|
Davin Valkri posted:Doesn't that game have a bunch of freeware versions? What does $49.99 get you compared to the free version? I'm not sure, exactly. Is this the version which includes all the Mega Campaigns? If so, it's because there's a bunch of user generated content, high quality I'm sure. But it's still Steel Panthers, and there's never going to be a shortage of playable content in any Steel Panthers game. At that price I would expect actual gameplay improvements rather than new maps (I think the campaigns also come with photographs in briefings and such but that kind of stuff doesn't really deliver to gameplay). Pull the price down to $20 and I might be tempted. Or give a demo (of the mega campaign content - the free version of course is more than enough for a demo, but Matrix can't really sell just the game itself because they only got it free from SSI under certain terms).
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2014 19:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 19:48 |
|
|
Davin Valkri posted:Doesn't that game have a bunch of freeware versions? What does $49.99 get you compared to the free version? It's Shrapnel Games that has freeware versions of Steel Panthers, and then it's just a matter of editing a file (details buried somewhere in this thread) to make it run on modern resolutions. Alchenar posted:They literally cannot bring themselves to admit that structured price reductions work, even as they do it. I've since learned that even people who have heard Steam's siren song and survived still aren't always swayed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2014 19:22
|
|
|
Davin Valkri posted:Doesn't that game have a bunch of freeware versions? What does $49.99 get you compared to the free version? As far as I can tell, it gets you an inferior OOB with no editor, a comparatively undeveloped engine, and inferior developer support, going forward. WinSPMBT and WinSPWWII are better in just about every quantifiable way.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2014 19:27
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:It's Shrapnel Games that has freeware versions of Steel Panthers, and then it's just a matter of editing a file (details buried somewhere in this thread) to make it run on modern resolutions. Steel Panthers World At War is also available for free. The difference is that SPWW2/MBT is based on SP2 while SPWAW is based on SP3. And SPWAW's development has ceased in 2005, apparently. Actually if SPWAW had been kept as a platoon level game in the fashion of Steel Panthers 3 ("Brigade Commander") it might still be current, as there aren't too many games in that niche. Nenonen fucked around with this message at 19:31 on Jan 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2014 19:28
|
|
|
WITP question - I keep getting confused about pilot management. How do I rotate my ace pilots out of Manilla and across to Port Moresby?
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2014 22:51
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I've since learned that even people who have heard Steam's siren song and survived still aren't always swayed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 01:05
|
|
|
I really enjoy how whenever this thread has a dozen new posts, I know Matrix has done something with its prices.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 05:38
|
|
|
V for Vegas posted:WITP question - I keep getting confused about pilot management. How do I rotate my ace pilots out of Manilla and across to Port Moresby? You can't do this immediately - there's some kind of restriction in effect for the first month or two. Eventually you'll be able to rotate Wagner & co out to the general reserve and disband or withdraw their squadrons.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 16:43
|
|
|
The pricey Matricx SPWAW should be the General's Edition, with the Megacampaigns; the MCs differ from normal pre-built or generated campaigns in some manner, can't remember details at this time. (And from behind the Nannywall, I can't easily google around to research.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2014 19:09
|
|
|
Just had a friendly fire moment in WinSPWW2. I'm the British in Normandy, and the German AI bought so much damned flak that every plane I sent in was either shot down or heavily damaged. So, I stopped caring about my airstrikes and didn't open up the menu for a few turns. The only indication that something was wrong was that a bomber came in on the wrong hex, on an area that I had just cleared. Then I knew that the damned Mosquito had locked on to my Shermans, and prayed that the flak would shoot it down before it dropped its load of 4 500-pound bombs. The one drat time my bombers come through the flak unscathed, and it dropped its bombs right on one of my platoon HQ tanks, destroying it and the infantry riding on it and some other surrounding tanks. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2014 01:34
|
|
|
