Wargames in comparison (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns



Message

Kettu -> Wargames in comparison (8/13/2001 2:17:00 PM)

Hi, Instead of reading about the constant minor and unimportant bug reports...
I'd like to discuss about the experiences on other wargames in comparison to SPWAW. What games do you play, or has SPWAW really wiped out all competition.
I hope this stays within the rules. Tactical level wargames. (Never really gotten into operational scale). 1. CC-series. Great fun. Have them all. Very simplistic and easy, but also requires the use of basic infantry/combined arms tactics. The role-playing element is a big plus, and strategic map + supply issues add little more depth to the game. CC-series has also big problems. There's no AI whatsoever. The lack of variety. It gets extremly boring to play with the basic BAR-teams and Rifle-teams and those few types of tanks. 2. Combat Mission. Great game. Nothing really wrong with it... It has everyting, even 3D. It's beautiful.... BUT! Somehow I find the game extremely tedious; you get really frust There's no sense of combat. Everything seems to be constructed of isolated elements and occasional explosions. Maybe I just don't like 3D no matter how pretty and realistic. Doesn't suit me. 3. SPWAW. Well, old Steel Panthers engine has it's limits. So far, however, no other wargame has been able to capture the sense of combat and the feel of war like SPWAW. Unmatched variety in units/countries/terrain. Great sound-effects. Artillery barrages that reduce a city to rubble, flames and smoke in few turns. Player doing a long flanking movement to avoid opponents main defenses and hits where it hurts most (only to be countered by strong reserves, that your a**hole flatmate has kept hidden from your recon teams ). Spwaw is the only game where most batallion sized unit's battle tactics can be used. I've never before been able to make an orthodox fighting withdrawal (and being pursued by that same a**hole flatmate*. I have many perfectly good wargames that I haven't played all that much because I also have SPWAW. No time, little intrest. Thanks a lot, Matrix; I am playing a free game when I have terrible expensive wargames collecting dust in the closet. Wasted money. Regards, Kettu



Halgary -> (8/13/2001 5:15:00 PM)

Yeah! I've always liked Steel Panthers (played it even before the first version was officially released ... well I also DID bought it when it hit the shelves...) because I like the idea of contructing my own core force, and the seeing if it can handle all these "what-if" situations. As my core force changes when they gain experience and units get updated, the situation is again a bit different. I'll never get bored! What comes to 2 player mode: In no other game I can feel the same thrill as when I stop my playmate's infantry and tank hordes by destroying the tanks with my few well placed ATGs and then my tank platoons runs the remaining grunts down. Oh, the humiliation! CC was something you played few times until you got bored of repeating the same maps over and over... Fun for a while.



lnp4668 -> (8/13/2001 7:22:00 PM)

One of my weaknesses is short attention span. I tends to buy a lot of games, then gets bore of them within a week or so 1. C&C Never finished 1&2, finished 3 from both sides. Realistic game control. the map is not very pretty. In 3, you could chose the units to upgrade, guess that is why I finished it. 2. Battleground series, still sitting there in my cd collection. I guess I don't like the scale where a unit represent a platoon as well as the inability to choose my own forces. 3. Combat Mission. Only played the demo, seems like a nice game. I am not sure how the campaign work, so still planned to get it one of these days. 4. SPWAW. I am still playing it almost a year after I learned about the game. 'Nuff said



Cromort -> (8/13/2001 7:53:00 PM)

1 Close combat is great(graphics) with the third as the best one(more tanks and own choices in order to upgrade the units) .Bad side: always the same. 2 combat mission: played the demo and seems nice: i've heard some good things about it 3 Operat Art of War: great game, i like it very much but (not enough control) play it when i've no SPWAW installed as right now . 4 SPWAW : always different i love it crazy about it still waiting that a finnish friend sends the cd (really nice )
in one word , just the best
"No plan survives contact with the enemy."
Field Marshal Helmuth von Moltke



Dan Bozza -> (8/13/2001 8:00:00 PM)

quote:

Originally posted by lnp4668:
One of my weaknesses is short attention span. I tends to buy a lot of games, then gets bore of them within a week or so
I'm just like you in that regard C&C is good if you want tactics lite. The game allows for many mistakes since you have the potential for many reinforcements during the game. Tactics aren't that important. I find the scale of SPWAW is what I like the best. The operational scale games are too slow for my taste, and although the graphics for CC are super, the scale is a little too small. I have SP I, II and III and love them all, but have not played a single game from any of them since SPWAW hit my hard drive! I know I still have a lot to learn tactically regarding this game, and someday I may feel brave (foolish?) enough to do a PBEM with someone here.



