Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

SPWAW vs SPWW2

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> SPWAW vs SPWW2 Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
SPWAW vs SPWW2 - 4/24/2001 3:40:00 AM   
Coachace


Posts: 49
Joined: 3/13/2001
From: Fountain Valley, California
Status: offline
I want to start by saying I am not posting this to start a flame war or turn gamers away from SPWAW. AND, I have already preordered four copies of MCNA. That said, I recently found the Wargamer hosting SPWW2, so I took a quick look at it. It's a free downloadable game (38mb) as stand alone or addition to SPII or SPIII. So quick was my look, the only obvious thing I noticed different than SPWAW was the red info bar across the top displaying hex information. I didn't get a chance to actually play SPWW2 yet, but the red information bar intrigued me. SPWAW's hex information is a floating message that pops up after the mouse is inactive for a few seconds. SPWW2's information bar was constantly updated as I moved the cursor from hex to hex. Not being very good at guessing hex numbers on the map, I thouht this was a cool feature. Has anyone checked out this 'other' SP addition and if so, how does it compare to SPWAW? I already know the SPWAW support in unequalled, and can assume that the 38mb SPWW2 offers is 10% of what SPWAW offers, but I was more curious about features like the information bar, not necessarily game mechanics or OOB. It's sad, but when I looked at SPWW2 I did only that - look. I haven't played it yet, but I already have this preconcieved notion that SPWAW outguns it. It is very interesting how many veins of this classic game exist.

_____________________________

Post #: 1
- 4/24/2001 3:49:00 AM   
Kharan

 

Posts: 505
Joined: 5/9/2000
Status: offline
quote:

SPWW2's information bar was constantly updated as I moved the cursor from hex to hex.
Set live delay to zero in the preferences to get the same effect in SPWAW. Don't know why it's at 200 by default really...

_____________________________


(in reply to Coachace)
Post #: 2
- 4/24/2001 3:55:00 AM   
dfsrusa

 

Posts: 62
Joined: 3/26/2001
From: St. Paul, Minnesota
Status: offline
I've played one pbem game in SPWW2, and about 15 in SPW@Wv4.5. Not that SPWW2 is bad, per se, W@W is just so much better. There's a different look to it, but other than that I haven't found any great differences. Scot Stephenson

_____________________________

Carpe Diem

(in reply to Coachace)
Post #: 3
- 4/24/2001 4:00:00 AM   
Mikimoto

 

Posts: 511
Joined: 11/6/2000
From: Barcelona, Catalunya
Status: offline
Hello. Before SPWAW I have played SPWW2 during a year or so. Now I only play SPWAW. In my humble opinion SPWAW (V 4.5) is better than spww2 and I will give you some reasons: 1. In Spww2: you can't entrench units. 2. In Spww2: the upgrade screen is POOR (that of sp2) 3. In Spww2: the Info of units in battle is poor 4. In Spww2: They mix all the machineguns teams of a Company in one great unit (9 men and three MG's)and I don't like this solution. 5. In Spww2: The same for mortars (But I like mortars) 6. In Spww2: They have Abstract armour value. 7. It's impossible to kill infantry with tank guns. 8. In Spww2: It's difficult to kill everything but tanks, Infantry goes with high supression and low casualties. 9. In Spww2: It's difficult to finnish an scenario capturing all the Victory hexes given the AI deployment and use of reserves. But I love four features of SPWW2: 1. They have hyper detailed OOB's, of 999 units by nation. 2. They have LOTS of infantry types per nation with LOTS of infantry AT weapons (my personal obsession). 3. In the Campaigns or battles you can select DEFAULT TERRAIN, that gives historical and realistical terraing types for battles, giving opponentes/month/year. 4. The duration in turns of a battle has a possibility of going further. But now I have a LOVE: SPWAW Saludos. :D

_____________________________

Desperta ferro!
Miquel Guasch Aparicio

(in reply to Coachace)
Post #: 4
- 4/24/2001 4:57:00 AM   
Tomanbeg

 

