Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >>

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

- 8/18/2003 2:07:42 AM

StrategyCat

Posts: 29
Joined: 8/17/2003
From: USA
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Kung Karl
[B]What exactly is the diffrence between the TOAW Volume 1 with patches and TOAW: COW?
Are the diffrence that major? Besides XP compability. [/B][/QUOTE]

I hate to tell you this, but CoW is *not* XP compatible. You see, that was one of the things the recently released 1.06 patch was supposed to do, but it's back to the drawing board for that, I guess.
To the best of my knowledge, the Warfare HQ website has the most up-to-date info regarding this game, so you're probably best off going there for info. Here's the URL: http://www.warfarehq.com/news.shtml

_____________________________

StrategyCat
-Any country that just rolls over and lets its president die like a dog in the street deserves all the Bushes it gets-

(in reply to Kung Karl)

Post #: 61

- 8/18/2003 2:22:57 AM

StrategyCat

Posts: 29
Joined: 8/17/2003
From: USA
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1
[B]That was a heck of a read Dave.

Were you previously unaware of this Wargamer article?

_____________________________

StrategyCat
-Any country that just rolls over and lets its president die like a dog in the street deserves all the Bushes it gets-

(in reply to Kung Karl)

Post #: 62

- 8/18/2003 2:33:53 AM

Les_the_Sarge_9_1

Posts: 4392
Joined: 12/29/2000
Status: offline

I don't see all of the articles Strategycat hehe.

Hey I still find people that have not even heard of Matrix Games or Wargamer in the first place hehe.

"I hate to tell you this, but CoW is *not* XP compatible."

You are going to have to explain that to my computer then. It disagrees :)

I will say this though, I have had games that "WILL" run on XP for others give me the finger in the past. Sometimes the user has to check out their specific hardware as well.

_____________________________

I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.

(in reply to Kung Karl)

Post #: 63

- 8/18/2003 2:56:16 AM

StrategyCat

Posts: 29
Joined: 8/17/2003
From: USA
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1
[B]I don't see all of the articles Strategycat hehe. [/B]

Were you aware of the issues the article points out?

[B]"I hate to tell you this, but CoW is *not* XP compatible."

You are going to have to explain that to my computer then. It disagrees :) [/B]

Well, I don't have the game currently installed (and in any case, I have Win98SE), but it was my understanding that there were XP compatability issues that were supposed to be addressed with the 1.06 patch and that these were the major fixes related to that patch.
Now, it may be that there are only XP issues related to PBEM, I don't know. It's also possible that you in particular may not be experiencing any problems, for whatever reason. But I'm almost sure there were a good number of people who ran into XP problems with CoW and that the 1.06 patch was supposed to address those.

_____________________________

StrategyCat
-Any country that just rolls over and lets its president die like a dog in the street deserves all the Bushes it gets-

(in reply to Kung Karl)

Post #: 64

- 8/18/2003 3:37:02 AM

Les_the_Sarge_9_1

Posts: 4392
Joined: 12/29/2000
Status: offline

The article was fairly exhaustive I will agree.

And a lot of the points were quite damning on the surface.
Some of the points raised, the first that leaps to mind being the 50mm ATG vs the 75mm ATG rating for instance would give a person just cause to be annoyed.

Hmm I guess in the final analysis, that is why I am a well known champion of board games.
Now if an ASL counter had something peculiar about one of it's ratings it would stick out like a sore thumb. And I could fix it the same way I fix all my counters that become recognised as being the victim of errata.

And the important thing to remember, is ALL wargames suffer errata.

Now I have seen games that had some sterling qualities, and they fell flat on their face because of a design flaw that just ruined the whole process.

The best board game example I can think of is Tank Leader. When I first got that game I was major league impressed with the notion. Trouble is the notion just didn't work end of story. I sold the game for 5 bucks when I off loaded all my WW3 designs the year Russian Communism died.

To date, I have not seen a single computer wargame outright beat a board game at its own game so to speak.
I have seen some programs do a damned fine job trying though.

_____________________________

I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.