I decided to take a chance and just jump right in to the world of serious grognardiness and bought War in the East. After loving around in the tutorial for a bit and just blindly loving around in the 1941 scenario for a few turns, I gave the "Road to Minsk" scenario a serious try and managed to get a decisive Axis victory by the skin of my teeth. I finished with a points ratio of 8:1 (dunno if its particularly good or not) and my mechanized and armor divisions managed to scream into the objective zones with like 4% fuel on the last turn. Now I guess I'm hooked and I'm eying War in the Pacific in a way that is worrying. Are there any good Pacific games that don't cost 100 bucks? Uncommon Valor seems to be like a mini scenario of WitP, but I don't know if its worth buying. As for War in the East, is there a trick to HQ management? Or do I just need to be more careful where I move my divisions? I tend to move and attack where it's most convenient, but this sometimes results in my formations getting jumbled up. Oh god, I've just crawled into a hole that I'm never getting out of, haven't I?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2014 03:01
|
|
|
Dramicus posted:I decided to take a chance and just jump right in to the world of serious grognardiness and bought War in the East. After loving around in the tutorial for a bit and just blindly loving around in the 1941 scenario for a few turns, I gave the "Road to Minsk" scenario a serious try and managed to get a decisive Axis victory by the skin of my teeth. I finished with a points ratio of 8:1 (dunno if its particularly good or not) and my mechanized and armor divisions managed to scream into the objective zones with like 4% fuel on the last turn. Now I guess I'm hooked and I'm eying War in the Pacific in a way that is worrying.  The only Pacific grand strategy game I can really recommend is WitP unfortunately. It's an awful, horrible game that I hate but it's also the best $80 I've ever spent and is absolutely incredible once you finally figure out how to play.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2014 03:05
|
|
|
The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Games > Grognard Games Megathread - It's an awful, horrible game but it's also the best $80 I've spent Dramicus posted:Are there any good Pacific games that don't cost 100 bucks? Uncommon Valor seems to be like a mini scenario of WitP, but I don't know if its worth buying. If you're a little bit apprehensive about learning WITP, I'd say Uncommon Valor is worth a first look especially now that it's down to 20 bucks. The interface is lacking some of the polish and added convenience that WITP:AE now has after its boatload of beta patches, but at the same time the engine hasn't been saddled yet with a decade's worth of minutia so it's easier to play. There's a fair bit of replayability too as far as different campaign start times and starting dispositions - one of the harder alt-history scenarios has you clawing back the South Pacific after it's assumed that Port Moresby fell to the Japanese and Midway never occurred. Are you a bad enough Halsey to fight the full Kido Butai with the Wasp and Essex near the Great Barrier Reef? Just remember that you're going to shell out another 80 bucks for WITP:AE anyway if this gets you hooked. === As for your WITE - HQ question, if two units assigned to different HQs attack together or get attacked, they suffer a combat value penalty. It's correct that you should be attacking wherever the enemy isn't / is weak, but try to keep a plan in your head so your forces don't intermingle too much. It might not be a big deal for the first 17 turns or so when the Russians will be in full retreat, but you definitely need to have a contiguous and organized line come winter.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2014 05:54
|
|
|
"It's an awful, horrible game but it's also the best $80 I've spent" is a great way to describe grognard games... No other form of entertainment is this cheap for me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2014 06:02
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Just remember that you're going to shell out another 80 bucks for WITP:AE anyway if this gets you hooked. This is the goddamn problem. It's also 94 bucks for me because Matrix hates Canada I guess. Thanks for the HQ tips, it will help to keep a general plan in mind for the bigger scenarios. I'm going to work through some more of the isolated missions before tackling the full invasion.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2014 06:26
|
|
|
If you want an awful pacific game that's actually quite cheap, look at Pacific Storm. It is an exercise in horrific micromanagement hell, but that hardly makes it any different to the usual fare.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2014 10:34
|
|
|
Honestly if you want a good pacific grand strategy game, look up Empire of the Sun. It's a board game, but it's got a rules-enabled thing on wargameroom and there are some very helpful videos on GMT games' youtube.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2014 15:00
|
|
|
War Plan Pacific is a solid grognard-lite game. Fun, easy to learn, and a whole campaign can be played in just a couple hours. It still costs $40, but that's a hell of a lot better than WitP.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2014 15:41
|
|
|
Has anyone tried the Fall Weiss game? I've seen a few people write negative things about Wastelands but I don't really know anything about them? Are they really a garbage developer?
