Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Oh man...I subscribed for a number of years...loved that magazine. Yes-that PRINT magazine.

ORIGINAL: Blacksheep

I second the motion for CNA. I managed to get through five turns of that monster in my pre-pc days, and I look at it as one of my finest gaming achievements. The logistics lend themselve to a computer model not to mention the A2A combat (which took days in itself to resolve). Probably will never see it but I can dream.

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

ORIGINAL: JWE

ORIGINAL: Empire101

I've got the horrible feeling that your deduction may be correct.

That might be true, but there’s still some interesting possibilities that the monster games offer, outside the conventional. Granted that GC style play very often devolves, due to the inherent flexibilities built into these games, leading to endless variations on the first year, but not a lot beyond that.

However, the monster games, like WiTP-AE, have a wealth of internal (coding) and external (editor) possibilities that obtain in the mid and late war periods. Little of this is noticed because of the tendency to build, flex, and kill during the first campaign year. Many AARs die a natural death in 1943, just when things could get interesting. So, although set up that way, maybe GCs aren’t the touchstone.

To really utilize the power and flexibility of the engine and the database of these monsters, it might make more sense to think of them as tools and build smaller, more specific, scenarios or Fleet problems, that span the time frame of the game engine. Most of my current involvement with this title is in writing, umpiring and playing small op-problem scenarios using the editor/engine smorgasbord. This kind of play is taking off with many groups in the US and Internationally. Would really like to see some small scenario AARs. They are short, playable, and a serious learning experience, both with the game and with an opponent. And if people play them, more will be done.

Matrix people understood this: never talked to the Slitherine people, don’t know as I would want to. But some of the gaming development community has had an opportunity to chat with some of the professional/grognard users, and gets it.

We will just have to wait and see. But I am somewhat hopeful.

And..to Termie Doom & Gloom, Light (tm) shines on DaBigBabes. [:D]

ORIGINAL: Mac Linehan

Re: Campaign for North Africa:

PizzaMan -

For some reason, I bought two copies of this game, but never had the time to play it. Also have SPI's War in the Pacific, War in Europe and the original War in the East. From 1971 until the advent of my first computer in 1989, I would come home on leave once a year or so and buy 100 dollars (or more) worth of SPI brand games. Also Squad Leader, ASL and so on. One of the advantages of being older is that I have all of the published modules for ASL. Back in 1977, I still recall reading the rules for SL during my lunch break - in preparation for game play on the weekend. Gosh - that seems so long ago...

Computer Campaign for North Africa would be awesome...

Mac

ORIGINAL: Blacksheep
I second the motion for CNA. I managed to get through five turns of that monster in my pre-pc days, and I look at it as one of my finest gaming achievements. The logistics lend themselve to a computer model not to mention the A2A combat (which took days in itself to resolve). Probably will never see it but I can dream.

ORIGINAL: fcharton

ORIGINAL: Blacksheep
I second the motion for CNA. I managed to get through five turns of that monster in my pre-pc days, and I look at it as one of my finest gaming achievements. The logistics lend themselve to a computer model not to mention the A2A combat (which took days in itself to resolve). Probably will never see it but I can dream.

Looks like lots of people had the same idea about CNA. I am not sure it would make a very good computer wargame, though.

Like many similar monsters, CNA implies a lot of small decisions by the players throughout the turn sequence. Unless you totally rework the combat and movement system, you won't be able to translate this into a WITP-like computer game: you'd end up with an incredible click-fest. The turn sequence also has a lot of player interaction, which complicates PBEM.

What might work would be a Vassal-like system, that would keep all the game files on one's machine (and therefore reduce the playing space), help with die rolls and resolution, and (perhaps?) could be played PBC (play by chat), in interactive sessions.

I have been toying with this idea for a long time, never really took the time to explore it in details, but I believe that would be the way to play "old wargames" again.

On the other hand, the design has lots of very interesting ideas, which could be used by computer games. For what I've seen, most computer wargames sort of "evolved" from ASL-like systems, where you get large scale result by agregating small scale figures. Many paper wargames followed a different, top down, route to modelling, that probably lends itself better to AI programming, and would most certaintly result in games with a very different feel than the ones we play now.

Francois

ORIGINAL: treespider
I have Vassal but have never used it...do you have any experience with it?

ORIGINAL: treespider

ORIGINAL: fcharton

ORIGINAL: Blacksheep
I second the motion for CNA. I managed to get through five turns of that monster in my pre-pc days, and I look at it as one of my finest gaming achievements. The logistics lend themselves to a computer model not to mention the A2A combat (which took days in itself to resolve). Probably will never see it but I can dream.

Looks like lots of people had the same idea about CNA. I am not sure it would make a very good computer wargame, though.

Like many similar monsters, CNA implies a lot of small decisions by the players throughout the turn sequence. Unless you totally rework the combat and movement system, you won't be able to translate this into a WITP-like computer game: you'd end up with an incredible click-fest. The turn sequence also has a lot of player interaction, which complicates PBEM.

What might work would be a Vassal-like system, that would keep all the game files on one's machine (and therefore reduce the playing space), help with die rolls and resolution, and (perhaps?) could be played PBC (play by chat), in interactive sessions.

I have been toying with this idea for a long time, never really took the time to explore it in details, but I believe that would be the way to play "old wargames" again.

On the other hand, the design has lots of very interesting ideas, which could be used by computer games. For what I've seen, most computer wargames sort of "evolved" from ASL-like systems, where you get large scale result by agregating small scale figures. Many paper wargames followed a different, top down, route to modelling, that probably lends itself better to AI programming, and would most certainly result in games with a very different feel than the ones we play now.

Francois

I have Vassal but have never used it...do you have any experience with it?

Did anyone play this monster game? My high school friend had a few modules, but we never played it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europa_(wargame)