familiar with the game to answer questions and chat about what the game is like in its board form.
But if not, oh well, I will live. Just wanted to toss that out there.
Matrix Games and Australian Design Group Seal Deal for World In Flames!
Moderator: maddog986
-
Les_the_Sarge_9_1
- Posts: 3943
- Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 10:00 am
Well Matrix certainly has a long list of forums currently 
But I think the game has enough merit and following to justify its own forum.
As this project gains attention, I am sure there will be those wanting to comment on it's many various elements.
But I think the game has enough merit and following to justify its own forum.
As this project gains attention, I am sure there will be those wanting to comment on it's many various elements.
I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
About time!
CWiF finally did it. It made me graduate from being a lurker into a Poster
I’ve played dozens of Face-to-face WIF with teams of up to six people and been fortunate enough to watch Harry (co-designer of WIF) playing in a few games. I have also designed software applications as a day job and have spent years talking to users about what they want out of software applications. That doesn’t make me Superman, but it hopefully adds a bit more punch to my following comment.
IMHO the Maricinni version tried too hard to duplicate the “boardgame” feel of WiF. The software divided up the game into all of the standard boardgame phases and even represented the airpower with clunky counter representations. I’m sure Chris did what was being asked of him but I felt frustrated that the computer game didn’t take full advantage of the new medium.
I’m not about to tell Matrix how to suck eggs, but I’d like to vote for an evolutionary approach to cWiF. That is, if a module of the existing game doesn’t work well in a computer environment then replace it with something that does work e.g.
* Don’t show us a screen half full of aircraft counters attacking a stack of ship counters when a Table of data (a la Pacific War – Matrix Project) will represent the data more effectively
* Add some smarts to the UI like the Convoy list in HoI which showed an individual convoy in red when the number of ships fell below the minimum required.
* When selecting an air unit then automatically shade in the hexes which that unit can reach and conversely, if a player selects a target hex then automatically highlight the friendly air units which could reach that hex.
OK… maybe I am trying to tell Matrix how to suck eggs… sorry about that, but as a long term Wif player I had given up on ever seeing the game on my computer and now you’ve got me all excited. Dammit all it’s almost enough to make me give up the American Civil War and return to WWII !
Only trouble is... we have no timeline... (mutter mutter mumble)
I’ve played dozens of Face-to-face WIF with teams of up to six people and been fortunate enough to watch Harry (co-designer of WIF) playing in a few games. I have also designed software applications as a day job and have spent years talking to users about what they want out of software applications. That doesn’t make me Superman, but it hopefully adds a bit more punch to my following comment.
IMHO the Maricinni version tried too hard to duplicate the “boardgame” feel of WiF. The software divided up the game into all of the standard boardgame phases and even represented the airpower with clunky counter representations. I’m sure Chris did what was being asked of him but I felt frustrated that the computer game didn’t take full advantage of the new medium.
I’m not about to tell Matrix how to suck eggs, but I’d like to vote for an evolutionary approach to cWiF. That is, if a module of the existing game doesn’t work well in a computer environment then replace it with something that does work e.g.
* Don’t show us a screen half full of aircraft counters attacking a stack of ship counters when a Table of data (a la Pacific War – Matrix Project) will represent the data more effectively
* Add some smarts to the UI like the Convoy list in HoI which showed an individual convoy in red when the number of ships fell below the minimum required.
* When selecting an air unit then automatically shade in the hexes which that unit can reach and conversely, if a player selects a target hex then automatically highlight the friendly air units which could reach that hex.
OK… maybe I am trying to tell Matrix how to suck eggs… sorry about that, but as a long term Wif player I had given up on ever seeing the game on my computer and now you’ve got me all excited. Dammit all it’s almost enough to make me give up the American Civil War and return to WWII !
Only trouble is... we have no timeline... (mutter mutter mumble)
/Greyshaft
-
Les_the_Sarge_9_1
- Posts: 3943
- Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 10:00 am
I like the ideas you seem dedicated to Greyshaft. There is little reason to make cWiF a computer game if it doesn't do anything at all with the power of the computer.
Sure I want the game to stay the boardgame as much as possible. But if I didn't want it to be a game at all, then it might as well just become a module for Aide De Camp or VASL really.
And I don't object to it becoming a game if done right. And it might as well benefit from the computational power of a computer.
Steel Panthers does a fine job of making what seems like ASL leap forward in numerous ways. The fog of war, shading of movement potential etc.
Strategic Command does a nice job of recreating the A3R experience too.
Sure both games are sufficiently different that neither is either, but I like the way they used the computer environment.
My first look at the first attempt at cWiF was met by me thinking "oh my god this interface needs work".
I haven't actually gotten much further into the game than that yet though. The raw unfinished interface scared me off for the time being hehe.
Sure I want the game to stay the boardgame as much as possible. But if I didn't want it to be a game at all, then it might as well just become a module for Aide De Camp or VASL really.
And I don't object to it becoming a game if done right. And it might as well benefit from the computational power of a computer.