Saltone -> (8/13/2001 9:32:00 PM)

I was playing the Campaign series - East Front, West Front and Rising Sun - until I found SP: WAW. I wouldn't have been out looking for SP: WAW if it wasn't for three critical things:
1. There is NO RECON/STEALTH element to the Campaign Series!!! If you move within enemy LOS, you get spotted! This is what killed the game for me.
2. As far as I could see, you'd get about 2 half-squads of reinforcements per battalion of troops after a battle. I'd like to see a WWII battle where 1 squad was all that was lost above COMPANY level, even. I was forced to hoard my core troops to the rear, and assault with the support troops. Sad... really took the enjoyment out of the game. I expect to be able to rebuild my core troops at least 90% of the time, only losing experience from combat losses.
3. You are EXTREMELY limited in your gameplay, specifically dynamic campaigns. For instance, it is not possible to play a dynamic campaign with Marines in the Rising Sun/Pacific Theatre game! What is that?!? Similarly, you can not play a dynamic campaign with airborne forces - in fact, I don't think you can use airborne forces at all unless it is hardcoded in the scenario (so never in a dynamic campaign). No choice in drop zones etc. So, with all that in mind, I am in heaven after finding SP: WAW...



hhsohn -> (8/13/2001 11:35:00 PM)

1. CC Series: Probably the best small unit tactics I've played. I thought CC2 had the best operational level feel to them. You know, many nights have gone by where I had to bitterly withdraw my units from the LZ since I had no more AT units, while a single panzer sat in middle of the field spewing stream of death. 2. V4V series: poor graphics and AI, but I love that anticipation and guessing of WEGO system. 3. SPWAW: The only game I play these days.



Waylander -> (8/14/2001 12:16:00 AM)

Have to agree with every poster here, I love Cm because of the eye candy, but there are some serious AI balancing problems, Play Wittman at Villers Bocage, as Allied. I managed to take out the Tigers in 4 turns with the loss of only 2 halftracks and one recon unit.
Michael would turn in his grave at that one.
Yeah, ok it is a little artificial in that we can sit and stare at the screen for a while and decide our next move, but then again Ace commanders did the same thing in a quick decision, We are just amateurs and need the extra time ..
Regards
Freddie



gbotto600 -> (8/14/2001 12:23:00 AM)

SP:Waw is probably the best game i 've ever played and i own lots of games, even when i got the latest and greatest games that came out, they last maybe a month then are uninstalled, SP never goes away, it is the only game i own that is always on my hard drive at all times, its funny, one second i am playing my pals in Rouge Spear, the next second we start playing SP:WAW, lol



gdpsnake -> (8/14/2001 12:33:00 AM)

I enjoy the Battleground series and the Campaign series games. The problem is that Talonsoft doesn't support them anymore. They don't do upgrades or fix bugs on their games. I've reported bugs and ideas/fixes but they never do anything.
SPWAW is a superb game made more so by the fact that Matrix continues to listen to us gamers and fix or answere questions about the games. I'm looking forward to buying many of the games just because of that!



