Which wargame has done it best?

[Zorch]

ORIGINAL: USSAmerica

ORIGINAL: larrybush


Edit: Some reason I did reply to Chickenboy, meant to reply to Zorch!

An easy mistake to confuse the two of them. [:'(][:D]

CB, I think one of us has been insulted.

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: Zorch

ORIGINAL: USSAmerica

ORIGINAL: larrybush


Edit: Some reason I did reply to Chickenboy, meant to reply to Zorch!

An easy mistake to confuse the two of them. [:'(][:D]

CB, I think one of us has been insulted.

Not at all. You both are so brilliant that it is easy for us mere mortals to confuse which one of the immortals uttered the divine words.

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: Orm
Not at all. You both are so brilliant that it is easy for us mere mortals to confuse which one of the immortals uttered the divine words.

I think Zilch is right. After all, if I'm immortal, why is my hair turning gray and thinning? [&:]

[Zorch]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: Orm
Not at all. You both are so brilliant that it is easy for us mere mortals to confuse which one of the immortals uttered the divine words.

I think Zilch is right. After all, if I'm immortal, why is my hair turning gray and thinning? [&:]

Gray? I skipped gray and went directly to white.

[Falken]

For me, its 2 games:

1) War in the Pacific AE, or the original. I've been playing this game every day since the early days. Best Naval Wargame i've ever played, and nothing beats it for the price. Tremendous MODs, Graphic add-ons, and has taught me a lot about the Pacific War.

2) World in Flames. I bought the game in 2014, and honestly, i've only started playing it since last year as I was waiting for the game to stabilize. Because of the great AARs from Warspite1 and rkr1958, i've been able to figure out how to play, albeit slowly. To me, it's a monster (which I love) because it really depicts well the "entire" war from 1939 to 1945 (or slightly beyond depending on options). I've bought the board game as well, and just finished the hardcover books that WiF came with

Again, i'm learning so much about the LCUs, the ships, the geography, etc. I've tried so many games about the European/Asian side of the conflict, and it has never interested me, until this game.

To me, it's about learning and enjoyment. Both games give me both in spades.

[sPzAbt653]

Thanks for the comments and again I will state that I am not picking on anyone's choice of what they like the best, but we are discussing what is the best. World in Flames is one of the many poster children for what I am talking about. See post #7 for a frame of reference, and post #41 for a fans apologia that reinforces post #7. That negative part said, I will also restate that I want to like WiF, it is large and ambitious, it has been around for a long time and they are still working on it, but in the end it is a Grand Strategy game, isn't it ?

[sPzAbt653]

War in the Pacific - May be the winner for Best Game Ever, but my personal experience is limited to watching a few partial videos. One person says land combat is not good overall, another person says it is, so its not clear. Is the fact that it only does the Pacific Theater a negative in this contest? Personally I have no interest in the PTO so I would never buy this game, but does that disqualify it from being the Best ? Also, I have read in a few places that WitP-AE is very complicated ['down to individual pilot stats for various activities', yikes!] and takes a long time to play. I would think this would exclude many players and therefore might keep it from being the Best.
'Land combat in AE could be more sophisticated; but it's not the most important aspect of AE'. Ok that cinches it, this game can't be the Best if Land Combat is not important!

[Twotribes]

You attack choices and then while attacking them claim, but golly I am not REALLY attacking your choice.

[Zovs]

There is only two games that are the best, they can be played multiple times over and over and cover everything one would need.

TOAW for operational level warfare spanning a century or more.

Steel Panthers WW2 and MBT for tactical level warfare spanning 1908 to present day (I just created a pack of scenarios covering 1908-1929).

Of course ones mileage may vary, and the original poster should have stated the criteria.

Perhaps re-phrasing the question(s) like so:

Which is the best strategic level war game?
Which is the best operational level war game?
Which is the best tactical level war game?

1. Computer War In Europe 2
2. TOAW
3. Steel Panthers WW2/MBT

And there you have it case closed. [:D]

[Twotribes]

The best war game is the one that provides multiple Eras, multiple types and genre and has replay ability. That would be Advanced Tactics Gold. Any Era, any Genre is possible. It can be strategic or operational.