Steel Panthers does a fine job of making what seems like ASL leap forward in numerous ways. The fog of war, shading of movement potential etc.
Strategic Command does a nice job of recreating the A3R experience too.
Sure both games are sufficiently different that neither is either, but I like the way they used the computer environment.
My first look at the first attempt at cWiF was met by me thinking "oh my god this interface needs work".
I haven't actually gotten much further into the game than that yet though. The raw unfinished interface scared me off for the time being hehe.
I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
Reading this announcement was a bit of a shock to me I must say. For one thing I like many have been waiting for CWiF for years now (I haven't managed to play a table top game of WiF for 3 years I believe, just takes too much room). In that time I also beta tested CWiF a bit and have come to greatly respect Chris Marrinacci's work (he single handedly programmed the old CWiF beta). I hope he will be part of the team to work on the now Matrix Games CWiF.
But my great worry concerning this announcement is that Matrix Games will remake CWiF to it's own vision. That was never the intent of the original CWiF project. While Chris was the sole programmer of the project, Harry and the guus at ADG were spending a lot of time to refine and clarify the rules (RAW, rules as written, the continous update process of Deluxe WiF rules). Likewise the WiF mailing list(s) worked on this over the years, trying to assist Harry in interpeting the rules and then later beta test CWiF. It was in many ways through this process that matters such as leaving out the ai for the beginbning were arrived at. It was deemed more important to create a faithful computerised version of WiF rather then create a second rate ai which would not challenge any of us (I have played WiF and CWiF solo exclusively, I need no ai, the only ai I'd ever use would have to be first rate). Therefore it was decided that two ways to play should be encouraged, hotseat (the way to solo it or play against a local opponent) or via the internet (email or other, I think the closed beta tried some of this out, hopefully some of that group will arrive on these forums soon). From the start it was clear that CWiF had to follow the original game sequences and be able to use any and all options (some might not work in the end and will have to be dropped, but the least is to try and implement them). That means CWiF should be able to handle WiF Classic (deluxe rules though, not 5 or earlier versions) as well as it would handle a complete deluxe version with SiF, PiF, AfiF, AmiF, PaiF etc. Preferably CWiF should also include some of the more classic house rules developed over the years, better even allow for some customisation of rules. Today, hardly any table top game of WiF uses the same identical set of rules, this should be reflected in CWiF (even the WiF tournaments usually start by agreeing on the options and house rules).
Lastly, Matrix Games need not look at new markets to sell CWiF to. If a faithful copy of WiF is created, a large customer base of the original games will be available as well as numerous traditional wargamers who either never played WiF or never even bought it due to it's enormous size and complexity. Much of this fear of the monster game will be negated through the simplification a computer version will provide (it takes hours to set up a game of WiF, with the computer's help you can do it in minutes, with the computer you also don't always have to reference obscure rules or worse post a quiestion on the mailing list or contact Harry directly). Reaching new markets outside the existing wargaming groups should be a secondary aim (in the end we should gain many of the current users of HOI and similar semi historic games).
Oh and a game editor would definitelly be needed in CWiF, I for one would probably rework the entire naval order of battle (I wish adding my shipyards in flames options along with a version Marc Horran's order of battle were possible, but I bet such drastic changes to the unit build process is impossible). But in the end, I think a simple editor is the norm anyhow and a complex one might not be needed.
Lastly, if Harry hasn't done so yet, the WiF mailing list should be contacted to help in this project. For political reasons I won't return there now, but concerning WiF, that list has enormous experience and skill as well as some serious design capacity. In addition, that list can form the backbone of future beta testers (along with experienced Matrix gamers and testers).
Marc Burggraff aka Caran...
But my great worry concerning this announcement is that Matrix Games will remake CWiF to it's own vision. That was never the intent of the original CWiF project. While Chris was the sole programmer of the project, Harry and the guus at ADG were spending a lot of time to refine and clarify the rules (RAW, rules as written, the continous update process of Deluxe WiF rules). Likewise the WiF mailing list(s) worked on this over the years, trying to assist Harry in interpeting the rules and then later beta test CWiF. It was in many ways through this process that matters such as leaving out the ai for the beginbning were arrived at. It was deemed more important to create a faithful computerised version of WiF rather then create a second rate ai which would not challenge any of us (I have played WiF and CWiF solo exclusively, I need no ai, the only ai I'd ever use would have to be first rate). Therefore it was decided that two ways to play should be encouraged, hotseat (the way to solo it or play against a local opponent) or via the internet (email or other, I think the closed beta tried some of this out, hopefully some of that group will arrive on these forums soon). From the start it was clear that CWiF had to follow the original game sequences and be able to use any and all options (some might not work in the end and will have to be dropped, but the least is to try and implement them). That means CWiF should be able to handle WiF Classic (deluxe rules though, not 5 or earlier versions) as well as it would handle a complete deluxe version with SiF, PiF, AfiF, AmiF, PaiF etc. Preferably CWiF should also include some of the more classic house rules developed over the years, better even allow for some customisation of rules. Today, hardly any table top game of WiF uses the same identical set of rules, this should be reflected in CWiF (even the WiF tournaments usually start by agreeing on the options and house rules).
