Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: pompack

ORIGINAL: Mynok

Hex based wargames have been around since the early seventies.

Surely longer than that. IIRC AH's Gettysburg was a hex game; that was about 1961

The original Gettysburg had squares. I think it was in 61 it became hexes, so you're correct. But, D-Day was certainly published around 1961 and had hexes, so it may have been the first. Hell, I can't remember. (I first played Tactics, not Tactics II mind you, and it had squares and round counters. I think the counters had "Tnk", "Inf", "Abn" on them. Whatever it was, it was real simple.)

But the point is that PG was NOT the first hex-based game. In fact, I'm not sure it was the first hex-based PC game. Talonsoft published four or five games that year that are hex-based. (I still have every Talonsoft game published.)

PG was fun to play, up to a point, but was never more than a beer and pretzels game, IMO. It appealed to those who did not necessarily demand serious historical context. I played it for a month or two, then gave it away to a kid down the street. I just didn't care for it.

And as for the NATO symbols ... I ALWAYS use them. If a game has two modes, one NATO symbols, one sprites of some kind, I ALWAYS select the symbols. The only exception might be, for example, one of the good battlefield games, like Talonsoft's Gettysburg, when I occasionally turned on the sprites just to see what the battlefield looked like at some point in time. I always turned them off to actually playe the game.

Chris,

I think you really 'stirred up the pot' with a thread title of 'NATO symbols are a total NO-GO for WWII games'. Granted it's only an opinion of yours, but it really is quite a heavy statement. I've been playing war games from board to computer for over 20 years and even have helped design a few. Personally I feel your statement is extremely naive and will really limit your ability to enjoy the wealth of great war games out there that only have NATO counters. So I actually feel sorry for you, because your attitude towards WWII games and NATO symbols will cause you to miss an opportunity to play the BEST computer strategy game ever on the market. Yes, WitE is that good a game and only getting better with each patch thanks to the contribution of these forum members and a dedicated group of developers and testers.

Chirs, I hope someday you can look past the NATO symbols in WitE, because I think if you can you'll have a great experience with the game as so many of us have had.

For me I absolutely LOVE the NATO symbols in WitE. I'm with Kirk that it's hard to take a grand strategy war game at this scale (bat/rgt/div/corps/army) serious if it doesn't have NATO symbols representing units.

ORIGINAL: Chris10

I read about WITE about a year ago and was really looking forward for this game. I did not checked back on this title until now as I thought it to be a good idea to wait for some patches after release to flatten out the biggest issues (those who play Paradox Hearts of Iron and other grand strategy games know why...LOL)
Anyway, today I thought to have a look on this game and read thru the forum and watched some youtube videos to see if its the great title I was expecting and I have to say:
Its a real pity but there is no way Iam going to bother with a WWII game wich uses only NATO symbols. Those who played the original Panzer General will remember how immersive it was despite the fact that its mechanics where a lot more simple but players got seriously attached to their units as you could see grow their experinece (the gold stars) and the Player was not stearing on some metaforical NATO symbols who dont provide any atmosphere at all. With todays graphics it would have been megaeasy to make some nice individual sprites for each unit and unti type (main unit) and for each individual country and implement one more zoom level to be able to appreciate them and to give the impression of some closer control.
The devs should really re-install the first Panzer General and play a few turns to be remembered what direct Player-Control means (move-attack or attack-move) and to realize how much better and immersive it is to have unit sprites instead of those crappy Nato symbols (besides...there was no Nato in WWII as far as I remember so it feels totally off to have to play with them)...

Just a shame...a first post really should be something positive [&:]

I would have enjoyed Panzer General more with NATO counters. I am the exact opposite of you for games (like Advanced Tactics) which don't have NATO counters i like going out to mod them to implement NATO designs. It's the simplicity that lets you look over the map in a glance and see what's going on.
How much more immersive can you get then looking at a tactical board with the same counters real generals would be looking at. They won't be looking at a map with pretty sprites to depict unit locations.

To each their own. Your post would have had a little more weight if you had decided not to use the word "crappy".

OMG a bwheatley sighting.

