John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> John Tiller's Battleground Series



Message

acwbuff63 -> John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (9/9/2007 5:50:57 AM)

Just curious, how many of you folks have at least one copy of John Tiller's ACW or nappy games published by HPS?

If you do, then what is your opinion vs the BG series?


Just one request, we all recognize that the the 3D maps for the BG series are beautiful and unequal, so let's assume we all play in 2D.

What are you favorite HPS improvements




Motomouse -> RE: John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (9/9/2007 12:58:37 PM)

Sadly, not one.
I would really wish that HPS would offer downloads as well, I think there is quite a business potential for them. (He, I would love them to do this via Matrixgames).
Regards
Motomouse





acwbuff63 -> RE: John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (9/9/2007 10:11:30 PM)

Interesting, I have never downloaded a game.  What is the appeal?  Why not order the CD?  If you have the CD, you can reinstall and take it anywhere.



cgoddard -> RE: John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (9/9/2007 11:04:47 PM)

I have all the BG series and a couple of HPS games.

I find the HPS games a real clickfest that gives me RSI as there seems no way to reduce the reliance on the mouse without any break.

This has stopped me buying more of them which is a shame as the campaign choices you make to create the next battle are brilliant.



Motomouse -> RE: John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (9/10/2007 2:12:58 AM)

quote:

Interesting, I have never downloaded a game. What is the appeal? Why not order the CD? If you have the CD, you can reinstall and take it anywhere.


No shelf space, no shipping costs, easy recovery after data loss, no waiting, (nearly) instant available, no driving to store, no scratches, no cd necessary to play, better prices, better margins for the developer, ...

Most important to me: International version available, they get better support than localized versions most of the time (matrix support is good!), think patches and user designed scenarios compatibility

and especially consider shipping cost and delay if you are living on this side of the world

regards
motomouse



tbsfan -> RE: John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (9/10/2007 6:03:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: acwbuff63

Interesting, I have never downloaded a game.  What is the appeal?  Why not order the CD?  If you have the CD, you can reinstall and take it anywhere.


What Motomouse said. [:)]

Also, once downloaded, you can save a backup copy of the file to a CD or such if you like.



acwbuff63 -> RE: John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (9/11/2007 7:14:44 AM)

Alas, I only have dial up.



Ashantai -> RE: John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (9/18/2007 2:23:16 AM)

I've done this before, but these are my personal views of the strengths of the two series.

TS:
- Much better 3D maps. Hand drawn and with lovely detail.
- Overall better music IMHO.
- The videos are nice to watch every so often.
- The OOBs and maps are freely editable.

HPS:
- The scope and ability to fight a campaign.
- The range of titles.
- Availability of updates and new features.
- The 1 man make up of units.
- The orientating maps N/S! That really threw me sometimes with the TS games.
- Variety of OOBs (especially Gettysburg where there are 3 versions of every base OOB).
- Editors included.

On that basis, HPS wins hands down. If TS introduced some of the above they might be competition. As it is though, they're pretty outdated.



JudgeDredd -> RE: John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (9/18/2007 11:04:38 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Motomouse

Sadly, not one.
I would really wish that HPS would offer downloads as well, I think there is quite a business potential for them. (He, I would love them to do this via Matrixgames).
Regards
Motomouse




I am in the same boat...never bought an HPS game because they don't do downloads. Also, as far as I know, they don't ship IN the EU...they ship TO the EU, but not in...so an extra $15.

If they opened a download shop, I'd probably have a few of their titles [:D] Being as I am a game whore



pad152 -> RE: John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (9/18/2007 9:28:23 PM)

Try the NWS for cheaper prices on HPS games NWS Store

I own one each of the different series, Panzer Campaigns, Squad Battles. They play pretty much play like a computer port of a board game, not bad, but if you played one John Tiller you pretty much played them all. There has never been any real major improvements (graphics, sound) or evolution in gameplay, it's like wargaming stuck in the 1980's.



Zap -> RE: John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (9/19/2007 2:04:39 AM)



If they opened a download shop, I'd probably have a few of their titles [:D] Being as I am a game whore
[/quote]




[:D]



JudgeDredd -> RE: John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (9/19/2007 12:24:05 PM)

I quite liked the look of War over Vietnam



acwbuff63 -> RE: John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (9/20/2007 4:41:01 PM)

Well, not many comments about the original topic.  I suppose I must conclude that most have never tried the HPS series.  Strange, because they use the same basic engine and had been developed by the same programmer.  Th HPS games come with many new and improved features and a ton more scenarios.  Most BG games came with 20-30 scenarios, the HPS games come with 50-300 scenarios each.  The 2D graphics are better (IMHO). 