Lastly, Matrix Games need not look at new markets to sell CWiF to. If a faithful copy of WiF is created, a large customer base of the original games will be available as well as numerous traditional wargamers who either never played WiF or never even bought it due to it's enormous size and complexity. Much of this fear of the monster game will be negated through the simplification a computer version will provide (it takes hours to set up a game of WiF, with the computer's help you can do it in minutes, with the computer you also don't always have to reference obscure rules or worse post a quiestion on the mailing list or contact Harry directly). Reaching new markets outside the existing wargaming groups should be a secondary aim (in the end we should gain many of the current users of HOI and similar semi historic games).
Oh and a game editor would definitelly be needed in CWiF, I for one would probably rework the entire naval order of battle (I wish adding my shipyards in flames options along with a version Marc Horran's order of battle were possible, but I bet such drastic changes to the unit build process is impossible). But in the end, I think a simple editor is the norm anyhow and a complex one might not be needed.
Lastly, if Harry hasn't done so yet, the WiF mailing list should be contacted to help in this project. For political reasons I won't return there now, but concerning WiF, that list has enormous experience and skill as well as some serious design capacity. In addition, that list can form the backbone of future beta testers (along with experienced Matrix gamers and testers).
Marc Burggraff aka Caran...
Marc aka Caran... ministerialis
-
Les_the_Sarge_9_1
- Posts: 3943
- Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 10:00 am
I think it is safe to say, there will be numerous parallels to the development of Strategic Command and persons desires that it be as much of a game as Advanced Third Reich, with WiF going to cWiF.
I think you would find an equal number of very active and very vocal individuals, if tomorrow it was announced Matrix Games was doing a revised Third Reich PC as well.
I have my faith in Matrix Games though. No Matrix Games is not the centre of the universe, but it is a wargamers type of company.
As to whether cWiF can completely and absolutely be produced as an entirely literal and total translation of the board game, well lets look at some details.
First and most obvious, it has languished now for enough years it might as well be called Road to Moscow
I would like to see it manage to be the boardgame reborn on the computer. But I am not holding my breath that it will do so 100% unchanged. If it was an easy task, it would have managed this long ago too.
I would rather cWiF not end up the way Steel Panthers did ie two separate ideals and two seperate creations born out of a single idea.
I don't think anyone at Matrix Games is going to rush to ditch any of the effort to date done on it, doesn't make automatic sense. But if some of the past efforts just don't fly, it will be time to admit it.
Some games will only be doable through a program like VASL where you just don't try to make it a "game" in the normal computer wargame sense of the word. Some will be possible.
I was stunned to see how completely Columbia Games was able to translate their wooden block game East Front into a computer wargame. So it CAN be done. But it might depend on the specific game.
I think you would find an equal number of very active and very vocal individuals, if tomorrow it was announced Matrix Games was doing a revised Third Reich PC as well.
I have my faith in Matrix Games though. No Matrix Games is not the centre of the universe, but it is a wargamers type of company.
As to whether cWiF can completely and absolutely be produced as an entirely literal and total translation of the board game, well lets look at some details.
First and most obvious, it has languished now for enough years it might as well be called Road to Moscow
I would like to see it manage to be the boardgame reborn on the computer. But I am not holding my breath that it will do so 100% unchanged. If it was an easy task, it would have managed this long ago too.
I would rather cWiF not end up the way Steel Panthers did ie two separate ideals and two seperate creations born out of a single idea.
I don't think anyone at Matrix Games is going to rush to ditch any of the effort to date done on it, doesn't make automatic sense. But if some of the past efforts just don't fly, it will be time to admit it.
Some games will only be doable through a program like VASL where you just don't try to make it a "game" in the normal computer wargame sense of the word. Some will be possible.
I was stunned to see how completely Columbia Games was able to translate their wooden block game East Front into a computer wargame. So it CAN be done. But it might depend on the specific game.
I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
Evolution
Caran:
Perhaps part of the problem with cWiF 1 WAS that Chris was the only person involved. Any developer can get stuck and run on out of steam or inspiration... thats where being part of a Team of developers can create a more polished product. While I respect Harry's original vision for cWiF as being a "faithful" representation of the boardgame I'd venture to suggest that this was not doing justice to his own creation. Imagine taking a radio play and translating it "faithfully" to Television. You'd have shots of actors sitting in chairs just reading their scripts! A new medium brings new opportunities. I'm not suggesting changing the map (although ADG did... more than once), but I'd like the Matrix team to add to the flavor of the game. Go to it guys! I'm sure this Forum and the beta-testing will let you know if you go too far off the beaten track.
That means CWiF should be able to handle WiF Classic (deluxe rules though, not 5 or earlier versions) as well as it would handle a complete deluxe version with SiF, PiF, AfiF, AmiF, PaiF etc.
