A Bombardment Test and Results

[Jack]

Grumble,
The real thing and a game is just that, one is a game the other for real. As far as games go what is your recommondation for a tactical level game?

[swagman]

I find interesting the number of comments on the failure of SPWAW to accurately model this weapon or that effect...SPWAW is only a game, not a SIM...which means it has limitations we all have to live with...and since we all have to deal with it, the game design still allows balanced or historically accurate scenarios...and that's what makes SPWAW such a great game.

Many of the greatest games succeed because they are content to be a game, and do not try to be a simulation. I have never heard of a Knight charging in an "L" except in chess...just as foot soldiers never change into queens (at least not until after the battle has been won and they have got back to their tents).

As Paul indicated, the game engine doesn't model strategic bombing in a tactical context...I guess the purpose of the bombers is to represent a bomber group called into support a tactical situation.

I don't think any player would want to sit through the equivalent of six issue comes down to the game engine failing to model something that would NEVER be built into a scenario...so who cares... certainly not me.

If the intention is to create a Monte Cassino Scenario ireflecting six hours of pre-assault bombardment, then the solution is to create the scenario following the bombardment...with half-strength and missing squads reflecting the 50% casualties and lots of rubble hexes...german units could be set-up with high opening suppression to allow the attackers and initial advantage before suppression reduction enables the defense to harden.

I think such a Monte Cassino scenario would be challenging and interesting to play.

[Grumble]

Swagman,
SHACK!
Jack, the "best game" is frankly dependent on what you want-no surprise. SPWAW is probably the best IMHO. Not because it tries to model every round in flight, or "did my driver forget to check the oil today?" (roll the dice as per 199.8.7.67.5.3.2.4.21 amended in 130.93.35.90 <img src="smile.gif" border="0"> ). But because the DECISION-MAKING one makes at the this level of military operations is very similar to that of a Kampfgruppe, RCT level commander (and staff as well). Some folks want to be able to direct their crews to engage with a specific type of ammunition-fine by me, but that's DETAIL, not a simulation of what the player at the level denoted in the game should be concerned with. My contention is/was that ASL became exactly that type of detail-obsessed game. Again to my mind that's perfectly fine, it obviously fills a niche in gaming to still be supported by the fans after AH went Tango_uniform. But it goes too far to say the most "accurate/realistic" model of infantry combat.

[Steve Wilcox]

Yeah, the "realism" of ASL is over-rated. On the ASL mailing list's FAQs they even admit the infantry values were "fudged" until they "felt right". They don't seem too accurate to me.

[El Vito]

This game is friggin great. I played and loved Squad Leader from its inception in '77 but couldnt make the jump to ASL since I was so programmed with the old Squad Leader, but SPWAW is pretty dang close to that, and except for some gray areas I am completely happy with it.

[peter hellman]

At least I like the availability of aircraft in the game. Don't you dare thinking of taking them away <img src="smile.gif" border="0">

If there's more aircraft in one scenario, okay, maybe it isn't in the next one. I like it when the scenarios are different and often I myself have the choice to buy aircraft if I want.

And I like reading tests made by you players. <img src="wink.gif" border="0">