Take HPS Shiloh for example.  Not only can you play Shiloh, but also, Grant's campaign to Shiloh: Belmont, Fort Henry, Fort Donelson, then Shiloh.  You can even fight Mill Springs and a "What if" Battle of Nashville, plus many others.

New features include: Arty capture/Spike, Cavalry skirmishers, weather (including gun smoke), arty prolonge, bridge repair, single phase turns with opportunity fire, and more with more coming!

So buying a game like HPS Shiloh comes with much more than the original BG game.

New titles like Campaign Atlanta and Campaign Chickamauga (which includes battles like Perryville and Chattanooga).  

Yes, I started with all the BG games (everyone), but now HPS has my full attention. 

And yes, I appauld Matrix for coming out with these new releases.  I will consider buying them for sentimental reasons, but I play mostly HPS.   



acwbuff63 -> RE: John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (9/20/2007 5:10:11 PM)

As for cost, if you are looking at the HPS website, they will seem expensive, but if you look at other distributors like NWS online, they sell for $27 to $29.  Not sure about shipping costs.



captskillet -> RE: John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (9/20/2007 7:13:02 PM)

single man SP losses.



berto -> RE: John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (9/20/2007 9:46:13 PM)

Yes, the HPS games beat the BG games in almost every way. But, damn, those default HPS 3D unit graphics are bad! You can substitute alternative 3D unit graphics, though, and I readily do.

Visit the ACW Campaign Games Design Center at

http://www.brettschulte.net/ACWCGDC/index.html

and try the alternative 3D unit (and other) graphics sets if you haven't already done so.



Luciano B -> RE: John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (9/21/2007 6:15:25 PM)

As I told before, it's not a matter of which serie is the "best one", the old BG or the new HPS, they are different things in my opinion, and it depends upon what a player is looking for in a game. Would be a great error to try to find what you have in the BG games in the HPS titles, because the two series follow different paths and have different goals. If your are looking for something which gives you a full immersion in the atmosphere of a great battle, the old BG games are still the top. Historical accuracy, playability, atmosphere, beautiful graphics and other quality media contents - the BG games still have the best ensemble of these factors.



1925frank -> RE: John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (9/21/2007 6:43:05 PM)

Thanks for the posts.  If I were to purchase a game, I would choose between HPS or BG.  I'm still not sure.



acwbuff63 -> RE: John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (9/22/2007 2:04:32 AM)

Luciano,

I respect your view, but I disagree.  If you remove the HPS campaign feature (which is a vast improvement) from the equation, each battle can be played stand alone, just the same as BG games.

So how do the follow different paths and goals?? 

So tell me, why do you say BG games give more ACW atmosphere, playability and accuracy.  The media issue is irrelavant and it has already been agreed that the 3D grahics are better with BG games. 

As for accuracy, what in inaccurate about the HPS games.  Patches have corrected many errors. 

As for playability, perhaps the BG games, they use smaller maps, and perhaps that makes it quicker, but not more accurate.

As for atmosphere, please explain.  The new HPS features and upgrades have moved these games far ahead.  And if one wants to play like the BG series, they only need to turns off these upgrades.  Very simple!

I look forward to your reply. 



lancerunolfsson -> RE: John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (9/22/2007 4:37:53 AM)

quote:

If you remove the HPS campaign feature (which is a vast improvement) from the equation, each battle can be played stand alone, just the same as BG games.

No they don't especialy the Napoleonic. The TS games are phased more like Miniature games
Red Move
Blue Defensive fire and counter charges
Red Fire
Red Charges
flip and repeat

Now for PBEM this blows, because you have four file swaps per turn. OTH the continuos phasing of the HPS games makes for fewer file swaps but unfortuneatly results in a Panzer Grupe Napoleon. as in a single move a guy can blow a hole in a line advance through it and then attack in rear or Flank without interuption. This can be fun but not Napoleonics.

I have all of the TS Nap and ACW games and actually play them sometimes. I have have Ozark, Ehkmuhl, Napoleons Russian Campaign. FIW 1812 and 1776 and never play them.



acwbuff63 -> RE: John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (9/22/2007 7:55:21 AM)

That's not true. 