With an expansion kit for Patton in Flames - oh yeah!
Perhaps part of the problem with cWiF 1 WAS that Chris was the only person involved. Any developer can get stuck and run on out of steam or inspiration... thats where being part of a Team of developers can create a more polished product. While I respect Harry's original vision for cWiF as being a "faithful" representation of the boardgame I'd venture to suggest that this was not doing justice to his own creation. Imagine taking a radio play and translating it "faithfully" to Television. You'd have shots of actors sitting in chairs just reading their scripts! A new medium brings new opportunities. I'm not suggesting changing the map (although ADG did... more than once
), but I'd like the Matrix team to add to the flavor of the game. Go to it guys! I'm sure this Forum and the beta-testing will let you know if you go too far off the beaten track.That means CWiF should be able to handle WiF Classic (deluxe rules though, not 5 or earlier versions) as well as it would handle a complete deluxe version with SiF, PiF, AfiF, AmiF, PaiF etc.
With an expansion kit for Patton in Flames - oh yeah!
/Greyshaft
< That means CWiF should be able to handle WiF Classic (deluxe rules though, not 5 or earlier versions) as well as it would handle a complete deluxe version with SiF, PiF, AfiF, AmiF, PaiF etc.
With an expansion kit for Patton in Flames - oh yeah!>
Yep, that's exactly what I meant;-) Though in my case, Patton in Flames is the only game module I don't actually own (thought I'd preordered it at the time, when I noticed my error I was already so low on my budget I had decided to stop buying board games which I rarelly get to play anyhow). All these modules and corresponding optional rules will probably represent the biggest problem for CWiF2 (other then an adequate ai). I don't think I have played WiF in a classic form since version 4 (WiF 4, not RaW 4) or so (except maybe the WWI module). It would also be good if DoD could be incorporated. But if you look at the entire WiF package that might just be too daunting a work. Maybe that and the rules conflicts were what eventually slowed Chris' work to a crawl, though it is certain that his having to program the whole beta alone was an almost impossible task from the start.
Despite my fears, I still expect a great CWiF from Matrix Games, I wouldn't be on these boards if I didn't generally approve of Matrix products:-) Though in the end, if CWiF won't closely correspond to the board game, I would prefer an entirely new grand strategic WWII wargame. But again, that's only if it can't be made to correspond to WiF the boardgame. For me, WiF has been on my top 3 list of board games ever and I greatly regret not having the time and space to play it anymore.
Marc aka Caran...
P.S.: Les the Sarge I'm sure you are right when it coms to equally devoted ATR-TR players, I know there was some cross over between the mailing lists (I think Salvatore aka Spike was on the WiF, EiA and ATR lists and at times crossposted topics between lists). I for one only ever played TR and was swept off my feet the day I picked up my first copy of WiF (never played TR or ATR after that, even though I own a copy (SPI-TSR's WWII also never got played after I got hooked on WiF)). For the sakes of the players of those games I would hope they get a well adapted computer version and that their experience is used to produce that game.
With an expansion kit for Patton in Flames - oh yeah!>
Yep, that's exactly what I meant;-) Though in my case, Patton in Flames is the only game module I don't actually own (thought I'd preordered it at the time, when I noticed my error I was already so low on my budget I had decided to stop buying board games which I rarelly get to play anyhow). All these modules and corresponding optional rules will probably represent the biggest problem for CWiF2 (other then an adequate ai). I don't think I have played WiF in a classic form since version 4 (WiF 4, not RaW 4) or so (except maybe the WWI module). It would also be good if DoD could be incorporated. But if you look at the entire WiF package that might just be too daunting a work. Maybe that and the rules conflicts were what eventually slowed Chris' work to a crawl, though it is certain that his having to program the whole beta alone was an almost impossible task from the start.
Despite my fears, I still expect a great CWiF from Matrix Games, I wouldn't be on these boards if I didn't generally approve of Matrix products:-) Though in the end, if CWiF won't closely correspond to the board game, I would prefer an entirely new grand strategic WWII wargame. But again, that's only if it can't be made to correspond to WiF the boardgame. For me, WiF has been on my top 3 list of board games ever and I greatly regret not having the time and space to play it anymore.
Marc aka Caran...
P.S.: Les the Sarge I'm sure you are right when it coms to equally devoted ATR-TR players, I know there was some cross over between the mailing lists (I think Salvatore aka Spike was on the WiF, EiA and ATR lists and at times crossposted topics between lists). I for one only ever played TR and was swept off my feet the day I picked up my first copy of WiF (never played TR or ATR after that, even though I own a copy (SPI-TSR's WWII also never got played after I got hooked on WiF)). For the sakes of the players of those games I would hope they get a well adapted computer version and that their experience is used to produce that game.
Marc aka Caran... ministerialis
-
Les_the_Sarge_9_1
- Posts: 3943
- Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 10:00 am
"Though in the end, if CWiF won't closely correspond to the board game, I would prefer an entirely new grand strategic WWII wargame."
