How Many scenarios are included???

[MikeToth]

Just pondering before I spend my Valentine Day gift money... this or Cross of Iron


tks!!

[LarryP]

Do you have a preference for the type of game you like? These two games are quite different. For instance Battlefront is turn based while CoI is real time. CoI has a ton of missions versus the four in Battlefront. If I had to choose I would pick Close Combat, but that's me. I also really like Battlefront. Heck, that's why I just bought both because they serve two different moods! [8D]

[BlackSunshine]

Battlefront all the way.

Close combat is uuugggly...  How old is it?  10 years?

In a month or 2 many user made scenarios will be out and it will be even better. TOAW better I hope!

Plus as the other guy said, they are different types of games. Ive always preferred operational style games.

[cdbeck]

Not to thread hijack, but I was going to ask a similar question.

My dilemma is between Battlefront or The Operational Art of War. I know that TOAoW has been heralded as "best ever" but I'm really drawn to Battlefront's beautiful maps, the brigade level (but is this a noticable difference than Korsun Posket). Also, I am afraid that TOAoW will be uuugly too.

Any thoughts, Battlefront vs. TOAoW?

As to the original post, I concur that Battlefront is the way to go. If you want real time squad level stuff, there are many current games that have "updated" the CC system (like Combat Mission).

Son of Montfort

[JSS]

ORIGINAL: Son_of_Montfort

Not to thread hijack, but I was going to ask a similar question.

My dilemma is between Battlefront or The Operational Art of War. I know that TOAoW has been heralded as "best ever" but I'm really drawn to Battlefront's beautiful maps, the brigade level (but is this a noticable difference than Korsun Posket). Also, I am afraid that TOAoW will be uuugly too.

Any thoughts, Battlefront vs. TOAoW?

As to the original post, I concur that Battlefront is the way to go. If you want real time squad level stuff, there are many current games that have "updated" the CC system (like Combat Mission).

Son of Montfort

I recommend BF over TOAW3 if you have to choose one right now. TOAW3 is one of my favorites and highly recommended (I simply prefer BF & DB over TOAW as game systems... of course I prefer to play WWII games.)

[cdbeck]

Of course I forgot Matrix's own Panzer Command as a replacement for Close Combat in the above post... [X(]

JSS, how do the two combat systems compare. I have played Korsun's Pocket, so I understand the early iterations of the DB series. What kind of play difference is there with TOAW? From the AAR's I have read it looks like BF gives some intricate control over units, such as allowing detachments, specialized engineering, ect.. Of course a big selling point for TOAW is the large library of scenarios, which totally eclispes the 4 that BF has atm (but I hear the scenario editor is very good and new scenarios will follow soon).

I guess my main question is, how do these systems differ (mainly on the TOAW side, as I have no experience with it)?

Son of Montfort

[BlackSunshine]

ORIGINAL: Son_of_Montfort

Not to thread hijack, but I was going to ask a similar question.

My dilemma is between Battlefront or The Operational Art of War. I know that TOAoW has been heralded as "best ever" but I'm really drawn to Battlefront's beautiful maps, the brigade level (but is this a noticable difference than Korsun Posket). Also, I am afraid that TOAoW will be uuugly too.

Any thoughts, Battlefront vs. TOAoW?

As to the original post, I concur that Battlefront is the way to go. If you want real time squad level stuff, there are many current games that have "updated" the CC system (like Combat Mission).

Son of Montfort

Well, a game with counters really can only be so pretty (graphically). Close Combat is a different kind of game (3D sprites). In this day and age it should look good.

An operational game with counters you can only do so much, which Battlefront and the DB games have done.

I hate to say it, but TOAW is the game that started operational play for a lot of people. Plus, since it has been out so long, it has tons of scenarios. Some are amazing (DNO).

It is a must have game, and it still looks great to this day.

Once you get your feet wet though, the decisive battles games and now battlefront have all improved upon the gameplay!