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2014 22:01
|
|
|
War in the Pacific never ceases to amaze me - got into an unexpected bunfight with the Enterprise and Lexington off Midway with the Hiryu and Soryu. Took down both enemy ships but the Lexington went down - but before it sank, all of its planes diverted and landed on the island instead.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2014 22:33
|
|
|
Dramicus posted:Has anyone tried the Fall Weiss game? I've seen a few people write negative things about Wastelands but I don't really know anything about them? Are they really a garbage developer? I made the mistake of buying 2 of their games, Strategic War in Europe and Storm Over the Pacific. In both cases, the UI feels very unpolished (mouse clicks on buttons make this horrid sound like a squeaky hinge), the AI is braindead, many game mechanics flat out don't work (as in naval bombardment always deals 0 damage in a game about WW2 in the Pacific) and the whole thing just feels extremely generic. Battlefront's Strategic Command series, or Hearts of Iron does this kind of thing much better.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2014 22:40
|
|
|
Is there a somewhat casual (IE: a few hours plus) board game involving the eastern front that I can get a hold of?
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2014 22:41
|
|
|
Unity of Command.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2014 22:45
|
|
|
maev posted:Is there a somewhat casual (IE: a few hours plus) board game involving the eastern front that I can get a hold of? If it's a board game you want, there's a No Retreat! The Russian Front game going on in the LP Forum. As one of the participants, it seems quite manageable! (Although the man in charge of the cards is a dolt  )
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2014 22:47
|
|
|
maev posted:Is there a somewhat casual (IE: a few hours plus) board game involving the eastern front that I can get a hold of? You'll probably have better luck looking for boardgames here: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3564278, but No Retreat was the first thing I thought of (it's more than a couple hours though, most board wargames will be 6-ish hours at a minimum). If you like crazy WitE-style complexity, The Dark Valley just came out and is a divisional-scale Eastern Front game (probably at least 20-30 hours playtime for a full campaign).
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2014 23:02
|
|
|
maev posted:Is there a somewhat casual (IE: a few hours plus) board game involving the eastern front that I can get a hold of? Battle for Moscow is literally babby's first wargame: http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/49276/battle-for-moscow-second-edition http://grognard.com/bfm/game.html Computer conversion: http://war-game-programming.com/Moscow.html 
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2014 02:56
|
|
|
Here go play some Panzer General in your browser http://openpanzer.net/
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2014 19:03
|
|
|
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3531211quote:Hello I discovered your forum today. quote:Matrix World In Flames  Riso posted:Here go play some Panzer General in your browser http://openpanzer.net/ This is pretty great! I did notice though that it's not the original campaign/scenarios - even the first Kutno/Lodz mission has way more units than normal.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2014 04:51
|
|
|
nenonen That guy prefaces all his posts with his screenname as above. Wargaming forums seem to attract people with the weirdest posting habits. Well, and other habits. All Forums >> New Releases from Matrix Games >> World in Flames >> Just purchased the game last night. posted:
Now I'm almost tempted to try out the Boardgame Chit Arrangement Simulator 2013!
