Any enhancements to the AI? (Full Version)

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



Message


Longstreet_slith -> Any enhancements to the AI? (11/9/2007 6:57:57 PM)

Have any enhancements been made to the AI in the Battlground series? I loved these games, but if I remember correctly, the AI was not so good and these games were really PBEM only. [:(]

Longstreet




1NWCG -> RE: Any enhancements to the AI? (11/9/2007 6:59:20 PM)

No they didn't, just made it Vista Compatiable, added 32-bit engine and I think scenario editor.  The A/I in any games of this type are bad no matter who makes it sadly....




sullafelix -> RE: Any enhancements to the AI? (11/9/2007 8:04:21 PM)

I want to buy both packages but I'm wary. I have all of these games already, but I would like to run them on vista. Is this new release going to be an ongoing development as in patches or is the compilation " what you see is what you get "? The released blurbs do state that the AI was worked on by Mr. Tiller. I guess what I'm looking for in plainer language is what exactly I'd be purchasing? Thanks.




Erik Rutins -> RE: Any enhancements to the AI? (11/9/2007 8:13:20 PM)

We do not plan on ongoing development, these are basically intended as an affordable and comprehensive collection of the Battleground titles. In addition to including all previous updates from TalonSoft (and the unofficial ones from John Tiller), these are also updated to work on Vista, which the old ones don't, so these should have a substantially longer lifespan. The AI was looked at, but as I understand it any improvements there were minor.




duckenf -> RE: Any enhancements to the AI? (11/9/2007 8:31:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

We do not plan on ongoing development, these are basically intended as an affordable and comprehensive collection of the Battleground titles. In addition to including all previous updates from TalonSoft (and the unofficial ones from John Tiller), these are also updated to work on Vista, which the old ones don't, so these should have a substantially longer lifespan. The AI was looked at, but as I understand it any improvements there were minor.


OK, I have all the old BG games (Nappy and ACW), and a bunch of the HPS ACW titles as well. Yes, I like the Tiller games, so sue me. I'd be interested in buying this, but as best I can see, it's just been made Vista compatible, right? So this is for people like Tiller stuff or are interested in the topic but don't already have the BG series -- and also for those afflicted with Vista? If that's the case, I guess I'd wait to get it until I get a machine with Vista -- but with the dollar worth more as scrap paper than a currency compared to the all-conquering British pound, maybe I should get it now....;)




John 3rd -> RE: Any enhancements to the AI? (11/9/2007 8:32:32 PM)

Are there any real improvements to the games?  I understand that they have been updated to handle the newer operating systems so that is good.  Is there much, if anything, else? 

A couple of us from the WitP Forum are thinking about getting the Civil War series for a pleasant and fairly quick distraction from the Grand Strategy of the Pacific.





Erik Rutins -> RE: Any enhancements to the AI? (11/9/2007 8:39:59 PM)

As I posted earlier, we tried to work with some community members to add some new content, but that fell apart (twice) leading to the various delays in releasing these titles. The only substantial change is the integration of all official and unofficial updates and the new update that adds Vista compatibility.

These games play and look just like the originals, but they will work on the OS you'll all likely be running in three years, so they're a good archival copy. We also updated the games to require less space, so each compilation fits on one CD.

Basically, if you like the BG games and want a copy to last you for many years, this is the one to get. If you never tried the BG games but wanted to, this is definitely the compilation to get. There's a lot of historical wargaming value here.

Regards,

- Erik




duckenf -> RE: Any enhancements to the AI? (11/9/2007 9:47:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

If you never tried the BG games but wanted to, this is definitely the compilation to get. There's a lot of historical wargaming value here.

Regards,

- Erik


I'd agree with that 100%. It's a great value game. If you don't have it already it's worth buying; if you have Vista ditto. I'm sure I'll make my purchase when I get Vista (long may that be delayed though -- but that's a microsoft issue not Matrix)




Adam Parker -> RE: Any enhancements to the AI? (11/9/2007 11:55:21 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: 1NWCG

No they didn't, just made it Vista Compatiable, added 32-bit engine and I think scenario editor.  The A/I in any games of this type are bad no matter who makes it sadly....


