Competition For Flashpoint Germany?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Competition For Flashpoint Germany?

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.] >> [Modern] >> FlashPoint Germany >> Competition For Flashpoint Germany?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Competition For Flashpoint Germany? - 4/7/2004 12:31:26 AM

Marines

Posts: 164
Joined: 4/6/2004
From: USA
Status: offline

Flashpoint Germany isnt the only game out there in development or released that deals with the NATO/Warsaw Pact engagement. HPS games like Fulda Gap 85 and North German Plain have only recently been released and im sorry to say they look pretty impressive. However I believe Flashpoint Germany will be the better game due to the fact that it encompasses the entire theatre as well as HPS Simulations games are known for being extremely difficult. Check it out for yourself.

http://www.hpssims.com

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Marines -- 4/6/2004 11:24:42 PM >

Post #: 1

FPG v. GP85 - 4/7/2004 12:56:29 AM

Greyshaft

Posts: 2252
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline

I'd say that FPG is Operational/Tactical whereas the HPS effort is Strategic/Operational. Both are fun but they are very different beasts. Unit positioning and LOS is very important in FPG but I can't see how they would be implemented in HP85.

IMHO one good test for a wargame is to change the era and see if the system still works. If it does then ask are you modeling a specific era or are you creating a game and then just pasting era-specific graphics on the units e.g. substitute Roman chariots for MBTs in FPG and the system falls over dead since it's highly tuned to display a specific form of warfare. I can't comment on GP85 since I haven't played it yet.

I'm also a bit wary of the 3D eye-candy games. They're visually impressive but I'd rather the CPU was spending its time looking after the AI. Let's wait for the reviews.

(in reply to Marines)

Post #: 2

RE: FPG v. GP85 - 4/7/2004 1:12:57 AM

Marines

Posts: 164
Joined: 4/6/2004
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

I'd say that FPG is Operational/Tactical whereas the HPS effort is Strategic/Operational. Both are fun but they are very different beasts. Unit positioning and LOS is very important in FPG but I can't see how they would be implemented in HP85.

IMHO one good test for a wargame is to change the era and see if the system still works. If it does then ask are you modeling a specific era or are you creating a game and then just pasting era-specific graphics on the units e.g. substitute Roman chariots for MBTs in FPG and the system falls over dead since it's highly tuned to display a specific form of warfare. I can't comment on GP85 since I haven't played it yet.

I'm also a bit wary of the 3D eye-candy games. They're visually impressive but I'd rather the CPU was spending its time looking after the AI. Let's wait for the reviews.

I agree for the most part. Have you played FG85 if so whats your impression of it and do you recommend it? Either way im still going to buy FG. Oh and neither game uses any type 3d engine its tile based like fallout 1/2

< Message edited by Marines -- 4/6/2004 11:26:33 PM >

(in reply to Greyshaft)

Post #: 3

3D display - 4/7/2004 2:23:57 AM

Greyshaft

Posts: 2252
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marines
Oh and neither game uses any type 3d engine its tile based like fallout 1/2

I saw from the GP85 screenshots that it's tile based. My point is that their 3D Point of View doesn't add anything to the gameplay and IMHO rendering it as 3D is a waste of CPU cycles. If they had realistic 3D terrain showing how it affected LOS etc then I'd say that it was worth doing... but at their Operational/Strategic level of play I don't think LOS is a factor.

I haven't played the game yet so I can't comment any further. Lets wait for the reviews.

P.S. I loved Fallout...

(in reply to Marines)

Post #: 4

RE: 3D display - 4/7/2004 3:01:16 AM

Marines

Posts: 164
Joined: 4/6/2004
From: USA
Status: offline

Thats right baby Fallout blows every game out of the water!

Semper Fi

(in reply to Greyshaft)

Post #: 5

RE: 3D display - 4/7/2004 6:04:17 AM

Catgh_MatrixForum

Posts: 665
Joined: 3/13/2002
From: Durango, CO
Status: offline

I am one of the beta testers for Flashpoint, but can not comment about it due to NDA.

I am an avid player of Fulda Gap 85, North German Plains 85, and Korea 85 (aka Modern Campaigns). I can say Flashpoint and XX85 are two different beasts all together. I really enjoy the Modern Campaign line and for the fact of the matter Panzer Campaigns. MC is a hex based gaming system; with each hex representing a mile, in the classic UGO/IGO format.

If I were to look for a direct competitor to Flashpoint, it would have to be TacOps (www.battlefront.com); which I also play.

(in reply to Marines)

Post #: 6

RE: 3D display - 4/9/2004 6:25:07 AM

byron13

Posts: 1589
Joined: 7/27/2001
Status: offline

I spilled a lot of ink with Robert Crandall about my feelings toward Fulda. Not sure if it shows up in this forum or whether it was in private e-mails. But . . .

First, let me say I am a big fan of the Panzer Campaigns series. I play them more frequently than any other game and have for the past several years. The AI is terribly weak and limited, but the combination of small tactical scale applied to large battles is unique. Basically every Panzer Leader/Panzer Blitz player's fantasy of a monster game. And the research into the OOB is fabulous. Works well in the WWII era - especially with a human opponent.

But I did not think it translated well to the modern environment. In a word, it seemed "sterile." Perhaps I am just used to those kooky Germans always having bunches of specialized units that provide variety, but the homogeneity of the units is a turn off. Every American tank company is the same (albeit there are two types: M1s and M60A3s), every mech company is the same, etc.

Second, I don't feel the game captured the intensity I would have expected in a modern NATO v. Warsaw Pact clash. Too much of the Panzer Campaigns' WWII engine seems to have made its way over. Each turn is, if I recall, two hours. In that time, a typical U.S. tank company only destroys about two WP tanks in clear terrain. Realistic possibly for WWII, but not the initial stages of WWIII. I don't buy that result.

I would love to get my hands on a good NATO game that piques my interest as I served in tanks in Germany in the mid 80s. That's why I'm waiting so impatiently for Flashpoint. But despite this, and as big a fan as I am for the Panzer Campaigns series, Fulda just didn't do it for me.

This is just one person's point of view, of course. I'd be glad to answer any more specific questions before you spend your dough.

(in reply to Catgh_MatrixForum)

Post #: 7