A_B -> (8/14/2001 12:46:00 AM)

I found the Talonsoft games very dull. They had a many great ideas, but the sum of them just didn't pull together into a fun game. CC. I really love this game. For people who say the tactics are shallow, i don't agree whatsoever. Play a four hour online game against a high level ladder player and your brain starts to swell up. At first i didn't like CC4 or 5, but i've been playing the campaigns of these with two cyber friends since Christmas, and i'm really starting to enjoy the combo of the strategic/tactical play. Yes, the strategy is shallow, but it makes it go fast, which helps the game part. CC2 was great CC3 could have been, but is very buggy in online campaign mode. The limited size is also very annoying. Better than SPWAW for online play, because of the 'real time', IMHO. SPWAW; Still my favorite. SP got me addicted way back when. I love the campaigns, being able to continue throughout the war. Love the scenario building tools. Love the realistic combat system (for a turn based). Love the depth of tactics available, and the depth of the simulation (weather, reinforcements, air/arty, etc.). Wish the computer generated campaigns were any good, but they are not. I've only played one game online. It was fun, but hard to hold interest via email, and games takes a long time via direct connect. Looking forward to CA/CL. Love matrix games, and the local community here.



Panzer Capta -> (8/14/2001 1:08:00 AM)

I have played them all, and still do. Although i overall enjoy SPWAW hands down, i also enjoy Talonsoft Camapaign Series, Close Combat Series, Panzer Campaings Series, War of 1812, Vietnam Squad Battles (brand new), Battleground Series, and the wonderful Tigers on the Prowl II, Panthers in the Shadows, Dragons in the Mist, and Broken Alliance. Although the graphics are as primitive as cave paintings, and the sound is best left off, the Tigers on the Prowl 2, Panthers in the Shadows, Dragons in Mist, and Broken Alliance truely are just loaded with depth and substance. I am sure many would consider them quite boring, but it is incredible what you can learn about tactics, and of the serious frustrations of commanding a task force. In my opinion, if you can master these games, you can master any wargame. They are quite expensive, and if you are after "eye and ear candy" save your money. But, if you are after a challenge.....you wont be disappointed one bit.



Dan Bozza -> (8/14/2001 2:07:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by A_B:
[QB]
CC. I really love this game. For people who say the tactics are shallow, i don't agree whatsoever. Play a four hour online game against a high level ladder player and your brain starts to swell up. QB]
Actually, I was refering to Command and Conquer, not Close Combat. I agree the tactical proficiency necessary for CC is high. Needless to say, the German MG's in CC give me fits!



Oberbefehlshaber -> (8/14/2001 5:09:00 AM)

With the exception of Panzer Campaigns, all of the games mentioned so far have lived on my hard drive for some period of time. The only ones still on my drive are: SPWAW- I've been playing this series since SP1 in 1995. What I think makes this game stronger than the rest is it's combination of scope(you get all of the forces and theaters of WW2...without having to buy "add ons"), it's historical accuracy, and it's ease of play (interface). Some of the games mentioned are stronger in one of these areas (like HPS Panthers in the Shadows being the most realistic...but graphics and interface are horrible) but can't stand up to SPWAW as a package. On the down side I do think SPWAW is showing it's technological age a bit in the top down graphics look in spite of some wonderful artistic upgrades performed by several people. Look to Combat Leader to address this issue.
Campaign Series - Still on my hard drive but played less and less....great eye candy, but imho completely misses the boat by not allowing for PBEM play of a battlegenerated game. You can only play scenarios. This along with some historical accuracy issues leaves it dated, and as stated above we'll not see any further support from Talonsoft.
Combat Mission - this one just misses the mark for me. It is a great game....and enjoys as large a community as SPWAW, but after several attempts to get into it I just can't seem to feel comfortable with the game. Probably more me than the game. Again though it's only Western Front...you'll have to shell out more $$$ to play Eastern Front in CM2. I also found the editor clunky to use. The Operational Art of War - this one has always been enjoyable to play. It gives me a good break when I want to play something other than the tactical level SPWAW. I believe this one is the best operational level game of all time. Some would counter with the World at War series, but without an editor, and again having to pay a separate price for each theater of war it doesn't match up to TOAW. On the down side...TOAW's supply rules are light and subject to debate, and of course, is no longer being supported by it's publisher. With fewer players in the wargaming biz it will be interesting to see what happens in our hobby over the next few years. Joe Osborne



Mark Ezra -> (8/14/2001 7:48:00 AM)

