|
I'd just like to point out that Command is cheaper and funner! Plus I've added a turn based multiplayer capability to Command if any of you guys would like to give it a shot.
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2013 12:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 17:25 |
|
|
I've decided I'm definitely buying Command Ops on sale then just to try and show them that sales are cool and they should do sales frequently. Plus they have a Market Garden Add-On and I love Market Garden.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2013 12:36
|
|
|
Jakse posted:I've decided I'm definitely buying Command Ops on sale then just to try and show them that sales are cool and they should do sales frequently. Plus they have a Market Garden Add-On and I love Market Garden. It's like Combat Mission in that it's one of those games that I'll never play obsessively but I'll always come back to.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2013 13:46
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:I'd just like to point out that Command is cheaper gently caress Matrix.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2013 03:06
|
|
|
Jakse posted:I've decided I'm definitely buying Command Ops on sale then just to try and show them that sales are cool and they should do sales frequently. Plus they have a Market Garden Add-On and I love Market Garden. I bought this and war plan orange for exactly this reason. They're games that I would probably have never bought at full price but I will definitely buy them when you put them 50% off. Keep on putting real games on weekly sale matrix!
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2013 03:54
|
|
|
Just a heads up that the Unity of Command: Black Turn beta test is over and the DLC should hit Steam any day. http://unityofcommand.net/ If you enjoy Unity of Command, buy it. If you've never played Unity of Command, what is wrong with you, why are you in this thread, go buy Unity of Command. Get your rear end kicked by the AI, then buy Black Turn. Need more persuasion? Read my review of Red Turn for Armchair General, my interviews with lead developer Tomislav Uzalec, and with AI-wizard Ante Turudic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2013 05:16
|
|
|
Myoclonic Jerk posted:Just a heads up that the Unity of Command: Black Turn beta test is over and the DLC should hit Steam any day. http://unityofcommand.net/ They're saying December 10th is going to be the release date, so that gives you a month to replay the main game and Red Turn in order to secure your perfect Brilliant-Victory-in-all-scenarios masterpiece before taking on the new DLC
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2013 06:20
|
|
|
blackmongoose posted:They're saying December 10th is going to be the release date, so that gives you a month to replay the main game and Red Turn in order to secure your perfect Brilliant-Victory-in-all-scenarios masterpiece before taking on the new DLC Or break your monitor attempting to punch the magnificent bastard AI. Whichever comes first.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2013 07:06
|
|
|
I'm enjoying Command Ops' tutorial scenario so far. Very interesting game system. What level do you guys normally manage at though? I know it's a tutorial, but I issued orders at a Combat Command level and it feels weird to be winning ordering all of two hq's.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2013 16:19
|
|
|
Jakse posted:I'm enjoying Command Ops' tutorial scenario so far. Very interesting game system. What level do you guys normally manage at though? I know it's a tutorial, but I issued orders at a Combat Command level and it feels weird to be winning ordering all of two hq's. I'm usually ordering battalions around and then shifting the weird assets(like AA) by platoon to provide support as needed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2013 16:20
|
|
|
The way I play command ops is pretty much the same, there is the micro stuff of course (those american AA halftracks are great) of weird assets and guys that sometimes get in a weird los issue, but I think the biggest challenge is managing to get off an assault with artillery and everything hitting at the same time. I tend to play with command delays though, so I might be making it that much harder for myself.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2013 17:52
|
|
|
The game is certainly a lot better now that fire effectiveness has been upped a bit and rifle companies don't use up all their ammo after an hour and are prevented from requesting any more. Main tip: if you want your troops to bypass enemies and be more directly aggressive towards the objective then you need to lower their aggro setting. That's the most unintuitive thing I've learnt.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2013 18:03
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:The game is certainly a lot better now that fire effectiveness has been upped a bit and rifle companies don't use up all their ammo after an hour and are prevented from requesting any more. I think it makes sense, aggro is how aggressive they are in engaging the enemy. Low aggro means they will ignore enemy formations to move towards the objective.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2013 18:09
|
|
|