(in reply to Kung Karl)

Post #: 65

- 8/18/2003 3:37:20 AM

Kung Karl

Posts: 323
Joined: 7/1/2003
Status: offline

Here are the answer from Koger about the wargamer article
http://www.warfarehq.com/Articles/TOAW%20Articles/toaw_review_rebuttal_koger.shtml

(in reply to Kung Karl)

Post #: 66

- 8/18/2003 3:45:05 AM

Kung Karl

Posts: 323
Joined: 7/1/2003
Status: offline

To Norm Koger if you read this thread:

Would you say TOAW: Elite Edition with patches is a bad simulation of WW2 combat compared to the CoW edition?

I can't get CoW because it is too expensive to import to Sweden.:( A nice guy did however sell me TOAW 1:EE and I am hoping it isn't much inferior to the COW edition.

(in reply to Kung Karl)

Post #: 67

- 8/18/2003 3:52:46 AM

Les_the_Sarge_9_1

Posts: 4392
Joined: 12/29/2000
Status: offline

Kung dude here you are, the coveted Sarge Bullseye award hehe.

The first link featuring the original article is excellently countered by your link featuring the rebutal.

I even noticed the rebutal comments to the 50mm vs 75mm ATG comments.

Damned good show ole boy, you are a first rate debater.

_____________________________

I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.

(in reply to Kung Karl)

Post #: 68

- 8/18/2003 3:55:33 AM

Kung Karl

Posts: 323
Joined: 7/1/2003
Status: offline

Thanks.:) The answers were realy nice to read and I am looking forward to this game more than ever!!:D

(in reply to Kung Karl)

Post #: 69

- 8/18/2003 6:04:48 AM

StrategyCat

Posts: 29
Joined: 8/17/2003
From: USA
Status: offline

Sarge, I have now asked you two simple and direct questions, neither of which you chose to answer.

First I asked whether you were previously aware of the Wargamer article. You responded thusly, "I don't see all of the articles Strategycat hehe." Although I can't be sure, this sounds like you were not previously aware of the article.

I then asked you, even more specifically, whether you had been aware of the issues raised in the Wargamer article. Again you sidestepped the question by answering, "The article was fairly exhaustive I will agree"...yada, yada, yada.

Both of your evasive responses lead to the obvious conclusion that you in fact were not aware of this article prior to this discussion.
This is amazing, for someone who professes to know enough to give advice to other people in regard to buying this game. The Wargamer article is nothing short of the biggest indictment of any computer wargame to date, and again, that is not an exaggeration, imo. Anyone who claims to know anything about TOAW knows about this article and, more specifically, the many faults in the game it correctly points out.
Consequently, anyone who doesn't know about this article can reasonably be considered to know little about the game, or at least not enough to advise other people on their buying decisions.

All of that having been said, where do you get the temerity to question my knowledge of the game by asking me to point out what part of it is broken?

For starters, if patch 1.06 does not in fact break the game, then why are people going back to 1.04?

Beyond that, people can read the history of this game and make up their own mind. For me, there are 101 little things wrong with this game, as well as perhaps a half-dozen major issues, all of which add up to nothing more than a steaming pile (a broken steaming pile, if you will).

It would just be nice if certain people wouldn't try to legitimize their ill-informed visions of grandeur, just because they've established a seemingly 24-hour omnipresence in a forum.

But to each his own, I realize. In regard to TOAW, some folks will just keep on playing in that sandbox, no matter how many times the dog pee'd in it - kids can be like that.

_____________________________

StrategyCat
-Any country that just rolls over and lets its president die like a dog in the street deserves all the Bushes it gets-

(in reply to Kung Karl)

Post #: 70

- 8/18/2003 7:45:42 AM

Les_the_Sarge_9_1

Posts: 4392
Joined: 12/29/2000
Status: offline

Strategycat I thought I had stated what I said clearly enough, maybe you just didn't see it in the comment.

I had not seen the article prior to this thread.

Believe it or not it is possible to know the game, have enjoyed the game, and not been a denizen of the appropriate forum to have hashed over a specific article.

