John Tiller or Norm Koger (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion



Message

rowech -> John Tiller or Norm Koger (10/24/2010 11:58:23 PM)

I plan on buying one of these two games given them being on sale. Which should I pick up given the following considerations:

1. "Bang for the Buck" -- want the game to give me a lot of scenarios. Seems like both games will do this?

2. Needs to have good AI -- I'll be playing this game on my own so I need it to have a good AI.

3. Accessible to a new gamer -- I've been toying with wargames the last year on the tabletop but I've been sticking with simple games. Don't want to be overloaded with a game. Along the same lines, it would be great if the game had a nice help file.

4. Fun -- want the game to be fun obviously...would like to learn some as well.




Lützow -> RE: John Tiller or Norm Koger (10/25/2010 12:30:48 AM)

1. Both have tons of content and can occupy one for years. However, JTCS offers tactical combat with miniatures, while TOAW III aims for operational level and is more massive - they're total different in playstile and scope. For a short introduction with ingame scenes search at youtube.

2. As usual. If you're new to a game, the AI will challenge you. After a while it won't anymore.

3. I started with Panzer General back in the 90's and moved to East Front (Campaign Series) afterwards. At this time TOAW was still too abstract for my taste, but this changed when I got more proficient with wargaming.

4. Fun is always in the eye of the beholder and it depends what you expect to learn, these titles are no 'militairy study sims'. But if you want a personal advice: purchase TOAW III and look at shrapnelgames for the free version of WinSPWW2. This one is quite comparable to JTCS.



jomni -> RE: John Tiller or Norm Koger (10/25/2010 1:44:09 AM)

1.  Both JTCS and TOAW gives you bang for your buck as they all have tons of scenarios.
2.  JTCS has predictable AI if you play a lot of it.  But it's still fun.  TOAW has scripted AI so it's all based on the skill of the scenario designer.
3.  JTCS is more simple... turn based... just move and fire.  TOAW is has more settings like combat stance, etc.
4.  I find both fun.  But TOAW involves more work than JTCS.

One more thing.  TOAW goes beyond WW2.  JTCS is strictly WW2.



NefariousKoel -> RE: John Tiller or Norm Koger (10/26/2010 12:17:01 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jomni

One more thing.  TOAW goes beyond WW2.  JTCS is strictly WW2.


That, along with scale, is the big difference.

Also, if you were to compare them to tabletop games then the Campaign Series is more like a miniatures game while TAOW is the big hex-map and counters style. Though they both uses hexes.



junk2drive -> RE: John Tiller or Norm Koger (10/26/2010 12:21:07 AM)

JTCS can be played in 3D (isometric) minis style or 2D counter style.



Lützow -> RE: John Tiller or Norm Koger (10/26/2010 12:29:58 AM)

One can use counters for JTCS and 3D models for TOAW, but it plays better vice versa.



jomni -> RE: John Tiller or Norm Koger (10/26/2010 3:03:37 AM)

You would notice that the "3D" models of both games look similar.
That's because both were originally published by Talonsoft and use the same graphics library.



Adam Parker -> RE: John Tiller or Norm Koger (10/26/2010 11:00:57 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rowech

I plan on buying one of these two games given them being on sale. Which should I pick up given the following considerations:

1. "Bang for the Buck" -- want the game to give me a lot of scenarios. Seems like both games will do this?

2. Needs to have good AI -- I'll be playing this game on my own so I need it to have a good AI.

3. Accessible to a new gamer -- I've been toying with wargames the last year on the tabletop but I've been sticking with simple games. Don't want to be overloaded with a game. Along the same lines, it would be great if the game had a nice help file.

4. Fun -- want the game to be fun obviously...would like to learn some as well.


1. John Tiller's series such as Panzer Campaigns contain the most "out of the wrapper" scenarios in any wargame I've ever found. I know the guys who make the maps and create the scenarios and their research is a labor of love.

2. John Tiller's games fall short in terms of competitive AI. SSG's games (see Battles in Normandy and Kharkov here) are far better in this regard. Norm Koger's The Operational Art of War has never impressed me either.

3. John Tiller's games are extremely easy to understand and learn. Just expect to do a lot of clicking to move hundreds of units in his bigger scenarios.

