which one shall i buy?

[hempy]

I have no any idea and experience with BF or DB series, which shall I buy? give me your advice and thank you of all...[:)]

[Howard7x]

Well i guess it depends what scenarios your looking to play. Also the game systems are slightly but not radically different.
 
BF you have currently a limited number of scenarios. Gazala, Market Garden, Saipan, Novri and Crusader but more are in the works.
The BF engine is wonderfull and the best yet from SSG IMO. You can use artillery and air strikes seperately to cause step losses. Use direct fire with your armour. You have a HQ and a supply unit, the HQ unit gives attack supply to your units, the supply unit gives off defensive supply. This adds a whole new feel to the way you commence an offensive as you have to conserve your ammo for the main thrust of an advance. Wasting your artillery too early before an offensive can slow your advance considerably.
 
DB has a huge list of scenarios, Battles In Italy being the best. You have the 3 Italy campaigns plus Operation Typhoon, Sealion, TAO, On To Moscow, Fall Wiess, WiE, Velikiye Luki, Burma, Merkur plus lots of hypothetical what if scenarios. Fall Gelb is also in the works. It also ships with a good tutorial.
The game engine is still brilliant. Artillery is used as combat shifts towards combat. There is one supply unit which gives both attack/defensive supply. The scale of the game is one step up from BF so your counters are entire divisions rather than battalions.
 
Both DB and BF are worthy of a purchase. Its a hard choice if your going to get just one. Do you balance a better engine with a lack of scenarios (at the minute) or do you go for an older engine with lots of scenarios?
 
Good Luck deciding [;)]
 

[hempy]

thanks a lot! can you tell me more about BIN? I havn't played any before, therefore, I will play again the AI first...

[Howard7x]

Yeah sure,

BIN has 1 main scenario shipped with the game. Overlord. Its great. Definately my favourite scenario by SSG.
There are 7 small to medium sized scenarios on the same map that make up the decisive battles of overlord.

The game plays alot like BII but without the extra few enhancments made to the engine, like surrendered units and allied co-operation. Again it has a good tutorial.
There are 9 custom scenarios available on the SSG website. Kursk and several virants of the overlord scenario. It doesnt have as many scenarios as BII and currently no one is making scenarios for it anymore.
BII is the engine that modders are using.

The main reason to get BIN is the Overlord campaigns and the Kursk battle. Other than that BII is better value for money.

But if you had all 3 you would have lots of scenario options [:D]

The AI is very challanging on both BIN and BII, especially to start with. BF has a weaker AI but more potential to get better.

[hempy]

now I know more about between DB series and BF, thanks Howard...

but I have to say, it's difficult to make a decision[8|]

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: Howard7x

Yeah sure,

BIN has 1 main scenario shipped with the game. Overlord. Its great. Definately my favourite scenario by SSG.
There are 7 small to medium sized scenarios on the same map that make up the decisive battles of overlord.

The game plays alot like BII but without the extra few enhancments made to the engine, like surrendered units and allied co-operation. Again it has a good tutorial.
There are 9 custom scenarios available on the SSG website. Kursk and several virants of the overlord scenario. It doesnt have as many scenarios as BII and currently no one is making scenarios for it anymore.
BII is the engine that modders are using.

The main reason to get BIN is the Overlord campaigns and the Kursk battle. Other than that BII is better value for money.

But if you had all 3 you would have lots of scenario options [:D]

The AI is very challanging on both BIN and BII, especially to start with. BF has a weaker AI but more potential to get better.

BIN also has an alternate version of the strategic scenario...the Rommel Plan...which IMO is the most fun of all to play as German!

Also, the Across the Dnepr expansion scenario for Kosun Pocket is a great recreation of the venerable old Panzergruppe Guderian gboardgame. Follow that with the Operation Typhoon or On to Moscow custom scenario for BII and you have a couple of great scenarios depicting the main drives of Army Group Center after the initial breakthrough drive.

[JReb]

I have been hearing about these new scenarios that are being done but have not seen one yet. Does this indicate that the editor is as bad as TOAW? Its always been one reason I have held off on purchasing. I am looking for something along these lines but after hearing all the bad comments about the interface, hard to see unit icons and the lack of new scenarios it really scares me off. I desparately want a WW2 tactical game and have played TOAW and CS to death and would like something newer and up to date.

[flintlock]

I honestly don't think you can go wrong with any of SSG's titles, whether it's a game from the venerable DB series, or their latest offering, Battlefront. The latter is at the battalion level and offers many changes and improvements to the earlier titles. Granted, there are currently more scenarios available for the older series, though Battlefront will undoubtedly be infused with additional scenarios over time. I would suggest consider picking up BF and learning the system. This way you'll be ready to play as newer scenarios make their appearance.

As I said earlier though: In the end, no matter which of their quality titles you choose you really can't go wrong.

[flintlock]

ORIGINAL: JReb

I have been hearing about these new scenarios that are being done but have not seen one yet.

Operation Crusader is a wonderful scenario put out by Brubaker and currently available via SSG's scenario page. There are more in the works, but I'm sure you can appreciate it takes some time to put out a quality offering.

Does this indicate that the editor is as bad as TOAW?

I have no experience with TOAW's editor, though the one that ships with BF is a powerful and comprehensive tool. It's the same editor that was used by SSG to develop the scenarios that shipped with the product. There is undoubtedly a learning curve in mastering it, though help is offered to those ask. SSG's Run5 forums are a great resource.

Cheers.

[Toby42]

BF is the better "Game System", but it is limited because of the lack of scenario's. Not a single one with an AI has been released yet. That tells me it is very difficult to put one together. Only three of BF's scenario's can really be played. Saipan is good for learning the game. Market Garden is the best of the lot.
 
DB games have more scenario's and are as much fun to play.
 
Decisions, Decisions!!!!

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: JReb

I have been hearing about these new scenarios that are being done but have not seen one yet. Does this indicate that the editor is as bad as TOAW? Its always been one reason I have held off on purchasing. I am looking for something along these lines but after hearing all the bad comments about the interface, hard to see unit icons and the lack of new scenarios it really scares me off. I desparately want a WW2 tactical game and have played TOAW and CS to death and would like something newer and up to date.

They can be found here:

http://www.ssg.com.au/

[Howard7x]

The scenarios that ship with BF can take quite some time to play as both the axis and allies agaist the AI and then again in PBEM so dont worry about the lack of scenarios. How many are can you play at once exactly [:D]?
BIN had one large scenario upon its release and people didnt moan half as much as they do now.
I guess with the recent boom in strategical games people can afford to be picky.

How people can compare TOAW to BF. The amount of time and effort that goes into making the maps and counters is way more than TOAW as the graphics are so much richer and more detailed. Honestly, if it were that simple to make scenarios for DB or BF, there would be more than 4 shipped with the game.

Im not putting TOAW down by no means but you gotta admit the maps and counters are simple in comparison.

If you dont own BII then thats your safest bet if worried about the lack of scenarios in BF.

Ive been playing BII/BIN for a few years now and i STILL have not played through all of the scenarios. Some against the AI, some by PBEM and i play pretty much every day of the week. Theres pleanty to keep you going [;)].

Edit: Heres why it takes so long to make a scenario.

http://web.aanet.com.au/ooyeah/images/FullScreen1.jpg

The maps and the unit counters rule!!! And thats before adding any data to it!

[Neilster]

@ Howard7x. Thanks for the excellent map! I'll be using when reading about operations in France and the Low Countries.

Cheers, Neilster

[Howard7x]

No problem but dont thank me, thank Brubaker over at the RUN5 forum, he designs user scenarios for BII and as you can see, hes pretty damn hot at it! [:)]
 
Theres a thread over at the RUN5 forum all about Fall Gelb.
 
Thanks

[hank]

Awesome map !!  Can I assume that's a scenario in development for BF ?

[Howard7x]

No, due to the amount of units involved and the fact that you can only move 1 at a time in the BF system + the scale its aimed (divisional) , this scenario is for BII only.

[hempy]

Howard, you've play all of this. and you know the new game system of BF. do you think BF to be more reality? I've seen the screenshot, there're not so many army like BII and BIN ...

[flintlock]

ORIGINAL: hempy

do you think BF to be more reality?

There was an interview that Armchair General did fairly recently with Gregor Whiley (VP, SSG) about Battlefront. With respect to the question above, here's a small excerpt from that article:

ACG: Looking only at screenshots, Battlefront seems to be an enhancement of the Decisive Battles series (Ardennes, Korsun, Normandy and Italy). But the battalion level scale of Battlefront is much more tactical than DB, so it is really a different game. For those familiar with the DB series, how is Battlefront different?

GW: Many of the Battlefront concepts will be familiar to fans of the DB series. However, there are some important differences. You directly control artillery and airstrikes, picking targets and causing casualties. However, you can’t attack indiscriminately. Battlefront introduces the concept of Attack Supply, which regulates the tempo of combat operations. Only units within command range of their own HQs get the extra materiel necessary for attacks and this will often not be enough to allow attacks every turn. So as well as picking your targets you have to think about properly co-coordinating offensive operations. The new OMA scheme, outlined below, introduces greater flexibility for the player and the scenario designer. The more tactical scale introduces the concepts of Direct Fire and Line of Sight and special combat modes, such as Banzai attacks, give a significant edge to different countries when attacking.

If you haven't already done so and wish to read the whole interview, it's available right here.

[hempy]

oh, thanks flintlock, but actually, I would rather hear the opinions from yours..

[Fred98]

In my view Battlefront, brings wargaming one step closer to reality.  Separating "Attack supply" from "defense supply" in a leap forward in wargaming.
-