Spot on. Definitely nothing done to the AI.

Tiller Software has made it clear that the living ACW and Nap series are the HPS games. They offer massive leaps in terms of scenario coverage and the on-map combat results/option for non-phased play are their biggest enhancements to the designs. Then there's the campain play. Not to mention the broader spread of campaign subject matter.

The 2d graphics and maps in the HPS games are also leaps above the BG series. Further HPS's Waterloo is a massive expansion of Prelude to Waterloo + Waterloo itself. Ditto Gettysburg. Massively different geographical games.

The Talonsoft Battleground games which John pioneered offer much more beautiful 3d map and unit graphics. Although I always found the Prelude to Waterloo unit sizes way too small for my eyes. IIRC John was unable to secure the rights to this graphics set on Talonsoft's demise. Hence HPS runs with a different 3d look.

But that's it. Players are locked in phased-play.

I've noticed the AI in the HPS ACW titles very good in the smaller scenarios. Otherwise PBEM and solo hotseat offer the best gaming regardless of series IMHO.




berto -> RE: Any enhancements to the AI? (11/10/2007 12:25:55 AM)

quote:

The Talonsoft Battleground games which John pioneered offer much more beautiful 3d map and unit graphics... IIRC John was unable to secure the rights to this graphics set on Talonsoft's demise. Hence HPS runs with a different 3d look.


It's a d*** shame then that HPS doesn't contract a graphics designer to bring their graphics set back up to BGS snuff. Poor 3D graphics are the HPS series' greatest weakness, IMO.

Or does HPS reason: Why bother? Just let the modder community upgrade the graphics for free.




Krec -> RE: Any enhancements to the AI? (11/10/2007 1:43:58 AM)

You hit the nail on the head. i have never bought a HPS Tiller game and probably wont untill the graphic are cleaned up. [&:] The games are said to play good but the graphics are very poor. [:-] I believe if the games looked better they would sell better. Heck even CWG2 had decent graphics. Just give me clean easy see stuff and i am happy. [8D]




berto -> RE: Any enhancements to the AI? (11/10/2007 1:59:35 AM)

If you didn't already, you should know that user modded graphics sets are available to fix HPS' atrociously bad 3D graphics.

Check out

ACW Campaign Games Design Center

I won't play HPS Civil War games without the user modded 3D graphics fixes!




keeferon01 -> RE: Any enhancements to the AI? (11/10/2007 4:41:00 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Krec

You hit the nail on the head. i have never bought a HPS Tiller game and probably wont untill the graphic are cleaned up. [&:] The games are said to play good but the graphics are very poor. [:-] I believe if the games looked better they would sell better. Heck even CWG2 had decent graphics. Just give me clean easy see stuff and i am happy. [8D]



I think you chaps are missing the point, I personally have every hps title been a hps fan since it started really, your paying for the extensively researched OOB's and damn fine scenario builds to be honest, graphics and music are not why you are playing these titles




Adam Parker -> RE: Any enhancements to the AI? (11/10/2007 5:16:28 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Krec

You hit the nail on the head. i have never bought a HPS Tiller game and probably wont untill the graphic are cleaned up...


Whilst I know you're referring to the 3D graphics, remember the HPS 2D graphics are an intended massive improvement over the Battleground games. Hexes are bigger, terrain better looking and unit icons bigger too. IMO these games have 2d play in mind.

Also I was unimpressed with the HPS Napoleonic 2d icons so re-did them. These are now included in the Volcano Man HPS graphics packs found HERE




berto -> RE: Any enhancements to the AI? (11/10/2007 7:00:51 AM)

quote:

I think you chaps are missing the point, I personally have every hps title been a hps fan since it started really, your paying for the extensively researched OOB's and damn fine scenario builds to be honest, graphics and music are not why you are playing these titles.


And I suppose you like your French haute cuisine served on paper plates and your fine wine drunk from dixie cups? Forget about the larger experience, it's all just about the food isn't it? Heck, what difference would it make if you just mash it all together and run it through a blender? It's just as nutritious, right?