[MrsWargamer]

Actually, the thread has been conducted fairly well guys.

I expected spirited defense of Gary's works and pretty much expected a dedicated support of WiF. I'd have been shocked if there hadn't been.

I am a fairly big supporter of TOAW as stated earlier, it just offers so many games under one title. But it can't master grand strategy, or tactical, so I won't say it is perfect.

I came into computer wargaming with Steel Panthers. I think Steel Panthers is pretty much the digital equal of ASL. Some simply won't have time or interest for anything else In the beginning, I was pretty much a daily hardcore all the time player of SPWaW. I like the SPCamo versions a good bit, they cover more than WW2 nicely. my main preference a lot of times is Steel Panthers III Brigade Combat. It's like playing digital Panzer Leader. Panzer Leader being one of my most loved board game wargames at the below operational level.

I think Steel Tigers has a chance of appearing, and totally flopping due to expectations we are placing on it thanks to what we have in Steel Panthers. I mean, what an act to follow eh. Steel Panthers offers us anywhere and any when from WW2. Nothing can't be simulated. That's not too common in wargaming. I find the Mega Campaigns to be the pinnicle of tactical gaming.

I love Battle Academy, but even though it's a great competitive design and very replayable, it's not the hardcore simulation that others try to be. It's closer to chess. But I doubt I'd like it if the board was 3x the size and the units 4 times the quantity.

My vote, is still with TOAW IV (took me a while to go from III to the latest, the wallet just didn't like the idea ).

[wodin]

I know of a tactical game in development that looks like it will be THE squad based WW2 tactical game out there. Apparently it's going to be ASL that looks great and fully featured. I've seen some vids and I have to say haven't been this excited about a game in development for a long time.

Been told it will be announced to public in a couple of months.

Honestly, ST will have some competition, though for me it will have its pros like individual casualties, where as the other game is like ASL so half squad etc. The visual look of the other game I've fallen for in a big way. Even has a small window of close up of currently selected unit so you can see say a tanks progress whilst looking elsewhere. Plus little details like infantry moving out of way of a vehicle that's moving down a road, little things like that. Also maps look easy to build plus easy way to see LOS and LOF. I believe it will have all the depth of ASL straight off the bat. I was told look at it as ASL with a 3D graphic interface (that looks great, looks like a ASL map that's been put in a 3D viewer software, an AI and sound effects, if you want you can just see counters r both counters and units on the map. Animations are very good indeed. What I've seen you wouldn't believe this isn't from a big development studio. The main man was tired of seeing tactical games touted as ASL for the PC and on release being some way off possibly in a bit way others b t being there due to one of two missing features etc, and so has decided to finally do it himself).

So with the release of two tactical games that appear to be big hitters I'm very happy. I imagine the "other" game will hit shelves first, as we haven't even had a peek at ST or even a proper game description.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

Thanks for the comments and again I will state that I am not picking on anyone's choice of what they like the best, but we are discussing what is the best. World in Flames is one of the many poster children for what I am talking about. See post #7 for a frame of reference, and post #41 for a fans apologia that reinforces post #7. That negative part said, I will also restate that I want to like WiF, it is large and ambitious, it has been around for a long time and they are still working on it, but in the end it is a Grand Strategy game, isn't it ?

warspite1

What do you mean? I've read and re-read your 'frame of reference' and my totally innocuous comment on World In Flames, and the OP's initial post and I don't have a scoobie what you are talking about.

The title of the thread is "which wargame has done it best?" The OP went on to say that some of the 'greats' out there are at the 'strategy end of the spectrum' - but where was the inclusion of a strategy game precluded? World In Flames is a wargame. I personally happen to think that it is the wargame that has 'done it best', I gave reasons for my opinion, and then added further comment in support following a challenge.

So what is with the 'fans apologia' comment? and what exactly does that reinforce in post 7?