Posts: 4385
Joined: 7/14/2000
From: Memphis, Tn, CSA
Status: offline
WW2 is not as radical a departure from SP as W@W is. W@W has more detail, which confuses some players into thinking It's more realistic. WW2 has better maps and I think does better at dealing with fog of war. W@W has better support and more room for growth. And I play a lot of WW2 ver 4 and have no problem killing off Inf. at least in WW2 you don't have to worry about a squad that has been shot down to 4 men from 12 suddenly going from routed to pinned and having to deal with 3 Rambos lead by an Arnie, which is ok 1 % of the time but when it happens 99% of the time is BS. WW2 is not that popular a period, I'm looking forward to seeing if the Matrix model holds up when a M1A2 special op fires and kills an entire Soviet Armored Battalion in 2 or 3 minutes. It will sure make some people wake up and take notice. I think SP2 is the best of the SP series, (even with all it's warts, all matrix and the cammo group have done is provide a new set of warts,while proving yet again that anything can picked apart) 10 years from now if we could look at final distribution #'s, I would'n be suprized to find that SP2 sells more then both WW2 and W@W give away. T.

_____________________________

"The 15th May, 1948, arrived ... On that day the mufti of Jerusalem appealed to the Arabs of Palestine to leave the country, because the Arab armies were about to enter and fight in their stead."
– The Cairo daily Akhbar el Yom, Oct. 12, 1963.
[IMG]http

(in reply to Coachace)
Post #: 5
- 4/24/2001 7:19:00 AM   
Don Bowen


Posts: 8183
Joined: 7/13/2000
From: Georgetown, Texas, USA
Status: offline
I play and enjoy both SPWW2 and SPWAW. As mentioned already in this thread, they each have their good and bad points. Two of the areas where SPWW2 really outshines SPWAW: 1. There is an extra level of zoom in. Sometimes, after playing SPWAW, I'll go over to SPWW2 just to give my poor old eyes a rest. I understand that SPWW2, being a child of SP3, is stuck with the lower level of magnification. That's too bad. 2. SPWW2 allows up to 500 units per side (actually 459 is the max due to purchase screen programming). The extra units make it possible to break down the multi-MG/Mortar squads into single gun sections and return to the 1-vehicle, 1-crew served weapon, 1-squad sized units. Sure would be nice if SPWAW could handle more units. Don

_____________________________


(in reply to Coachace)
Post #: 6
- 4/24/2001 7:49:00 AM   
Phil

 

Posts: 64
Joined: 12/12/2000
From: New Iberia, LA, USA
Status: offline
I used to play SPWW2 when it first came out. Sadly though, I must confess that SPWAW is about the only thing I play now. I downloaded the latest SPWW2, and after playing a few battles, realized that I much perferred SPWAW. Not that SPWW2 is bad, I just like SPWAW better. First off, SPWW2 is a DOS game. Which Windows ME doesn't play well. You can get it to work, but you have to do some tweaking. And there is always the chance of the game crashing in the middle of a battle no matter what you do. Then there is the fun of playing a DOS game on a 933 Mzh machine. Those units fly across that screen! SPWAW seems to have a greater varity of sounds for the weapons being fired. Though, as mentioned before, SPWW2 has much more varied infantry, and from earlier dates I think also. You can assemble a force from the 1920's. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that isn't in SPWAW. It's your choice, you have nothing to lose by checking SPWW2 out. Oh, don't you need the Steel Panthers II or III disc to play?

_____________________________

Phil

(in reply to Coachace)
Post #: 7
- 4/24/2001 7:59:00 AM   
Kharan

 

Posts: 505
Joined: 5/9/2000
Status: offline
C&C, sounds, penetration model, TCP/IP... four things which made SPWW2 pretty obsolete for me. I confess I haven't played v4 that much to be sure, but it looked like the balance was still out of whack, tanks being next to useless against infantry.

_____________________________


(in reply to Coachace)
Post #: 8
- 4/24/2001 10:06:00 AM   
victorhauser

 

Posts: 318
Joined: 5/29/2000
From: austin, texas
Status: offline
Tomanbeg: I have never really liked any of the Steel Panthers modern games (SP2 and SP3 post-WW2). The WW2 games are far less complex and easy to model, which means that they are more "realistic" and thus "better". Helicopters absolutely dominated SP2 and post-WW2 SP3. And rather than mess with all the headaches and problems that the modern games have, I prefer to play the cleaner, more perfected, SPWaW. I also prefer WW2 games from the perspective that there is a lot more historical data and information to work with. Modern games tend to be very speculative and hypothetical and that doesn't appeal to me as much either. Give me SPWaW anyday! :)