Hey I find it odd that I am still telling people about Steel Panthers as if they had never even heard of the game, but it happens eh.

One of our Mega Campaign designers just found out about VASL, I thought he was kidding at first. That Steel Panthers and ASL are talked about so commonly in the same group would make me think that unlikely.

But unless you want to completely ignore the thread inserted in Kung's recent post, then I have to assume you couldn't find a tree in a forest man.

I read that article just today, it wouldn't matter though if I read it first time today, or a year ago, it was effectively rebutted by Norm Koger himself. Good enough for me, he made the game.

Now on the subject of the veracity of my comments, and the worthiness of them, the forum is here for all eh. No ones opinion is worth more than any others.

But as I have been here since almost the day Matrix Games began, and as I have several years worth of persons that respect my views. And as I have had my opinions specifically and intentionally sought out by no less than David Heath himself.

I am inclined to not worry to much if you think my views are of little merit.

When I like a game, I like it and I am not afraid to say why. When I hate a game ask around, I am not afraid to say so, and not afraid to elaborate either.

I hope you enjoy the forums here. I hope you enjoy Wargamer as well. Are you aware I am a moderator over at Wargamer?
I do indeed get around. But I am not omnipotent and all knowing.

Last word, this article beats your article
http://www.warfarehq.com/Articles/TOAW%20Articles/toaw_review_rebuttal_koger.shtml

_____________________________

I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.

(in reply to Kung Karl)

Post #: 71

- 8/18/2003 10:07:55 AM

Knavery2112

Posts: 47
Joined: 8/12/2003
Status: offline

Good post Les... I purchased CoW as you are well aware of and am still waiting for it. Anyone can bitch and moan about a particular game, but I have seen more postive reviews on this series than negative ones.

Here are a few:

[URL=http://www.neoseeker.com/resourcelink.html?rid=14365]Wargamer Review[/URL]

[URL=http://www.cgonline.com/reviews/centurywar-01-r1.html]Computer Games Online[/URL]

[URL=http://gotoworld.gamezone.com/gamesell/p14549.htm]GameZone Review[/URL]

[URL=http://www.gameindustry.com/reviews/000619centuryofwar.asp]Game Industry News Review[/URL]

You don't need to answer to anyone. It seems as though StrategyCat wants everyone to be against the game. Sure, many games are flawed, but that doesn't mean they aren't good. I can name dozens of instances.

_____________________________

Knavery2112

"If I'm not back in 5 minutes...... Just wait longer." --Ace Ventura

(in reply to Kung Karl)

Post #: 72

- 8/18/2003 10:20:18 AM

Brigz

Posts: 1162
Joined: 1/20/2002
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Kung Karl
[B]Here are the answer from Koger about the wargamer article
http://www.warfarehq.com/Articles/TOAW%20Articles/toaw_review_rebuttal_koger.shtml [/B][/QUOTE] Thanks Carl. I remember reading this a while back and that was the reason I didn't give up on this system. I'm sending the email to Norm tonight. As he said in the article you presented, he doesn't like to spend his time rebutting all the articles about his games and I understand his point. He'd never get anything else done. Maybe we will luck out and he will see this thread.

_____________________________

�You're only young once but you can be immature for as long as you want�

(in reply to Kung Karl)

Post #: 73

- 8/18/2003 10:37:21 AM

Brigz

Posts: 1162
Joined: 1/20/2002
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by StrategyCat
[B]I hate to tell you this, but CoW is *not* XP compatible. You see, that was one of the things the recently released 1.06 patch was supposed to do, but it's back to the drawing board for that, I guess.
To the best of my knowledge, the Warfare HQ website has the most up-to-date info regarding this game, so you're probably best off going there for info. Here's the URL: http://www.warfarehq.com/news.shtml [/B][/QUOTE] StrategyCat,
I think you're getting your TOAW versions mixed up. The 1.06 patch referred to is for "TOAW Wargame of the Year" not "TOAW Century of Warfare". This was clearly stated in earlier posts on this thread. To my knowledge the latest patch for "Century of Warfare" is 1.04. If I'm wrong, please show me where I can download a 1.06 patch for "Century of Warfare".

