Hearts of Iron (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion



Message


Brigz -> Hearts of Iron (11/29/2002 11:29:37 AM)

Anyone played this game?

http://hearts-of-iron.wargamer.com/




Fred98 -> (11/29/2002 12:13:10 PM)

I looked at the screen shots and went "Yuck!"

Whats wrong with an improved version of Avalon Hill's Rise and decline of the Third Reich !

And its companion game Rising Sun




Brigz -> (11/29/2002 12:30:09 PM)

Guess I should'a looked first but I just found a thread over on the Art of Wargaming forum and after reading one of the reviews posted there, I'm sold. I'd like to buy this game. Just might do it.




Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (11/29/2002 10:23:30 PM)

I have been following this game since I turfed my interest in the fairy tale ladden Strategic Command game.

Strategic Command has only one connection with a decent wargame at this level, it has hexes.

That Hearts of Iron doesn't have hexes won't bother me at all though. Hexes do not make a wargame any good (as SC proved).

That the game's time management seems tedious is not much though as I understand the game has a fast forward capacity.

It appears to have all the logic and realism of a good game of A3R though.
It appears less vulnerable to "gamey" idiocy than SC clearly is.

After all if I want a game that allows me to completely ignore virtually any limitations required to make the game look and feel like that actual war, then I will get a game that allows me to completely forgo being stuck in earth during the 40's in the first place.

For those that can't handle historical limitations, I suggest they play Civilization III.

I am personally giving Hearts of Iron, Sarge's thumbs up till I get given a decent reason to say otherwise.

I think this is a refreshing potential change of pace when you have tired of Battlefield 1942 looking shooters, RTS sims, and Combat Mission looking games.

It is currently the only example of a game where the word "Strategy" is warranted by a wargamer.




Von Rom -> (11/29/2002 11:14:24 PM)

I just bought Hearts of Iron a couple of days ago.

All I can say is: It's brilliant!

Paradox has succeeded in making a game about ALL of WW2. It is a huge game world. And I mean HUGE. . .

I have played as Germany and got my butt kicked. I then switched and I am now playing as Italy. I am amazed at what Paradox has been able to put into this game.

And don't let the RTS part of it fool you. It is actually "continuous time" and can be slowed down to about one minute equals one month of time, and can be paused at every stage of the game.

If you like to micro-manage and fuss with your country, you will be in 7th heaven.

While it's not perfect, and things could be improved, Paradox has a reputation for listening to their customrs and supporting their games (like Matrix), and this game can only get better with improvements to the AI and with mods and scenarios. . .

I am having a blast playing it.

Cheers!




Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (11/30/2002 4:08:03 AM)

I love positive marketing reviews.




SoulBlazer -> (11/30/2002 4:41:57 AM)

Wish I could FIND the darn game....

No luck at my local EB or any other store......

grumble, grumble......




Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (11/30/2002 5:17:51 AM)

No luck in my corner of the world either, and I am not exactly in a software impoverished region.

I wonder how long this thing has been on the market though, does anyone know how long it has actually been on sale?




Von Rom -> (11/30/2002 5:57:07 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1
[B]No luck in my corner of the world either, and I am not exactly in a software impoverished region.

I wonder how long this thing has been on the market though, does anyone know how long it has actually been on sale? [/B][/QUOTE]

It hit the stores in Vancouver on Nov 26.

There are no less than 700 techs that you can research. If you want to fight the Pacific War as Japan - it's ALL there - carriers, battleships, . . .

As far as I know, no other company has succeeded in a WW2 game of this scale.

With UV, now Hearts of Iron, and later with WiTP, I am one happy wargamer. . .

Cheers!




Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (11/30/2002 6:25:41 AM)

I suppose I will locate a copy just after christmas...

I won't be holding my breath to see it appear on a shelf around here though.

Looks like an online order for me.




Sgt.Striker -> (11/30/2002 9:50:24 AM)

it looks great but first i'm gona by Europa Universalis I in the Bargain box hehe




swatter555 -> (12/4/2002 12:05:09 PM)

Its a good game, though air power needs to be worked on. Its more than just good to tell the truth. It is pretty complicated with poor documentation, though the people at the BBS will help you out.

