Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Kippling
Jun 24, 2005

And the Grinch, with his Grinch-feet ice cold in the snow, stood puzzling and puzzling, how could it be so?
I would love to buy this game, but at £60, not a chance. £40 maybe, considering the praise here, but I'd have to be out of other things I'd also like to buy/play. Which I'm not. I am the typical customer that matrix isn't making money from, owing to their pricing: I've got lots of PC games, I regularly spend money at steam/GOG/GamersGate, I've played a couple of serious war games in the past (e.g. Steel Panthers), and I could see myself buying proper war simulations if only I wasn't being asked for 2 or 3 times the price I pay for anything else. I bet there's thousands more just like me.

If I ever had the chance to become a fan the genre I'd no doubt be sad to see the way it's being starved into non-existence. But as it stands the schadenfreude that I'm getting from watching Matrix bungle their way forward with (what appears to an uninvolved observer) closed mindedness and self-assured vanity is great. There's nothing more satisfying than watching from the sidelines as some stubborn jerk gets slowly steamrolled by an easily avoided problem!

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Neruz
Jul 23, 2012

A paragon of manliness

Baloogan posted:

Its my favorite game; its one of the best naval warfare simulations ever.

I'm thinking of streaming some gameplay at some point on twitch.tv.


But to awnser your question, it has a tactical AI; but the AI will not automatically decide that it should attack some radar instalation. You create misisons which have say a flight of escort F16s, a flight of SEAD aircraft, a flight of strike aircraft and they will then go attack the radar instalation.

Quite a few things happen automatically, you don't need to tell your inbound Migs to Hi-Lo-Hi strike, they do that sort of thing automatically; and its attached to loadout, so they will use long range standoff weapons at high altitude to get the most range out of the weapons.

Fuuuck this sounds like it takes away all the parts I hate about grognard games and keeps all the parts I like. gently caress you I don't have enough money to buy this game stop making me want to.

gradenko_2000
Oct 5, 2010

HELL SERPENT
Lipstick Apathy

smr posted:

I'm going to be the Devil's Advocate here and say that a game like Command _should_ cost $80 because it's far too groggy to ever get a big enough uptake, even at $20, to make the same amount of money. That's all I have to say about price.

If your game is so obtuse and complex (or terrible) that dropping the price by 20 bucks or something doesn't yield any extra sales, the problem is that your game is too obtuse and complex, not that you priced it wrong. Bad Rats doesn't cost $40 just because the physics is so hard to learn, and Hearts of Iron 3 has gone as low as $1.99 despite being more impenetrable than some of Matrix's offerings, AND it's Paradox's best-selling game.

And speaking of Paradox, it's THOSE guys that should be publishing all these wargames - except now I wonder if War in the Pacific would have passed their QA.

Baloogan
Dec 5, 2004
Fun Shoe

gradenko_2000 posted:

If your game is so obtuse and complex (or terrible) that dropping the price by 20 bucks or something doesn't yield any extra sales, the problem is that your game is too obtuse and complex, not that you priced it wrong. Bad Rats doesn't cost $40 just because the physics is so hard to learn, and Hearts of Iron 3 has gone as low as $1.99 despite being more impenetrable than some of Matrix's offerings, AND it's Paradox's best-selling game.

And speaking of Paradox, it's THOSE guys that should be publishing all these wargames - except now I wonder if War in the Pacific would have passed their QA.

You know, gently caress it, some videogames are just too obtuse and complex for everyone. I don't want them to become any LESS obtuse and complex.

gradenko_2000
Oct 5, 2010

HELL SERPENT
Lipstick Apathy

Baloogan posted:

You know, gently caress it, some videogames are just too obtuse and complex for everyone. I don't want them to become any LESS obtuse and complex.

It's not even that we should cut out how a merchant ship might catch on fire easier if it happened to be carrying oil, or that you can order merchant ships to carry oil in drums if tankers aren't available - but the interface for actually forming up the supply convoy and sending it somewhere should be as slick as, say, XCOM Enemy Unknown. I'm not asking for WITE to be dumbed down, only that the information you need to fight be as easily accessible as in UOC, or even Decisive Campaigns.

uPen
Jan 25, 2010

Zu Rodina!
I bought this stupid game and I'm loving it, I'll do a more detailed writeup once I get deeper into it. So far this is my favorite thing:


:allears:

Baloogan
Dec 5, 2004
Fun Shoe
Welcome to the dark side :)

Lord Windy
Mar 26, 2010
I bought as well, shame it's going to take like an hour or two to download. I wish they had better download servers.

uPen
Jan 25, 2010

Zu Rodina!
I've changed my mind, my favorite thing about this game is the manual uses a Wrath of Khan reference to explain the effects of the thermal layer on sub-hunting efforts.