Maybe someone else will find this tip useful: I'm currently plowing through an Uncommon Valor* campaign, and I use the "speedhack" feature of Cheat Engine to speed up the game. It makes the UI much more responsive as far as mouse clicks, hotkeys and opening windows being instant, and it makes the inter-turn processing just blaze through. Obviously the latter has some drawbacks if you're a sperg that wants to watch the combat animations in real-time for the additional info, but I don't. I've also used this with WITP and WITE to great success, although using something called "Cheat Engine" is obviously not kosher if you're playing another human being, but it helps speed through all the boring waiting while playing the AI. * It's the predecessor of War in the Pacific, only covering the South Pacific from Truk down to Brisbane from May 1942 to Dec 1943. Basically the Guadalcanal scenario map. I come back to it every now and then because all the extraneous grognardy bullshit from Admiral's Edition hadn't been added yet: - No preparation points, just invade where you want - No "sorties" counter on carriers, CV airgroups will fly as often as long they're out at sea. Limitations are managing fatigue - No futzing around with Move opmode vs Strategic move opmode. Just a basic "go-here" move order (the original War in the Pacific not-AE also does this) - No futzing around with specific pilot training - No futzing around with squadrons having to be close enough to their assigned Air HQ before they can draw torpedoes (and a bunch of other preconditions for torpedoes to be available) - No futzing around with managing repairs on individual ships. If Brisbane and Noumea can't fix it, you send the ship off-map to Pearl Harbor and Nimitz will eventually return it to you (or not) - Base Force units are much larger; a single group has 200 Av Support, which let me turn Henderson Field into an imposing airbase fairly quickly (this also applies to the Japanese) - Australia and Noumea (and for the Japanese, Truk) has unlimited supplies - As a drawback, some advanced controls don't exist yet, such as automated convoys, so I have to truck supplies to Port Moresby and Guadalcanal with manually-created TFs every time they need it
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2013 11:32
|
|
|
I've finally got some free time and was wondering if anyone is interested in a PBEM of Flashpoint - Red Storm? I'm not very good but it would be fun to play again some humans. I tend to suck as the Soviets(American ICM just murders my poor  pixeltroopers) but I'll play either side.If you haven't got it I recommend it, their command system and dynamic length between orders is really neat and gives it a step up for me over most of the N remakes of the same hex based wargame style.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2013 03:27
|
|
|
WitP ChatSaros posted:Well the game is about amphibious operations and all those ships are really really different in size and capabilities, APD is a converted troop carrying Destroyer (the greatest things), LST/LSI are beaching craft for infantry tanks and LSD are giant floating docks that small landing craft unload from. Dunno what an APM is, do you mean an APA? See, I'm so incensed I can't even rant about them without confusing ship classes!  That said, the more time I spend with the game, the more miscellaneous ship types I'm remembering - for example, I finally figured out that most ships with P or AP are transports of some sort. Still no idea what half the auxiliaries or tenders actually do, but that's a whole 'nother kettle of fish. Finally, Grey Hunter's epic four year long LP is THE BEST THING. I can't wait for it to be transferred to the LP Archive and the image links restored. Book chat I've enjoyed the hell out of Shattered Sword - can anybody recommend other histories of the war against Japan with a broader scope? I've read Eagle Against the Sun, but it feels archaic after Shattered Sword.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2013 14:43
|
|
|
I keep this page open while playing WITP: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hull_classification_symbol There's also a bunch of rules about tenders for ship repair (AR) and reloading battleship guns outside of level 9 ports (AE I think?) and then sub tenders (AS) for reloading subs with torpedoes. One key thing to keep in mind is that AK is a cargo ship, suited for making long, slow hauls of supplies/resources, while AP is a transport that's faster and more suited for use in combat situations. AKs load and unload the slowest and thus are unsuited for amphibious operations, APs are better, and then the various LST/LSV classes always fully unload in one turn. Unique to WITP is that some ships are tagged as xAK or xAP to denote that they're wholly unsuited for amphibious operations. I think you can still force the game to use them as such if you want to, but that's frowned upon as unrealistic and the real way to do it is to use a plain AK or AP ship, which most of the xAK/xAP types will upgrade to later eventually. EDIT: Another thing you can do is, when you're selecting ships to add to a TF, you can right-click on it and that'll bring you a short summary screen for the ship. The key part is that the game spits out a general rating for ASW and Anti-Air. I'm not sure how that number is computed, but it definitely reflects in a relative sense that CLAAs have better AA ratings (1400ish) than pre-war CAs (1000ish, but then the CAs improve with upgrades) and that the late-war Fast BBs have fearsome AA ratings in the 2000s, and that DDs have much better ASW ratings than trawlers, patrol boats, etc. EDIT EDIT: If you haven't already, make sure you've upgraded to the latest beta patch and the latest data scenario updates http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3185062 - beta patch http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3198064 - scenario updates - make sure point the installer to the \SCEN\ folder instead of just the base folder because the devs messed up They fix a bunch of issues and bugs that you might have seen discussed in Grey's LP, such as the 200-plane CAP limit, super-powerful ASW from a particular Japanese escort vessel, anemic flak/AA performance, and a much better working auto-convoy system (of course everyone that plays this game are all autists that never use the latter, but eh) gradenko_2000 fucked around with this message at 15:55 on Nov 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2013 15:21
|
|
|