Also, as Les has already pointed out and several others I have talked to, Century of Warfare runs just fine on XP and there was never a need for a patch for that purpose.

Lastly, why are you getting so belligerent with Les? This is supposed to be a beneficial thread to help all of us. I see no need for confrontational cross examination. Try to be friendly like the rest of us.

_____________________________

�You're only young once but you can be immature for as long as you want�

(in reply to Kung Karl)

Post #: 74

- 8/18/2003 11:07:20 AM

Les_the_Sarge_9_1

Posts: 4392
Joined: 12/29/2000
Status: offline

Thanks knavery.

Everyone knows I am a take no prisoners type of forum poster.

But I try to limit my attacks to the games :)

There will always be games some people don't like, my recent thoughts on Blitzkrieg at Wargamer were classified as "classic Les" hehe.

My diatribes on Hearts of Iron are hardly legendary, but no one has to look far to find someone that knows where I stand on that game :) .

I think Strategycat's only fault was coming on to a forum and going for the throat with one of the forums old hands hehe. Not going to win him many friends with that route.

No I ain't special, but there are indeed those that like my posts :)

I am not a formal game reviewer, just a guy with decades of wargaming experience, and unafraid to speak out.

Maybe he doesn't get laid as often as me :) :)
He needs to chill out hehe.

_____________________________

I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.

(in reply to Kung Karl)

Post #: 75

- 8/18/2003 11:31:37 AM

StrategyCat

Posts: 29
Joined: 8/17/2003
From: USA
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dave Briggs
[B]StrategyCat,
I think you're getting your TOAW versions mixed up. The 1.06 patch referred to is for "TOAW Wargame of the Year" not "TOAW Century of Warfare". This was clearly stated in earlier posts on this thread. To my knowledge the latest patch for "Century of Warfare" is 1.04. If I'm wrong, please show me where I can download a 1.06 patch for "Century of Warfare".[/B]

The 1.06 patch was for CoW, not any other version of the game. If previous posts in this thread said otherwise, then those are wrong. You need go no further than this discussion at The Blitz wargaming club, entitled "ACOW Patch 1.06 has serious flaw! Read this!", http://www.theblitz.org/message_boards/read.php?f=8&i=3586&t=3586

Notice it says "ACOW" patch. You should understand that if you're not willing to go outside of this thread to check the accuracy of your statements, then I will not bother to continue doing this work for you, just to prove you wrong. I take no particular pleasure in having to waste my time proving anyone wrong, regardless of what it may look like.
As for where to get the 1.06 patch, beats me, as I'm not currently playing the game (I already said that in an earlier post for Sarge). In any case, the patch is broke, so there's no sense in installing it. However, I understand that you may want to verify it's broken status yourself, but again, I don't know where to get the patch.

[B]Also, as Les has already pointed out and several others I have talked to, Century of Warfare runs just fine on XP and there was never a need for a patch for that purpose.[/B]

I have already pointed out in an earlier post that the main purpose of 1.06 was to fix XP compatability issues that some people were apparently experiencing. Once again, all one has to do is go to the Talonsoft website and look at the hardware requirements for CoW. XP is not mentioned - and why should it be, since it did not exist at the time CoW was made. Jesus Christ, do you folks ever get outside of this forum?

[B]Lastly, why are you getting so belligerent with Les? [/B]

Just read your own prior posts to answer your question. Both you and Les (Sarge) have shown incredible ignorance of basic facts. You did it by referencing your error to a previous erroneous post made in this very thread (that 1.06 was for the Wargame of the Year edition) thereby showing your unwillingness to even take the basic step of veryfying your statements by going someplace else where the game is discussed in depth. Les proved his ignorance by not only acknowledging that he had never even heard of the Wargamer article, but by trying to influence others with their purchasing decisions regarding this game.

The fault here lies not with me, but with people like you and Les and probably an army of others who seem to have nothing else to do with their lives besides inhabiting gaming forums. It's no wonder folks like you find people like me "belligerent".