Tomn
Aug 23, 2007

And the angel said unto him
"Stop hitting yourself. Stop hitting yourself."
But lo he could not. For the angel was hitting him with his own hands
Huh.

In that Matrix pricing thread linked earlier, one of the WitP: AE devs seems to have suggested that they were paid a contractually-agreed fixed sum instead of getting money based on how sales are doing. Is that normal?

Terminus posted:

Slitherine doesn't even share its sales numbers with its development teams. When we made WitP: AE, all we got was the money agreed upon. Fine by me.

Edit: Nevermind, he clarified. He got a percentage of profits, he just wasn't informed how many sales he'd made. Still seems a bit odd.

Tomn fucked around with this message at 12:47 on Sep 26, 2013

Riso
Oct 11, 2008

by merry exmarx
That's stupid. If you don't know how many units you sold, how can you properly gauge interest in your product?
It's nice if you make money, but if you know you only sell ~1000 units you should change something.

Cabbage Disrespect
Apr 24, 2009

ROBUST COMBAT
Leonard Riflepiss
Soiled Meat

uPen posted:

I bought this stupid game and I'm loving it, I'll do a more detailed writeup once I get deeper into it. So far this is my favorite thing:


:allears:

It's not a true grog game if I don't have to toggle the Mk. 1 Eyeball on and off repeatedly to simulate blinking and prevent my sailors' eyes from drying out.

Neruz
Jul 23, 2012

A paragon of manliness
I'm really hoping that somewhere there is a ship with a Mk. 2 Eyeball.

ArchangeI
Jul 15, 2010

Riso posted:

That's stupid. If you don't know how many units you sold, how can you properly gauge interest in your product?
It's nice if you make money, but if you know you only sell ~1000 units you should change something.

It is remarkably intransparant. How is he to know that the money they paid corresponds in any way to the number of copies sold? It doesn't even have to be fraud, mistakes do happen.

Ghost of Mussolini
Jun 26, 2011

uPen posted:

I bought this stupid game and I'm loving it, I'll do a more detailed writeup once I get deeper into it. So far this is my favorite thing:


:allears:

Finally, a game that will track the blindness of each and every one of my sailors

Zamboni Apocalypse
Dec 29, 2009

Neruz posted:

I'm really hoping that somewhere there is a ship with a Mk. 2 Eyeball.

First you have to spend research points on the prerequisites "glasses" and "contact lenses", and then "Lasik" will unlock.

fermun
Nov 4, 2009
You guys are crazy, mark 2 eyeball is feeding your lookouts a special diet with manufactured vitamin A so that the retinal of your sailors is responsive down in the infrared range.

Davin Valkri
Apr 8, 2011

Maybe you're weighing the moral pros and cons but let me assure you that OH MY GOD
SHOOT ME IN THE GODDAMNED FACE
WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR?!
Wouldn't a mark 2 eyeball be a guy with a pair of opera glasses? Or is that considered a "lookout" sensor or something like that?

Davin Valkri
Apr 8, 2011

Maybe you're weighing the moral pros and cons but let me assure you that OH MY GOD
SHOOT ME IN THE GODDAMNED FACE
WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR?!
Double post? How the devil did that happen?!

Tomn
Aug 23, 2007

And the angel said unto him
"Stop hitting yourself. Stop hitting yourself."
But lo he could not. For the angel was hitting him with his own hands

Davin Valkri posted:

Wouldn't a mark 2 eyeball be a guy with a pair of opera glasses? Or is that considered a "lookout" sensor or something like that?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZ5VzlRvIw4

This seems appropriate.

gradenko_2000
Oct 5, 2010

HELL SERPENT
Lipstick Apathy
Anyone else really unexcited about World in Flames?

I think the last game I saw that looked this unappealing was Avalon Hill's disastrous Third Reich PC back in the mid-90s.

fermun posted:

You guys are crazy, mark 2 eyeball is feeding your lookouts a special diet with manufactured vitamin A so that the retinal of your sailors is responsive down in the infrared range.

It worked for the Brits, after all.

Panzeh
Nov 27, 2006

"..The high ground"

gradenko_2000 posted:

Anyone else really unexcited about World in Flames?

I think the last game I saw that looked this unappealing was Avalon Hill's disastrous Third Reich PC back in the mid-90s.


It worked for the Brits, after all.

World in Flames is a bloated mess of a board wargame that i'm not sure how it has a following compared to better games like Axis Empires:Totaler Krieg/Dai Senso.