I'll not play a game with atrociously bad graphics for the same reason I won't listen to Beethoven's Ninth Symphony performed by a grade school marching kazoo band.

Who are you to dictate our tastes in fine games, to suggest the "real" reasons why we should enjoy playing them? [:-]





ravinhood -> RE: Any enhancements to the AI? (11/10/2007 9:52:00 AM)

There's nothing wrong with the graphics in HPS or the BG series of games and anyone who has issues with the graphics in these two series of games just has graphicsbuttitus. They don't care about the game all they care about is how does it look. These are your total world yahoos and that's what they should go back and play with its sorry gameplay and AI. I'd rather have a game that is good in overall gameplay with poor or average graphics than one with great graphics and nothing else. I mean look at the graphics of that new game AT, it's nothing state of the are for sure, but, just look at the fanfare about it. Which proves it's better to have a better game and just average graphics.

This is a good deal to those that don't already own the BG series or even those that do and don't like the hassle of having to put everything together to get them to work on XP. I run a dual boot system with WIN98se and XP so I don't really have that issue and don't need the upgrades. But, for $29.99 or $24.99 if you buy both series you are getting a good deal for each bundle. Less than $50 for all those games (if you don't already own them) is really a great deal just like the Campaign series they recently released. Still makes me wonder why they charge so much for the Close Combat series remake though they should have put all of them into a package deal as well for $29.99 or $39.99 max.




freder -> RE: Any enhancements to the AI? (11/10/2007 10:20:45 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: berto
I won't listen to Beethoven's Ninth Symphony performed by a grade school marching kazoo band.


hahaha that's a nice comparison, might be interesting though.
Like the "Switched on Bach" from the 70's. Bach on moog-synthesizer, if I remember correctly.




Leopejo -> RE: Any enhancements to the AI? (11/10/2007 1:45:17 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ravinhood

There's nothing wrong with the graphics in HPS or the BG series of games and anyone who has issues with the graphics in these two series of games just has graphicsbuttitus. They don't care about the game all they care about is how does it look.

A troll or what? BG games are beautiful, HPS graphics, presentations, manuals are sloppy.




Leopejo -> RE: Any enhancements to the AI? (11/10/2007 1:48:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Adam Parker
Whilst I know you're referring to the 3D graphics, remember the HPS 2D graphics are an intended massive improvement over the Battleground games. Hexes are bigger, terrain better looking and unit icons bigger too.

What are you talking about? In napoleonic games at least this is not so. Lack of a 2D Zoom In View is one of my main concerns, I have to go to the (horrible) 3D graphics to be able to see more close action.




keeferon01 -> RE: Any enhancements to the AI? (11/10/2007 4:14:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: berto

quote:

I think you chaps are missing the point, I personally have every hps title been a hps fan since it started really, your paying for the extensively researched OOB's and damn fine scenario builds to be honest, graphics and music are not why you are playing these titles.


And I suppose you like your French haute cuisine served on paper plates and your fine wine drunk from dixie cups? Forget about the larger experience, it's all just about the food isn't it? Heck, what difference would it make if you just mash it all together and run it through a blender? It's just as nutritious, right?

I'll not play a game with atrociously bad graphics for the same reason I won't listen to Beethoven's Ninth Symphony performed by a grade school marching kazoo band.



Who are you to dictate our tastes in fine games, to suggest the "real" reasons why we should enjoy playing them? [:-]




then what the hell are you doing on these forums then, if you don't like the game go away.




berto -> RE: Any enhancements to the AI? (11/10/2007 4:16:20 PM)

quote:

There's nothing wrong with the graphics in HPS or the BG series of games and anyone who has issues with the graphics in these two series of games just has graphicsbuttitus. They don't care about the game all they care about is how does it look. These are your total world yahoos and that's what they should go back and play with its sorry gameplay and AI. I'd rather have a game that is good in overall gameplay with poor or average graphics than one with great graphics and nothing else. I mean look at the graphics of that new game AT, it's nothing state of the are for sure, but, just look at the fanfare about it. Which proves it's better to have a better game and just average graphics.