_____________________________

StrategyCat
-Any country that just rolls over and lets its president die like a dog in the street deserves all the Bushes it gets-

(in reply to Kung Karl)

Post #: 76

- 8/18/2003 11:41:48 AM

Les_the_Sarge_9_1

Posts: 4392
Joined: 12/29/2000
Status: offline

Strategycat we are here because A we like it, and B we have friends here.

Do you know what friends are?

I am sure they exist outside of Matrix Games so surely you must have had adequate chance to obtain one.

If you don't like it here, the obvious question is of course why then are you here?

This ain't the be all and end all of my existence.

If you liked research as much as you claim, you would already know I post here a great deal and at Wargamer a great deal and I have been known to post at Warfare HQ.

I used to post a lot at Battlefront, but there were too many people too much like you there. And Battlefront wasn't interested in dumping people like you where people like me didn't have to hang out with them.

If you want to post comments that spend more time flaming members, kindly go into Art of Wargaming where they will gladly welcome your remarks with warm fuzzy thoughts.

You are not "belligerent", you just don't know how to make friends.

_____________________________

I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.

(in reply to Kung Karl)

Post #: 77

- 8/18/2003 11:59:56 AM

Knavery2112

Posts: 47
Joined: 8/12/2003
Status: offline

StrategyCat,

What is your problem really? Did your wife/girlfriend put you in the doghouse? Why the attacks? You ought to hang out at the GoneGold forums for a while and learn proper ettiquete. You obviously have a big problem with the game so why post in this thread at all? No one owes your heightened ego an explaination of any kind regarding TOAW. You claim to know much more about the game than anyone here. I've been around as well as Les and others in this forum and speaking for myself, I don't want to get in a tizzy with someone that is insistent on arguing until the next solar eclipse. Lets just leave it at that. You don't like the game... Others do. What's the problem? Do you still feel you need an explaination?

[QUOTE]The fault here lies not with me, but with people like you and Les and probably an army of others who seem to have nothing else to do with their lives besides inhabiting gaming forums. It's no wonder folks like you find people like me "belligerent".[/QUOTE]

Ha.. Thanks for making this fine point. I can't speak for the others here, but I frequent gaming forums, but I am also a writer, musician and an avid fitness freak. So before making a belligerent statement as you did, maybe you should learn some facts before insinuating about our habits. Or do I have to do the research for you?

_____________________________

Knavery2112

"If I'm not back in 5 minutes...... Just wait longer." --Ace Ventura

(in reply to Kung Karl)

Post #: 78

- 8/18/2003 12:02:30 PM

StrategyCat

Posts: 29
Joined: 8/17/2003
From: USA
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1

[B]If you want to post comments that spend more time flaming members, kindly go into Art of Wargaming where they will gladly welcome your remarks with warm fuzzy thoughts.

You are not "belligerent", you just don't know how to make friends. [/B]

How can I be both "flaming" and yet not be belligerent? How does one do that? (It's a rhetorical question, no need to reply as you'd probably just dig yourself deeper into a hole.)

You and Dave Briggs are confusing being shown to be wrong with being flamed, which I think might be a sign of having spent too much time in discussion forums. This conversation is over for me.

_____________________________

StrategyCat
-Any country that just rolls over and lets its president die like a dog in the street deserves all the Bushes it gets-

(in reply to Kung Karl)

Post #: 79

- 8/18/2003 12:23:21 PM

Les_the_Sarge_9_1

Posts: 4392
Joined: 12/29/2000
Status: offline

He says it's over, I wonder, can we hold him to that?

Is he going to be like this in the next thread?

Does he think he can be anti social and then poof new thread slate is wiped clean and no one cares?

I meet people on forums, 90% come and go with no impact, 9% become friends, and then there is the 1% that don't seem to get it, if you are unkind to me today, I will remember it tomorrow.

I regret every time I have gone over a line and been anti social. And that means I have to fix it.

I never regret making a comment, if the comment is about a game and just my opinion on it.
I am pleased when someone is assisted when I say something especially when I said it to be useful in some way.