Fintilgin
Sep 29, 2004

Fintilgin sweeps!

Panzeh posted:

World in Flames is a bloated mess of a board wargame that i'm not sure how it has a following compared to better games like Axis Empires:Totaler Krieg/Dai Senso.

Aw, man. Totaler Krieg! was so cool. Back in high school I used to have a big, old kitchen table set up alongside my bed where I'd keep running solo games of TK! going. :3:

Davin Valkri
Apr 8, 2011

Maybe you're weighing the moral pros and cons but let me assure you that OH MY GOD
SHOOT ME IN THE GODDAMNED FACE
WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR?!

gradenko_2000 posted:

Anyone else really unexcited about World in Flames?

I think the last game I saw that looked this unappealing was Avalon Hill's disastrous Third Reich PC back in the mid-90s.

Why in the world are they saying "our manual is so fricking big it comes in three volumes!" as a selling point? :confused: Was the board game manual that big too, or what?

vyshka
Aug 10, 2010

gradenko_2000 posted:

Anyone else really unexcited about World in Flames?

I think the last game I saw that looked this unappealing was Avalon Hill's disastrous Third Reich PC back in the mid-90s.


It worked for the Brits, after all.

Considering their ability at porting Empires In Arms, I have no desire to pick up World in Flames. I think the only title that has been in development longer is Combined Arms.

Panzeh
Nov 27, 2006

"..The high ground"

Fintilgin posted:

Aw, man. Totaler Krieg! was so cool. Back in high school I used to have a big, old kitchen table set up alongside my bed where I'd keep running solo games of TK! going. :3:

They came out with a second edition that improves the game considerably. Me and a couple of other people are playing a few games on VASSAL.

Davin Valkri posted:

Why in the world are they saying "our manual is so fricking big it comes in three volumes!" as a selling point? :confused: Was the board game manual that big too, or what?

The thing about World in Flames is that it has a basic game, and then a zillion expansions that added in tons of different things, from more detailed naval combat to South America. The way people play it these days just feels like a tremendously bloated game.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008

Davin Valkri posted:

Why in the world are they saying "our manual is so fricking big it comes in three volumes!" as a selling point? :confused: Was the board game manual that big too, or what?

Grognards often mistake complexity for depth.

Which makes it all so irritating when they try to poo poo on other people for not being 'smart enough' to like their games. Yes I am smart enough. I just think it's really stupid to roll for every rifle squad in a corps v corps battle when the whole thing is going to be abstracted out to 2:1 odds or better anyway.

Cabbage Disrespect
Apr 24, 2009

ROBUST COMBAT
Leonard Riflepiss
Soiled Meat
If there's anyone else who's on the fence about Command and wants to know more, one of the Matrix guys posted the manual so that people could preview it.

Baloogan
Dec 5, 2004
Fun Shoe
code:
Destroying Air Bases

Tying everything we have learned about the functions of Command 
air bases and how to build them, we can now see ways to destroy 
or mission-kill them.

Methods to Mission-kill or otherwise incapacitate a modern air 
base:

[b]  ƒDestroy aircraft holding facilities:[/b] Probably the least efficient 
but you can eliminate all aircraft at the facility by destroying 
the buildings/sites that contain them. Most nations harden 
these facilities or disperse aircraft to make this task difficult. 
To evaluate a weapon’s effectiveness against a target please 
review the weapon’s legal target values and damage point value 
(DPs) in the aircraft stores section of the database viewer and 
compare it to the target’s armor and damage point values.

[b]  ƒDestroy Magazines:[/b]  Destroying ammo storage facilities prevents 
aircraft from receiving necessary ammunition. A combat 
aircraft without its weapons is only marginally more useful than 
if it has been destroyed. Similar to aircraft holding facilities, 
most nations harden the facilities or disperse ammunition to 
minimize loses.

[b]  ƒDestroy Access Points, Taxiways and Elevators: [/b] Destroying 
these “transit” points prevents aircraft from reaching runways 
or other aircraft launch facilities. Usually there are only a few 
of those in a base or ship so taking them out is a great way to 
jam the base shut.

[b]  ƒDestroy runways:[/b]  Destroying these eliminates the ability of an 
aircraft to launch. This is probably the most efficient method. 
Nations tend to add secondary runways or use auxiliary 
runways to make this task slightly more difficult. COMMAND 
does support numerous dedicated anti-runway weapons.
My favorite way to mission kill a airbase is a nuke. ICBM. Airbases can't run; though airbases can hide (depending on how generous a scenario's author is).

