|
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!
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 02:48 |
|
|
# ? Jun 1, 2024 02:44 |
|
Baloogan posted:Its my favorite game; its one of the best naval warfare simulations ever. 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.
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 03:23 |
|
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.
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 07:14 |
|
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. 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.
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 07:21 |
|
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.
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 07:41 |
|
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:
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 07:42 |
|
Welcome to the dark side
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 08:01 |
|
I bought as well, shame it's going to take like an hour or two to download. I wish they had better download servers.
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 08:03 |
|
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.
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 08:46 |
|
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 |
# ? Sep 26, 2013 12:44 |
|
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.
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 12:51 |
|
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: 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.
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 13:16 |
|
I'm really hoping that somewhere there is a ship with a Mk. 2 Eyeball.
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 13:34 |
|
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 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.
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 13:53 |
|
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: Finally, a game that will track the blindness of each and every one of my sailors
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 14:23 |
|
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.
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 15:57 |
|
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.
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 18:01 |
|
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?
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 18:03 |
|
Double post? How the devil did that happen?!
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 18:03 |
|
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.
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 18:34 |
|
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.
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 18:46 |
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Anyone else really unexcited about World in Flames? 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.
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 18:50 |
|
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.
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 19:09 |
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Anyone else really unexcited about World in Flames? Why in the world are they saying "our manual is so fricking big it comes in three volumes!" as a selling point? Was the board game manual that big too, or what?
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 19:14 |
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Anyone else really unexcited about World in Flames? 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.
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 19:18 |
|
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. 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? 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.
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 19:19 |
|
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? 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.
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 19:22 |
|
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.
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 19:35 |
|
code:
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 19:51 |
|
So does it simulate most nation's plans to use various bits of road around the country as extremely dispersed airbases?
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 20:08 |
|
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.
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 20:21 |
|
Is there a millennium challenge scenario? If not, someone should make and release one without telling anyone what it really is.
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 20:25 |
|
Baloogan posted:It would be up to the scenario's author to set up the autobahn-airbases. 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.
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 21:11 |
|
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.
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 21:18 |
|
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.
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 21:50 |
|
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. Of course only the USSR/Russia and USA are this complete. Other nations do have their own equipment too.
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 22:06 |
|
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.
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 22:09 |
|
You're not making it any easier to resist this blatant highway robbery.
|
# ? Sep 26, 2013 23:04 |
|
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.
|
# ? Sep 27, 2013 00:00 |
|
|
# ? Jun 1, 2024 02:44 |
|
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.
|
# ? Sep 27, 2013 02:09 |