--I have been playing wargames for 45 years, since the AH board games from the early 1960s.
--For me, the most important things in a game are, in descending order, from most important to least important: (a) subject matter; (b) historical plausbility; (c) depth; (d) "production values" (graphics, sound, music); (e) solitaire suitability, hence strength of AI.
--I don't play Medieval Total War, Age of Empires, etc. and others of their ilk. I wouldn't even think of playing a 3D shooter or RPG.
--When I play BGS and HPS, I mostly do it in 2D. I think the HPS 2D graphics are top-notch.
--From time to time, on occasion to clarify some game play point (e.g., to gain a better understanding of the terrain) and at other times just for the enjoyment of it, I will switch to 3D.

Why is your thinking so binary, so either/or? Why must their be a tradeoff between (a) good gameplay and (b) good graphics? Why can't we expect to have the best of both (indeed all) worlds?

If you want to see a game that has it all, check out AGEOD's American Civil War: unparalleled historical plausibility and depth of game play and truly beautiful "counters" and maps. They offer it all. More power to them!

IMO, what helped (not exclusively; it added to the total experience) make SPI games so great was the work of Redmond Simonsen, a true graphics design genius. His games were beautiful. Games from the pre-Simonsen era to the Simonsen era were like night and day. My wargame playing brother I both agreed: Sometimes we would stretch out our game play (each at his own residence, especially when playing solitaire), leaving some of the monster games like Terrible Swift Sword up for days, weeks, and even months at a time because they were so gorgeous to look at--akin to performance art.

quote:

This is a good deal to those that don't already own the BG series or even those that do and don't like the hassle of having to put everything together to get them to work on XP.


--I already own most of the BGS series, although for some reason over the years I lost Gettysburg and Waterloo, and I never purchased Age of Sail.
--I intend to purchase the rereleased BGS, both Civil War and Napoleonics, because (a) I want those lost titles, (b) I want to be able to play them on my faster XP systems (my BGS games are installed on an old Win ME system here), (c) I don't want the hassle of having to patch the old games ever again, (d) I want to support Matrix, (e) I want to support the genres.
--So far, I have three titles in the HPS Civil War Series (Vicksburg, Shiloh, Chicamauga--I have a special fondness for the war in the west; I have other HPS games besides), and I intend to get them all eventually. I will also purchase the entire HPS Napoleonics lineup sooner or later. What tips the balance in HPS favor, what helps get me over my distaste for their poor 3D graphics (just part of the total equation!) is that there are user-modded 3D graphics fixes available.

In sum, I am no "total war yahoo" and I don't think I have "graphicsbuttitus" What's the source of your either/or, two-dimension thinking? Why can't we hope to appreciate these games in all of their dimensions, on all levels? And at least expect, if not demand, high production values across the board from the game designers?

(And does HPS not see that there is a significant, vocal minority of players--would-be but maybe lost customers--for whom good 3D graphics is a significant consideration (just one of many)? That they would increase their game sales if they, HPS, would just try harder in this one area?)




keeferon01 -> RE: Any enhancements to the AI? (11/10/2007 4:26:27 PM)

so berto my dear new friend , you do agree with me after all as music and graphics are only at 4 on your list [:)]




berto -> RE: Any enhancements to the AI? (11/10/2007 4:27:09 PM)

quote:

then what the hell are you doing on these forums then, if you don't like the game go away.


More binary, either/or thinking. See my earlier post.

I mostly like the games (hence, I purchase and play them), but is it too much to ask HPS to do somewhat better?

What, are you suggesting that if HPS were to issue their games with stick figure soldiers fighting on black and white maps, or maybe maps drawn in virtual crayon, that it would make no difference to you, that you and others would be just as happy? [X(]

Is HPS above a little criticism? I personally think that John Tiller is a game design genius. He's like James Dunnigan. But where is his Redmond Simonsen? The addition of some extra graphics splash would elevate HPS games to true greatness.