As a long time player of SP and all it's variants I can say the SPWAW is with out doubt the best of the bunch. I got CM beta demo and had an absolute joy of playing PBEM. I played it to death, love the wego system, bought (advance sale got goofed up there, too)CMBO and PBEM'd it to death. At no time did I stop playing SPWAW. What CM did for me was get me started in PBEM. Since it was new everybody was learning the how to of the game and I felt like I wouldn't get stompt too bad (wrong of course!) When SPWAW got it's PBEM working really well I asked my CM buddies to try it. Some did, soime didn't. I don't have any currant CM/PBEM going for the simple reason that SPWAW offers a MUCH wider range of EVERYTHING...air, land, even sea is there. As good as CM is (I think it's great...) it just can't cover the war like I need it. I'll support the makers of CM (BTS) and purchase their next game(s) just as I will any Matrix product. With both companies being "By, For and Of Wargamers" and producing accurate games that are easy and fun to play, they deserve my support. I have also bought Norm Krogers OAW even though I don't have a real keen interest in the scope of his games generally. Again I respect and appreciate excellence in our very small market. The Battlfield ground "Bulge" was interesting but a bit clunky, with icons just too small for my tired, old eye. I believe it is encombant apon me to support the guys who make the games I want to play. That's why I'll always be among the first in line to purchase a Matrix game. I hope those of you who have not yet bought the MC CD will consider what gaming would be like without SPWAW and Matrix in our lives.



murx -> (8/14/2001 8:22:00 AM)

My 2 cents ....
Most 'main stream' RTS (C&C, Starcraft/Warcraft, Sudden Strike) etc bore me - if the C&C video cutscenes weren't so great ...
CM - tried the demo and played some pbem - but couldn't afford it till now.
PanzerCampaign - the big one playing th Normandie; I really like the game (even if I'm really annoyed of the airstrikes hitting my precious tanks...) - but only in the biggest scenario.
SP:WaW - I play it from tim to time; the gereic campaign gets boring, no time for pbem, but the scenarios are always fun. Close Combat 2 - my alltime fave ! In our home LAN (500 students in a big LAN) from time to tim we play it. And with the campaign mode it is rally replayable. Against the AI and with the 15 unit limit it gets boring after you win the first 1-2 weeks as German (by then you should have 15 units at all operations and no AI beats that - even on hero-mode).
No other game gave me the fun when I blew up my friends brand new two Panthers with two Zooks sneaking up is flanks... the out-cry and my laughter was audible mils away Right now I'm in War in Russia (MatrixEdition...) - now anotherr good game (though it crashes with no visible reason both in full DOS or Windows mode...luckily only from time to time...) murx



alassi -> (8/14/2001 3:33:00 PM)

To Panzer Captain or anybody! What company makes Vietnam Squad Battle? I didnīt fin it...sounds interesting, when one must pause from WWII for awhile



lnp4668 -> (8/14/2001 6:41:00 PM)

quote:

Originally posted by alassi:
To Panzer Captain or anybody! What company makes Vietnam Squad Battle? I didnīt fin it...sounds interesting, when one must pause from WWII for awhile
Checks this link:
http://www.hpssims.com/



alassi -> (8/14/2001 8:50:00 PM)

Thanx inp4668!



Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (8/14/2001 9:55:00 PM)