4. Fun to me = a good AI. That's why neither of the above designers are recommended for solitaire play. Go SSG instead. Or as I do, play board wargames against yourself.



jomni -> RE: John Tiller or Norm Koger (10/26/2010 11:03:53 AM)

Above comments are true.
I'm an avid PBEM gamer of Tiller Games as they are good PBEM games.



diablo1 -> RE: John Tiller or Norm Koger (10/26/2010 11:13:22 AM)

I'd have to agree with Adam above the ai's aren't very challenging but the detail and depth of TOAW III is over the top.

I would recommend SSG's Battles in Italy as you get the best of both worlds and plenty of mods to play just about any varient of WWII European theater.



Lützow -> RE: John Tiller or Norm Koger (10/26/2010 2:57:16 PM)

SSG games, while superior in graphics and quality, fall short in terms of comprehension. In addition, they're harder to learn than JTCS.

I guess its's not exactly what OP asked for.



Adam Parker -> RE: John Tiller or Norm Koger (10/26/2010 3:21:45 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lützow

SSG games, while superior in graphics and quality, fall short in terms of comprehension.


Unsure what you mean here. I found both Battles in Normandy and Kharkov's Husky (Invasion of Sicily Scenario for the OP) games to faithfully recreate history. My Patton found himself frustratingly stuck outside Messina whilst my Monty slugged his way ever so slowly up the right flank of Etna [:D]

As a side note, Husky (the newer incarnation of the system) plays well solitaire as the Axis too.



Lützow -> RE: John Tiller or Norm Koger (10/26/2010 4:04:27 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Adam Parker

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lützow

SSG games, while superior in graphics and quality, fall short in terms of comprehension.


Unsure what you mean here. I found both Battles in Normandy and Kharkov's Husky (Invasion of Sicily Scenario for the OP) games to faithfully recreate history.


I do agree here. AtD II is my favorite Matrix title for this year, gave it a high rating in my German Reviev. On the other hand, these games don't deliver that much content, in comparison to TOAW and it's by far easier to get into JTCS than learning SSG's ruleset.



NefariousKoel -> RE: John Tiller or Norm Koger (10/26/2010 7:39:00 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jomni

You would notice that the "3D" models of both games look similar.
That's because both were originally published by Talonsoft and use the same graphics library.


It looks far better in the campaign series. I don't bother with anything but the NATO symbol counters in TAOW as I suspect most people do.



Adam Parker -> RE: John Tiller or Norm Koger (10/27/2010 8:38:02 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lützow

AtD II is my favorite Matrix title for this year, gave it a high rating in my German Reviev. On the other hand, these games don't deliver that much content, in comparison to TOAW...


I totally agree with that. SSG is shooting themselves in the foot as a result.



berto -> RE: John Tiller or Norm Koger (10/27/2010 8:56:25 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rowech

I plan on buying one of these two games given them being on sale. Which should I pick up given the following considerations:

1. "Bang for the Buck" -- want the game to give me a lot of scenarios. Seems like both games will do this?

2. Needs to have good AI -- I'll be playing this game on my own so I need it to have a good AI.

3. Accessible to a new gamer -- I've been toying with wargames the last year on the tabletop but I've been sticking with simple games. Don't want to be overloaded with a game. Along the same lines, it would be great if the game had a nice help file.

4. Fun -- want the game to be fun obviously...would like to learn some as well.

Although it doesn't meet all your criteria (yes to 1, 3 and 4; no to 2), overall I think you would be happier with JTCS.

I'm a long-time player of JTCS and TOAW. Both are very fine games, but for my own reasons I prefer TOAW.



gabeeg -> RE: John Tiller or Norm Koger (10/27/2010 6:14:22 PM)

I prefer tactical wargames myself but own both JTCS (scratches my prefered tactical itch) and TOAW III.   I have to agree with Berto, though it does not meet all your criteria...it just seems to me like you would enjoy JTCS more.   This is not a slight on TOAW as it is a great game.  In fact it is the only operational computer wargame that I own...and honestly I do not think I need another one.  TOAW is soooo flexible it can be made to scratch whatever occasional operational itch that I get.   Both titles are loaded down with content (onboard and downloadable).