There are going to be a few things that they need to work on for it to be a good "wargame".

1) Minor powers tend to take too much territory. Germany often fights the major battles while their allies just occupy territory.

2) Airpower, as mentioned above. It needs to be more abstracted.

3) Naval warfare needs to be tweaked, especially carrier based airpower.

The game will go through growing pains, but it is still very good.

To the person who wants to buy EU first, just skip that and get EU2. EU2 is also a great game, very polished now.




Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (12/4/2002 7:38:22 PM)

Just to keep threads in order where I have posted.

Hearts of Iron is currently enjoying the same status I gave to Strategic Command.

The game is not worth buying for any reason.

See my other threads for plenty of specifics.




screamer -> (12/5/2002 5:35:37 AM)

got it today, like it. only needs major tweaking on the AI and some minor rules to certain types of units.

for the rest its brilliant.

i am currently playing out a dutch-belgian war in 1937. :) i have already taken over the Belgian Congo and have control of the skies.

Belgium is doomed, or it needs a miracle. next thing. Join the axis




slickric -> (12/5/2002 11:01:50 AM)

Well I thought the game was good, It did lack in graphics in some areas. Well worth the money..... yea, Go pick it up!




Culiacan Mexico -> Re: Hearts of Iron (12/5/2002 1:25:41 PM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dave Briggs
[B]Anyone played this game? [/B][/QUOTE]Not yet, but there seems to be a lot of Euros who think it is the best thing since 'sliced bread'. ;)




Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (12/5/2002 8:17:59 PM)

Hmmm a sports analogy, write this down guys because I don't know much about sports hehe. So sports related comments are very rare for me.

Hearts of Iron is like the Leafs. They kick butt in the opening stages, and then when it comes to the crunch they always seem to go flat.
I found that Hearts of Iron was the same. Lots to say nice things about initially, but then when you you go to pay for it, at the last second you realise it's better to buy a different game.

I can suggest a lot of titles, heck even titles that are not turn based designs. Just because I hate them doesn't mean I can't give an accurate review.

If you have money in your pocket, and are desperate to purchase something, and just can't handle my turn based world, then if it has to be a shooter or an RTS game, then you might think of Battlefield 1942 perhaps.

I won't play BF42 myself, but that has nothing to do with the product or product quality. I just don't like those games myself.




Spooky -> (12/6/2002 3:16:26 AM)

Well, HOI is not really a wargame for grognard ... it is a global strategy game in which war is of course a major component ... like R&D, economy end even diplomacy !

Right now, it is an enjoyable game even if the AI needs to be tweaked and some bugs to be solved. However, since the Paradox "after-release game support" is as good as the Matrix one, I think the situation will be quickly improved !

Moreover, nearly all the elements of the game are easily "modable" so some players (ie : Bolt) are now looking for ways to get a better UK or China AI, some OOB changes or stats units changes .

To sum up, it is right now quite a good game and I am confident that the next patch(es) ... and some community-made mods ... will improve it to a really GREAT game ;)

Spooky




dpstafford -> (12/6/2002 3:23:48 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Spooky
[B]Right now, it is an enjoyable game even if the AI needs to be tweaked and some bugs to be solved. However, since the Paradox "after-release game support" is as good as the Matrix one, I think the situation will be quickly improved !
[/B][/QUOTE]Speaking of Matrix support, I've noticed that your UV fansite hasn't announced the availability of versions 2.10 or 2.11 yet. Smart move! You've saved some people a lot of grief.

As for Paradox, as a long-time player of EU and EU2, I can tell you that they were never really able to solve the AI problems. You end up just accepting that and playing for the flavor of the history being presented. Or because you can't find anything else to do.




Spooky -> (12/6/2002 3:42:19 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by dpstafford
[B]Speaking of Matrix support, I've noticed that your UV fansite hasn't announced the availability of versions 2.10 or 2.11 yet. Smart move! You've saved some people a lot of grief.

As for Paradox, as a long-time player of EU and EU2, I can tell you that they were never really able to solve the AI problems. You end up just accepting that and playing for the flavor of the history being presented. Or because you can't find anything else to do. [/B][/QUOTE]

Well, the UV 2.11 patch does not seem to have some new bugs - so it is now announced in the UV Fansite :) ... but without a link since this file is not yet in the Matrix download page :(

About EU 1/2, I spent an awful lot of time on these two games and even if the AI is not very smart, it is good enough for an entertaining game - especially playing an "underdog" country ...

BTW, I really like your sign ;)




Culiacan Mexico -> (12/6/2002 3:52:10 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Spooky
[B]Well, HOI is not really a wargame for grognard ... it is a global strategy game in which war is of course a major component ... like R&D, economy end even diplomacy !

Right now, it is an enjoyable game even if the AI needs to be tweaked and some bugs to be solved. However, since the Paradox "after-release game support" is as good as the Matrix one, I think the situation will be quickly improved !

Moreover, nearly all the elements of the game are easily "modable" so some players (ie : Bolt) are now looking for ways to get a better UK or China AI, some OOB changes or stats units changes .

To sum up, it is right now quite a good game and I am confident that the next patch(es) ... and some community-made mods ... will improve it to a really GREAT game ;)

Spooky [/B][/QUOTE]There has been a lot of discussion on the AoW forum about this game and they have convinced me to give it a try. I hope it does improve to be a great game. :)




dpstafford -> (12/6/2002 3:58:12 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Spooky
[B]BTW, I really like your sign ;) [/B][/QUOTE]
Great! But the main reason I fly the Amnesty banner is to piss off Sven.




Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (12/6/2002 4:20:19 AM)

Only thing keeping me from playing HoI is that it's RTS and not turn based and that it insists on letting you play all the schmuck nations, where all I want is US Britain France Russia Germany Italy and Japan.

Sure the contributions of the whole were needed, but I don't want to play the game where a Waftist Egypt conquers Britain. I wouldn't even indulge that in a science fiction story.




Charles2222 -> Realism? (12/6/2002 9:08:44 PM)

I just got the game yesterday, with just a perusal so far. It doesn't look that terribly complicated to me, as everything seems to stem for anywhere between 4-7 command paths.

One thing I hate to see though, is that on their BB a number of people complain that GE, or whatever nation, shouldn't be able to build so much of this or that by 1939 for example. What they fail to realize, and it's a tragic blindness to say the least, is that the game attempts to answer the question that if certain nations did things differently than they did, what would have happened. Now maybe you could follow the precise path a nation did and come up with very poor results, but I can't see it possible that someone could come up with totally understanding that game on the one hand, and have thorough access to that nations's historic records and translate that into games terms, other than if you're the programmers perhaps. In any event if GE for example were building the naval program and economics in the pre-war years, far greater than you did, while you went all out for the army, then who's fault is it that GE has too great an army? And until you know precisely what GE did and where they put everything, you cannot begin to criticise the game designers for something you don't know yourself.

On a lesser note, I see people also criticise how a certain tank or plane wasn't available by a certain date, but, then again, if you've no idea what amount of manpower and research went into a weapon coming available when it did, you have no way to reasonably claim that the weapon's availability couldn't have come out by that time. I thought about the basic argument about Panthers coming out when they did wouldn't have occured if the GE's hadn't invaded the USSR and thereby discovered the T34 was a pretty goos argument, but on second thought I don't like that line of reasoning either. All we know for sure, is that historically that was the case, but what we don't know is virtual-history so to speak. Sure, in game terms, maybe the Panther becomes available a lot earlier because you put a massive amount of research into tanks that GE did not, be that the game design fault or not, but then again if GE hadn't encountered the T34, maybe, just maybe, they would've designed a much better airplane for example. The game attempts to do this. The eternal question of what could've happened is attempted to be answered in that game. It's probably not the fault of the game if something became available a lot earlier then it did, but that you have no idea just what every specific nation put into the research in given areas, and then are far out-pacing your historic counterparts. Maybe one of the men that died during bombing on some HQ in France is the same one who would've came up with a radical new design for tanks that the Panther would've paled in comparison. Another angle comes to me at the moment, specifically about this Panther availability thing. Suppose for example that your GE had conquered one more nation, let alone twice as much, as the RL GE. What if in the RL GE, not conquering Sweden, there was a spy there who would've got you the T34 information fresh off the designers's desk, but because the RL GE didn't annex them they never knew of the T34 till later? When you start arguing history with a largely hypothetical game, you better have all your bases covered, and if you so much as conquered one nation more than the historic counterpart did, or one less, or at different times (and one needn't even get into research differences as I did earlier), then you have very little grounds for saying that the Panther couldn't have been available earlier.




