Korsun HPS/Tiller version

Korsun HPS/Tiller version (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Decisive Battles: Korsun Pocket

Message

coach3play4 -> Korsun HPS/Tiller version (8/10/2003 10:08:37 PM)
I bought the SSG version, and buy most Matrix or SSG games. I also have purchased HPS/Tiller games - but not their version. Can anyone share the experience of both games - pros and cons?

John Pancoast -> (8/10/2003 10:25:13 PM)
Don't have KP yet, should arrive tomorrow, but did have the HPS game. Sold it. The HPS games are good, but I'm not a big fan of the Grand Tactical scale they use. It's a compromise, and like most of those, shows it negatively imo. A game should be either Operational or Tactical, make a choice, don't blend, imo. In all their PzC games, to me, there's just WAAAAY to many units. It becomes a chore, not an enjoyable hobby, to make moves, especially with the two hour time scale, which is also a mistake imo. The SSG games flow so much better imo. I find myself concentrating on strategy, etc. with them much more so than with the HPS stuff. Also, the AI in SSG stuff is head and shoulders above any HPS/Tiller game. Hope this helps.

sol_invictus -> (8/10/2003 11:04:30 PM)
Agreed John; after I played the Normandy game I realized I wasn't enjoying myself and the whole thing was a mindnumbing bore. Haven't bought a Tiller game since.

coach3play4 -> (8/10/2003 11:12:00 PM)
I totally agree that for those of us that play against the computer, the SSG games AI is much better than HPS games. i assume that remains true for the Korsun comparisons.

John Pancoast -> (8/10/2003 11:14:28 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by oleary111 [B]I totally agree that for those of us that play against the computer, the SSG games AI is much better than HPS games. i assume that remains true for the Korsun comparisons. [/B][/QUOTE] Even in pbem, KP is going to be better; in the HPS stuff, there's nothing preventing you or your opponent from replaying the turn. While that same problem currently exists in KP, there's supposed to be a fix on the way. Not so with the HPS stuff.

John Pancoast -> (8/10/2003 11:17:07 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Arinvald [B]Agreed John; after I played the Normandy game I realized I wasn't enjoying myself and the whole thing was a mindnumbing bore. Haven't bought a Tiller game since. [/B][/QUOTE] Exactly. Heck, a turn can literally almost take as long to move units, etc in real time, as the games simulated two hour scale.

elmo3 -> (8/10/2003 11:33:41 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by John Pancoast [B]Even in pbem, KP is going to be better; in the HPS stuff, there's nothing preventing you or your opponent from replaying the turn. While that same problem currently exists in KP, there's supposed to be a fix on the way. Not so with the HPS stuff. [/B][/QUOTE] As a beta tester for HPS I'm staying out of this discussion except to point out that this statement is incorrect. There is an option to prevent players from replaying PBEM turns if they want to use it.

PeterF -> (8/10/2003 11:34:14 PM)
John Pancoast: [QUOTE]Even in pbem, KP is going to be better; in the HPS stuff, there's nothing preventing you or your opponent from replaying the turn.[/QUOTE] Unfortunately, it appears you have the same option in KP. In response to a query of mine on this subject posted in the alt-historical forum Chris Merchant, replied that SSG is working on a fix that will prevent re-loading turns. It will be included in the eventual patch. I'll hold off purchase until then because playing the AI, as good as it's reputed to be in KP, doesn't enthrall me. I'm spoiled by the air tight PBEM procedure in Combat Mission. (Whoops just read the rest of your post)

Black Cat -> They Are Different Beasts (8/10/2003 11:49:57 PM)
I`m a little surprised at the out of the blue HPS Bashing. These are completely different scale systems and different design philosophys at work. So while saying you " like" one more then the other is fair, I don`t think it`s reasonable to say one is a "better" Wargame based on that. While the tactical AI is far better in the SSG games in the way it responds to your moves, the HPS games give you much more control over both Arty. and Airstrikes and far more options in the way of the game play details that you can configure, including supply variations and combat variations. It is yet to be seen how the editors compare. Starting Game publisher Wars is IMO not helpful to the hobby.