Some times the above comment is the only intelligent route too.
If cWiF "just isn't possible" to accomplish due to unyielding boardgame environment specific elements, then I would actually not mind Matrix Games doing their best to honour both WiF and ATR with a really nice global grand strategy wargame.
And no, I do NOT want any single solitary aspect of real time in it whatsoever.
Real time = you won't be able to pay me to play it.
SC is a great game, it is just not the entire globe.
I would like a good turn based global grand strategy wargame of the sort a WiF player would be honoured to call the next best thing to actual WiF
I play Steel Panthers for exactly the same reason, it pleases this hard core ASL player who would not play it if it did not come so close to being ASL and to be nearly incapable of difference.
Some times the above comment is the only intelligent route too.
If cWiF "just isn't possible" to accomplish due to unyielding boardgame environment specific elements, then I would actually not mind Matrix Games doing their best to honour both WiF and ATR with a really nice global grand strategy wargame.
And no, I do NOT want any single solitary aspect of real time in it whatsoever.
Real time = you won't be able to pay me to play it.
SC is a great game, it is just not the entire globe.
I would like a good turn based global grand strategy wargame of the sort a WiF player would be honoured to call the next best thing to actual WiF
I play Steel Panthers for exactly the same reason, it pleases this hard core ASL player who would not play it if it did not come so close to being ASL and to be nearly incapable of difference.
I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
-
Peeking Duck?
- Posts: 96
- Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2001 8:00 am
A plea for progress
I am primarily aiming my comments at Les the Sarge:
As a wargamer for the last 28 years, I am someone whos tarted with PanzerBlitz, moved to ASL and A3R, and eventually arrived at WiF - which a friend and I play faithfully every year for 2 weeks in the summer (still). I've "been there and done that" as far as wargaming is concerned. I've played Clash of Steel, Strategic Command, High Command, etc.
All that to say this - I want to invite you to explore the CORE mod for HOI with all the latest patches. Play it multiplayer with some quality players, and you will really respect it. We play on the slowest settings, we pause whenever we want to, and it really is an evolution in wargaming. I'm looking forward to cWiF, but I must say that I have been utterly entranced by HOI CORE since the beginning.
It's a great game.
As a wargamer for the last 28 years, I am someone whos tarted with PanzerBlitz, moved to ASL and A3R, and eventually arrived at WiF - which a friend and I play faithfully every year for 2 weeks in the summer (still). I've "been there and done that" as far as wargaming is concerned. I've played Clash of Steel, Strategic Command, High Command, etc.
All that to say this - I want to invite you to explore the CORE mod for HOI with all the latest patches. Play it multiplayer with some quality players, and you will really respect it. We play on the slowest settings, we pause whenever we want to, and it really is an evolution in wargaming. I'm looking forward to cWiF, but I must say that I have been utterly entranced by HOI CORE since the beginning.
It's a great game.
-
Les_the_Sarge_9_1
- Posts: 3943
- Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 10:00 am
Getting Sarge to play HoI
Not sure I could do that without hell freezing over hehe.
Frankly not sure I am able to even indulge the notion, even if I wanted to do a 180 and play the one game I hate the most.
For one thing, I would have to be willing to invest 50 some bucks to get a game, when I might spend the 50 some bucks to get something like Korsun Pocket.
Just can't see myself doing that hehe.
Actually if I had 50 bucks right here right now, I think I would have to spend it on an outstanding bill
I have seen the phrase "Core" mod, but must confess the term is meaningless to me. Care to go into further detail?
Not sure I could do that without hell freezing over hehe.
Frankly not sure I am able to even indulge the notion, even if I wanted to do a 180 and play the one game I hate the most.
For one thing, I would have to be willing to invest 50 some bucks to get a game, when I might spend the 50 some bucks to get something like Korsun Pocket.
Just can't see myself doing that hehe.
Actually if I had 50 bucks right here right now, I think I would have to spend it on an outstanding bill
I have seen the phrase "Core" mod, but must confess the term is meaningless to me. Care to go into further detail?
I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
CORE mod
CORE is an ongoing mod by a worldwide team of serious historical wargamers. It is currently in 0.62 beta and played by hundreds of gamers. It adds numerous technologies, political events, nation-specific AI's, equipment designs and models, etc., to the basic HOI (1.05c) engine. It adjusts the counter-mix to reflect WiF colors (the design of the game is WiF-inspired) and dramatically enhances the historicity of the game. There are specialists working at every level worldwide on the CORE mod, and each iteration is fantastic.
Honestly, if you've never bought/played HOI, you're missing out. I share your intense dislike of "real-time " games, and yet HOI is as far from an RTS as it's possible to be. I think the catch-phrase "real-time" was simply inserted by the marketing types.
Well, anyway, I won't belabor the point - but as someone who is just as passionate about turn-based historical wargaming as you seem to be, I would hate to think that you're missing out on a great game.
And just in case the moderators drop in - I have UV! I love it! I'm planning to buy WitP and Empires in Arms! matrix is wonderful! (There, did that do the trick?)