Adam Parker -> RE: Any enhancements to the AI? (11/11/2007 1:16:10 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ravinhood

These are your total world yahoos and that's what they should go back and play with its sorry gameplay and AI. I'd rather have a game that is good in overall gameplay with poor or average graphics than one with great graphics and nothing else.


Well you know I strongly disagree. Also you're suggesting that the AI in Battleground was good or has now been made good? I have this same problem with the Matrix re-release of the Campaign series.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ravinhood

This is a good deal to those that don't already own the BG series or even those that do and don't like the hassle of having to put everything together to get them to work on XP.


Strongly disagee again. Good value would have been re-doing these games with a working AI. SSG took this approach with Carrier Strike.

The AI in Battleground IIRC just stood there, didn't attack, didn't defend. And then you get those painful pop-up combat result boxes that you continuously have to click off and then you get the old phased play.

How is this good value? I learned this sad lesson when I bought the re-releases of TOAW and Harpoon here.

The only value is in the fact that the ACW pakage includes 3 campaigns not yet covered by HPS and I love Antietam and Bull Run as battles to play. But we should tell buyers Ravinhood, that they're not buying this Vista patch for any enhancement to the AI - they need to expect to play these games solo hot seat or PBEM.




Erik Rutins -> RE: Any enhancements to the AI? (11/11/2007 3:26:41 AM)

Adam,

quote:

ORIGINAL: Adam Parker
Strongly disagee again. Good value would have been re-doing these games with a working AI. SSG took this approach with Carrier Strike.


These games never left the market - when we got the rights from Take 2, they were still selling them for $50 each. Was that good value? Should we have simply put them back on the market at that same price? Instead, you can now get ALL of them for $50 with our new compilations.

SSG, incidentally, re-wrote Carriers at War from scratch as a new game in order to "re-do the AI". Writing the Battleground series over again from scratch to get a possible AI improvement for games that people already love as they are seemed a little more than pointless.

quote:

The AI in Battleground IIRC just stood there, didn't attack, didn't defend. And then you get those painful pop-up combat result boxes that you continuously have to click off and then you get the old phased play.


Actually, the AI in Battleground attacked, it just didn't do a great job of it. These games did not earn their popularity based on AI play - they earned it based on excellent PBEM play and historical accuracy. That's the same thing the re-releases offer.

quote:

How is this good value? I learned this sad lesson when I bought the re-releases of TOAW and Harpoon here.


What? You're claiming the TOAW III AI isn't good if I understand you correctly? Wow, I don't know what game you're playing but the TOAW III AI runs circles around the original TOAW AI in the scenarios I've played. Seriously, you're the first person I've seen say anything other than 'the TOAW III AI kicks butt!'.

quote:

The only value is in the fact that the ACW pakage includes 3 campaigns not yet covered by HPS and I love Antietam and Bull Run as battles to play. But we should tell buyers Ravinhood, that they're not buying this Vista patch for any enhancement to the AI - they need to expect to play these games solo hot seat or PBEM.


The value is in the fact that these games, which many folks still love just as they are, are now available _all together_ for the price that was previously charged for one before we bought the rights. In addition, they have been updated by John to work on Vista. In addition, John now gets money again for every sale, whereas he was getting nothing from the sales Take 2/Talonsoft were making.

We don't claim that the AI is improved - these are re-releases updated for Vista compatibility, period.

Regards,

- Erik




Adam Parker -> RE: Any enhancements to the AI? (11/11/2007 4:16:24 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Actually, the AI in Battleground attacked, it just didn't do a great job of it. These games did not earn their popularity based on AI play - they earned it based on excellent PBEM play and historical accuracy. That's the same thing the re-releases offer.


Yes absolutely agree. There has always been a vibrant PBEM and PBEM modding community for Battleground.

I was commenting on the suggestion that those who want good graphics do so at the expense of AI.

And I'm thrilled that Matrix and John are getting payment for these releases but really if we follow your logic Erik, Matrix could just do an Atari and pack up every nostaligic game in existence and put them all in 1 box - call it the Tiller Legacy Pack - Battleground and Campaign Series $19.99.




ravinhood -> RE: Any enhancements to the AI? (11/11/2007 11:46:22 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Adam,

quote:

ORIGINAL: Adam Parker
Strongly disagee again. Good value would have been re-doing these games with a working AI. SSG took this approach with Carrier Strike.


