Page 3 of 3
RE: why not more post-wwii games?
Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2010 8:00 pm
by NefariousKoel
ORIGINAL: Sarge
ORIGINAL: SLAAKMAN
Oh, and I of course love the immersion when I finally get to upgrade to Tigers, Panther-G's & Kings
My sentiments exactly. P
laying the Axis in WWII isone of the greatest challenges in wargaming. [:D]
Despite the programmed axis bias in most titles.................[:'(]
Zee Nazi Fanbois sez: Needs Moar Supa Special Colors for only zee SS unitz. Cause dey is zee beztest!!1
RE: why not more post-wwii games?
Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2010 8:05 pm
by Feltan
I suppose my dream game would be a very well done modern/future grand strategic game that included military, political and economic simulation components. I say "well done" because there are a couple of offerings out there that are, in my opinion, somewhat less than satisfactory in design.
Grand strategy is what I look for too. For me, modern/future tactical and operational games seem to lack an appropriate/realistic setting. Additionally, at a certain level many of the unkowns can be abstracted out of the game while at a tactical level assumptions about future equipment characteristics can compound to make things unrealistic quite quickly.
Anyway, God willing I have another 20-30 years of game playing to wait for my dream game. However, with my luck, in 31 years my great grand child will deliver it to me in a nursing home, and I'll have vanila pudding dribbling down my chin while sitting in my wheel chair in a Depends full of crap.
Regards,
Feltan
RE: why not more post-wwii games?
Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2010 8:29 pm
by ilovestrategy
I like games from ancient battles up to WWII. Anything after that bores me to tears.
RE: why not more post-wwii games?
Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2010 8:41 pm
by SLAAKMAN
I like games from ancient battles up to WWII. Anything after that bores me to tears.
(Actually those are also my sentiments but Ive made exceptions for Korea, Vietnam & Starcraft Broodwars). [:D]
RE: why not more post-wwii games?
Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2010 8:57 pm
by wodin
ORIGINAL: Feltan
Anyway, God willing I have another 20-30 years of game playing to wait for my dream game. However, with my luck, in 31 years my great grand child will deliver it to me in a nursing home, and I'll have vanila pudding dribbling down my chin while sitting in my wheel chair in a Depends full of crap.
Regards,
Feltan
Lol..that made me smile...cheers mate....I have the same worry over Battlefront releasing the next CM EF which will be covered by 4 games and maybe upto 20 modules!!!! With just two programmers...and the amount of time it has taken for Normandy (Though now CMSF is all finished they can concentrate on it more) I will probably have vanilla pudding for brains...
RE: why not more post-wwii games?
Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2010 10:45 pm
by jomni
ORIGINAL: Feltan
I suppose my dream game would be a very well done modern/future grand strategic game that included military, political and economic simulation components. I say "well done" because there are a couple of offerings out there that are, in my opinion, somewhat less than satisfactory in design.
Grand strategy is what I look for too. For me, modern/future tactical and operational games seem to lack an appropriate/realistic setting. Additionally, at a certain level many of the unkowns can be abstracted out of the game while at a tactical level assumptions about future equipment characteristics can compound to make things unrealistic quite quickly.
Anyway, God willing I have another 20-30 years of game playing to wait for my dream game. However, with my luck, in 31 years my great grand child will deliver it to me in a nursing home, and I'll have vanila pudding dribbling down my chin while sitting in my wheel chair in a Depends full of crap.
Regards,
Feltan
Ah you must be talking about the Battlegoat games (Supreme Ruler series). It fits your criteria. But that gameplay is a bit "iffy". Too detailed for the scale, too focused on war, RTS clickfest?, AI unable to cope with game mechanics, etc.
The problem with doing modern grand strategy / geopolicital games is that, if you want it to be exciting, you must be aiming to conquer the world militarily which ends up like a WW2 game with modern weaponry. But we all know that that won't happen anymore. Wars these days are more limited and low intensity. More "battles" are fought politically / economically than militarily these days. This might be one of the reasons why a lot of people are still looking at the WW2 scenario.
RE: why not more post-wwii games?
Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2010 10:53 pm
by Obsolete
This thread has inspired me to do another nostalgic run of People's General now.
Here we go, American campaign. Luckily the US tanks are more effective here than their joke of a performance during the second world war. On the other hand, the communists are supposed to have much better infantry. We'll see how it goes!
RE: why not more post-wwii games?
Posted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 12:39 am
by Obsolete
I guess I have been playing the General series too long. Can't even remember much of these scenarios, but pulling off brilliant victories and getting prototypes. No luck for the Chinese aparently...
RE: why not more post-wwii games?
Posted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 3:00 am
by jomni
I actually had a hard time progressing in that game.
Hope GOG re-releases it.
RE: why not more post-wwii games?
Posted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 12:16 pm
by Dimitris
ORIGINAL: hawkeye_de
[*] Naval Warfare: Sure no 'complete' Pacific Theater with island-hopping but modern naval warfare is just so more varied and a big naval clash between NATO and Warsaw Pact has just more potential (even battles for Islands -> Iceland) IMO. Hopefully Red Pill will be the coming benchmark concerning Post WWII Warfare
Thanks for the confidence vote [:)]. We will do our best towards this goal.
RE: why not more post-wwii games?
Posted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 9:35 pm
by KG Erwin
I remember an old Vietnam game for the C64 that I was very impressed by. It was Microprose's "Conflict in Vietnam". It had good AI, hidden units, great OOBs for the Americans, and it was very tough to win. It also had a nice rules booklet with plenty of historical info. I still have the game, but no longer own a working C64. It was re-released for early PCs, but it had godawful graphics. I still hope for an updated version of this game, which had battles from 1954-1972 included. I remember playing the Ia Drang 1965 scenario, in which the US had sledgehammer firepower, but it was like trying swat a fly with it. The Air Cav would land into a hornets' nest, and when we called in the heavy stuff, they would just fade away into the jungle. THAT was a frustrating experience. We had plenty of airpower and arty, but too few boots on the ground.
RE: why not more post-wwii games?
Posted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 11:16 pm
by jomni
ORIGINAL: KG Erwin
I remember an old Vietnam game for the C64 that I was very impressed by. It was Microprose's "Conflict in Vietnam". It had good AI, hidden units, great OOBs for the Americans, and it was very tough to win. It also had a nice rules booklet with plenty of historical info. I still have the game, but no longer own a working C64. It was re-released for early PCs, but it had godawful graphics. I still hope for an updated version of this game, which had battles from 1954-1972 included. I remember playing the Ia Drang 1965 scenario, in which the US had sledgehammer firepower, but it was like trying swat a fly with it. The Air Cav would land into a hornets' nest, and when we called in the heavy stuff, they would just fade away into the jungle. THAT was a frustrating experience. We had plenty of airpower and arty, but too few boots on the ground.
I have the DOS version of that and still works with DOSBOX.
Still fun. A Simple but fairly realistic RTS.
RE: why not more post-wwii games?
Posted: Fri Oct 22, 2010 7:18 am
by sprior
In that case how about SSI's Red Lightning?
RE: why not more post-wwii games?
Posted: Sun Oct 24, 2010 12:38 pm
by Obsolete
I actually had a hard time progressing in that game.
Sometimes if you do very poorly early on, it could snowball against you in the later scenarios. Anyhow, I protected America from the evil Chinese, so I'm off to try some of the other campaigns after I take a break.
RE: why not more post-wwii games?
Posted: Sun Oct 24, 2010 1:20 pm
by Erik Rutins
For Post WWII gaming, have you looked at TOAW III (on sale now [;)])?