Honestly, if you've never bought/played HOI, you're missing out. I share your intense dislike of "real-time " games, and yet HOI is as far from an RTS as it's possible to be. I think the catch-phrase "real-time" was simply inserted by the marketing types.
Well, anyway, I won't belabor the point - but as someone who is just as passionate about turn-based historical wargaming as you seem to be, I would hate to think that you're missing out on a great game.
And just in case the moderators drop in - I have UV! I love it! I'm planning to buy WitP and Empires in Arms! matrix is wonderful! (There, did that do the trick?)
-
Les_the_Sarge_9_1
- Posts: 3943
- Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 10:00 am
-
James Taylor
- Posts: 692
- Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2002 10:00 am
- Location: Corpus Christi, Texas
- Contact:
OK Chaplain2 I'll bite. I was really looking forward to HoI but a friend of mine playing it said the naval model (specifically carrier operations) really sucked. I have not talked to him in awhile, but he basically told me the game would never make it and I respect his opinion. He described it as a wanna be turn based strategic level game and loved a lot of the innovative concepts included in the game, especially the tech model. His final comment was wait for HoI2. Now since I don't have time to devote to on line play i have to either play myself or the AI or do PBEM, which I prefer. Haven't seen any RTS game yet that can be played PBEM so that leaves the AI. If I played against myself I would have to be every nation and I would probably never get through the first couple of turns. Now tell me I'm wrong Chap2, tell me the game has a decent AI, at least as good as AA or SC and I will consider the purchase. Tell me that the carrier operations and naval model are true to the Pacific WW2 theater. It won't take much of a shove to put me over the top.
SeaMonkey
AI ...
Well, James, let me try -
1) The carrier problem was fixed in 1.05b and 1.05c. Carrier-based aircraft now operate properly. Most complaints about carrier ops that you read about in HOI are either A) from players who haven't patched to the latest patch, or 2) players who never develop the necessary techs to field truly effective airpower. There seems to be an expectation (wish?) that every nation should have Essex-class carriers by 1940 at the latest, which is of course silly in a historical context. In multiplayer games, the US and Japan can have some very interesting carrier duels. Planes launch and strike automatically, you can raid ports, soften up amphibious targets, etc.
However, the AI is less adroit at using its carriers than players are. (What AI isn't?) I hear you on the issue of the SC AI being "better", but that's because SC is infinitely less complex and versatile - not to mention much smaller in scale. Not a knock on SC, they're just different games.
2) As far as AI is concerned in general, the AI in CORE will knock you around quite a bit. I have yet to win as Japan or the UK. But that's not the best part - the best part is that it is constantly being upgraded, not only by the CORE modders but by the original programmers - Paradox continues to release expanded AI variables in each patch. Every time they do that, hordes of die-hards go to work tweaking the nation-specific AI's for CORE. As it stands now (0.62 beta), you can expect Allied landings at any weak points in Fortress Europa, and the USA and Japan will invade often as well. If you could see the truly dramatic development of the AI since the beginning, you would understand what can happen.
There is one last problem being addressed by both the CORE modders and the Paradox people, and that is D-Day. AT this point the AI will conduct an efficient D-Day operation at a smart point in time and place, but it does not "break out" as well as it should. This is the primary focus of the current beta stage of CORE, as well as Paradox itself. It is definitely "doable" because the AI donducts lots of breakthroughs/exploitations (remember A3R?) during land campaigns all over the world.
Anyway - I'm completely sold. I still play the WiF global game once per year on tabletop, and I'll buy cWiF, and I hate RTS - but I also feel that CORE HOI is approaching the level of A3R and WiF in terms of long-term lifespan. Try it in multiplayer with a group of serious gamers. It's a blast!
1) The carrier problem was fixed in 1.05b and 1.05c. Carrier-based aircraft now operate properly. Most complaints about carrier ops that you read about in HOI are either A) from players who haven't patched to the latest patch, or 2) players who never develop the necessary techs to field truly effective airpower. There seems to be an expectation (wish?) that every nation should have Essex-class carriers by 1940 at the latest, which is of course silly in a historical context. In multiplayer games, the US and Japan can have some very interesting carrier duels. Planes launch and strike automatically, you can raid ports, soften up amphibious targets, etc.
However, the AI is less adroit at using its carriers than players are. (What AI isn't?) I hear you on the issue of the SC AI being "better", but that's because SC is infinitely less complex and versatile - not to mention much smaller in scale. Not a knock on SC, they're just different games.
2) As far as AI is concerned in general, the AI in CORE will knock you around quite a bit. I have yet to win as Japan or the UK. But that's not the best part - the best part is that it is constantly being upgraded, not only by the CORE modders but by the original programmers - Paradox continues to release expanded AI variables in each patch. Every time they do that, hordes of die-hards go to work tweaking the nation-specific AI's for CORE. As it stands now (0.62 beta), you can expect Allied landings at any weak points in Fortress Europa, and the USA and Japan will invade often as well. If you could see the truly dramatic development of the AI since the beginning, you would understand what can happen.