The HPS games can be played either single phase, or multi-phase.  If multi-phased, then the HPS games play exactly the same as BG games.  If you want to play like BG games, be sure to check "Manual Defensive Fire" in the options window.

BTW, I'm a little less certain about the Nappy sequence, but the ACW will play exactly as TS. But both Nappy and ACW can be played in multi-phases.



Luciano B -> RE: John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (9/22/2007 12:43:34 PM)

I told that the BG serie has the "best ensamble of accuracy, playability, "atmosphere", beautiful graphics and other media contents", it doesn't mean that HPS are inaccurate, I wrote that the BG serie together with historical accuracy (obviously also HPS are higly accurate and deeply researched) has also wonderful media contents (music etc.) and wonderful graphics ...and let me say that these last matters aren't irrilevant in a game. As more recent games, the HPS titles introduced some interesting improvements, but those alone don't make a better game than the old Battlegrounds. Obviously it's my personal opinion.

About the different goals, I mean that HPS are campaign-oriented, so the player is able to play a whole campaign, notwistanding that a single battle may be less interesting to play than the same battle played in the Battleground style ...graphics, again, and "atmosphere".

With "atmosphere" (I don't know if this expression is correct in English...) I mean the immersiveness of a game; it depends upont different factors, like fascinating graphics and music and other "immaterial" factors that form the artistic part of a game and the way those things work togehter with the technical aspect of a game ...it isn't easy to explain with my badly shattered English... however it is something that when I play with the HPS games seem to lack and that the BG games have in great measure.

P.S. I got all BG titles and almost all of the HPS ACW and Naploeonic titles. I enjoyed both series, but the old Battlegrounds are still my favourite games.



acwbuff63 -> RE: John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (9/23/2007 8:21:36 PM)

I respect your Opinion and know you put alot of work into modding.

I suppose my main intererst lies in the engine improvements.  There I think HPS rules!!

I play in 2D, I don't listen to the music often, and I certainly never cared for the video clips that the BG games offered. 

All I cared about is improving the engine so that ACW warfare is better represented.  IMHO, John Tiller and HPS has done that to a great extent.




acwbuff63 -> RE: John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (9/24/2007 3:41:48 AM)

It's a shame that the engine improvements couldn't be ported over to the BG series, or perhaps they can be.  One can never tell.

If you could help make HPS ACW games better, though we can't go back to painted maps, how else would we improve them?




berto -> RE: John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (9/24/2007 7:43:50 AM)

HPS' less than stellar 3D maps I can live with; it's the 3D unit graphics I can't stand. How hard would it be for HPS to create a one-set-fits-all set of decent (as in not toy-like, better scaled) 3D unit graphics? Hand-painted maps are one thing, but 3D unit graphics are another, and easily recreated, or reapplied.

Other improvements:

For Commander Control, more options: Move To, Forced March To, Reconnoiter, Tactical Reserve, Strategic Reserve, ..., also the ability to backtrack in the sequence.

Better AI: improved path finding (as in, yes, it's more direct from point A to point B moving over that mountain as the crow flies, but it's faster being a little roundabout and taking that road over there), more intelligent maneuver (especially in response to flanking attacks and encirclements), less predictability, ...



Ashantai -> RE: John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (9/25/2007 7:11:56 AM)

The AI's artillery suicide assaults are always fun....



Leopejo -> RE: John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (11/6/2007 4:36:14 PM)

Talonsoft BG maps are painted and as such beautiful. But I don't understand why they can't make better graphics in HPS, after all the Talonsoft CS (now Matrix Games: John Tiller's Campaign Series) has much better not painted 3D graphics.

Another problem/desirable improvement for the HPS games is hex size. With modern screen resolutions (1280 x 1024, 1600 x 1200,...) hexes and units are too small for me. I much prefer the three 3D zooms of BG. This is also why I can't play HPS 2D: the hexes are just too small, it's like watching a boardgame from a 3 meter height.

Some of the HPS maps are atrocious, just vast plains with very little detail. Luckily NRC (and based on screenshots, Campaign Waterloo) maps are better.

The Campaign game is an improvement, but it requires commitment from the player(s). Not to talk about the "megacampaign", where all the campaign is played as a 100s of turns long gigantic battle.

The HPS AI is even worse than the BG one, IMHO. In addition, the majority of scenarios seem to be designed for PBEM; many of them are huge: no more NIR 14: Never too late (Utitsa fight in Borodino). I haven't HPS Jena yet, but I recognized every playtester in the credits, along with the designer, as members of the Napoleonic Wargaming Club. What I mean is that the HPS titles, even more than BG, are geared towards PBEM only, and specifically, towards an established community of PBEM gamers.