[&o] ^ 100

+1

I do agree that in the end Paradox gets it figured out. HOI series are great. But they too have nato icons you can use. yay

ORIGINAL: Chris10

ORIGINAL: PeeDeeAitch

Still, Neuromance, admit it....a little animated Panzer V over-running a 45mm AT gun would be cool.

this [:D] well...sort of

ORIGINAL: neuromancer
And yes this game does have a much steeper learning curve than HoI3. I have the game, its not a hard game to learn or play. Especially the vanilla version (helps that the AI blows).

HoI III brings a lot of automation which is good for the more casual player..
HoI II is considerably harder...but anyway...steep learning curves can be an indication of design flaws too.

ORIGINAL: neuromancer
I'll take the solid game play and superior support of someone like Matrix over Paradox's crap coding and poor support any day.

thas simply untrue...on the long run Paradox always get their games running very nice and the massive Paradox Community is proove of that.
Besides...HoI II and III are various times as complicated as WITP or WITE as they feature hundreds of countrys who have to work actually ingame with their own AI managing production,diplomacy,trade,espionage and warfare independently which country the player chooses and they run real time. If you would know something about programming you would be aware of that fact and not judging about crappy coding while having no clue what you are talking about.

ORIGINAL: neuromancer
Sure, little tanks and guys fighting does look cool, but that's an RTS, not a large scale strategy game like this.

arrrghhh...you getting worse with each post...HoI II or III is grand strategy on a worldwide scale...so do EU II or III and they do use sprites and povide great immersion...so ?




Anyway...I made my point...there is no need for me adding further things neither getting carried away in pointless disussions. [:)].

ORIGINAL: bwheatley

I do agree that in the end Paradox gets it figured out. HOI series are great. But they too have nato icons you can use. yay

thats the point...nato symbols you CAN use...yay [:'(]

ORIGINAL: bwheatley
To each their own. Your post would have had a little more weight if you had decided not to use the word "crappy".

you are right...Iam going to correct that...thnx for being reasonable on the subject

Iam totally aware that the hardcore players use them but where is the bad about having one more zoom lvl where players can use sprites (current hex size is to small)...its just an option adding diversity and maybe attract more casual players who dont want the dry stuff and need to see some actual infantry or tanks moving across the board...I mean on a board game they usually use little figures if they can get them and not chips,do they ?...If not for the zoom lvl the thing could be modded but it needs bigger hexes for displaying 2d sprites in an acceptable quality and size)

btw the nato symbols dont carry any more info themself as a sprite as they only indicate infantry,tank,air...etc..the real info is provided by the pop up boxes. Again..I dont ask for 3d modelled sprites with moving animation...just for basic sprites indicating air,tank,infantry div etc on first sight without having to bother about miltary symbols...something really basic

HOI could have been a great game, but they decided to make it a RTS ( = FAIL IMO). Guess I'm just old school.

Although, for those that might remember an old SSI(Billngs, Grigsby, Keating, Krogel, Koger) classic: Objective Kursk that had a very ingenious movement/combat phase. Basically each side plotted out a unit's movement and/or bombardments. Then then each sides moves would be executed simultaneously. Units that tried to occupy the same hex during the same segment (1..4) would have combat. Both players would watch the outcome.

Really enjoyed that game and it had a nice feel for the chaos of the battlefield and trying to actually out maneuver your opponent. This concept could be sophisticated a bit more and make a great alternative to the IGUO war game format.

Joel, if you read this maybe you can respond to why that type of movement/combat execution never caught on?




nice tie Joel [:'(] check out that Apple ][(+, e, ?) in the back. how in the world did we ever get by with 64k (maybe this one had 128k)

That kind of play is called WEGO and it still can be found in many games, for example Panzer Command.

Henri

Yes, forgot. Just have not seen it in any recent computer war games I've played. It's a little difficult to implement in a board game.

ORIGINAL: Chris10

Just a shame...a first post really should be something positive [&:]

Most everyone here considers PG to be a light-weight beer and pretzels game for people who don't wargame much. So extolling its virtues over and over and over really doesn't score you any points. Personally I played the crap out of it and its sequels, they were nice games, but they weren't real wargames. They were toy soldiers games, with nearly-fictitious scenarios, maps, OOBs, and mechanics and results far far far removed from reality.

I believe this and almost everyone here in the forum believes this, so you're beating your head against the wall. To some people PG is still cool and they're busy creating user content or mods for it, but they don't live here. We're more hardcore than that. I'm not saying this as some kind of elitist jerk, but this forum prefers insane amounts of detail, cluttered maps, and tons of hard to read information screens to a simplified presentation like you describe. We don't want our developers to give a rat's ass about sprites when they have muzzle velocities to fix.