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2014 09:30
|
|
|
That guy literally recommends World in Flames to everyone regardless of what they ask for.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2014 11:41
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:That guy literally recommends World in Flames to everyone regardless of what they ask for. Maybe he thinks if enough people buy it, the game will finally get multiplayer.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2014 12:05
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:That guy literally recommends World in Flames to everyone regardless of what they ask for. Now that you mention it, there are certain similarities to "this may not be exactly what you're looking for, but have you considered quote:So as the title reads, I just purchased this game last night. I decided to do a Global War scenario on Solitair as my "introduction to the game". I opted for the "standard" rule set and sallied forth. It took me nearly two hours to set up the countries. I enjoyed that and it was interesting. I do wonder why they all mention their AARs as 'solitaire' games when there's literally nothing else to play as. Maybe there are some people out there who are running hotseat games?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2014 16:29
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Now I'm almost tempted to try out the Boardgame Chit Arrangement Simulator 2013! Wait you have to set up the board? its a computer game holy poo poo matrix come on
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2014 17:47
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Now that you mention it, there are certain similarities to "this may not be exactly what you're looking for, but have you considered Game design has passed World in Flames up, so in order to keep up with modern gaming, they just add more and more and more bloat.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2014 17:53
|
|
|
Ghost of Mussolini posted:Wait you have to set up the board? its a computer game holy poo poo matrix come on Given that Matrix still sells boxed versions of games, it is so they can use the time honored tradition of putting "Over 100+ hours of gameplay!" on the box. They can't resort to cutscenes and level grinding, so they have to resort to you setting up the board yourself for two hours every game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2014 22:30
|
|
|
Admittedly I have faced down the 6+ hour horror that is a turn 1 WITP grand campaign as the IJN but at least half that was plotting the first 3 months of the game and not just placing pieces.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2014 00:11
|
|
|
I just finished my first full Case White scenario for Decisive Campaigns: Warsaw to Paris! I just made it exactly at the deadline of Sep-25-1939 after taking Warsaw in 3 turns of direct assaults. I had no other choice because I had completely mismanaged Army Group South and was still a good 3-4 turns away from Kielce, Pyzemysl, Lvov and Lublin, and AGN was also not going to make it to Brest-Litovsk in time.   (Note that I had stopped moving AGS on the last 2 turns after I realized that Warsaw was going to be the only ticket to win, so the forces on the last 2 screenshots should have moved up farther still) Overall I enjoyed the experience: It's easier to grasp than TOAW, less minutiae than WITE (and has more realistic encirclement modeling) and the interface is simple and clean without being as dead-simple as Panzer General/Corps. I think I'll try it from the Polish side next.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2014 09:33
|
|
|
When is the rule preventing consolidation of carriers into single task forces removed for the Allies in WitP? I can't find it in the manual and I'm pretty sure this rule exists and it's driving me nuts.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2014 09:52
|
|
|
quote:The coordination of air strikes is affected by how many Carrier aircraft are based in the TF launching a strike. The chance of uncoordination is doubled under the following circumstances: A single American carrier will never carry more than 100 aircraft, so a single carrier in a TF by itself will never suffer a coordination penalty. Two carriers will have 180 aircraft maximum. Since the uncoordinated strike chance in 1941 and 1942 is 101-200, a strike from 2 carriers in the same TF will have an 80% (?) chance of becoming uncoordinated. In 1943, this becomes a 20% chance to become uncoordinated. Three carriers in a TF, 270 aircraft maximum, will have an 80% chance to be uncoordinated in 1943, or a 35% chance to be uncoordinated in 1944. Four carriers in a TF, 360 aircraft maximum, will have an 80% chance to be uncoordinated in 1944. Note that this is per TF, and not per hex. Some players run 2-carrier TFs and then have multiple TFs in the same hex. Others run single-carrier TFs but then still do have more multiple TFs in the same hex. Your chances at a coordinated strike would also go up if you're not running full aircraft complements such as due to battle damage or resizing, but mission settings (leaving some fighters for CAP) would not change this. The disadvantage to splitting up your carriers into their own TFs is that while their strikes might be coordinated, they wouldn't be arriving all at the same time. As well, more TFs means needing more escorts. gradenko_2000 fucked around with this message at 10:28 on Jan 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2014 10:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 19:48 |
|
|
That makes sense, thanks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2014 21:07
|
|