[Kuokkanen]

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

ORIGINAL: Kuokkanen

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

I don't see what the trouble would be. You would have to make your own equipment, but many designers do the same for later periods. I saw a Phoenician War scenario, but the guy never released it to the public. Maybe that was you [:)]

Nah. Scenarios I had in mind were about medieval units clashing with modern/vanilla TOAW3 units. Stargate type thing. TOAW3 has some cavalry units with melee weapons by default, so I copied combat values for foot soldiers to make spearmen. In the end foot unit size of a brigade (4000 or so) kicked tank platoon out of the way.

Ok, lol, but that is just silly, I mean, that is not a game, that is just goofing off! But even at that, those results are bogus, being based on Foot Soldiers from the 20th Century to make Spearmen is wrong, you need to Edit a new category of Spearmen. I give you an example of that Zulu Battle where thousands of spearmen were held off by 150 riflemen. This is modeled in TOAW perfectly, but you can't use the stock weapons. They weren't designed for that. And making your own category of Spearmen, or anything else, is very easy with the in-game TOAW Editor.

You can blame Japanese for giving me the idea [:D]
^ Anime in question is praised by military guys because it gets relevant terminology right. Or so they tell me.

[MrsWargamer]

"I know of a tactical game in development that looks like it will be THE squad based WW2 tactical game out there. Apparently it's going to be ASL that looks great and fully featured. I've seen some vids and I have to say haven't been this excited about a game in development for a long time."

Hmmm VERY intriguing indeed.

[wodin]

Wish I could say and show you more but not allowed yet.

Honestly is exciting and I reckon perfect for you.

It's not a future Matrix release though. Publisher unknown at moment. I'd love it to be AWNT first game to be published as it looks a cracker to start a publishing company off with!

You never know stranger things have happened, I imagine. Oh just to clarify this isn't some sort of hint AWNT is publishing it, though I suppose it could be seen as a hint we'd love to publish it!

ORIGINAL: MrsWargamer

"I know of a tactical game in development that looks like it will be THE squad based WW2 tactical game out there. Apparently it's going to be ASL that looks great and fully featured. I've seen some vids and I have to say haven't been this excited about a game in development for a long time."

Hmmm VERY intriguing indeed.

[asl3d]

ORIGINAL: wodin

Wish I could say and show you more but not allowed yet.

Honestly is exciting and I reckon perfect for you.

It's not a future Matrix release though. Publisher unknown at moment. I'd love it to be AWNT first game to be published as it looks a cracker to start a publishing company off with!

You never know stranger things have happened, I imagine. Oh just to clarify this isn't some sort of hint AWNT is publishing it, though I suppose it could be seen as a hint we'd love to publish it!

ORIGINAL: MrsWargamer

"I know of a tactical game in development that looks like it will be THE squad based WW2 tactical game out there. Apparently it's going to be ASL that looks great and fully featured. I've seen some vids and I have to say haven't been this excited about a game in development for a long time."

Hmmm VERY intriguing indeed.

It's great news Wodin.

I see that here there are many friends who are fans of strategic games, with large units, immense operative terrain (even at the level of states or continents complete), and the time scale is of the order of days, weeks, or months.

I started with this type of games with Tactic II (Avalon Hill), many years ago. But when Squad Leader and then Advanced Squad Leader appeared, I understood wargames at this level of scale are much more exciting.

Naturally, with the assistance of computers, and the appearance of Tigers on the Hunt and, above all, Heroes of Stalingrad, the dynamism of wargame has been increased.

A scenario is played in a few hours !!!!!!!!

[sPzAbt653]

Actually, the thread has been conducted fairly well guys.

I like the question, I am also looking for the answer. But you did say - not too tactical, not too strategic, not too limited, and not too time consuming? Or did I misunderstand the question? My first answer was in post #7, 'thirty years on and there is no game that can do it right'. Everybody here is giving good suggestions that send me scrambling to their forums and YouTubes. Some seem agonizingly close, and people may like their choice but still admit the shortcomings. Which means it's not the best, unless the search is for the best that floats to the top of the swill we are drowning in.

[ncc1701e]

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

I like the question, I am also looking for the answer. But you did say - not too tactical, not too strategic, not too limited, and not too time consuming?

May be Heart of Iron 3 or 4?

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: MrsWargamer

Actually, the thread has been conducted fairly well guys.

warspite1

But sadly not by everyone....[:(]