RE: Valor, Victory & Me
Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2021 1:59 pm
The number of tactical wargames that I have played regularly for years can be counted with the fingers of one hand.



ORIGINAL: rico21
The number of tactical wargames that I have played regularly for years can be counted with the fingers of one hand.
![]()
ORIGINAL: wodin
For me it's four (Squad Battles (for me no top down, 2D turn based tactical wargame does it better, yet SB has areas for improvement), TSS games, Combat Missionx2 games and Graviteam Tactics Muis Front and DLC)! Reason is because of what I've highlighted. Considering there are a fair amount out there, they are all doing pretty much the same thing. I'm looking forward to Second Front, Steel Tigers and Burden of Command, lets see how they measure up. All others that have hit my radar have nothing that stands out.
The developer talks about simplifying, yet my issue is that most are already to simple and abstract. The lower the scale the less abstraction there should be. We have the LnL games series or Company of Heroes etc already out there doing exactly this. It's the lack of indepth and detailed tactical games that needs addressing esp in the 2D top down format. Why I put SB top. It considers each individual soldier and his weapon, no squad abstracted together. Casualties at the man scale so not the abstract full squad half squad mechanic. As I said I think the lower the scale the less abstraction should be used.
ORIGINAL: ncc1701e
ORIGINAL: wodin
For me it's four (Squad Battles (for me no top down, 2D turn based tactical wargame does it better, yet SB has areas for improvement), TSS games, Combat Missionx2 games and Graviteam Tactics Muis Front and DLC)! Reason is because of what I've highlighted. Considering there are a fair amount out there, they are all doing pretty much the same thing. I'm looking forward to Second Front, Steel Tigers and Burden of Command, lets see how they measure up. All others that have hit my radar have nothing that stands out.
The developer talks about simplifying, yet my issue is that most are already to simple and abstract. The lower the scale the less abstraction there should be. We have the LnL games series or Company of Heroes etc already out there doing exactly this. It's the lack of indepth and detailed tactical games that needs addressing esp in the 2D top down format. Why I put SB top. It considers each individual soldier and his weapon, no squad abstracted together. Casualties at the man scale so not the abstract full squad half squad mechanic. As I said I think the lower the scale the less abstraction should be used.
Squad Battles is just horrible to look at. And, I am not sure Steel Tigers will have the management of each individual soldier and his weapon.
I miss something like Jagged Alliance...
ORIGINAL: wodin
Why oh why do developers of tactical wargames keep leaving out the features missing from all previous similar games that players keep asking for, like multi level buildings. I don't get it. If I was going to all that trouble and hard work of developing a new tactical wargame I'd make sure it has all those features that are always requested and always missing. That way I know the game will stand out from the crowd and offer players features\mechanics missing from all previous similar games. Otherwise why make a game that's like all the previous ones. Seems alot of hardwork for nothing new.
ORIGINAL: z1812
ORIGINAL: wodin
Why oh why do developers of tactical wargames keep leaving out the features missing from all previous similar games that players keep asking for, like multi level buildings. I don't get it. If I was going to all that trouble and hard work of developing a new tactical wargame I'd make sure it has all those features that are always requested and always missing. That way I know the game will stand out from the crowd and offer players features\mechanics missing from all previous similar games. Otherwise why make a game that's like all the previous ones. Seems alot of hardwork for nothing new.
Lock and Load Tactical Digital has multi-story buildings. Movement is intuitive. With your unit in a building hex, you click on a stair icon, up/down, which moves your unit up or down.
ORIGINAL: wodin
ORIGINAL: z1812
ORIGINAL: wodin
Why oh why do developers of tactical wargames keep leaving out the features missing from all previous similar games that players keep asking for, like multi level buildings. I don't get it. If I was going to all that trouble and hard work of developing a new tactical wargame I'd make sure it has all those features that are always requested and always missing. That way I know the game will stand out from the crowd and offer players features\mechanics missing from all previous similar games. Otherwise why make a game that's like all the previous ones. Seems alot of hardwork for nothing new.
Lock and Load Tactical Digital has multi-story buildings. Movement is intuitive. With your unit in a building hex, you click on a stair icon, up/down, which moves your unit up or down.
My big gripe I had with LnL Stalingrad was the spotting and shooting mechanic. How you couldn't do recon by fire and had to respot every turn. Hated it. Esp as Germans used recon by fire ALOT during Stalingrad city fighting. Plus full squad/half squad abstraction really not keen.
ORIGINAL: z1812
ORIGINAL: wodin
ORIGINAL: z1812
Lock and Load Tactical Digital has multi-story buildings. Movement is intuitive. With your unit in a building hex, you click on a stair icon, up/down, which moves your unit up or down.
My big gripe I had with LnL Stalingrad was the spotting and shooting mechanic. How you couldn't do recon by fire and had to respot every turn. Hated it. Esp as Germans used recon by fire ALOT during Stalingrad city fighting. Plus full squad/half squad abstraction really not keen.
I am not talking about LNL Stalingrad. Look for "Lock and Load Tactical Digital". It is a completely different game.