Oh the luxury of frowning upon using xAKs (converted merchants) for amphibious assaults  I wouldn't say using them should be discouraged as gamey: It really isn't. Unloading from them on an uncontested beach is slow and leaves them exposed to air strikes. xAKs landing at a defended beach will get shredded to bits if the enemy has anything larger than few infantry guns. (My first long-term game as the Allies, I lost most of a Marine division and a good chunk of the merchant marine trying to take Kwajalein some time in 1942. Coastal guns are pretty drat good at making reefs.) Therefore it should be discouraged as a matter of common sense, unless xAKs are basically all you have and will ever have in your inventory. Then just send them to die and have a bottle of whiskey at the ready to drown your regrets. Edit: Dunno about ASW, but AA is computed simply by adding up combat values of devices with a non-empty combat ceiling variable. The value doesn't reflect presence of radars, other search devices, or any considerations of maneuverability, experience, accuracy etc. Therefore for instance some Japanese destroyers upgrade their AA assets while losing points in the computed AA value. steinrokkan fucked around with this message at 16:01 on Nov 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2013 15:53
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:Oh the luxury of frowning upon using xAKs (converted merchants) for amphibious assaults I may have been too harsh. If it was good enough for Gallipoli ...  And thanks for the clarification on the AA rating. One of these days I will do another showcase of Naval Campaigns Guadalcanal to show how easy it is to own Japanese cruisers from beyond visual range with radar.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2013 16:32
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:And thanks for the clarification on the AA rating. One of these days I will do another showcase of Naval Campaigns Guadalcanal to show how easy it is to own Japanese cruisers from beyond visual range with radar. Well using radar in those circumstances is basically cheating.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2013 16:37
|
|
|
The appendix of the witp manual has a list of all the ship classifications and is invaluable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2013 16:43
|
|
|
Myoclonic Jerk posted:
Neptune's Inferno is ok and if you haven't read it Samurai by Sakai is a fun read. As for broad scope I think Toland's The Rising Sun is considered the best one book history. Bix's Hirohito is the best one on the politics of the war from the Japanese side.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2013 18:09
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:
Thanks - would these patches have been included in the auto update? Because I ran that when I first got the game.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2013 21:04
|
|
|
Myoclonic Jerk posted:Thanks - would these patches have been included in the auto update? Because I ran that when I first got the game. The scenario updates definitely no, and the beta patch very likely not either - check the game version on the main menu. The good thing is that these patches should be backwards-compatible with on-going saves (and well they should because gently caress patches invalidating year+ long games) Also recommending Neptune's Inferno as a good read.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2013 21:25
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:The scenario updates definitely no, and the beta patch very likely not either - check the game version on the main menu. The good thing is that these patches should be backwards-compatible with on-going saves (and well they should because gently caress patches invalidating year+ long games) Oh Matrix, making us jump through extra hoops to download fanmade patches to make your epic, year long games work properly. . . . and I can't figure out how to switch the downloaded zip files to .exe's. I'm running Windows 7 and it just isn't an option that I can find. Help, I am computer retarded.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2013 00:03
|
|
|
Myoclonic Jerk posted:Oh Matrix, making us jump through extra hoops to download fanmade patches to make your epic, year long games work properly. Tools -> Folder Options -> Show extensions for known file types. Change the .zip extensions on the files to .exe
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2013 00:43
|
|
|
World in Flames got me interested in seeing if anyone besides Matrix had done any recent direct board game to PC conversions. I was surprised to find a currently active lone developer who has - not only that, he's posted demos and a couple of free games on his website. A few of his projects have also been commercially published by Decision Games and wargamedownloads, with more apparently on the way, all in the $10-$25 range. They aren't super polished and they don't have AI, but they enforce rules and the user interface seems to be on par with World in Flames, which doesn't make Matrix look any better. He has games covering the Eastern Front, Malaya 1942, North Africa, Roman campaigns in Gaul, and the Uganda-Tanzania war. D-Day at Omaha Beach is in development as of 6/15/13. I've played a little bit of Battle of Moscow and Siege of Leningrad. Documentation isn't really there, but the games seem pretty simple and they do a good job of guiding the player through the rules, with helpful rules pop-ups before the beginning of every phase and turn. Also, period music and archival photographs for that extra historical touch. Fairly impressed overall. site: http://war-game-programming.com/
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2013 04:40
|
|
|