_____________________________

VAH

(in reply to Coachace)
Post #: 9
- 4/24/2001 1:17:00 PM   
AJVa


Posts: 69
Joined: 1/17/2001
From: SF
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Phil: Oh, don't you need the Steel Panthers II or III disc to play?
If I recollect correctly you could use just any disc. In case you wanted to see the video clips you had to use SP discs. This should be the case in the latest version I believe. What I liked in SPWW2 was the higher number of units per nation and those neat snorkel tanks that had different icons (head of the snorkel) when going under water (not only cosmetics, they could not fire when under water). [ April 24, 2001: Message edited by: AJVa ]

_____________________________


(in reply to Coachace)
Post #: 10
- 4/24/2001 6:31:00 PM   
Harry

 

Posts: 85
Joined: 4/7/2000
From: Aachen, Germany
Status: offline
Some corrections form above messages 1. You can play SPWW2 V4 _without_ any SP-CD. 2. Scroll and Game Speed can be lowerd in a ini-file. 3. Runs fine under WIN98. This is better in SPWW2 1. IMO SPWW2 has better generated maps than SPWAW. Here SPWAW needs an upgrade. (Well don't know how good they will be in V5.0) 2. I like the infantry in SPWW2. overall I think SPWAW has more potential to improve further. (SPModern, Age) my 0.02 Euro

_____________________________


(in reply to Coachace)
Post #: 11
- 4/24/2001 6:38:00 PM   
Ken999

 

Posts: 2
Joined: 4/24/2001
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by AJVa: If I recollect correctly you could use just any disc. In case you wanted to see the video clips you had to use SP discs. This should be the case in the latest version I believe. What I liked in SPWW2 was the higher number of units per nation and those neat snorkel tanks that had different icons (head of the snorkel) when going under water (not only cosmetics, they could not fire when under water). [ April 24, 2001: Message edited by: AJVa ]
spww2 version4 definitely has it's strong points over spwaw,one of them being the highly detailed OOBs,and I don't know if it's just me but the long campaign is far more challenging in spww2 then spwaw(I crushed the computer 10 games in a row in spwaw before I got bored with it,mostly due to the fact the AI does a pathetic job of deploying it's units).As far as spwaw goes, it looks better, sounds better,easier install,TCPplay with human opponents,superb armor penetration model,breakdowns and weapon malfunction and U don't need a disc to play.Though I must admit I haven't played spww2 or spwaw since I got my copy of combat mission, beyond overlord

_____________________________


(in reply to Coachace)
Post #: 12
- 4/24/2001 6:45:00 PM   
mrmayor

 

Posts: 7
Joined: 3/22/2001
From: Eastlake, Ohio
Status: offline
Hi Gents, I have played both versions of SP. SPWaW is light years ahead in almost every aspect but a few. 1.) I like the multiple elevations that SPWW2V4 gives in the map editor. Making maps is so much more challanging and fun with this option. Gives you more variables to your maps. There is even a Monte Cassino scenario in SPWW2 that is so much fun to play because of all of the elevation levels (15) that you have to go up. Extremely challanging. 2.) I also like the vast amount of editor slots for units. You can customize your OOB for just about anything you can dream up. 3.) Since SPWW2 is built from the old SP@ engine there seems to be another Zoom in level that gets you just a bit more up close and personal. I miss that with SPWaW. However the terrain variations of SPWaW blows the socks off of SPWW2. I really enjoy using the map editor of WaW so much more. I wish they could enlarge the map area side to side also. Now you can make maps maxed out and have an area of 2.6 miles by 6.8 miles. You can get a lot of fighting done there, but how about a msp that is 5 miles by 6.8 miles. A monster map indeed!! :eek: :D

