Regarding hex/turn based games

[Prince of Eckmühl]

ORIGINAL: Llyranor

Particularly because it's pausable. Just stop the action whenever you feel you need more time to evaluate the situation.

Totally off topic here, but I wonder when pausable became a word? I don't doubt that it is now, BTW. Surely, it's related to computers, somehow. I'm just too burned-out at the moment to research it! [;)]

[GoodGuy]

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl

...I wonder when pausable became a word? I don't doubt that it is now, BTW. Surely, it's related to computers, somehow. I'm just too burned-out at the moment to research it! [;)]

Actually, you can't find it in any online dictionary, not even in urban dictionaries. Still, Google indicates 71,200 hits for the word "pausable".

The funny thing is, one of my attempts to Google it gave me some forum and blog entries (along with reviews) discussing Matrix titles, like Distant Worlds or HTTR/COTA, as they advertize them as "pausable real-time" games [:D].

Actually, I came across that word solely in conjunction with programming (eg. as a switch or parameter in games and apps: "mp_pausable=1") but also on IC layouts, "pausable clock" or "pausable clock generation unit".
So it rather seems to be some "tech-talk", where programmers or engineers needed to give that parameter a coherent name, even if they had to make up a new word, i guess. [:)]

TBH, besides having seen it in source-scripts, config files or programming languages, I was pretty surprised that Matrix was using the term "pausable real-time", when I spotted HTTR's product info page back then. I scratched my head and was like "uh, is there such a word? Hm, well, they're native speakers, they'll know what they're doing". [:D]

EDIT:

This entry looks a bit sparse:
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/pausable

Now compare this to let's say "pause":
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/pause

or

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/plausible .

I think there is no such word, but it might just take a few years until it finds its way into english dictionaries. [:)]

[Arjuna]

We coined the term "Pausable Continuous Time" the initial reaction from wargamers who were dismissing our first title "Red Devils Over Arnhem" as another real time strategy ( RTS ) click fest. As soon as they saw the term real-time they made the assumption that this would be like all the other RTSs out there.

As to its English bona fides, I'll leave that to other to judge. But it's certainly more worthy of inclusion than some of the terms my 23 year old son bandies around saying that they are valid because everyone uses them.[:)]

GoodGuy,

Please note I do not refer to our system as pausable real-time. I purposefully used the term "continuous" rather than "real" because real time means one second of game time equals one second of real world time and that is definetely not how our system works. It will run as fast as the hardware will allow or the speed setting chosen by the player. Most of the time this will be accelerated time - ie 1 second of game time equals many seconds of real world time. But sometimes it can actually run slower - eg if it is calculating complex routes.

[junk2drive]

Firefox spellcheck bugs me about all kinds of common terms like spellcheck. spacebar, hotkeys, and yes, pausable or pauseable. Open Office does the same.

FlashPoint Germany, while WEGO, has time compression that is different than anything I've ever played.

[GoodGuy]

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

GoodGuy,

Please note I do not refer to our system as pausable real-time. I purposefully used the term "continuous" rather than "real" because real time means one second of game time equals one second of real world time and that is definetely not how our system works.

I thought Matrix' game profiles for both HTTR and COTA would indicate "pausable real-time", like for Distant Worlds for example, for some reason. Sorry about that.

Still, even if the game handles stuff in 1-minute increments technically, playing at "normal" speed allows for battles without any of the "choppiness" that can be seen in let's say titles like "Carriers at War" (with a minimum of 5-min.-increments, IIRC, which was advertized by Matrix as "Real Time" game - by the way), and this makes the Panther engine so realistic.
So, visually - eg. COTA is closer to *cough* real- *clearing throat* errr continous time than anything else. [;)]

We coined the term "Pausable Continuous Time" the initial reaction from wargamers who were dismissing our first title "Red Devils Over Arnhem" as another real time strategy ( RTS ) click fest. As soon as they saw the term real-time they made the assumption that this would be like all the other RTSs out there.

Yes, I understand the idea behind this "strategical" move. I think a die-hard turn-play wargamer will still translate that term to "real-time" the very same minute he reads such game profile, though. [;)]

Anyway, I was just emitting some thoughts about the word pausable, so if I steamrolled some delicate plant named "continuous", it happened accidentally and unintentionally, really! [:)]

[Crimguy]

What the hell are you people still doing here? Move on!

[junk2drive]

Maybe it has to do with multi vision eyeglasses. I have progressive lenses. Like bifocals, I have to point my eyes at whatever I want to be in focus. Depending on the brand and quality (I have Varilux) your peripheral vison is compromised. When playing Armored Brigade on slow speed, I may be looking at the action in the lower left of the screen and then notice something blows up in the upper right. I can pause the game but now it's too late to figure out what happened and what I should have done beforehand. With FOW it gets worse. Maybe people with normal vision comprehend more of the screen than I do. Or I'm just an old fart that can't process info.

[TheWombat_matrixforum]

Same here--bifocals for the lose!