But Strategycat, tomorrow is another day, and I will still be here.
And that means each and every thread will pass by my eyes eventually.
I won't have something to say to all of them.
But assuming you don't change your manner of behaviour, you will likely find no one cuts you much slack.

As the saying goes, you get more with honey. And people don't forget people that ain't friendly.

_____________________________

I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.

(in reply to Kung Karl)

Post #: 80

- 8/18/2003 9:01:37 PM

Brigz

Posts: 1162
Joined: 1/20/2002
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by StrategyCat
[B][QUOTE]Originally posted by Dave Briggs
[B]The 1.06 patch was for CoW, not any other version of the game. If previous posts in this thread said otherwise, then those are wrong. You need go no further than this discussion at The Blitz wargaming club, entitled "ACOW Patch 1.06 has serious flaw! Read this!", http://www.theblitz.org/message_boards/read.php?f=8&i=3586&t=3586
[/B][/QUOTE] I stand corrected. Now, see how easy it is to be civil. I'm not upset or angry. This is just a forum. Sometimes we're wrong and it's no big deal. The whole purpose of this thread was to get to the bottom of this TOAW mystery. I won't have time to read all the messages on the forum you quoted but if you have time could you post the link to the 1.06 patch for COW?
Thanks, Dave Briggs

_____________________________

�You're only young once but you can be immature for as long as you want�

(in reply to Kung Karl)

Post #: 81

- 8/20/2003 3:49:59 AM

Knavery2112

Posts: 47
Joined: 8/12/2003
Status: offline

Well.. I got my Cow. However I was a little more than disapointed to find out all they send is the disk along with a manual printed on a standard b&w. For a game that old and for what you get, they should not charge 40.00. It is rape if you ask me, but I will soon find out it is probably worth it.

_____________________________

Knavery2112

"If I'm not back in 5 minutes...... Just wait longer." --Ace Ventura

(in reply to Kung Karl)

Post #: 82

- 8/20/2003 4:49:25 AM

Les_the_Sarge_9_1

Posts: 4392
Joined: 12/29/2000
Status: offline

In some ways I agree, but not in others.

We are conditioned to think that 6 months after it appears software should plumet in price.

I think that's the fault of pirates though.

It's now decades since Squad Leader first graced the shelf. ASL is also something that has a lot of years under the bridge.
I would not hesitate to pay the full price for it tomorrow (assuming I was that rich of course hehe).

Steel Panthers is today a largely free wargame. Tomorrow I would gladly slap down 50 bucks for it if I had never played it before, and it looked like it does today.

I got Panzer General for peanuts. I still think it is worth full price.

I think Close Combat is still worth full price.

I think TOAW to a first time consumer has not lost any value too.

Sure the lame manual copy seemed a quick fix, but I didn't buy the game to get a fancy book. I can read it, and that's good enough.

Now I could sure list you a few games that were not worth the full price on day one, and they haven't gained any value with me either.

_____________________________

I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.

(in reply to Kung Karl)

Post #: 83

- 8/21/2003 12:34:20 PM

Brigz

Posts: 1162
Joined: 1/20/2002
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Knavery2112
[B]Well.. I got my Cow. However I was a little more than disapointed to find out all they send is the disk along with a manual printed on a standard b&w. For a game that old and for what you get, they should not charge 40.00. [/B][/QUOTE]That seems to be the trend these days. Personally I don't care if the game comes in a cardboard box or not. I've got dozens of PC game boxes just taking up storage space in my closets. Never ever look at them. All the games are neatly in their plastic jewel boxes on my computer hutch shelf ready for access. As far as printed manuals go, well, I prefer them but every game I have has had the manual revised so many times that I always end up having to print out from file the newest update so I really don't care if there is a printed manual or not. If it's on the disk in PDF or Word format then that is fine with me. I'm just concerned that my money is being spent on a good program.:cool:

_____________________________

�You're only young once but you can be immature for as long as you want�

(in reply to Kung Karl)

Post #: 84