_____________________________

Dwight A. Hartley

(in reply to Coachace)
Post #: 13
- 4/24/2001 7:34:00 PM   
Mike Wood


Posts: 2095
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Oakland, California
Status: offline
Hello... I have played both versions. In fact, I wrote both versions. I was the programmer for SPWW2, although since version 2.9, Andy has been adding features. I was the programmer for SPWAW, although since version 4.5, Tom has been adding features. I am, however, currently working with Gary Grigsby on Uncommon Valor. I really liked the work that we did in SPWW2. The design team included David Heath, Don Goodbrand, Andy Gailey, Nick Papp, Bill Wilder, Paul Vebber and myself. The game was produced by TGN, the Camo Group and Wild Bill's Raiders. Some of us wanted to add TCP\IP play and make the game a native Windows program. Some wanted to add more features, but basically leave the game alone. So, we broke into two teams. Those who stayed with The Camo Group set their design agenda and those who went with David Heath set ours. The primary design improvements the Camo Group settled on were an expanded orders of battle database and an expanded set of map variables. We decided that downward compatibility was more important to us, we would forego these changes. Before we could decide our primary design improvements, we needed a game. Having written the earlier game, we felt we had learned a lot about what would work well in a game of this type and what would not. We took the code from Steel Panthers III, which was much more advanced and had far fewer bugs to begin with, and started work. We included many of the same type features we had put into the earlier game and added many new ones. We eventually put on a second programmer. Several of the Camo Group artist had left and come over to us. The composer and most all of the production people had stayed with David. We had a larger team of very dedicated folks. We had to make our orders of battle from scratch, so until version 5.0, ours were not really complete. The better points about our product have become the infantry and armor combat systems, the ambiance produced by the sound effects, the addition of the role playing elements of Mega Campaign, the new and very improved orders of battle in version 5.0, our newer and more friendly secure PBEM system, TCP\IP play of up to four players, the new op fire system that allows the player to be more than a spectator during his opponents turn and the many other improvements that have proved popular with many players. If SPWAW is a better game, and I feel it is, it is not only because it is a later game, but also because David has listened to end user input and incorporated many of the suggestions made by you folk. I feel the people in the Camo Group have worked hard to improve our original game and have done good work. But, if I might say this without offending the loyal SPWW2 players, I also feel that David's group has really, really, really done an outstanding job with their effort. Humbly... Michael Wood

_____________________________


(in reply to Coachace)
Post #: 14
- 4/24/2001 7:52:00 PM   
murx

 

Posts: 245
Joined: 3/6/2001
From: Braunschweig/Germany
Status: offline
This is what I really REALLY love about Martix Games - all of You there care for the 'consumer' - none of the big companies have their programmers, developers, artist reply to their forum. Most of the time they have just a few folks from their 'technical support stuff' post useless info (like once in a week they post). It's good to know that here at Matrix it is the way it is " :) murx

_____________________________


(in reply to Coachace)
Post #: 15
- 4/24/2001 7:56:00 PM   
Larry Holt

 

Posts: 1969
Joined: 3/31/2000
From: Atlanta, GA 30068
Status: offline
I prefer the more realistic armor penetration system in WaW, based on actual mm of armor, instead of the abstracted "factors" used in WW2. However, I really, really, really miss that Storch in my core! It sure was fun in an arcade sort of way to shoot up the AI after I saw everything. Unrealistic but relaxing & fun after a hard day. (its a game as much as a simulation)

_____________________________

Never take counsel of your fears.

(in reply to Coachace)
Post #: 16
- 4/24/2001 7:59:00 PM   
Marder_MatrixForum

 

Posts: 99
Joined: 12/15/2000
From: Austria
Status: offline
Can somebody please tell me if there is a free download for SPWAW2, i haven´t heard of that version, and i would like to have a look at it! Thanks!

_____________________________

"klotzen nicht kleckern"
(H.Guderian)

(in reply to Coachace)
Post #: 17
- 4/24/2001 8:21:00 PM   
Charles2222


Posts: 3993
Joined: 3/12/2001
Status: offline
Marder: Go to www.wargamer.com and on the home page you will see one of their main articles that has it.