John Pancoast -> Re: They Are Different Beasts (8/11/2003 2:27:11 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Black Cat [B]I`m a little surprised at the out of the blue HPS Bashing. These are completely different scale systems and different design philosophys at work. So while saying you " like" one more then the other is fair, I don`t think it`s reasonable to say one is a "better" Wargame based on that. While the tactical AI is far better in the SSG games in the way it responds to your moves, the HPS games give you much more control over both Arty. and Airstrikes and far more options in the way of the game play details that you can configure, including supply variations and combat variations. It is yet to be seen how the editors compare. Starting Game publisher Wars is IMO not helpful to the hobby. [/B][/QUOTE] Don't see any bashing here myself. An opinion was asked, and one was given. As far as the age old "Example A discussion is not helpful to the hobby", I've never cared for that, nor seen examples for that matter, imho. I remember hearing the exact same worries(be careful, or we won't have any more games, etc.) in both this genre and flight sims.............in the early '80s :)

John Pancoast -> (8/11/2003 2:34:44 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by elmo3 [B]As a beta tester for HPS I'm staying out of this discussion except to point out that this statement is incorrect. There is an option to prevent players from replaying PBEM turns if they want to use it. [/B][/QUOTE] Maybe I missed the method, but if you're talking about using pbem encryption plus pbem no save, that still doesn't prevent a player from quitting his turn without saving, reloading it, and starting over.

PeterF -> (8/11/2003 2:53:48 AM)
[QUOTE]Starting Game publisher Wars is IMO not helpful to the hobby.[/QUOTE] Uh? Where are we? In church? My philosophy is if they want my money they can listen to my opinion. If you can't take the heat.... I thought Pancoast's opinions were fair; HPS developed a kind of strategic/operational hybrid system and, based on which, has been churning out games like toaster ovens. Where's the growth, the evolution? As the Spanish say: [I]basta[/I] !

Wilhammer -> (8/11/2003 3:06:08 AM)
Tiiler's Philosophy: His wargaming design theory is based on making some of his favorite games form the late 70s and early 80s computer playable: Age of Sail : Wodden Ships and Iron Men. His Civil War Games: Old SPI GBACW system. for me, his best work is his Civil War games: PzC: Series. A lot like old SPI titles, like Panzer Group Guderian, or Drive on Stalingrad, or even like GDW's Operation Crusader or Suez '73, White Death. And, comparing Korsun '44 to KP is a bit hard, the scales being so different. But one thing I do like about Korsun 44 is the availability of smaller scenarios; I like the Kanev '43 scenario. But, to play the entire scope of the Korsun Pocket battle in 1 km hexes and 2 hour turns, with things like defensive fire, reaction fire; well, it would take about 10 times as long compared to KP. For me, the products don't really compete. I hope the KP system gets the long legs of PzC and finally provides us with a steady Operational System for PCs. World at War/V4V had my attention for a long time (I really like weplot/wego), but that series has died.

Fred98 -> (8/11/2003 5:11:55 AM)
My view of the HP games is thta it taked toooooo long to play a turn. HP needs a "combat advisor" that comes with SSG's Korsun Pocket. It is one on the great innovations of wargaming.

elmo3 -> (8/11/2003 5:46:03 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by John Pancoast [B]Maybe I missed the method, but if you're talking about using pbem encryption plus pbem no save, that still doesn't prevent a player from quitting his turn without saving, reloading it, and starting over. [/B][/QUOTE] True. There is no way to stop the approach you describe in any turn based games AFAIK. Combat Mission is different of course because it is wego with the turn only being resolved after both players have moved. The approach HPS uses, encryption with no save, prevents saving as you go and refighting battles to get a better result.

Adam Parker -> (8/11/2003 6:02:33 AM)
Guys, you're likely expecting something from me on this but pending my copy of KP reaching me there's nothing useful I can add ;) However, I do have one thing to ask: Elmo you've got me stumped. LOL... fess up. Who are you? :D

sol_invictus -> (8/11/2003 6:22:31 AM)
Willhammer, I completely agree; the WEGO type system is my favorite way to go. I loved the V4V/WaW games and still have them. Playing them is getting very hard though as the OS has left them behind. My only real gripe with KP is that it is turn based and I don't feel that the engine takes advantage of what the computer now allows. I guess to make KP a WEGO system would take a complete engine overhaul, but I do hope SSG goes that route in the future. I am really looking forward to Battlefields, as this seems to be very close to what V4V/WaW was and hopefully improves on it. I think KP using a IGO/UGO turn sequence, more than anything else, is why it is viewed as a computerized board wargame. Regardless, it is a very enjoyable game and a very good engine.