The game manuals are also worse, IMHO. With BG games you could calculate all the combat factors and probabilities quite easily, this I can't in HPS.

Finally, I have the definite feeling that HPS Napoleonics are a "poor brother" of their excellent Panzer Campaigns series. They saved in scenario design (some designers are very good and dedicated, but essentially just wargamers, not professionals), graphics, music (I put the old BG music in my HPS folders), documentation, but most of all, I have the feeling John Tiller really has "abandoned" the napoleonic project and just implements some minor engine changes and corrects bugs. No AI improvements, no big engine improvements.

Now that I have bashed HPS too much, they also have good qualities:

- there is just one phase for each player instead of the three of the BG series (your movement, opponent defensive, your offensive and vice versa). This saves a lot of file swapping in PBEM games
- many scenarios, many maps, a complete scenario editor, scenario specific PDT files; maps are locked though (but modders have released all kind of games none-the-less, so there is a workaround).
- graphic mods available on internet
- support: you can raise not only bugs but also game issues to the designers and chance is they are considered and evaluated (but no major engine changes though). For each game there are many updated even after years. In addition manuals and help files are updated too.
- The close relationship between HPS and the PBEM gaming community (especially the www.wargame.ch board = NWC) helps to better the games.
- much new research - I think both NRC and Campaign Waterloo are more up-to-date regarding maps or orders of battle than NIR or BGW respectively.
- easier to find PBEM players, given the availability of games and the one phase per turn file swapping - but I hope a new interest for BG PBEM comes with the Matrix release.



Leopejo -> RE: John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (11/6/2007 5:22:20 PM)

Other HPS disadvantages:

- using "Automatic Defensive Fire" (necessary if you want to only play once per turn in PBEM games), AI takes care of defensive fire - well at least an Optional Rule permits to not waste ammunition on skirmishers.
- even when playing Manual Defensive Fire, there is no Cavalry Countercharge phase.

Other HPS advantages:

- it is more "realistic", with the 1 man losses, supply rules, and many little engine enhancements over BG
- many Optional Rules to choose from, to make it more flexible and adjustable to one's own tastes
- with the right combination of Optional Rules, a more realistic and less gamey play: no more Blitzkriegs and rapid elimination of entire units with ZOC kills and such



acwbuff63 -> RE: John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (11/7/2007 5:37:44 PM)

Actually the BG and HPS A/I uses the same logic.  In fact, there have been some improvements to the logic.  The problem is size, scale and duration.  There are two kinds of A/I used in HPS games, only one for BG.

1) Scripting (BG and HPS).  The designer attempts to give units way points with attack or defend orders.  Move from point A to point B at a certain time and attack or defend. 

This is the best method of a challenging game. 

Problems:  Only good for the attacking side and for relatively small battles or preset positions. 

2) Dynamic A/I (HPS only).  A/I developes it's own plan.  The designer tell the A/I to fight offensively or defensively.

Problem:  The scenario must be limited in scale and size.  Attackers are a better challenge.

Overall, HPS games tend to use much larger maps and incorporate meeting engagements.  With these type of scenarios, any A/I will be nearly useless. 

BUT, many recent scenarios are speically designed for the A/I.  Campaign Atlanta, and Campaign Chickamauga have several "A/I Challenge" games. 

Overall, HPS is a far better engine.  True the 3D maps are not as pretty.  Though I like the music, but I don't use it.  2D maps are as good, or better IMHO.  MUCH MUCH MUCH more variety.  MANY MANY more scenarios per title. 

Example:  Campaign Chickamauga vs BG Chickamauga.  HPS CC includes Perryville, Nashville, Frankfort, Franklin, Stones River, Chickamauga, Chattanooga, and more.  BG Chick only has Stones River and Chickamauga.

Both are good games, but HPS is much different.  And IMHO, only the 3D maps are better in BG games.



gwack -> RE: John Tiller's ACW and Nappy games at HPS (11/7/2007 11:15:41 PM)

I am near completion of a more accurate battlefield map for HPS Gettysburg. What I cannot seem to locate is where the data is that places the stone walls on the map. Some of the walls are in dire need of changing or deletion to conform to the actual field. Please, if anyone knows where to direct me in the files so I change the placement of the stone walls, I would be grateful beyond measure. [:D]



Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.141113