Another point is that by the time PG was released there were dozens and dozens of hex-based wargames, so there's nothing original there. I had SSI and AH games that used sprites, nato symbols, outlines, blocks and bars, numbers, and plain text that was used to convey unit information, so again it's not like PG pioneered anything. They dumbed it down for the masses, sprinkled it with color and funny explosions and enjoyed some popularity because of it.

We understand. We get it. You like cute sprites and that's a deal breaker for you. We prefer mechanics over presentation. That's why WITE is expensive. Because it caters to what we want, and we're not the most numerous group of consumers around, but we are willing to spend the money Matrix asks for and we hope that keeps the process going.

Well said carnifex! [:)]
+1

Although I would add that WitE really doesn't compromise too much on the presentation (quite beautiful out of the box) for what it offers on it's grand scale. Some of the map/UI mods /I've seen are quiet exceptional too.

Well, technically that is more or less exactly what BFTB/COTA etal are:

Square cell based* one minute per "turn", plotted multi-turn movement and fire orders.
Enhanced with AI control/use of subordinate units on both sides (in accordance with orders given to higher HQ).

*100m per cell, unit footprint superimposed in metres (vector) onto the square grid.

Runs in continuous time, but pause-able so that orders can be given, reports browsed, toilet calls answered etc.

It does have both NATO and sprite icons though, but only 'ittle-bitty ones.

I have to say that I HATED Panzer General, and that I LOVE NATO Symbols in all my WW2 games except the very low level tactical ones. Having tanks etc on the counters just makes me feel like I'm back in 3rd grade or something.

Just my humble opinion!

I played HOI with sprites, and couldn't stand the counters. But I can't imagine playing WITE with sprites. Weird.

ORIGINAL: Garth Vader

I played HOI with sprites, and couldn't stand the counters. But I can't imagine playing WITE with sprites. Weird.

at least you had a choice, did you ? [;)]

For me it works like this:

Turn based operational games = Symbols
RTS or low scale tactical games, like single squads and tanks = Icons

ORIGINAL: Chris10

ORIGINAL: Garth Vader

I played HOI with sprites, and couldn't stand the counters. But I can't imagine playing WITE with sprites. Weird.

at least you had a choice, did you ? [;)]

Chris,

you have a choice too. You can mod the game and make it yourself. 99% of the players here would rather prefer a gamer to provide the sprites to "the masses" than the developers. Their talents are best used for other, more valuable tasks.

Xian

ORIGINAL: Xian
Chris,

you have a choice too. You can mod the game and make it yourself. 99% of the players here would rather prefer a gamer to provide the sprites to "the masses" than the developers. Their talents are best used for other, more valuable tasks.

Xian

Unfortunately it is easier said than done...on the current max zoom the hex fields are to small to display sprites/icons in a way so that they actually make some sense and look nice...another zoom level would be needed but this requieres a little change in the engine, the map and the user interface...I doubt that this can be modded to look professional not to mention the sprites/icons.
As well it would be necessary to make the different country units use of different sprites which would requiere another change in the engine (assign an additional unique path for each unit type depending on country/type which tga image to use. I suppose they are tga) plus a swap over function that from 2nd zoom level the nato symbols come back by default cause sprites/icons get to small (so that the sprites are actually only displayed when zoomed in full)and an on/off button in the game-options so that people can make use of the icons/sprites or not...so all in all there would be some work to do but without official dev support this is not possible...
but I bet it would look really nice when done and implemented properly

With all this talk of NATO counters...

...APP 6A didn't start from scratch. I'm pretty sure that the X for infantry comes from the two crossed bandoliers, which may be from before WW1.

Anyone actually has some pictures of the symbols used by the Germans and Soviets during WW2?

Hello

I am not sure if it is right..maybe this :

He wrotes that these are from the official German handbook of military symbols (H.Dv. 272) of 1938 :

http://niehorster.orbat.com/011_germany ... ls_39.html

Omat

ORIGINAL: fbs

With all this talk of NATO counters...

...APP 6A didn't start from scratch. I'm pretty sure that the X for infantry comes from the two crossed bandoliers, which may be from before WW1.

Anyone actually has some pictures of the symbols used by the Germans and Soviets during WW2?