Matrix Games Forums

Hello:

Hope it is OK to ask this here; if not please tell me a more appropriate forum.

Just found this game in the last few days and it seems very interesting. I am attracted to it probably because I used to play ASL. I have tried many computer wargames, mostly tactical. Those are Campaign Series, Squad Battles, Panzer Command, and Combat Mission: Battle for Normandy (CMBN).

I just play CMBN now. It is a great game but an awful lot of work/micromanagement. Some have argued on Battlefront's forums that it is more a simulation than a (fun) game now.

CoH seems very neat but I wonder is it too "lite" compared to some of the other systems I know? I don't want to just buy another game "to see" if I like it. Any input from those that have played some of the systems I mentioned above and that can address this issue of depth would be appreciated. Even if you haven't played any of the aforementioned games I would appreciate your ideas on this.

Thanks very much,

Gerry

I eat fish once in a while but I don't like some kinds. My buddy raves about salmon cooked on the grille. Someone could tell you that this is the greatest game ever but you have to decide what it is for you.

"Lite" isn't a bad thing. Some games are more game and less simulation. Some are more puzzle than tactics. Days that you don't feel like thinking too hard are good for lite games that are more fun than work.

Hi Gerry,

COH for me is a lot like a less complex SL. It feels about as realistic, but has much less rules overhead. Even though it is more streamlined, it reflects historical tactics and challenges and I get the same kind of feeling playing a COH scenario as I did with SL. I said SL vs. ASL deliberately as ASL goes into much more detail, but IMHO COH does scratch the historical tactical itch quite well.

Regards,

- Erik

Have to agree with Erik.

It has the right feel to it without the minutae. And the firefights seem much more fluid.

But of course there is no computerized ASL to make a comparison.

Jamm

ORIGINAL: Gerry

Just found this game in the last few days and it seems very interesting. I am attracted to it probably because I used to play ASL. I have tried many computer wargames, mostly tactical. Those are Campaign Series, Squad Battles, Panzer Command, and Combat Mission: Battle for Normandy (CMBN).

I just play CMBN now. It is a great game but an awful lot of work/micromanagement. Some have argued on Battlefront's forums that it is more a simulation than a (fun) game now.


Gerry

Hi Gerry,
I used to play CMBN alot and found it to be great game but lacking one major ingredient....fun. This game is really a blast to play and I don't get stressed out like I used to playing CMBN. I found a game that I can smile when I don't get a diceroll in my favor rather then getting frustrated.

Funny, I'm in the same position than the OP- I've played the original SL a loooong time ago, played to death CMx1, now I'm playing CM:BN too - and enjoying it- and wondering about buying CoH.. Seems indeed like a simpler SL game, but I'm wary about the lack of troops/variety/scenarios.
I mean we only got 41-early 42 Germans and Russians, that's not much...

Hi Gerry,

I also loved to play CMx and did not get really into CMBN (at least up to now)...

I play ASLSK, CombatCommander and CoH (boardgame) - and I kept looking for a computerized version for one of the latter...

Counting the editor, the number of scenarioes and the amount of "love" that obviously was put into the pc game, I consider it a good buy...

I really like it...

Cheers
Mac

The editor in CMBN is awesome, and tons of mods and scenarios. In CoH, it's tougher. Not an issue, if you don't create/play custom stuff though.