Rudi Starnberg
Jul 8, 2012
So does it simulate most nation's plans to use various bits of road around the country as extremely dispersed airbases?

Baloogan
Dec 5, 2004
Fun Shoe
It would be up to the scenario's author to set up the autobahn-airbases.

I personally have modeled an number of autobahn-airbases as a configuration of a Runway-Grade Taxiway (450m) and a A/C Tarmac Space (2x Medium Aircraft). Maybe a Ammo Pad with a few dumb bombs if I was feeling generous.

The game currently doesn't model aircraft fuel consumption but it certainly CAN if they enable it at some point in the future. For example on a Perry class FFG it keeps track of aviation fuel separately from bunker. Different units use different kinds of fuel.

Runway-Grade Taxiways are both taxiways and runways. I think they are weaker than normal runways. I'd also set these facilities to be invisible to the enemies at scenario start so they would have to perform recon flights or wait for a satellite overhead pass to nuke em.

This game also models ASAT weapons, and that airborne laser system which can shoot down ICBMs as they are launching off of the pad. The game pays attention to the physics involved, the only real time you have a chance to intercept an ICBM is during the launch phase.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008

Is there a millennium challenge scenario?

If not, someone should make and release one without telling anyone what it really is.

ArchangeI
Jul 15, 2010

Baloogan posted:

It would be up to the scenario's author to set up the autobahn-airbases.

I personally have modeled an number of autobahn-airbases as a configuration of a Runway-Grade Taxiway (450m) and a A/C Tarmac Space (2x Medium Aircraft). Maybe a Ammo Pad with a few dumb bombs if I was feeling generous.

The game currently doesn't model aircraft fuel consumption but it certainly CAN if they enable it at some point in the future. For example on a Perry class FFG it keeps track of aviation fuel separately from bunker. Different units use different kinds of fuel.

Runway-Grade Taxiways are both taxiways and runways. I think they are weaker than normal runways. I'd also set these facilities to be invisible to the enemies at scenario start so they would have to perform recon flights or wait for a satellite overhead pass to nuke em.

This game also models ASAT weapons, and that airborne laser system which can shoot down ICBMs as they are launching off of the pad. The game pays attention to the physics involved, the only real time you have a chance to intercept an ICBM is during the launch phase.

I know it is called Air/Naval operations, but does it simulate ground forces at all? Because it would be kinda silly to have WWIII scenarios where the front line doesn't move.

Nenonen
Oct 22, 2009

Mulla on aina kolkyt donaa taskussa

ArchangeI posted:

I know it is called Air/Naval operations, but does it simulate ground forces at all? Because it would be kinda silly to have WWIII scenarios where the front line doesn't move.

Do any of the scenarios last long enough that you'd actually see any change in ground front lines in that time? If not, that can be safely ignored.

gradenko_2000
Oct 5, 2010

HELL SERPENT
Lipstick Apathy

ArchangeI posted:

I know it is called Air/Naval operations, but does it simulate ground forces at all? Because it would be kinda silly to have WWIII scenarios where the front line doesn't move.

It probably doesn't in the same vein as Harpoon: You have to shepherd the NATO convoy from Newfoundland to Wilhelmshaven, but the scenario ends after the merchants have spent some hours at the docks.

Baloogan
Dec 5, 2004
Fun Shoe
This is the post 1980 database. There is another database that goes from 1945 to 1980; which includes Fat Man and Little Boy if you were curious.
:whatup:



:getin:

Of course only the USSR/Russia and USA are this complete. Other nations do have their own equipment too.

Baloogan
Dec 5, 2004
Fun Shoe
Also one neat thing about this game that most games do not simulate is buddy lazing. SEAL recon team lazing a target in the middle of a city for a precision LGB strike for a bomber that doesn't want to stick around for the boom is something that happens.

This game really focuses on the little details; things like the number of illumination radars limits the number of targets you can attack at once.

ArchangeI
Jul 15, 2010
You're not making it any easier to resist this blatant highway robbery.

Cabbage Disrespect
Apr 24, 2009

ROBUST COMBAT
Leonard Riflepiss
Soiled Meat

ArchangeI posted:

You're not making it any easier to resist this blatant highway robbery.

If I keep hearing good things about it and haven't decided I don't want it in the next few days, I'll probably pick it up.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Imaginary Baron
Apr 14, 2010

Mr. Showtime posted:

If I keep hearing good things about it and haven't decided I don't want it in the next few days, I'll probably pick it up.

Same here, my resistance is dropping.

How extensive are the scenarios? I'd hate to spend the money on this to have limited replay value.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply