Matrix Games Forums

i had a love/hate relationship with hoi and hoi2. On the one hand, i spent alot of time with 1, working on the economic model mainly, and trying to make it work. Having some of my work get incorporated into the best moder's work at the time(which later formed the basis of the excellent CORE mod) was also very gratifying. But strangely, i didn't end up playing the game that much, just working with it....Then came the realization that the AI was very poor and prone to 'sleeping' - something which never was really corrected(even in #2). I understand that some people are po'd at paradox for releasing such buggy games (and the first was way worse than the second), however one thing to their credit is they do keep working on them.

I think the main problem with Hoi(s) is the sheer ambition of it all. When you think of everything they're trying to get the computer to do at once (execute movements, battles, economics, trade, politics) for EVERY COUNTRY, all in real time - and then to think that the AI(for every country) is supposed to come up with long term strategy? The permutations make my head stagger...I so wish they'd take that game and make it turn-based - but anyways.

I do like the grand scale of it, and just the sheer enormity and depth of it - i just wish it worked. WaW might be alot simpler, but it works and it's fun. Hands down winner...

ORIGINAL: marc420
1. This attitude that says release a very sorry game, get people to buy it, then use the money to fix the game and sell the fix as another full price game really PO's me.

2. But when I zoom in to one area to see what's going on, things get out of control somewhere else. But for a strategic game where I'm supposedly representing a commmander-in-chief with a massive general, political, and diplomatic staffs that are helping me, this out-of-control real-time method always seems wrong to me. I much prefer a turn-based game for this scale where I can analyze a situation and plan moves and production to try to deal with it.

Theres an almost identical thread to this over in the Paradox forums of course hehe.

Anyhoo I love both games and felt the need to comment.

Taking number 2 first - I presume you are referring to multiplayer only, because you can adjust the speed or hit the pause key any time you like otherwise. In multiplayer so long as you get people willing to play on very slow or slow you don't often face a situation where you are out-of-control. That said, I do wholeheartedly agree that for multiplayer I prefer turn based and WaW hands down.

On number 1, I have an alternative perspective. I think of the games I've bought over the past few years that I can remember: Rome Total War, Knights of Honor, Vampire Bloodlines, Temple of Elemental Evil for example. These games were released in a buggy state and never fixed, whereas at least with Paradox you can be sure that they will stick with it until their product is of good quality, quite a long time after they could have walked away and said it was finished.

Also - I enjoyed HoI vanilla. Although given the perspective of the later patches, I wouldn't choose to play it again.

On that note - I wholeheartedly recommend booting up your old version of HoI, applying patch 1.06c and the CORE modification [:)]

I like GGWAW much better than HOI cause of following reasons:
- HOI's AI is ferociously weak and can be beaten just by having your dog walk around on your keyboard and mouse for a few days (yes that's how long it takes to play a game of HOI)
- GGWAW is sweet and simple but looks like it can be very tactically challenging with human players or high level setting
- GGWAW is a very fun game and HOI tends to put my brain to sleep
- HOI is easy to exploit so from what I saw on their forum everyone just puts production on permanent tank building until they get bored of the cakewalk and then start a new game.. tanks... repeat... tanks again... repeat... hey lets build tanks this time... repeat.. yawn... so its a one unit game
- planes in GGWAW work nicely except for the heavy bomber exploit I saw on a thread here which needs editing, but in HOI planes cannot damage ground units but only reduce their organization which is lame I think
- GGWAW has very nice battle sounds plus animated battles which HOI has none of

Interesting opinions and like other poster said similar discussion going on in the Paradox forums. Regardless of what I now think about GGWAW, there is a place for it and HOIT2. I'll keep WAW and try it again when I have time to get to it. I just started a PBEM game of WITP, purchased Highway to the Reich and got Stronghold 2 yesterday. I'm also waiting for Cossacks 2, which should be out end of month. I recently read an article making the bold statement that PC gaming is dead. Well I sure don't see any signs of that. It seems like we're entering a new golden period of computer gaming.

Games currently on my hard disk:

Rome Total War
HOIT2
War in the Pacific
Highway to the Reich
WAW
Pacific Fighters
Civ2 Conquests
Freelancer
Act of War
EU2
Crusader Kings
Silent Hunter 3
Panzer Elite
Stronghold 2


Games I plan on Buying
Battles in Normandy
Cossacks 2
Steel Beasts 2
Battle of Midway Game that looks promising-can't recall the name

Looks like I'll be supporting the devs for a while

For mass market appeal, PC gaming IS dead. Luckily, I have little interest in mass market games.

Unless the next-gen consoles have Keyboards and Mice, the PC will always be the superior platform for RTS and TBS games. There are many who much prefer to play FPS games on the PC due to the control schemes as well.

But even the best selling PC games barely scratch the surface in sales of what many console games sell. So, it makes sense that more and more publishers are leaving the PC industry to go where the money is. That will leave room for the smaller independents to make a small but comfortable living in the PC market. Companies like Matrix, Shrapnel, Battlefront etc are all moving into that void being left by many of the big boys exiting the arena.

Personally, I dont think what is happening in the PC industry is a bad thing. A lot of the fat and crap is being trimmed away and its leaving companies that are better suited to delivering what the remaining PC gamers are interested in.

True alot of the big devs are heading towards the mass appeal market. While some of the games are very good I too am not big on the first person shooters so I really don't care. From the looks of it, smaller devs like Matrix who cater to the smaller market seem to be devoted to the genre which makes for better products than the marketing driven companies who pump out garbage.

My workmate, however brought up an excellent point. He is from Europe and pointed out that while there are tons of concil gamers in the US and Japan and things are moving that way, most of the world is still on PC's and that along with the PC gamers in the US is a huge market.

Many of the PC games being released were developed in Europe/Russia and the quality is superb, Silent Hunter 3, IL2/Pacific Fighters, Blitzkrieg are some of the titles that come to mind.

I think that Rome Total War was from a Europen design firm too.

Let's just hope that companies like Matrixgames, HPS, Shrapnel and a few indies continue to stick with the PC world of games though. They could get the money bug as well and dive into the console industry. I noticed they are even "supporting an RTS" game. GAH, We better start worrying now. hehe

I own both games, as well as the first HoI. To be perfectly honest, I prefer HoI to HoI2 (although the latter has some nice features and tweaked combat engine that would have been welcome in HoI)

I enjoy both games, for different reasons. HoI is full of little details that the micromanager in me loves , but WaW seems just right for when I want something a little less heavy.

As far as the AI goes, I think both games have a well-thought-out AI (not with regards to players that exploit it), with the WaW AI having an edge with far less variables to deal with. Both AI's seem to fight decently on the tactical level. At the strategic level, HoI's AI can fall flat. I'm thinking this is due to the greater number of "zones" to look after, as well as the greater number of separate nations involved.

I give HoI the nod for multiplayer, specifically for the real-time element. (it almost caused me not to buy it, I felt the same about it before trying it that I did about WaW's 3-month turns [:)] )

Someone mentioned that they didn't like the realtime format because they had to do too many things at once. I like it because I forget stuff [:)]. Forgetting for 30 seconds to build those fighters you need to defend against a brewing offensive in HoI is far less catastrophic than in WaW[:)] Also, I would hate to play a turn-based game with/against a full slate of opponents, if they took as long as I do. It certainly does take more time commitment though. My old MP games would generally take 2 4-hr sessions a week, for 3 or 4 weeks, to complete. We played on Below Normal speed. It did take some getting used to though.

HoI has a far steeper learning curve than WaW, which can sometimes be a problem.

I am enjoying WaW immensely right now, I certainly give it the edge in the presentation department, and I love the fact that although abstracted, all the factors that made a difference are there.

IMO, WaW is a simpler game than HoI. But it's the first simpler strategy game I've ever enjoyed since playing HoI, and that says a lot. (I played Strategic Command once on each side, then never again)

In short, they're really two different games and not really comparable IMO, although similar in terms of scope.

If you have HoI and not WaW, I'd recommend to buy WaW. If you have WaW and not HoI, I'd say to try and try out a friend's copy before you buy it, it's not for everyone.

HOI 1 was a micro mananging hell (a bit like WitP in that sense, but only worse)
HOI 2 is a good game, but lacks a bit of flavour I think.
WaW is a beer and pretzel game, a bit too simplistic for my liking. A bit strange when you think about it. Isn't Matrix main focus on the hardcore Strat market, and not kid games like this? Oh well.

So, both WaW and HOI2 are good games in their own right, just depends on what you are looking for. I prefer HOI2 between the two.

ORIGINAL: Panzer76
WaW is a beer and pretzel game, a bit too simplistic for my liking. A bit strange when you think about it. Isn't Matrix main focus on the hardcore Strat market, and not kid games like this? Oh well.

hehe, I doubt this could be considered by anyone but a Grognard as a kids game.

I can just imagine the reaction when WaW was booted up instead of the latest RTS, and the poor player finds that not only have their commando units dissapeared, but areas they definately explored earlier are blacked out again AND they have to supply their troops before they can fire?!? OMG wtf?? teh game suxx0rs! Matrix r ghey! [X(][X(][X(]

I'd have to agree with Svend. A beer n pretzels game would be one where one doesn't really have to think. Ala Warlords, Emipre Deluxe, most RTS games (hehe), Risk and Axis & Allies. Any game that can be played and finished in under 4 hours is a beer n pretzels game, while not having to use the grey matter too much. WAW is far from a beer n pretzels game. It requires quite a bit of thought, while not as much as a HOI, considerably more than a Risk or an Axis & Allies. I would place it in the intermediate range of wargames. A newbie certainly wouldn't pick it up and not find it somewhat daunting. It's certainly no click n go game like most rts games are.