These games never left the market - when we got the rights from Take 2, they were still selling them for $50 each. Was that good value? Should we have simply put them back on the market at that same price? Instead, you can now get ALL of them for $50 with our new compilations.

SSG, incidentally, re-wrote Carriers at War from scratch as a new game in order to "re-do the AI". Writing the Battleground series over again from scratch to get a possible AI improvement for games that people already love as they are seemed a little more than pointless.

quote:

The AI in Battleground IIRC just stood there, didn't attack, didn't defend. And then you get those painful pop-up combat result boxes that you continuously have to click off and then you get the old phased play.


Actually, the AI in Battleground attacked, it just didn't do a great job of it. These games did not earn their popularity based on AI play - they earned it based on excellent PBEM play and historical accuracy. That's the same thing the re-releases offer.

quote:

How is this good value? I learned this sad lesson when I bought the re-releases of TOAW and Harpoon here.


What? You're claiming the TOAW III AI isn't good if I understand you correctly? Wow, I don't know what game you're playing but the TOAW III AI runs circles around the original TOAW AI in the scenarios I've played. Seriously, you're the first person I've seen say anything other than 'the TOAW III AI kicks butt!'.

quote:

The only value is in the fact that the ACW pakage includes 3 campaigns not yet covered by HPS and I love Antietam and Bull Run as battles to play. But we should tell buyers Ravinhood, that they're not buying this Vista patch for any enhancement to the AI - they need to expect to play these games solo hot seat or PBEM.


The value is in the fact that these games, which many folks still love just as they are, are now available _all together_ for the price that was previously charged for one before we bought the rights. In addition, they have been updated by John to work on Vista. In addition, John now gets money again for every sale, whereas he was getting nothing from the sales Take 2/Talonsoft were making.

We don't claim that the AI is improved - these are re-releases updated for Vista compatibility, period.

Regards,

- Erik



You tell him Erik I couldn't have said it better myself. Even without an AI improvement those who NEVER had this series before are getting a GD GREAT A$$ DEAL. I'm one of the ones who paid well $40 a copy way back when and to get ALL of them and now for $50 even with a shoddy AI providing you enjoy PBEM which I do this is like kissmass in November for the series. Now Erik about that remake Close Combat game and its PRICE? [:D]

Here's a question for yah Erik....How's PBEM compatibility for those of us with the OLDER versions and these updated versions? What problems if any will we run into?

Also to the graphics whore who said "Why must their be a tradeoff between (a) good gameplay and (b) good graphics? Why can't we expect to have the best of both (indeed all) worlds?
"

Because it costs lots of money to put in higher end graphics into these WARgames. I hate to see them waste money on graphics when they could put it to better use in the AI and UI. Yeah I could play with STICKmen again if the quality of the game was as good as those days when we played with STICKmen and didn't raise a fuss. Also, bud I've got 41 years of wargaming behind me so your 45 years doesn't mean squat to this guy. Graphics are the last item on my list I care about and if you notice most all the rest of the old guard on this forum. Gameplay first (meaning it's PBEM compatible) and a solid AI will always come first in my book. As far as the UI I can still use just a keyboard as that's how I came up in this gaming industry long before the lazy mans mouse and having to have a hotkey for everything. Why back in my day we moved everything with a number before we even had KEYPADS too. So don't try to school me pal consider yourself schooled instead.[:D]

Some people just don't realize it's GRAPHICS that cause many of us to have to or need to UPGRADE these damn machines. Keep the graphics at a minimum and you could play on your P166 with 32mb of memory forever. hehe Look at the specs of your RTW/M2TW vs SHOGUN and MTW....and then look at the quality of play between them. Some people ran out and spent $1000's of dollars for a rig to be able to play RTW/M2TW how silly that was! One things for sure we can play a lot more wargames for a lot more years on the same machine we played on years ago for the most part. You can't say that about the more mainstream KIDS games out there. So, as I said before and I'll say it again the graphics for HPS and BG series are just fine and anyone who has issues with these graphics just has GRAPHICSBUTTITUS. [:D]




Hertston -> RE: Any enhancements to the AI? (11/11/2007 12:14:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Adam Parker

quote:

ORIGINAL: ravinhood

This is a good deal to those that don't already own the BG series or even those that do and don't like the hassle of having to put everything together to get them to work on XP.


