Hearts of iron

[Fred98]

ORIGINAL: SurrenderMonkey
with a full-fledged mod like CORE.

Please tell us about CORE

[Les_the_Sarge_9_1]

So Core makes the game work? Who made Core, the company?

Hmm does that say enough?

[String]

ORIGINAL: TOCarroll

Since the Matrix game I play the most is TAOW3........it is obvious I'm not in it for the graphics or interface.[:'(]

If Paradox could learn something from Matrix---Make WW2 Strategy games turn based [:-], then I'd be very happy.[&o]

Trying to micro-manage more factors than there are digits on a calculator is tough, but with TAOW3 you at least get to pause for a smoke. That being said, lots of folks love "real time", which IMHO should be reserved for shooters. That being said HOI2 is a GREAT game, but I still like turn based better (or multiple pulse, a la Squad Leader).

Oh but it is turnbased. There are 1 hour turns, only to save you the hassle of clicking that "next turn" button every 2-3 seconds, the computer does that for you. You can stop it at any time with your "pause" button on your keyboard and issue all the orders you like.

Pausable real-time i think they call it. Imho it's just an evolution of the turn based concept, and a good one at that.

Improves the flow of the game while keeping many of the good qualities of the turn based concept

[jvgfanatic]

ORIGINAL: String

ORIGINAL: TOCarroll

Since the Matrix game I play the most is TAOW3........it is obvious I'm not in it for the graphics or interface.[:'(]

If Paradox could learn something from Matrix---Make WW2 Strategy games turn based [:-], then I'd be very happy.[&o]

Trying to micro-manage more factors than there are digits on a calculator is tough, but with TAOW3 you at least get to pause for a smoke. That being said, lots of folks love "real time", which IMHO should be reserved for shooters. That being said HOI2 is a GREAT game, but I still like turn based better (or multiple pulse, a la Squad Leader).

Oh but it is turnbased. There are 1 hour turns, only to save you the hassle of clicking that "next turn" button every 2-3 seconds, the computer does that for you. You can stop it at any time with your "pause" button on your keyboard and issue all the orders you like.

Pausable real-time i think they call it. Imho it's just an evolution of the turn based concept, and a good one at that.

Improves the flow of the game while keeping many of the good qualities of the turn based concept

I really can't stand RTS but I love pausable real-time. One of Highway to the Reich's (and COTA's) super-cool features is that.

[TOCarroll]

RE: JVGFANATIC:  I pause HOI2 Against the AI, but internet play is hell, as you cant pause unless everyone agrees.

[SurrenderMonkey]

ORIGINAL: Joe 98

ORIGINAL: SurrenderMonkey
with a full-fledged mod like CORE.

Please tell us about CORE

CORE is a mod that adds lots of detail and chrome. It is a group effort that usually takes a year or so to get finished. You can read more here: http://www.terranova.dk/

[SurrenderMonkey]

ORIGINAL: Les_the_Sarge_9_1

So Core makes the game work? Who made Core, the company?

Hmm does that say enough?

Hardly. [8|] [8|][8|]

[JudgeDredd]

Well, as I already mentioned, HoI2 DD is fantastic, engrossing and in depth. Not historically accurate withe regards to outcomes...but what would the point be of playing a game where the outcome was historical? I mean...if you play as the Germans...you're going to lose.
 
Besides...you can play any nation in HoI2....

[charlieart66]

seems i missed quite alot.
what i was trying to suggest was a game that had the grand stratergy of HOI with ecomeny, building units researching, but with the land battle being able to be played out in a Close combat style.
a big project i know.

[Sarge]

Tactical combat will always be abstract in grand strategic games.

Can you imagine trying to play out WWII division by division, company by company on a tactical level. Each turn would take a month with the AI turn lasting 24-48 hours to resolve.

HOI2 may indeed be a fun title, but the fact is, HOI was a complete joke and unplayable out of box. The war gamming community is very small and unforgiving (see: GI Combat), the whole HOI pay to beta has left a bad taste in a large percentage of the communities mouth .[;)]

[charlieart66]

of course there would be the option of skipping the battle, and the AI would do the battles as normal, meanig potentially it wouldnt take to long.

[JudgeDredd]

ORIGINAL: Sarge

Tactical combat will always be abstract in grand strategic games.

Can you imagine trying to play out WWII division by division, company by company on a tactical level. Each turn would take a month with the AI turn lasting 24-48 hours to resolve.