I'm a big fan of Paradox and their games and a huge fan of Gary Grigsby's games (though I suspect others played a large part in the development of GGWAW). HOI2 is a big improvement over HOI1 and a very enjoyable game; but I have never played it Multiplayer as it seems so daunting. For one thing you would have to have a Player for every major combatant so I assume arranging schedules would be a problem. For another I would think the game would take a long time to play. If I'm getting wumped at GGWAW I can at least take solace in the fact that it will be over soon. The big problem for me is that the AI in HOI2 is so lame and it is not IMHO an accurate simulation. As Canada (my nation of choice) I can usually conquer Italy and Germany without much if any WA support (though I do require Russian help) and in the process build up an elite army of 30 Divisions. By contrast the AI in GGWAW gives me a battle. If playing the Allies it usually takes me into late 44 before I have conquered both Germany and Japan. In fact it is the best AI I have ever seen in a wargame. Despite it's simplicity I also think GGWAW is a more accurate simulation of WWII. It can certainly be improved and in fact I hope they are already working on a GGWAW2. Anyway, just my 2 cents worth.

I would also like to suggest that people try Strategic Command which is a very good game of the War in Europe only. They are also going to come out with Strategic Command 2 this year. WWII strategy games are my favorite so this is a great year for me.

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana
Despite it's simplicity I also think GGWAW is a more accurate simulation of WWII.

To call such a fairly simplistic approach a SIMULATION is perhaps a bit of a stretch, don't you agree?

For other points, yes, to each their own, if you come from Axis And Allies, Im sure WaW looks complex. Now, Combined Arms looks promising...

Well Panzer I guess it depends on how you define "simulation". But I accept your point and will retract my statement that GGWAW is a "simulation" of WWII and instead say that GGWAW more accurately simulates WWII then does HOI2. Is that better?

and instead say that GGWAW more accurately simulates WWII then does HOI2. Is that better?

I agree with that. What I find in the Paradox games is they are totally "whatifs" and hardly represent anything realistically. Just too many variables and the AI doesn't conform to really anything historically.

Brazil was always my favorite nation in HOI and I too could muster 30 to 50 divisions and take out North Africa, Italy and Lower Germany with Russias help. While it was fun, it was hardly realistic or historically accurate by any means.

ORIGINAL: Panzer76
To call such a fairly simplistic approach a SIMULATION is perhaps a bit of a stretch, don't you agree?

For other points, yes, to each their own, if you come from Axis And Allies, Im sure WaW looks complex. Now, Combined Arms looks promising...

Well, like you I come from heavyweight grognard world of WITP (which I consider perhaps the best wargame of all time), UV and similar games, but unlike you I'd never call WAW a "kid game", nor "simplistic" one.

WAW is not "complex" in WITP-like way, where you get to micromanage every barge in the Pacific, but it is, I would use the term "layered".

Anyone thinking WAW is a "kid game" didn't play enough of it (especially vs. humans).

O.

Well, unless I am mistaken, you are a beta tester, so ofcos, whatever you say is heavily biased.

I agree that its not a kids game per se, but compared to WitP and the "regular" Matrix games, it is. The game has too few variables, too generic units, too limited diplomacy, too large areas as zones of control and too long time frames pr turn too be considered a serious war game in any shape and form.

But, that's my POV, so hey, no big deal

ORIGINAL: Harrybanana

Well Panzer I guess it depends on how you define "simulation". But I accept your point and will retract my statement that GGWAW is a "simulation" of WWII and instead say that GGWAW more accurately simulates WWII then does HOI2. Is that better?

Hehe. Well, I think neither game is a good simulation of WWII, but I would think HOI2 is the better one, if only they would improve the AI. As a side notice, it's easier to make a good AI with a simple game as WaW compared to HOI2.

ORIGINAL: Panzer76


hehe. Well, I think neither game is a good simulation of WWII, but I would think HOI2 is the better one, if only they would improve the AI. As a side notice, it's easier to make a good AI with a simple game as WaW compared to HOI2.

I agree with you Panzer that neither HOI2 or WaW is an accurate simulation of WWII. However, I have played numerous Board and Computer WWII stategic games (ie games covering the entire War or at least the War in Europe) and IMHO WaW comes the closest to realistically simulating the entire war I've seen. Is there any game (Board or computer) that you would reccommend as being a more accurate simulation as I would love to try it.

There is no question that HOI2 is a more detailed and complex game, but this does not by itself make it a better simulation (yeah I know you don't like that word) than WaW. The problem with HOI2 is that too many things can happen which were not historically possible. I am not talking here about Germany deciding to not go to war with the Allies and instead the Allies going to war with Russia. Rather I'm refering to things like nations like Canada fielding armies of 30 elite divisions along with an aircraft carrier, several cruisers and several squadrons of planes. This is just 1 example of several unrealistic things that happen in HOI2 primarily because the economic model is skewed. Don't get me wrong I do enjoy HOI2 and think the way it handles research for example is more realistic than WaW; but over all I think WaW is more realistic. Though again I should add the caveat that I have never played HOI2 multiplayer and perhaps if I did perhaps I would find it more realistic. Has anyone played HOI2 mutiplayer and can they comment on this?

With respect to the AI I agree with you that it was obviously easier to program the AI for WaW than HOI2; but War in the Pacific is IMHO even more complex than HOI2 and the yet the AI is superior. The fact is that Paradox is a great company with fantastic customer support, but they design their games primarily for multiplayer use and seem less concerned with having a competent AI. They choose to spend their development $ elsewhere and thats OK.