Strongly disagee again.


If you disagree with that you aren't thinking at all. How can it not be a "good deal" for those who don't already own the games? You can get all of them for the price of one HPS title (which, for the record, I also consider individually superior). Like the Campaign series, while the AI isn't the best it works, and will prove adequate for genre newcomers - and indeed for anybody long enough to get their monies' worth with these releases.. and that's before PBEM.

Like you, I own all the originals, and do not consider this re-release has much to offer me (I no longer play them, and have several of the HPS titles), but - other than the Campaign Series and maybe TOAW 3, I couldn't think of a better way for someone just starting their wargame collection to spend their money.




Erik Rutins -> RE: Any enhancements to the AI? (11/11/2007 2:23:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ravinhood
Here's a question for yah Erik....How's PBEM compatibility for those of us with the OLDER versions and these updated versions? What problems if any will we run into?


As long as you were updated to the latest unofficial update version, I don't think there should be any PBEM compatibility issues as the newer version included in these re-releases did not make any rule changes.

Regards,

- Erik




berto -> RE: Any enhancements to the AI? (11/11/2007 10:00:51 PM)

ravinhood,

First, in this instance, there is no need to upgrade our machines.

I think we all agree that the HPS 2D graphics are good enough (they're terrific IMO), and probably most of us play these games mainly in that mode.

As for 3D, many would agree that HPS graphics are not up to a reasonable standard (I think they're awful). At least some of us, from time to time, switch to 3D mode. Others have no use for 3D at all.

For those who have use for the 3D graphics, most would agree that the 3D graphics from BG Chickamauga or <pick your BG favorite> are good enough. That's a graphics standard from the mid 1990s. No need for the latest and greatest and fastest hardware--the games will still run acceptably on ten-year-old HPS minimum requirement systems with 200MHz Pentiums and just 32 MB of RAM ([X(]).

Nobody here is talking about real-time, wiz-bang 3D graphics a la World of Warcraft or Medieval Total War requiring water-cooled, quad-core, high-end graphics systems!

Second, why must it cost "lots of money" for HPS to upgrade the 3D graphics?

Most of the work has already been done by modders who post their work at the ACW Campaign Games Design Center and other sites. How about HPS either

--purchase the rights (likely a small, one-time fee) to use his/her/their existing work

or

--contract to hire, on a part-time basis, over the Internet, one of these talented modders to work a month or three or six (whatever) to merge their work into the HPS system.

Heck, I would guess that one or more of these modders would donate their work and/or be willing to work for free just for the honor of improving their beloved HPS games in this way.

It could very well happen that, with the improved 3D graphics, that will entice some fence sitters (not me! no need, I already own the HPS games) to jump down and buy the games, thereby offsetting any expense HPS incurs with this project.

There, would that be so hard? Or so expensive, either for us as system owners or HPS as game publisher?

For some reason--habit, faith, ideology?--certain grognards (and HPS management?) seem to take the in-your-face attitude, "So, the HPS 3D graphics suck, we're proud of it!!" Anyone who offers the well-meaning advice to improve the 3D graphics (and admits that good graphics are relatively low on the list of priorities) has his/her grognard credentials questioned and is given the epithet "yahoo" and "graphics whore" or worse.

[&:]

BTW, AGEOD is working with a member of the AACW (AGEOD American Civil War) modder community (hired for a modest sum on a part-time basis) to finish/upgrade the generals portraits for that game. AGEOD will then merge the upgrades into the official game release. If they can do it, if AGEOD can open their minds and be flexible in their approach, why can't HPS?




Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.7363281