_____________________________


(in reply to Coachace)
Post #: 18
- 4/24/2001 10:37:00 PM   
Paul Vebber


Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline
I would add to Mike's excellent synopsis, a couple of items form my perspective as developer for versions 4 and 5 of SP:WaW. SP:WW2 has focused primarily on map generation and other aspects of random battles, and refining the SP2 campaign process. We have many great scenario designs, they have fewer, so for their team, focusing on the random map generator makes great sense! With Wild Bill and his team of scenario designers, we focused more on map editing tools - greatly expanded in version 5, and our body of literally hundreds of scenarios and maps that can be used! The most requested part of this we hear about for adding into SP:WaW is "higher elevations". We declined to do this until we could adequately deal with the notion of "slope". As implemented in SPWW2 heights are like escalator steps and a unit is always parallel to the ground. This creates a whole host of bugs. We also wanted to implement the MegaCampaign system rather focus on "random" campaigns. So there is a general distinction between the 2 games where SPWW2 focued on automating scenario and campaign generation to a much greater extent, while we wanted to leverage our great scenario desing team with editing tools and the Mega-Campaigns. As Mike said we decided not to redo the OObs adding more slots, becasue it would have required abandoning scores of scenarios that would have to be redone. Yes having 30 different variations on infantryunits is cool, but we wanted to make sure teh distinctions between the combat arms we had where done right,before we added what would otherwise be essentially identical unis with differnet names and minor weapon variations. Even we have a hard time making distinctions deteen say types of rifles, so our feeling is, get what we have working with a wide a "dynamic range" as possible, then think about ways to expand the OOB pool. The combat system is where the games really have no comparison. A key reason for the two groups splitting was over whether the base combat sytem was "good enough" or needed massive overhaul. They thought it would be too risky to undertake such a massive "gut and paste" to the code, we thought that the combat engine needed overhaul to enable significant OOB modification to really make a difference on gameplay. The comment above about changes in "detail" in the combat engine being confused with increased "realism" is a good one that applies far mor to OOBs than the game engine! Neither game is "realistic" - they are games! - but historically appropriate detail to us must first be in the guts of the game for it to mean anything in the data that is manipulated by it! The effort has taken a while to get rid of bugs that this overhaul causes, but ver 5 has eliminated teh vast majority of them. The "dynamic range" of SP:WaW is a subtle thing. One can simply lower spotting to make things harder to see across the board, and raise infantry toughness so infantry take fewer casualties across the board. What I mean by dynamic range is the relationship between the effect on troops moving in the open and those in cover or entrenched. Infantry are tough in SP:WaW where they are supposed to be tough and are shredded when they should be shreddded. Are visibible when they should be at long range, and tanks can move right through them without seeing them when entrenched and holding their fire. You can "slide this scale" as you wish using the prefs for spotting and infantry toughness. We also completely redid artillery effcts so artillery and tank guns have their historical effect on denying areas and preventing movement. We have explained the reasons we have toned done infantry casualties, but if you disagree you can change artillery effect seperately for hard and soft targets. IF you like the lower spotting and lower infantry casualties in SP:WW2 - turn spotting down to 50 and infantry toughness up to 150 or 175. You find spotting far more difficult and infantry far togher to kill, but the realtive casualties between moving in the open and entrenched wil still be there. I think SPCAmo also assumes a dead is a WIA/KIA - while we assume a "casualty" is just rendered combat inefective for the rest of the scenario, so another reason for the casualty difference. Add in the multiple stances, Command and Control, and selectable opfire and you have a combat system that offers far more historical detail than any other SP game. The armor combat system in v5 is state of the art and a VAST improvement over the orignal "penetration +/- 50% > armor factor" in other SP games. Overalll there are those who don;t like the added detail and complication that SP:WaW adds. No game satisfies everybody and having the choices between the great work SP Camo has done, and SP:WaW makes it more likely a gamer will find one to their liking!

_____________________________


(in reply to Coachace)
Post #: 19
- 4/25/2001 3:03:00 AM   
Marder_MatrixForum

 

Posts: 99
Joined: 12/15/2000
From: Austria
Status: offline
Thanks charles for the info! I just took a look at spwaw2! I like the oob, but the graphic is so poor that i didn´t want play this version! Waiting for v.5 from matrix...

_____________________________

"klotzen nicht kleckern"
(H.Guderian)

(in reply to Coachace)
Post #: 20
- 4/25/2001 3:13:00 AM   
Coachace


Posts: 49
Joined: 3/13/2001
From: Fountain Valley, California
Status: offline
Paul & Mike: Thanks for your excellent feedback! I didn't know how to tactfully bring up the obvious team split, but Mike did a great job explaining. You guys have no idea how impressed I am seeing your team respond to simple questions asked on this forum like the one I asked. I knew there'd be other gamers responding, but it's rare to see the development team so consistantly involved in the forums. Thanks to everyone for the feedback!