HOI2 may indeed be a fun title, but the fact is, HOI was a complete joke and unplayable out of box. The war gamming community is very small and unforgiving (see: GI Combat), the whole HOI pay to beta has left a bad taste in a large percentage of the communities mouth .[;)]

That is true.

I remember G.I. Combat. I had big BIG expectations for that game...and it really didn't provide.

I think what he means about going from the strategic layer to the tactical layer is what I've suggested in the past...a bit like Crown of Glory...so you have the strategic layer and when you invade a country, you go to the tactical layer which would play out like COTA/TOAWIII. it would be aabstracted in that you wouldn't be simulating taking the whole country...but perhaps just a random map (roughly based on the general terrain) and some units that fight for control.

We aren't specifically talking about recreating each specific 40kmx40km area of a nation (although HoI2 is split into regions anyway). And also, like CoG, you would have the option of going into the detailed battle or not. The AI would not be affected because ALL AI battles owuld be resolved as they are now, but only when the player CHOOSE to go to detailed combat would a rough map depicting the region be displayed and the battle fought.

For example, my HoI2 game, I would invade, say Switzerland. It has 4 regions. I attack one region and, at the moment, a red arrow and line are depicted showing the progress of my troops. However, under the NEW concept, I would be asked if I wanted to go into detailed combat mode. Selecting No means the game will continue as it always has. Selecting Yes means I am thrown onto a map, with approximate units (scaled on both sides for the size of map I guess) and away I go....tactical battle ensues.

It's no different to how Crown of Glory or Forge of Freedom are played.....just a different era. I know that with that different era come problems (tactics being one) but they could be abstracted and still give the feel of a tactical battle.

[charlieart66]

i couldnt have put it better myself.

[charlieart66]

to put this ibnot perspective, it would be like axis and allies, but with more provences , better battles and just generaly alot lot better
is there any game like this already out?

[Les_the_Sarge_9_1]

ORIGINAL: charlieart66

to put this ibnot perspective, it would be like axis and allies, but with more provences , better battles and just generaly alot lot better
is there any game like this already out?

Man that was mangled I think you "might" want to look at GGWaW AWD, but I am not sure of what your question was.

[charlieart66]

forgive me i have not a clue what it is (GGWaW AWD)
my question is
is it feasable to make a game where HOI was combined with CC through modding?

[JudgeDredd]

GGWaW AWD  =  Gary Grigsby's World at War A World Divided

Anything is feasible in the world of programming....but not to bring two current, seperate games together in a "seemless" way. It could be done, I guess. For example, it would be feasible for me to create a battle in TOAWIII based on my actions in HoI2....so, lets say I attack one of the provences in Swizterland...Before it's resolved on the map I could run away and spend an age creating the battle in TOAWIII then fight it strategically...four immediate  problems with that...

1. You would have to do this each time you attacked a provence (different forces, different terrain etc),
2. The TOAWIII editor isn't a "pick up and go" piece of kit
3. That's only good for me...you may well be attacking the same provence, but my TOAWIII battle would be useless to you because you may well be using different forces.
4. It completely irrelevant...because the HoI2 engine would perform it's task of deciding who won anyway...so the results of your "tactical" battle would be redundant.

So, in direct answer to your question, it is very feasible for a developer to create such a game, but for individuals to mod two games and "morph" them into one to attempt what you ask, then the answer is most definitely no.

As I mentioned before, it has been done to a degree with the game Crown of Glory. That has a strategic map where units are moved between provinces and diplomacy is performed and resources are managed. Then when you attack a provence, you have the ability to go to the tactical level. It's abstracted slightly, but it works. Also, Forge of Freedom (American Civil War) will be doing this kind of strategic/tactical mix

[Sarge]

ORIGINAL: charlieart66
my question is
is it feasable to make a game where HOI was combined with CC through modding?

No [:)]

[charlieart66]

i cant say i didnt try.
maybe it will happen in the future HOI3 or CC6?
as for the other games judge dredd suggested are any worth buying?

[Les_the_Sarge_9_1]

He did actually mean Close Combat when he said CC correct?

Hmm, I would not even wish the turn based version of that thought process on a person.

Grand strategy good or bad, is just not realistically capable of having it's battles negotiated at the squad tactical scale. I wouldn't even wish to do it at the scale of something like Panthers games or SSG games.

I mean, in a game of Strategic Command, I characteristically will generate potentially 50-100 individual battle results EVERY TURN.
So, that would result in my having to play the equal of 100 games of Steel Panthers for every turn of Strategic Command.

That would take an appalling span of lifetime.