Hey call me anal if you must, but Command and Conquer is not even as close to being a "wargame" as Axis and Allies is. "War"game to me implies historical context. Command and Conquer is just an arcade toy designed to dupe kids into thinking they understand strategy. Yeah thats harsh, let me explain. I measure anything software against all of the board games of the past. Software games are merely wargames with training wheels, no thinking required (I mean REAL thinking). Try playing just one turn of Fire in the East and you see exactly what I mean. A bajillion calculations that you do in your head each and every turn. I was attracted to SP because it mirrors ASL admirably. The visual appeal is there of course and the sounds are fun as well of course. I have enjoyed getting updates to SPWaW because accuracy means something to me (I dont assume it is always upgraded for the best, but I am willing to support majority views generally).
Most of my SP sucesses come from my playing the game like I was playing ASL actually. I dont get many surprises. Each and every RTS game I have encountered has been nothing better than a toy destined to fill a need for low patience thresshold children (who would choke on their pop if you actually expected them to read the whole rules book first before actually playing the game). Yes again that sounds harsh, but I sit here (with my graying remnants of hair) looking at all the evidence when I watch youngsters play, and pat themselves on the back at how clever they are heheh (they get a lot wiser when the play their first game of Advanced Third Reich against me). I loved Operational Art of War because it didnt attempt to be cute (read the game is said to be "boring" by my young friends). Its basically what I wanted in a game, a wargame that provided me all the work of the board game style game when I couldnt get a flesh and blood opponent for a board game option. I have yet to find an adequate reason to replace it at its level of game. I recently scrounged a copy of Allied General, sort of a more lightweight on the thinking sort of game (when measured against Op Art of War), but very enjoyable. Cant comment on the other extrapolations of the design, havent had the pleasure, but the Allied General interface is dam easy to manipulate. I was able to fake my first try at the game (although I missed a lot of things at first cause I wasnt really looking anyways). I must say that for those obsessed with RTS they might give a try at a game called Firepower (its a boxed Avalon Hill board game so dont mistake it for something else). Out of print now but then with eBay nothing is impossible eh. Its a damn fun real time sort of squad level game. That and another board game called Sniper (also Hetzer sniper and special Forces Sniper exist). Essentially similar to Firepower in concept.
Best thing I can say about Firepower and Sniper is they will run perfect on any flat surface you put in on (try saying that about software eh). Main beef about high end RTS games is they are not worth the hardware purchase burden. Yeah I admit yammering about board games on a computer game site must sound like an incredibly stupid waste of time (I do think about that from time to time). But most comments I have seen here at Matrix would never see the light of day if the person had some board gaming experience. The person would already either A know the answer, or B would realise how the comments looked like to us old grognards.



KG Erwin -> (8/14/2001 11:49:00 PM)

Posted by Les the Sarge:""War"game to me implies historical context. Command and Conquer is just an arcade toy designed to dupe kids into thinking they understand strategy." I guess you would obviously place Age of Kings into that category, and I would agree with you, but it is still fun to play. However, I'll give you a tweak when it comes to wargame implying historical context. What about chess?



MarkFroio -> (8/15/2001 12:46:00 AM)

I've got to hand it to Matrix. SPWAW is the hands down winner for me. I still enjoy playing the occasional Panzer Campaign scenario. And I like to play TAOW after I've read a book about a certain battle or campaign (I'm reading The Battle of Kursk right now). However, I always come back to SPWAW. I started with SP1 back in the mid 90s and enjoyed SP 2 also. I was very excited when I read about Matrix and SPWAW in PC Gamer. I really like playing the Campaigns and being able to pick your core units and then upgrade them. I did enjoy CC 2-4 for awhile. I bought CM but it just didn't do it for me. It was "cool" for a while, but got boring. I'm going to continue to buy different games, but I'm pretty sure SPWAW will take up the majority of my gaming time. [ August 14, 2001: Message edited by: Max VonLoben ]



Brian Rucker -> (8/15/2001 7:28:00 PM)