[JSS]

ORIGINAL: Son_of_Montfort

...JSS, how do the two combat systems compare. I have played Korsun's Pocket, so I understand the early iterations of the DB series. What kind of play difference is there with TOAW? From the AAR's I have read it looks like BF gives some intricate control over units, such as allowing detachments, specialized engineering, ect.. Of course a big selling point for TOAW is the large library of scenarios, which totally eclispes the 4 that BF has atm (but I hear the scenario editor is very good and new scenarios will follow soon).

One of the reasons I prefer BF over TOAW is the relative stability of the combat forces. Its one of the few aspects of KP that can be compared directly with BF in terms of game play. You have an excellent idea of how capable your combat forces are in BF. In TOAW you only have a general idea. BF tells you the accurate combat power of your forces. So when you initiate an attack in BF you see the 6 possible results and the possibility for retreat of the defenders. Uncertainty comes from the dice rolls (there can be 3 different rolls in a combat... attack, retreat, defensive fire). So turn in, turn out you know if a division is good or bad, weak or strong... in TOAW you can never be sure... In TOAW combat just happens and there's often no rational outcome that I can discern... form what looks like a reasonable attack and go for it (TOAW's combat advisor has to be used with some Kentucky Windage...).

The other aspect of the BF system I prefer over TOAW is the ability to rapidly tell if I'm properly preparing combat forces for an offensive (supply, strength, ammo, etc...). In BF you can immediately see if a unit is supplied and ready (...and if its not you can organize a prep phase with some degree of control over the process).

[cdbeck]

JSS,
You are really selling me on Battlefront, and I think its scope is a bit more managable for me, being a relative newbie to the genre (only really played Korsun Pocket). TOAW scared me when I saw the FitE scenario had like 1066 units for the Soviet side [X(] Not something to jump right in to!

How is the scenario editor for Battlefront? I'm new at this, so I won't be producing excellent scenarios out of the gate, but I might play around a bit. Is it hard coded for only WWII era weapons and units, or could one tweak the numbers and names to provide for other, more modern or more distant types of brigades (I'm a medievalist, so modern weaponry for me is the Arquebus). Not that I don't love WWII (my second favorite era), but I am curious to the flexibility of the units and such in the editor.

Son of Montfort

[JudgeDredd]

Seems a bit on the low side...4 scenarios! Is that correct? I was sure when this was going to be released, it was going to have a large chucnk of major battles fought in WWII...is that not the case?

One of the things about the series was the lack of scenarios (there were other things, but this reason is on topic [;)]). For example, Korsun Pocket...1 scenario and full priced game kind of got me a bit. I know there are alot of people who thought KP was good value for money...for one scenario, I didn't.

So if this has only 4 scenarios, then I may well give it a miss.

[BlackSunshine]

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

Seems a bit on the low side...4 scenarios! Is that correct? I was sure when this was going to be released, it was going to have a large chucnk of major battles fought in WWII...is that not the case?

One of the things about the series was the lack of scenarios (there were other things, but this reason is on topic [;)]). For example, Korsun Pocket...1 scenario and full priced game kind of got me a bit. I know there are alot of people who thought KP was good value for money...for one scenario, I didn't.

So if this has only 4 scenarios, then I may well give it a miss.

The 4 scenarios will take up a chunk of your time. I would think by the time you are complete with them playing both sides, some user made scenarios will be out.

Or just wait until more have been made. In any event it's a must for any wargamers library.

[stevel40831]

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

Seems a bit on the low side...4 scenarios! Is that correct? I was sure when this was going to be released, it was going to have a large chucnk of major battles fought in WWII...is that not the case?

One of the things about the series was the lack of scenarios (there were other things, but this reason is on topic [;)]). For example, Korsun Pocket...1 scenario and full priced game kind of got me a bit. I know there are alot of people who thought KP was good value for money...for one scenario, I didn't.

So if this has only 4 scenarios, then I may well give it a miss.