John Pancoast -> (8/11/2003 6:34:41 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Arinvald [B]Willhammer, I completely agree; the WEGO type system is my favorite way to go. I loved the V4V/WaW games and still have them. Playing them is getting very hard though as the OS has left them behind. My only real gripe with KP is that it is turn based and I don't feel that the engine takes advantage of what the computer now allows. I guess to make KP a WEGO system would take a complete engine overhaul, but I do hope SSG goes that route in the future. I am really looking forward to Battlefields, as this seems to be very close to what V4V/WaW was and hopefully improves on it. I think KP using a IGO/UGO turn sequence, more than anything else, is why it is viewed as a computerized board wargame. Regardless, it is a very enjoyable game and a very good engine. [/B][/QUOTE] Yeah, the old v4v/waw had a great sytem that way, supply was great too. Elmo, that's true, thanks.

PeterF -> (8/11/2003 7:00:39 AM)
So.... KP players are going to be the recipients, via an eventual patch, of a revolutionary PBEM procedure, never before utilized in the IGO/UGO format, that will [B]prevent[/B] reloading of turns. Am I reading this correctly? Am I to be concerned that, if I'm out of town for the weekend, for example, the unopened file will loiter in my inbox only to suddenly ignite, obeying some countdown embedded by the programmer, and burn to a cinder like the tape recorder in Mission Impossible? Can someone kindly explain the mechanics of how this is gonna work? Signed, -Shy but Curious

Fred98 -> (8/11/2003 7:17:25 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by PeterF [B]1. So.... KP players are going to be the recipients, via an eventual patch, of a revolutionary PBEM procedure, never before utilized in the IGO/UGO format, that will [B]prevent[/B] reloading of turns. Am I reading this correctly? 2.Can someone kindly explain the mechanics of how this is gonna work? [/B][/QUOTE] In TAO2, the predecessor to this game, you can load as many times as you want. But, there is an indicator that tells both players how many times a game is loaded. Then you can see if the opponent has loaded a turn 20 times. I suspect that it is a simple thing to stop you loading more than once. If the PC knows I have loaded twice, then it can stop me loading twice. But it did lead to a problem. Example: I receive turn 7. But the PC crashes. Aaarg! need new hard disk. Get new hard disk, opponent re-sends turn 7. Can't play turn 7 because the computer has no record of the first 6 turns - or more importantly the first turn. Can't complete game.

PeterF -> (8/11/2003 7:23:43 AM)
[QUOTE]But it did lead to a problem. Example: I receive turn 7. But the PC crashes. Aaarg! need new hard disk.[/QUOTE] That did occur to me. But, frankly, what are the odds? Yes, No Rreload is the way to go. Or, at least, make it available as an option. As Reagan said to Gorbachev, 'trust but verify'.

elmo3 -> (8/11/2003 7:29:14 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Adam Parker [B]... However, I do have one thing to ask: Elmo you've got me stumped. LOL... fess up. Who are you? :D [/B][/QUOTE] The one with the kilt... ;)

Adam Parker -> (8/11/2003 9:03:28 AM)
LOL :)

e_barkmann -> (8/11/2003 10:20:31 AM)
[QUOTE]Can someone kindly explain the mechanics of how this is gonna work?[/QUOTE] Once the patch reaches beta status I will let you know. - no, I don't have an ETA :-) Cheers Chris

dwinston -> HPS versus V4V/WaW (8/12/2003 12:05:21 AM)
The HPS series takes way to long and is not particualry user friendly. It is very much like a traditional board game. V4V/WaW had several key functions that made it much easier to play - the big one being seniding a HQ unit to an objective and all the subordinate units automatically went to the objective as well. While HPS can go all the way down to the company level, generally the battalion level seems the easiest to handle (unless you need to spread your line out and don't have the troops to do it.) The combat mechanics of WaW were much faster and games could be completed within a reasonable amount of time. HPS turns take forever. The detail in HPS is excellent, and tghe gameplay seems to be accurate, but there are some design imprvements that would really help (like using the HQ to send units in a direction or helping you identify units within a command which is dsperately needed given the huge amount of units on the screen). Maybe Matrix could get the rights to the V4V and WaW game system and publich some additional games. Thoughts?