Spooky -> (12/7/2002 1:42:10 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1
[B]Only thing keeping me from playing HoI is that it's RTS and not turn based and that it insists on letting you play all the schmuck nations, where all I want is US Britain France Russia Germany Italy and Japan.

Sure the contributions of the whole were needed, but I don't want to play the game where a Waftist Egypt conquers Britain. I wouldn't even indulge that in a science fiction story. [/B][/QUOTE]

Well, you can play minor players ... but they are uninteresting except Finland and the major CW nations such as Canada or Australia (+ neutral powers such as Brazil)

BTW, the "Real time" tag is not really accurate - it is rather a "continuous time" and it is well implemented. There is nothing similar between HOI and a true RTS like C&C or Sudden Strike since you can pause whenever you like and configure your game to pause whenever an event happens (ie : land or naval combat, tech discovery, ...)




Charles2222 -> (12/7/2002 3:16:00 AM)

Spooky: Yeah, during my perusal yesterday, I left it on the slowest time, which is hourly. I think an hour passes about every three seconds at that rate, and I love that. It reminds me of one of the better things I liked about BTR; the ability to make things go real fast or real slow. There's nothing like the feel of unlimited turns or fly-by-night turns being entirely at your disposal. The hourly turns really give you the feeling that you're practically real-time and that the enemy is just creeping up on the borders, but, then again, I'm in those first look throws that people get into so easily and my imagination is pretty potent there.




Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (12/7/2002 10:46:19 AM)

Question...

In a game about a 6 year (in some tellings) long war, at the global grand strategy level, what the blue blazes is the point of the design being hourly?

I would object to it being weekly just as strongly.

The war to some was even more than 6 years. Good god I don't have the time to do the math to get an idea of how many hours long WW2 was.

Hourly might be handy for battles like the Bulge or Midway, but it was a pointless venture for the whole damned war.

You launch an air strike against London and it takes several hour increments to resolve. I have patience, but I would kinda like to resolve those sorts of details with "either it works or doesn't" resolutions.

The designer must think root canal is stimulating.




Pawlock -> (12/8/2002 8:15:12 PM)

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

In a game about a 6 year (in some tellings) long war, at the global grand strategy level, what the blue blazes is the point of the design being hourly?

I would object to it being weekly just as strongly.

The war to some was even more than 6 years. Good god I don't have the time to do the math to get an idea of how many hours long WW2 was.

Hourly might be handy for battles like the Bulge or Midway, but it was a pointless venture for the whole damned war.

You launch an air strike against London and it takes several hour increments to resolve. I have patience, but I would kinda like to resolve those sorts of details with "either it works or doesn't" resolutions.

The designer must think root canal is stimulating. [/B][/QUOTE]

Thing is Les, time is entirely scalable depending on what is happening in the game. I'll admit it Im slow thinking, but believe you me when you have battle raging all around and 20 messages a second coming in you need to turn the speed down.

When action quietens down again turn it up, easy really , and quite unique.

Slightly off topic, I always knew USSR was big ,but this game its immense!!!! Its taking me ages to conquer the whole country, and thats just a case of mopping up now.




Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (12/8/2002 9:00:26 PM)

If you want a "better" way of appreciating the scope of defeating Russia and want a good game to show it try getting a copy of Fire in the East as well as the Urals expansion maps from the Europa series.

For my money though, the game loses out on so many aspects, which you might not yet have experienced.

It is a great deal more than just about an AI that grade 6 girl could beat, or the fact that the time scale belongs in a colonising simulation, not a wargame of a specific time period.




Brigz -> (12/9/2002 12:37:03 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1
[B]If you want a "better" way of appreciating the scope of defeating Russia and want a good game to show it try getting a copy of Fire in the East as well as the Urals expansion maps from the Europa series.[/B][/QUOTE]

Again I'll say if you want a good intense game about the Russo/German war I suggest getting "Russo/German War". Simple and clean but a real challenge.




Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.109375