Matrix Games Forums

Kharkov looks promising, but I hope this game will "last" longer than Battlefront.

Greatly enjoyed the Market Garden scenario in Battlefront, but this game was the shortest lived of them all.
Pretty quickly I reverted back to playing custom made scenarios for Battles in Normandy.

I never complain about the price of Matrix excellent war games, and won't this time either.
Still, I got a feeling that Matrix is squeezing the lemon a bit by releasing very similar games as 'new designs' and hope that you will find time for a few more add ons and upgrades for Kharkov than what was made available for Battlefront.

ORIGINAL: PzB

Still, I got a feeling that Matrix is squeezing the lemon a bit by releasing very similar games as 'new designs' and hope that you will find time for a few more add ons and upgrades for Kharkov than what was made available for Battlefront.

[:-]Which we're still waiting for...
Grim news, i had hoped for a change for the better[:(].

I'm afraid I have to agree. I would far rather have seen a 'stand alone expansion' to and partial 'relaunch' of the Battlefront system. I was very happy with that; it was just desperately in need of more scenarios, a higher profile, and a little TLC.

I'm going to take a lot of selling on this one. Admittedly, some of the new features look cool, but I really can't see enough to justify what looks like a big step backwards to a single campaign, albeit with 'variants'... no matter how meticulously researched it is. I don't disagree with Erik on such things casually, but I do here. Not enough content.. exactly why Battlefront never took off.

ORIGINAL: Hertston

I'm afraid I have to agree. I would far rather have seen a 'stand alone expansion' to and partial 'relaunch' of the Battlefront system. I was very happy with that; it was just desperately in need of more scenarios, a higher profile, and a little TLC.

I'm going to take a lot of selling on this one. Admittedly, some of the new features look cool, but I really can't see enough to justify what looks like a big step backwards to a single campaign, albeit with 'variants'... no matter how meticulously researched it is. I don't disagree with Erik on such things casually, but I do here. Not enough content.. exactly why Battlefront never took off.

totally agree [:(]

Is there any chance that some (or even all?) of the major scenarios from the DB games could be adapted to this updated engine? At the very least, might there be a new Ardennes Offensive included?

I know Matrix/SSG want to keep the older titles viable, but with the inauguration of a new engine it seems unlikely that many people will want to step back to the old. I would certainly buy Donets if I thought I might eventually be able to play Normandy, Italy, and the Bulge in it.

I'm still playing the older titles, Battles in Normandy (currently The Ardennes Offensive).
This was perfect, a solid engine and upcoming scenarios to keep the game alive after the main scenario was played out.

There are limits for how many times you want to see the paras defeated in Arnhem, and Battlefront didn't hold to many variations.
Perhaps Kharkov will, lets hope so.

Matrix will most likely follow the most profitable approach, but they will also listen to their customers,
especially if we provide constructive criticism and suggestion, and this is mine:

After Korsun Pocket was released there was an add on - Across the Donets.
This was good and kept the game alive.

So what I'd like to see is at least a couple of add on scenarios to each new major revamp of the game engine.
While programmers are busy updating the game engine, scenario designers can produce a few more scenarios to the last release of the game.

If SSG really wants to go with the HPS-style "improvements with each release" model, I hope they'll also go with the HPS style of patching those improvements into earlier releases.

ORIGINAL: Paul Roberts

I hope they'll also go with the HPS style of patching those improvements into earlier releases.

The game engines of each SSG game are quite different so a patch is not possible. The old engines would not support the newer features.
-

Naturally, each person must make up their own mind as to what constitutes value for them. However, I would like to make a few points on the subject.

The inclusion of Areas of Operations is a big deal. It makes a huge point of difference with all our previous Decisive Battles/Battlefront games and makes a huge difference to how you play the game, especially when used with the mystery variants.

While it looks like just another bullet point on a marketing department's list, it was the type of change that required a lot of work under the hood and this took a considerable amount of time.

If you look at where this started with the original Ardennes game then we have come a long way in game design terms. It would have been easier, and more profitable, if we hadn't made constant design changes and just churned out scenarios, but we have chosen to innovate and improve the game system.