...I lied...I also own Uncommon Valor...suppose that is a more operational/strat type game. 
...damn, another lie....I might be interested in picking up WitpAE or War in the East someday...we will see.



rowech -> RE: John Tiller or Norm Koger (10/27/2010 9:44:46 PM)

I was looking at these two because they're on sale.  Doesn't seem from the responses that either is in the same class as some other games so I'll probably hold off.



berto -> RE: John Tiller or Norm Koger (10/27/2010 10:16:30 PM)

Your choice. But these are time-tested, excellent games. Classics of the genre.



gabeeg -> RE: John Tiller or Norm Koger (10/27/2010 11:08:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rowech

I was looking at these two because they're on sale.  Doesn't seem from the responses that either is in the same class as some other games so I'll probably hold off.


Your choice, but TOAW is top of the class and with the 3.4 beta update looks as good as it plays. I cannot imagine there are many newer operational games that are better. I just bought JTCS in the sale this week myself. I have played around with some of the tutorial scenarios and it is just as fun as the newer HPS SB games IMO (though slightly different scale and the SB games are a bit more detailed/realistic). Right now I am alternating between Red Victory and JTCS and having the same amount of fun playing both. By the way Red Victory is a gem. But, you got to find what fits your needs and wants so I understand.



Capt Cliff -> RE: John Tiller or Norm Koger (10/28/2010 1:10:15 PM)

Neither ... I have both and I am not impressed with either. Tiller seems to think one single game engine fits all levels of combat. Norm's game seems a tad off on the AI, not to say dumb ... but ... ummm ... dumb, but that's was a long LONG time ago.

I like Combat Mission for tactical combat (I wish they would improve it one more time and add Japan), V4V series for operational (the wego system) and for strategic; GGWbtS works for me as does WIR and Pacific War. I use to play the old board game Empire in Arms but have shyed away from the computer game due to bad reviews. Games have to be able to be played via PBEM. A realtime game is impractical for human vs human, to get someone to play head to head, either ftf or over LAN, is impossibly hard to accomplish. Way easier to use PBEM ... you play when you can if you can ... with a wego system like V4V or America Invades ... or an IgoUgo (bleh ... my second choice).



junk2drive -> RE: John Tiller or Norm Koger (10/28/2010 1:41:44 PM)

Capt Cliff the new server based PBEM systems are the way to go. No more starting an email and finding a flie to upload or zipping it up first.
You can exchange turns as fast as you want or stop to do chores and come back later.

I'm paranoid about the company server method as they may not be working years (or minutes) from now. There are free file exchange websites that can be used for these games or the old fashioned PBEM files as well.



V22 Osprey -> RE: John Tiller or Norm Koger (10/29/2010 1:19:56 AM)

I found JTCS to be much more fun that TOAW III. In fact I hated it. Both offer plenty of replayability. Both have powerful editors that allow you create almost anything. It really just comes down preference.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Capt Cliff

Tiller seems to think one single game engine fits all levels of combat.



Have to disagree. While they may use very similar interfaces, they are completely different games across different series. Squad Battles plays nothing like Panzer Campaigns. Panzer Campaigns plays nothing like First World War Campaigns. Civil War Battles plays NOTHING like Napoleonic Campaigns. Obviously his Modern Air Power and Naval Campaigns series are different engines all together, yet they still use the same interface. Tiller's interface fits all levels of combat, not a single game engine.




Capt Cliff -> RE: John Tiller or Norm Koger (11/2/2010 6:55:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: V22 Osprey

I found JTCS to be much more fun that TOAW III. In fact I hated it. Both offer plenty of replayability. Both have powerful editors that allow you create almost anything. It really just comes down preference.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Capt Cliff

Tiller seems to think one single game engine fits all levels of combat.



Have to disagree. While they may use very similar interfaces, they are completely different games across different series. Squad Battles plays nothing like Panzer Campaigns. Panzer Campaigns plays nothing like First World War Campaigns. Civil War Battles plays NOTHING like Napoleonic Campaigns. Obviously his Modern Air Power and Naval Campaigns series are different engines all together, yet they still use the same interface. Tiller's interface fits all levels of combat, not a single game engine.




I own quite a few Tiller games, but no more, and I think we'll have to agree to disagree! [:D]




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
3