I have to confess that I do play more SP: WaW than the other games discussed here but most of them do have their place in my gaming rotation from time to time. I can't help feeling that a game combining the finer points of many of these titles would be the ultimate tactical WW2 title. The Campaign Series: Graphics. Close Combat Series: Detailed treatment of individual soldiers and excellent battlefield psychology model. This is perhaps the only tactical game that really plays on psychological factors that tend to get abstracted by other systems. It is possible to get attached to units and individuals to the point that it can affect a player's strategy for other than practical reasons. I agree with the shortcomings already discussed above. Combat Mission: Fantastic random battle generator and 'believable' AI. Moving into engagements can be a harrowing experience and while the AI's patterns are somewhat predictable over time it sometimes manages to surprise both in behavior and unit placement. While I love the 3D experience, and really haven't had much problem with camera angles, I tend to find the graphics rather bland and in the case of squad units and animations painfully bad. The optimal solution is the one used in Panzer Elite with 3D objects, well detailed, for all units and terrain but the 2D sprite infantry. This allows rendering of entire squads with realistic proportions and dispositions as opposed to 3-man icons with toy soldier proportions so as to accomodate detailed scans of uniforms. Need to distinguish units by uniform? Use the info-bar and color illustrations rather than facial snapshots. Inclusion of star shells and other ambient effects, like on screen aircraft strikes, would also improve presentation. CM's lack of any campaign options and shallow treatment of individual soldiers also hold it back while the overall ambience of a particular battlefield (within the limited scope of the game) is still the best, most immersive, of any game I've played. The WEGO system works brilliantly and avoids the op-fire problems. Airborne 101: The Airborne Invasion of Normandy - While this is a man-to-man system it deserves mention. The individual systems really don't correspond to anything at the scale of SP:WaW but it does have some good ideas for how realistic wargames can also be fantastic adventure games for a more general public. The sequel, All American, is due out eventually from Shrapnel Games. A more detailed treatment of this game is off topic but I encourage you to find reviews. SP: WaW: The scope is staggering. The package is perfect with handmade missions, handmade campaigns, random battles and a variety of random campaign options. The graphics are decent and the fidelity of the actual combat, while varying depending on which patch you're on, tends to be excellent. As a baseline for all other tactical WW II games to measure up to, SP: WaW is it. The main weak spot for me is the rather bad AI placement and operations in the random campaign mode. They generally all play out the same way with few surprises. I'd hope that if Matrix does continue with SP:WaW after releasing their own engines that this problem is dealt with. SP: WW2 seems to have done some work with this and perhaps some cross-pollination wouldn't hurt.



Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (8/16/2001 1:44:00 PM)

Yo KG Erwin In response to your query on Chess. I think its a great game of skill (and I suck playing chess unfortunately). But regardless of its origins, it really doesnt do more than depict strategy in an abstract fashion. Chess is to Picasso, as SPWaW is to the Mona Lisa. Me I care for the Mona Lisa, in my opinion its art. I wouldnt say I think much of Picasso.
Hope that conveys my thoughts accurately



Banjo -> (8/17/2001 2:19:00 AM)

SPWAW has to be my hands down davorite. I hope that Combat Leader will surpass this. When I finally bought a new computer, I was gearing back up for enhancing my ASL play. Then a friend turned me on to SPWAW and ASL has been sitting on the shelf mostly. I was dissapointed with Axis and Allies. Command and conquer was fun on the Playstation for lying in bed at night as simple fun. Chess is still a favorite as is Go which i havn't seen mentioned yet. Red Baron 2 still gets a lot of time on my machine as does B17-2 even though they are sims. Also, I enjoyed the Pacific and Russian campaigns by Matrix.



Tombstone -> (8/17/2001 3:55:00 AM)

SPWAW is really quite engaging and tons of fun. For those of you who think that there is not strategy in a game like command and conquer you are in error. The typical RTS games simply focuses on things other than tactics. They are often about resource management, and there's room for plenty of strategy in that. Anyways, I think the Panzer Campaigns series of games are really good. They focus on a single large operation so they model that opation as well as they can. The system is very nice for that scale of combat. Games I play all the time still: SPWAW, Operation Flashpoint, TacOps, Counterstrike/TFC, and Operational Art of War. Tomo



ZoomBoy27 -> (8/17/2001 9:43:00 PM)

I'm mainly a flight sim guy ! flying so high in the air. TOAW was formerly the game I played until I discovered SPWAW. It struck a chord for me in terms of grand strategies and movements. SPWAW always has interesting problems to solve even if you've played the scenario 2 or 3 times. Napoleon In Russia was a long-time favourite because of the combinations of formations and morale.
An interesting note about one of my sims, in LongBow2, your flight was always attached to a troop(A B C D). Sometimes when they advanced, CAS was done to protect them from their reserve position to the advance point. No congratulations for downed enemy helos or destroyed tanks(though necessary) but your troop had to arrive with enough forces to hold the position. It was an awesome feeling when you'd watch them arrive, cut their engines, and signal "objective reached" A great combo of flight sim and ground war. ZoomBoy
Developing a iso-tile 2D RPG with skills, weapons, and adventure. See my old Hex-Tile RPG GAME, character editor, diary, 3D Art resources at Check out my web-site



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.75