_____________________________


(in reply to Coachace)
Post #: 21
- 4/25/2001 4:33:00 AM   
David Heath


Posts: 3274
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Staten Island NY
Status: offline
Being available to the gamers is one of the key things we wanted to do. We do not want spoke people. We want everyone of the Matix team available. This was also a factor in the breakup. The SP-Camo team never really wanted to hold a live chats, post on forums or take ideas from the public. When we split up this was one of the key things we wanted to make sure to do. Once gamers start getting the game we plan on have a nice big live chat and talk about the game, and the future of SPWAW. We really enjoy chatting with the gamers when we were with the Gamers Net. We also wanted to get the gamers ideas. So much of what you thank us for is really from you guys. A lot of the design fun is trying to put everyone tastes into the game. Not always possible but fun. We also understood working together in a tight team sometimes has you lose touch with the gaming community we never want that to happen here. We want everyone to be able to come up to us have beer and chit chat or just talk about our games or anyones games. I really feel that is what a true hobby style company is and what we try to promote. I really think everyone can see that this is a style that really works not only for us but also for the gamers.

_____________________________


(in reply to Coachace)
Post #: 22
- 4/25/2001 5:33:00 AM   
Harry

 

Posts: 85
Joined: 4/7/2000
From: Aachen, Germany
Status: offline
What can I say....I am speechless! Matrix you impressed me once more!! :eek: [ April 24, 2001: Message edited by: Harry ]

_____________________________


(in reply to Coachace)
Post #: 23
- 4/25/2001 6:59:00 AM   
Mikimoto

 

Posts: 511
Joined: 11/6/2000
From: Barcelona, Catalunya
Status: offline
Hello, David and Paul. Matrix is actually GREAT because YOU, people are the Greatest. I have never seen this style, and no words for describing it. Saludos. :eek:

_____________________________

Desperta ferro!
Miquel Guasch Aparicio

(in reply to Coachace)
Post #: 24
- 4/25/2001 7:16:00 AM   
Alby


Posts: 4855
Joined: 4/29/2000
From: Greenwood, Indiana
Status: offline
I have played (or tried to at least) spww2 a number of times. Whenever i get started, the graphics are so poor I usually just end up quitting. The smoke not only hides your units from the enemy, but from you as well! The oobs are good in spww2, and there is the closer in Zoom! Wish WAW would go one more on the zoom but.... spwaw has spww2 beat by a long shot. And David sure is right about them not wanting to "chat" and respond in forums...Im not sure the spww2 forum has worked for more than one day in a row!! heheh ;)

_____________________________



(in reply to Coachace)
Post #: 25
- 4/25/2001 8:56:00 AM   
Spike

 

Posts: 36
Joined: 3/1/2001
From: Buffalo, NY, USA
Status: offline
I've been playing both SPWAW and SPWW2. All in all I think SPWAW is definately the better game, but SPWW2 does have more units in the OOB. The main reason I play SPWW2 however is that it will run on my old laptop while SPWAW won't! :( (only supports 640x480 resolution..luckily I'm not away from my main PC too much)

_____________________________


(in reply to Coachace)
Post #: 26
- 4/25/2001 10:00:00 AM   
troopie

 

Posts: 996
Joined: 4/8/2000
From: Directly above the centre of the Earth.
Status: offline
I play SPWW2 for the following reason. I like WW1 small unit combat and SPWW2 is the only game in town. The OOBs are supremely customiseable and MOBhack is easier to use than SPOBedit. But SPWAW has superior sound, models armour penetration better, has special forces/guerrilla infiltration options, better visibility and weather modelling, (though not as good as AOR has) higher resolutions, clearer graphics and generally better playability. If SPWAW had WW1 capability and the ability to add OOBs it would be perfect. troopie

_____________________________

Pamwe Chete

(in reply to Coachace)
Post #: 27
- 4/27/2001 8:01:00 AM   
RockinHarry


Posts: 2963
Joined: 1/18/2001
From: Germany
Status: offline
Thanks David and Mike for the great background info on both projects! :) First choice still: SP:WAW simply more realistic, looks better, sounds better, plays better, designs better :D ,support´s better, forum´s better :D, Mega Campaigns better.... ___________ RockinHarry

_____________________________

RockinHarry in the web:

https://www.facebook.com/harry.zann

(in reply to Coachace)
Post #: 28
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> SPWAW vs SPWW2 Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.391