Black Cat -> Re: HPS versus V4V/WaW (8/12/2003 12:35:11 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by dwinston [B]The HPS series takes way to long and is not particualry user friendly. It is very much like a traditional board game. V4V/WaW had several key functions that made it much easier to play - the big one being seniding a HQ unit to an objective and all the subordinate units automatically went to the objective as well. While HPS can go all the way down to the company level, generally the battalion level seems the easiest to handle (unless you need to spread your line out and don't have the troops to do it.) The combat mechanics of WaW were much faster and games could be completed within a reasonable amount of time. HPS turns take forever. The detail in HPS is excellent, and tghe gameplay seems to be accurate, but there are some design imprvements that would really help (like using the HQ to send units in a direction or helping you identify units within a command which is dsperately needed given the huge amount of units on the screen). Maybe Matrix could get the rights to the V4V and WaW game system and publich some additional games. Thoughts? [/B][/QUOTE] Some things I discovered by reading the manual and asking on the various HPS Forums. First in the opinion department: 1. Your "reasonable amount of time" to complete is someone elses just right. 2. Some people think the Game is " user friendly" since it`s basically a point and click/drag system. 3. The Game is very fast on a fast machine if you use the F8 key to speed up the AI phase, which usually takes less then 90 seconds in the large HPS Campaign Games . In the facts department: 4. You can let the AI move any or all your units to an objective by 2 clicks of the mouse. 5. The V4V and WaW games had 1/10 of the units on Map compared to the HPS large scenarios. 6. You can highlight all units within a Formation, and each counter in every formation is color coded according to unit, you can also get the command radius of each HQ with one mouse click. 7. Almost all units can breakdown to smaller units and then recombine. I too would like to see Matrix republish the old V4V and WaW Games.

Wallenstein -> Re: HPS versus V4V/WaW (8/12/2003 12:50:51 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by dwinston [B] Maybe Matrix could get the rights to the V4V and WaW game system and publich some additional games. Thoughts? [/B][/QUOTE] I don�t know about the rights, but the V4V and WaW are great games with many options and functions - I liked how artillery and headquarters were resolved as mentioned above - such enhancements could be interseting improvements for future TAO/KP projects. I remember when I had my first glance at TAO2 I thought it was a new type of the old V4V games.

Wilhammer -> (8/12/2003 12:57:50 AM)
If I could fix one thing in Operation Crusader it is all those little independent Italian artillery units. You get a cloud of them, all moving very fast, and they functioned as great recon assets, IMO, ruining the play balance of the game. This is also a problem in PzC, the totally unrelaistic use of fast moving AT and ART assets to do forward recon and ZOC encirclements. Come to think of it, this is something of an issue in TOAW-COW as well, corrected by good scenario designers. The TAO3-KP system is wonderful in having movement friction modeled with different costs for no man's land and enemy territory vs friendly territory.

dwinston -> Re: Re: HPS versus V4V/WaW (8/12/2003 1:00:51 AM)
First in the opinion department: 3. The Game is very fast on a fast machine if you use the F8 key to speed up the AI phase, which usually takes less then 90 seconds in the large HPS Campaign Games. I use that and it is much quicker - but still slow (of course my machine is only 733mGHZ In the facts department: 4. You can let the AI move any or all your units to an objective by 2 clicks of the mouse. How? 6. You can highlight all units within a Formation, and each counter in every formation is color coded according to unit, you can also get the command radius of each HQ with one mouse click. I know how to highlight all the units in a formation, but how do you get the command range? The problem is that with all the units it is difficult to see the hightlighted ones, particularly if they are stacked. V4V/WaW mad it much easier to see (of course they had less unites as well). I too would like to see Matrix republish the old V4V and WaW Games. [/B][/QUOTE]

Sonny -> (8/12/2003 1:54:53 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Joe 98 [B].............. HP needs a "combat advisor" that comes with SSG's Korsun Pocket. It is one on the great innovations of wargaming. [/B][/QUOTE] So true! Can you imagine trying to move and unmove all of those units to try and get decent odds?:eek: :)

Page: [1] 2 3 4 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.108887