ORIGINAL: junk2drive

Maybe it has to do with multi vision eyeglasses. I have progressive lenses. Like bifocals, I have to point my eyes at whatever I want to be in focus. Depending on the brand and quality (I have Varilux) your peripheral vison is compromised. When playing Armored Brigade on slow speed, I may be looking at the action in the lower left of the screen and then notice something blows up in the upper right. I can pause the game but now it's too late to figure out what happened and what I should have done beforehand. With FOW it gets worse. Maybe people with normal vision comprehend more of the screen than I do. Or I'm just an old fart that can't process info.

[RayWolfe]

I have used Varilux for years ... never stopped me from using (and thoroughly enjoying) this series.
Must just be down to your "old fart" status ... but I honestly doubt that you are anything like as old a fart as this old fart! [:'(]

[junk2drive]

I am near sighted so my lenses are strong on top and weak on the bottom, opposite of most people. I never had a problem with stairs for example.

[TheWombat_matrixforum]

To clarify, I've never had any problems with most games, but I do experience the phenomenon described above. I am completely capable of losing wargames without any recourse to excuses, as I truly suck.

[RayWolfe]

ORIGINAL: junk2drive

I am near sighted so my lenses are strong on top and weak on the bottom, opposite of most people. I never had a problem with stairs for example.

Ditto!

[MajFrankBurns]

ORIGINAL: TinyPirate

I can't face turn based operational games any more, even strategic games, they have to be WEGO or real time. I just think we're, what, 35 years past hex-based gaming, and we have computers, yet we're still stuck with the same central game we had back when wargaming started, albeit, with tweaks.

Panther's COTA etc (and I'll add Combat Mission and a couple of others) are the only games which really seem to be prepared to embrace the power PCs give us, and the realism a good simulation can build. Love it, keep it up!

I'd say you and your little group are pretty much in the backfield when it comes to "traditional" wargaming. All you have to do is look in the hobby stores, online and in wargame magazines to see that 'turn based' wargaming is still the strongest form of playing them around world wide.

Computer wargaming is still just a niche market and hardly the size of the real wargaming market around the globe which is a board wargaming, dice, crt charts etc etc. They are 99.9% IgoUgo or alternative turns and that's the way the majority of them will be for a long long long time to come.

WEGO is a nice new twist on turn based wargaming and a computer does allow that, but, there's hardly a majority of wargamers who really like that style over traditional turn based. I personally like "initiative" type gameplay where the same person doesn't always go first every turn but that's not at the top of the charts either.

I still prefer traditional turn based though because I like controlled turns and I like to be in control of all my counters not just a portion of them.

I really think what most people want when they say they like real time or wego or anything outside of turn based is a wargame directors kit. They want to watch the action and just be the director. In essence they want to make a war MOVIE and just sit back and watch the action and pan the screen. This is what I see games like HTTR and COTA doing and pretty much the same with the Combat Mission series albeit you do get controlled turns in that game. With this I have to ask...whatever happened to playing a wargame? Too much realism takes away from a game being a game and just adds unncessary details to them.

[wodin]

I have to disagree....panthers games require you to play not just sit and watch...you have control...they follow your orders...granted pretty much all other realtime games for me are unrealistic and play to fast. Not this one.

I also like turn based games....though WEGO is my favourite.

Have you played a Panther Game? If not read an AAR and you will see its nothing like watching a war film (its hardly a feast for the eyes like a war film for a start)...nor being a director. Though thinking about it doesn't a commander direct his forces in real life?

[Obsolete]

I personally like "initiative" type gameplay where the same person doesn't always go first every turn but that's not at the top of the charts either.

I haven't seen one of these systems that I've liked very much.  And they seem highly exploitable (in non-realistic senses).

My favourite form of initiative I've seen?  Probably in Panzer General where different units had biases for initiative.  Though one could argue if this really counts, since while it may change battle-order, it doesn't quite change turn-orders & movement.

[Arjuna]

Actually modeling the attainment of initiative and surprise are a real strength in our engine. It models orders delay and hence, due to the different efficiencies and abilitites of commanders and their staff and the consequent variation in orders processing durations, it models the ability of one force to gain the initiative on another. But you can only realistically model this if you have a high fidelity of time and space, something traditional turn based/hex based games cannot achieve. Efforts at trying to model the achievement of initiative in these games must by their nature be highly abstract and to my taste highly contrived.

But having said that I want to make the point that there is surely room in every wargamers inventory for both turn based and pausable continuous time wargames. It's horses for courses. If you want a truly realistic simulation where you take on the role of an operational commander then IMO you can't beat our engine. I appreciate that there are many who prefer to have total control over what every unit does - ie they like to micromanage. Sure it is extremely unrealistic. Real commanders, the good ones anyway, macromanage via their subordinates. But such games can be good fun if you accept their limitations and focus. I grew up on turn based hex games and had a great deal of good times with them. It's just that as I grew older my hunger for a more realistic simulation compelled me to look in a different direction.

Maj Frank Burns,

I appreciate your comments about watching the play unfold like a director in a movie. A lot of other people have made similar comments. In part it's because you need to make a paradigm shift in the way you play, in the way you command. I tried to impart this in our COTA tutorials but few people bothered to invest the time in manually following these. That's why for BFTB we have produced a series of tutorial movies. I hope these will better explain how to play the game in a more digestable format. After we get the game released we'll be working up a demo. I do recommend you give it a look.