KP came with the full campaign scenario as well as several other smaller ones (not sure how many... 10 maybe?). Plus, you also got the new and improved version of Ardennes Offensive. If you only saw one scenario I'd say you didn't give the game much of a chance since you obviously didn't even read the advertising for it. Your comments on KP are incorrect... looks like you completely missed the boat on a great game.

Yes, Battlefront comes with 4 scenarios. Since your post has a negative slant about the DB series for some reason, maybe your money would be better spent on something else, it's obvious you would not be happy.

Steve

[JudgeDredd]

ORIGINAL: stevel40831
...Your comments on KP are incorrect...

...maybe your money would be better spent on something else, it's obvious you would not be happy

What you said

[JudgeDredd]

Scenario was the wrong word...map is more like it. IIRC there was one map and several scenarios.

And I did foget about the Ardennes Offensive...still not value for money in my book. But, as I said, there are many people, you are clearly one, who thought otherwise.

Enjoy.

[TheHellPatrol]

Across The Dnepr made Korsun a valuable commodity...Wow! My only hope with BF, it's got just enough meat so you won't go hungry, is that the Dev/User made scenarios have an "Ai" included. I don't prefer, or have time for, PBEM games.

[cdbeck]

ORIGINAL: TheHellPatrol
My only hope with BF is that the Dev/User made scenarios have an "Ai" included. I don't prefer, or have time for, PBEM games.

I concur, still deciding if I want to pick up BF or TOAW, but I do appreciate a good AI. PBEM would be an excercise in futility for me, at this point. Until I get good enough to beat the "gaming gods." [&o]

Son of Montfort

[TPM]

Just want to throw in my two cents--I love TOAW for the detail, the variable scale, the insane amount of scenarios and modibility. However, the combat/movement/impulse system has always been confusing to me...I have a hard time explaining it, TOAW experts could help out here, but I know you can't expect to attack and move however you want using every unit's movement allowance (as in a lot of games)...combat rounds get "used up" and you may find yourself unable to do a certain attack you wanted to. I think this is actually really cool, simulating some kind of operational/supply/logistics thing, but it frustrated me 'cause I could never figure it out. Anyway, that's my one thing that has always kept me from really enjoying TOAW.

Have not played BF, but I have KP and I think it's a great game...great engine, great scale, cool command/unit structure system. I found the map to be somewhat distracting, you can't really get a good operational view of your situation because the units blend into the map too much (IMHO), but other than that I like it...I would be playing the Decisive Battles series alot more if there were more and better (meaning=ones I like!) scenarios for it. Operation Typhoon, Kasserine Pass, North Africa, other great battles on the East Front (Manstein's victory in 1943, Kiev, etc.), the Balkans--where are these scenarios?

Well, that's a bit more than 2 cents. Thanks.

[JSS]

ORIGINAL: TPM

...I would be playing the Decisive Battles series alot more if there were more and better (meaning=ones I like!) scenarios for it. Operation Typhoon, Kasserine Pass, North Africa, other great battles on the East Front (Manstein's victory in 1943, Kiev, etc.), the Balkans--where are these scenarios?

Did you know there are a pair of really good Opn Typhoon scenarios available for BII?

[TPM]

Oh...well, OK, besides Operation Typhoon...and besides any other ones I mentioned that someone has already made a scenario for! Should have researched before I spoke...maybe I'll pick up Battles in Italy...thanks for the info.

[Valgua]

ORIGINAL: Son_of_Montfort

Not to thread hijack, but I was going to ask a similar question.

My dilemma is between Battlefront or The Operational Art of War. I know that TOAoW has been heralded as "best ever" but I'm really drawn to Battlefront's beautiful maps, the brigade level (but is this a noticable difference than Korsun Posket). Also, I am afraid that TOAoW will be uuugly too.

No, no. I love BF but TOAW is clearly my favourite. The game is very polished and frankly I prefer the graphics: the units are much easier to read. I own both, but if I had to pick one I'd choose TOAW.

Filippo