Shelled out for the Squad Battles: Spanish Civil War game, and have found it pretty enjoyable so far. There don't seem to be many squad-level grognardy games out there, but this series is a pretty good example of one. My only real criticism is that there are basically no campaigns - there's just a bunch of unlinked scenarios, a few of which are designed to be played in sequence as a sort of pseudo-campaign. I like my strategy games to have a bit more structure than 'pick random scenario, shoot mans', but it's definitely not a deal breaker. It's also much cheaper than a Matrix Games product would have been. I particularly like how the game handles reaction fire - namely, a unit's reaction fire can be triggered by another unit's reaction fire, so battles eventually turn into a chaotic mess of everyone firing at everyone until the side with greater fire superiority builds up enough suppression to push the enemy's heads down and cause their fire to slacken.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2013 07:02
|
|
|
What a find!  I managed to play a quick game of Battle For Moscow against myself and its pretty solid. I'd be down for PBEMing this.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2013 07:38
|
|
|
dtkozl posted:Neptune's Inferno is ok grandenko_2000 posted:Also recommending Neptune's Inferno as a good read. I downloaded it and am about halfway through. The above are understatements - this is gripping stuff. The thing I'm most struck by is how he describes the violence and aftermath of a pitched surface battle. I think in our hobbies as gamers and historians, we tend to imagine battles, especially naval battles, as being only between machines or counters on a map. But holy hell, are we wrong. The description of the detail assigned to 'clean flesh out of the nooks and crannies of the ship' the day after is horrifying. Top that off with the author's excellent feel for describing the characters of complex men like Admirals King and Nimitz and this is one of my favorite military history books ever. Myoclonic Jerk fucked around with this message at 23:55 on Nov 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2013 22:29
|
|
|
You should follow that up with Castles of Steel. Without all of WWII's methods of detection, WWI naval warfare was just a interminable series of blue balls in comparison.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2013 23:37
|
|
|
So who's the guinea pig who's going to buy Pandora, the supposed Alpha Centauri clone? Any good? Worthless? Priced at $30 which seems fair if it's decent.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 00:29
|
|
|
Whoa, that game is both insanely good looking AND cheap for Matrix. However, I'm quite uncomfortable with just how much it looks like a total Civ V rip off. Everything from macro and micro map design elements to UI layouts is basically the same. On a related note - why would they release it via Matrix? A game like that could find its place on Steam, and probably be many times more successful.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 00:52
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:Whoa, that game is both insanely good looking AND cheap for Matrix. However, I'm quite uncomfortable with just how much it looks like a total Civ V rip off. Everything from macro and micro map design elements to UI layouts is basically the same. Because they're pants on head retarded and are too idiotic to make any sort of smart business decisions?
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 00:55
|
|
|
MohawkSatan posted:Because they're pants on head retarded and are too idiotic to make any sort of smart business decisions? Because they're grognards? Game devs can be good at games but less good at other stuff. But a space civ 5 clone sounds pretty loving awesome honestly, if more games cribbed from civ 5 for interface mechanics I'd be a happier man.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 01:03
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Because they're grognards? Oh no argument, they make good games(which would be vastly better with a post 1994 UI). The game sounds and looks awesome. But for business decisions, it's a miracle that Matrix is still around.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 01:08
|
|
|
MohawkSatan posted:Oh no argument, they make good games(which would be vastly better with a post 1994 UI). The game sounds and looks awesome. But for business decisions, it's a miracle that Matrix is still around. It does seem odd if they have a marketable idea they go to the people who apparently take $100 as a starting point and then add or subtract a variety of normal game prices from that sum to work out the final price.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 01:10
|
|
|
Imagine War in the East having an interface as slick as Civ V's steinrokkan posted:On a related note - why would they release it via Matrix? A game like that could find its place on Steam, and probably be many times more successful. Yeah it doesn't strike me as being very grognardy at all. Some people just don't know their publishers, I guess. It makes me sad that Matrix /Slitherine might be spreading their blight across genres.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 01:12
|
|
|
The Theatre of War games end up being more RTS-clicky and not Close-Combat-style tactical-clicky, correct? They're on sale on Steam this week. (Matrix:  "Those meddling kids!")
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 01:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 17:25 |
|
|
Theatre of War is an interesting game that's halfway between an RTS and Actung Panzer! Theatre of War 2 goes full RTS mode and loses all of the uniqueness, I never played Theatre of War 3 but by all accounts it is terrible. The original is a worthwhile punt at that price. e: oh cool, the Steam version is loaded up with a massive modpack that's kinda official. That's pretty good support for an old niche game. Alchenar fucked around with this message at 02:38 on Nov 16, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 01:36
|
|