The good news on that front is that we are very happy with the new design and the next game will use this design, which should make it much easier to keep scenarios compatible.

On that note I can say that extra scenarios are already being worked on and we will look seriously at what is involved in updating our older titles.

We have also enlisted the help of Chris Merchant, a long time supporter, who has worked hard to update the Battlefront manual and to continue that improvement into Kharkov.

You will also be pleased to know that Kharkov does include a tutorial, something we acknowledge was missing from Battlefront. We also took the opportunity that the new design afforded to simplify the movement and supply systems which will make gamer's life easier.

I feel confident that once people start playing the Kharkov game then any doubts will be banished. It is an exceptionally exciting battle and in my opinion, our best yet, nudging in front of Market Garden and Across the Dnepr.

Gregor

I love the SSG games, and own them all (way back to TAO1), although I've never been totally enamoured with BF I must admit. and will definitely wait to see what comes before making any public criticisms. It looks nice, and the AO concept sounds very interesting, and I'm sure it will be a good game, I just hope it ships with more than one scenario.

I think you also have to be a bit careful with all the negativity coming out here. I'm sure the new AOs and so on require a lot of work from SSG, they might start thinking that it's just not economically viable to produce these games with all this flak flying around...

I must admit I prefer the one battle focus to the multiple battle ones. This release looks good and I love this series of games.

This sounds promising Gregor, just what I was hoping to hear.
My main concern was that longevity for the last title dropped markedly compared to earlier releases.

ORIGINAL: Gregor_SSG

The good news on that front is that we are very happy with the new design and the next game will use this design, which should make it much easier to keep scenarios compatible.

On that note I can say that extra scenarios are already being worked on and we will look seriously at what is involved in updating our older titles.

ORIGINAL: Hertston

I'm afraid I have to agree. I would far rather have seen a 'stand alone expansion' to and partial 'relaunch' of the Battlefront system. I was very happy with that; it was just desperately in need of more scenarios, a higher profile, and a little TLC.

I'm going to take a lot of selling on this one. Admittedly, some of the new features look cool, but I really can't see enough to justify what looks like a big step backwards to a single campaign, albeit with 'variants'... no matter how meticulously researched it is. I don't disagree with Erik on such things casually, but I do here. Not enough content.. exactly why Battlefront never took off.

I sadly must agree with Hertston. This game is even worse than Battlefront. I will pass on it.

Regards,

Greg

I liked a lot of the features of Battlefront, and am not sure I'll like the simplification of supply or movement in this new title.  I tend to agree that if there were any issue with Battlefront it was more content-related than anything else.  I guess I'm confused about why there's another engine change after only one title with Battlefront.

I too own every SSG title back to TAO1, so I'm a fan.  Just don't know enough about what the change is all about.

EDIT: I should add that I don't mind a single campaign release. It works for HPS and I've bought a lot of those. But HPS does update all of their titles when they add new campaigns, so the older stuff is always up to date. Also, their graphics are moddable and better looking stuff can be found than their stock graphics. This combination enhances the longevity of the products.

And remember in HPS Kharkov 42:

 [font=arial] [/font]Scenarios range from a series of 34 starter and intermediate historical scenarios, up to the full 140 turn campaign game. [left]

[/left][left] [/left][left]We're talking stacks of value plus a 140 turn campaign.[/left][left] [/left][left]We'll have to see what the answer is to my "Scale" thread before a real final pre-launch comparison can be made.[/left][left] [/left][left]But why oh why didn't SSG go Kharkov 43? Or better still, if this game is going to be regimental, offer real value and give us the full "Kharkov Experience" - with scenarios '41, '42, '43?[/left]

am not sure I'll like the simplification of supply or movement in this new title

Capitaine,

IMHO, I think that the 'simplification' of supply and movement in K:DOTD works well. The less I have to think about supply trucks/delivered OP's and more about the positioning of my formation HQ's is realistic from where I see it; and it means that now - these HQ's are really, really important, and provides a focal point for the needs and bonuses for combat units wheras in the past it was a chore to look after the 'trucks' as well as everything else. Gives me more brain CPU for the combat units!

This version of the engine is a keeper. Sometimes things take a while to mature.

cheers

Gregor_SSG quote ...
 
"The good news on that front is that we are very happy with the new design and the next game will use this design, which should make it much easier to keep scenarios compatible.
 
On that note I can say that extra scenarios are already being worked on and we will look seriously at what is involved in updating our older titles."
 
[&o]
This is probably the most encouraging words I've heard about SSG games in a couple of years.
 
Does this mean K:DotD is the game engine SSG is going to settle on for a while and start putting out other battles and enhancement patches?
 
One advantage of choosing Kharkhov as the signature battle is that there were two major battles in and around the same map area.  Since I haven't seen a full map yet, I can only hope the map stretches from Belgorad to south of Izium.  (today is the 1st I've heard of this)
 
Not sure I'm ready to buy yet but it sounds OK so far.  Maybe with further discussion here my opinions will improve from just "OK" to good or excellent.
 
One thing I'm sure hasn't been changed I wish was different in BF is the option to use artillery to add combat shifts to assaults (or melee attacks) or to conduct individual direct fire operations (which is all you can do in BF).
 
The simplified movement and supply features sound reasonable to me.
 
The biggest thing I'm going to be looking for before I buy is that SSG is committed to supporting this engine and issue subsequent battle packs; additions I would be willing to pay a reasonable price for like I did for the "Across the Dnepr" add-on to Korsun.
 
I've been saving money for Panther Games Battle from the Bulge; now I may have to work OT to get this one.

ORIGINAL: hank

Gregor_SSG quote ...

"The good news on that front is that we are very happy with the new design and the next game will use this design, which should make it much easier to keep scenarios compatible.

On that note I can say that extra scenarios are already being worked on and we will look seriously at what is involved in updating our older titles."

[&o]
This is probably the most encouraging words I've heard about SSG games in a couple of years.

Does this mean K:DotD is the game engine SSG is going to settle on for a while and start putting out other battles and enhancement patches?

One advantage of choosing Kharkhov as the signature battle is that there were two major battles in and around the same map area. Since I haven't seen a full map yet, I can only hope the map stretches from Belgorad to south of Izium. (today is the 1st I've heard of this)

Not sure I'm ready to buy yet but it sounds OK so far. Maybe with further discussion here my opinions will improve from just "OK" to good or excellent.

One thing I'm sure hasn't been changed I wish was different in BF is the option to use artillery to add combat shifts to assaults (or melee attacks) or to conduct individual direct fire operations (which is all you can do in BF).

The simplified movement and supply features sound reasonable to me.

The biggest thing I'm going to be looking for before I buy is that SSG is committed to supporting this engine and issue subsequent battle packs; additions I would be willing to pay a reasonable price for like I did for the "Across the Dnepr" add-on to Korsun.

I've been saving money for Panther Games Battle from the Bulge; now I may have to work OT to get this one.

The map includes Belgorod in the north and Dnepropetrovsk in the south, which means we go well south of Izyum and so there's a fair amount of ground to play with.

I can definitely say that this system will be used in our next game, although obviously I can't publicly say what that game will be.


Gregor

ORIGINAL: Gregor_SSG


I can definitely say that this system will be used in our next game, although obviously I can't publicly say what that game will be.


Gregor

And this will be the death of SSG. You have a niche market that you think you know. And as a result we have seen SSG's titles slowly dwindle to this. You hide away in your bat cave concoting what you think we'll like and then are disapointed and don't understand when we complain. It's will even be harder to sell your titles now as the world economy suffers. Energy prices, food, the necesseties are going to eat into our budgets.

I said it over on your forums. Your stance of not discussing anything with your fan base is stupid. Sure some questions here and there get answered but that isn't what I am talking about. You need to engage your fan base and discuss your titles and really listen to what we are asking for, because we make up the niche market, not you.

And with the economy the way it is and people trying to decide if they want to support this title I would implore you to rethink the above statement by you.

HercMighty,
 
You repeat yourself in all threads. I think You have made Your point Sir!
 
Stop crying about life in USA. For the price in my country for a Golf WW. You can get a Lexus or big Mercerdes in USA. Do You know what 1 liter petrol cost in Norway? Answer: 4$ . And we drill after oil in the whole North sea being the 5 biggest producer of oil in the world.