There is one last problem being addressed by both the CORE modders and the Paradox people, and that is D-Day. AT this point the AI will conduct an efficient D-Day operation at a smart point in time and place, but it does not "break out" as well as it should. This is the primary focus of the current beta stage of CORE, as well as Paradox itself. It is definitely "doable" because the AI donducts lots of breakthroughs/exploitations (remember A3R?) during land campaigns all over the world.
Anyway - I'm completely sold. I still play the WiF global game once per year on tabletop, and I'll buy cWiF, and I hate RTS - but I also feel that CORE HOI is approaching the level of A3R and WiF in terms of long-term lifespan. Try it in multiplayer with a group of serious gamers. It's a blast!
The issue, if you can call it that, with HoI is that it doesn't know what it is. It isn't a pure wargame and it isn't a political/economic one. Its somewhere in between. The problem is that the wargame section isn't that deep, even at a strategic level, while the country control is limited by the fact that sides are already set and there's little movement for politics during the period. Thus I don't think its going to appeal to diehard wargamers.
For the record I like it, but there is so much more expansion it needs. I do like wargames, but my favourite, by far, are those that allow me to control politics and economics. Those are my preferred fields. Its much more fun if there's a third way. I enjoy using my army and navy as a defensive force to protect assets that I'm controlling. That's why I can't wait for Victoria.
For the record I like it, but there is so much more expansion it needs. I do like wargames, but my favourite, by far, are those that allow me to control politics and economics. Those are my preferred fields. Its much more fun if there's a third way. I enjoy using my army and navy as a defensive force to protect assets that I'm controlling. That's why I can't wait for Victoria.
HOI2
I dislike the HOI naval model but their Russian front really rocks!!! The tech model and political events are great also. The disadvantage of the HOI naval model is that you just send in your forces and watch the Battle... there's no partial commitment of carrier fleets or selection of targets like Wif air attacks.
I didn't know about HOI2... tell me more... my budget's big enough for cWiF and HOI2.
And I'm another board wargamer whose family/work life has expanded to the point that I don't expect to ever play another mega FTF game this side of retirement.
I didn't know about HOI2... tell me more... my budget's big enough for cWiF and HOI2.
And I'm another board wargamer whose family/work life has expanded to the point that I don't expect to ever play another mega FTF game this side of retirement.
/Greyshaft
I will tell you a little about HOI that I know and about C.O.R.E. and a mod they don't mention very much and that is STONEY ROAD.
The AI doesn't know how to setup or handle invasions of France from the USA or Britian in the latter stages of the games. The Japan AI never invades the US mainland. The US ai rarely does anything but sit there and build up. I've seen the Russian AI with 90-120 divisions just sit there and do nothing while only half that many German divisions are holding the line.
I have sat an "watched" numerous games, well over 10 settings letting the AI play out the full war while I sat in Switzerland and watched. The Allies AI never wins, ever. It's either the Germans/Axis or the Russians, depending on what scenario you start with, I either use the 36' scenario or the 39/41 one. The AI usage of the tech trees are minimal, I played the paultry country of Brazil in one game and had more tech than the British and the French in 1939 than they did, lol, I was giving THEM techs.
If you want historical "events" then, yes, C.O.R.E. is the mod for you, but, if you want a challenging war, then STONEY ROAD is the best mod for that. While it doesn't improve the performance of the AI, it does give the AI many more divisions of units to deal with. With C.O.R.E. you will still pour all over Europe playing as the Germans, or Stomping Europe and the Germans playing as the Russians. The most challenging games are playing a minor like Brazil. I once conqured Germany myself lol as the Brazilians, took all of Spain, North and East Africa, all of Italy and then poured into lower Germany as the Russians were pouring into them from the East.
I'm sure many will tell you HOI shines as a Multiplayer game, but, the simple fact of the matter is, many people don't have that kind of time to pour into an online game. Some of these games can take days and weeks to playout. You sure have to have a reliable group of people to be able to play out a war online.
But, playing against the computer AI, you can take just about any of the majors and are assured a victory playing the vanilla game or using C.O.R.E. rules. Even with STONEY ROAD some are easier than others, but, at least you will feel like you have been challenged and not just wasted several hours or days of playtime to an easy predictable finish.
True it's real time that you can slow down to a crawl, but, sadly the game map are "provinces" instead of "hexes".
The combat is hands-off, you send a stack of divisions against another stack of divisions and the computer decides who wins.
Heh, and sometimes the outcomes are rediculous. I sent 20+ divisions in one game over some mountains that took six months to get over and those 20+ divisions lost to two divisions, TWO flippin divisions beat 20+ divisions back over the mountains! LOL totally rediculous. I had armor (yah I know armor over mountains is rediculous to begin with eh?), but, only 5 divisions, and 15+ divisions of infantry of all types, mountain divisions even. This all came after the 1.05 patch and some attrition to organization that brings your organization down to "ZERO" if you march over certain terrain, to the point that all my 20+ divisions had a org of zero and all they had to do was get hit once and they retreated. This clearly ruined the game in many ways for me, but, so many whined about how fast the Germans blitzkreiged into Russia and over-ran it within two weeks that i suppose this was the only way to stop the speedy advances all over the map. I would have liked to have seen something a little different that wouldn't make a 20+ division march over 6 months turn into a rout in a matter of seconds vs 2 measly milita infantry.
The concept of the game is massive and complex. So many techs, so many decisions, if the AI was more aggressive and could handle naval invasions and large troup movement across water, it would have been superb. But, as it stands it's a multiplayers dream, but, a single players nightmare to boredom.
The AI doesn't know how to setup or handle invasions of France from the USA or Britian in the latter stages of the games. The Japan AI never invades the US mainland. The US ai rarely does anything but sit there and build up. I've seen the Russian AI with 90-120 divisions just sit there and do nothing while only half that many German divisions are holding the line.
I have sat an "watched" numerous games, well over 10 settings letting the AI play out the full war while I sat in Switzerland and watched. The Allies AI never wins, ever. It's either the Germans/Axis or the Russians, depending on what scenario you start with, I either use the 36' scenario or the 39/41 one. The AI usage of the tech trees are minimal, I played the paultry country of Brazil in one game and had more tech than the British and the French in 1939 than they did, lol, I was giving THEM techs.
If you want historical "events" then, yes, C.O.R.E. is the mod for you, but, if you want a challenging war, then STONEY ROAD is the best mod for that. While it doesn't improve the performance of the AI, it does give the AI many more divisions of units to deal with. With C.O.R.E. you will still pour all over Europe playing as the Germans, or Stomping Europe and the Germans playing as the Russians. The most challenging games are playing a minor like Brazil. I once conqured Germany myself lol as the Brazilians, took all of Spain, North and East Africa, all of Italy and then poured into lower Germany as the Russians were pouring into them from the East.
I'm sure many will tell you HOI shines as a Multiplayer game, but, the simple fact of the matter is, many people don't have that kind of time to pour into an online game. Some of these games can take days and weeks to playout. You sure have to have a reliable group of people to be able to play out a war online.
But, playing against the computer AI, you can take just about any of the majors and are assured a victory playing the vanilla game or using C.O.R.E. rules. Even with STONEY ROAD some are easier than others, but, at least you will feel like you have been challenged and not just wasted several hours or days of playtime to an easy predictable finish.
True it's real time that you can slow down to a crawl, but, sadly the game map are "provinces" instead of "hexes".
The combat is hands-off, you send a stack of divisions against another stack of divisions and the computer decides who wins.
Heh, and sometimes the outcomes are rediculous. I sent 20+ divisions in one game over some mountains that took six months to get over and those 20+ divisions lost to two divisions, TWO flippin divisions beat 20+ divisions back over the mountains! LOL totally rediculous. I had armor (yah I know armor over mountains is rediculous to begin with eh?), but, only 5 divisions, and 15+ divisions of infantry of all types, mountain divisions even. This all came after the 1.05 patch and some attrition to organization that brings your organization down to "ZERO" if you march over certain terrain, to the point that all my 20+ divisions had a org of zero and all they had to do was get hit once and they retreated. This clearly ruined the game in many ways for me, but, so many whined about how fast the Germans blitzkreiged into Russia and over-ran it within two weeks that i suppose this was the only way to stop the speedy advances all over the map. I would have liked to have seen something a little different that wouldn't make a 20+ division march over 6 months turn into a rout in a matter of seconds vs 2 measly milita infantry.
The concept of the game is massive and complex. So many techs, so many decisions, if the AI was more aggressive and could handle naval invasions and large troup movement across water, it would have been superb. But, as it stands it's a multiplayers dream, but, a single players nightmare to boredom.
WE/I WANT 1:1 or something even 1:2 death animations in the KOIOS PANZER COMMAND SERIES don't forget Erik! 
and Floating Paratroopers We grew up with Minor, Marginal and Decisive victories why rock the boat with Marginal, Decisive and Legendary?
and Floating Paratroopers We grew up with Minor, Marginal and Decisive victories why rock the boat with Marginal, Decisive and Legendary?actually the lack of decent carrier operations and the naval system in general was what turned me off too. I spent a lot of time lurking on the forums last January to March and it seemed, to me, that the consensus opionon on naval, specifically carrier, ops in HoI is that they sucked big ones. The above information has perhaps turned me over to giving it a chance.
For that matter, WiF has a naval system that is somewhat abstract, with sea zones and "boxes" in them that represent levels of readiness or time spent in the zone. The more movement points spent in the zone you stop in, the higher "box" you can get into.
For that matter, WiF has a naval system that is somewhat abstract, with sea zones and "boxes" in them that represent levels of readiness or time spent in the zone. The more movement points spent in the zone you stop in, the higher "box" you can get into.