View Full Version : Tiller Con Releases?
Which games besides PzC will have a new release scheduled for Tiller Con?
Two games are being released one is a PzC.
The other I hoped would be an SB game but I dont think it will be.
I reckon its the next game of the First Blitz series.
Glenn Saunders
01 Jun 05, 19:58
> I reckon its the next game of the First Blitz series.
Naw - it is a little early for that yet Woldin. I wouldn't plan on another of that series for several more months, maybe even early 2006 but it is hard to say as there is no set schedule - which will tell much more time is needed.
The new games are already back from duplication now - so we are just waiting.
Glenn
KG_RangerBooBoo
01 Jun 05, 20:55
Well if God is good to me it will be whatever Panzer Campaign, probably an eastern front battle, and if God is good to me, a Civil War campaign covering the campaign from Chickamauga/Chattanooga to Atlanta!
Civil War maybe.
Or a new game similar to War over Vietnam??
Paulinski
02 Jun 05, 00:12
Besides new Pz title it will prolly be either Air War series or Naval Campaign...
My 0.02;)
Glenn Saunders
02 Jun 05, 01:13
Well guys - I sure hope some of you will be there at the Tillercon to see it.
For those that won't be there, I understand that distributors will have the info for release at around that same time and may be taking PRE Orders. But those at the meeting will be the first ones seeing them and playing them first hand.
Glenn
Glenn,
Is it possible to drop by TillerCon for just one day (paying whatever fee, off course)?
There is a remote probability that my wife could cut me some slack and allow me to go down there (if I take my kids with me or something). Right now the negotiation is stalled. :p
Cheers,
Glenn,
Is it possible to drop by TillerCon for just one day (paying whatever fee, off course)?
There is a remote probability that my wife could cut me some slack and allow me to go down there (if I take my kids with me or something). Right now the negotiation is stalled. :p
Cheers,
Offer her a bribe.... let's say a Swarovski crystal, works for me.... most of the time :)
Yes, you can show up at the door for a single day if you wish. All the details you need are here:
http://www.hist-sdc.com/con/
Let me know if you have any questions.
Regards,
Rich
Any chances the next TillerCon will be in Montreal?? Just kidding...
Anychance it being in the UK?
Infact how about the European capital of culture 2008 "Liverpool"
If someone from Europe wants to step forward to coordinate the event I'll be glad to share the knowledge I gained from coordinating this one. Some one local has to be the one running the show though, as you can't bring something like this together from long distance.
That goes for Canada as well, Danny! :D
Thanks Rich!
It's pretty clear from that webpage.
Cheers,
Gary McClellan
17 Jun 05, 10:19
I'm not at Tillercon :cry:
But, rumor starting to get out is that the PzC game is Salerno.
Salerno
and
Campaign Shiloh
Salerno
and
Campaign Shiloh
Yeap seems confirmed, Salerno 43 and Shiloh.
trauth116
18 Jun 05, 08:58
I recall reading in Designer's Notes somewhere when I really got heavier into the PzC series -that Salerno was actually being designed before Smolensk '41 - but something like it was felt that Smolensk would be a better seller...
so that title had been around for awhile...
Joao Lima
18 Jun 05, 16:28
Salerno
:-O ...
Bout time for a new WWII engine. Technology has changed a bit since Smolensk. Has Tiller lost interest in the period or what? :)
Cheers
Paul
Gary McClellan
20 Jun 05, 17:55
Considering that he just released a new engine a month ago, at a bit higher level (more operational), I don't think he's forgotten anything :)
Besides, yeah, technology has progressed since Smonlsek, but then again, so has the engine.
And, I really love to be able to open a brand new game and install it with having to even remotely wonder if it will be stable enough to play.
From what I can gather there are many PzC titles lined up.
Though the first game was released awhile ago the series has had countless updates and major enhancements. Just because the graphics havent changed doesnt mean the game hasnt.
From what I can gather there are many PzC titles lined up.
Though the first game was released awhile ago the series has had countless updates and major enhancements. Just because the graphics havent changed doesnt mean the game hasnt.
So you don't think PC could benefit from a bit of a facelift? C'mon man, face up to it. The game is old. It was excellent when we were all just happy to not have to roll dice, write everything down on paper and move hundreds of counters while trying to keep our little sister away from the map for weeks on end, but those days are over.
I have all the PC games and I will buy Salerno, but I am starting to think it's about time for HPS to put on their thinking caps and get with the times or, at the very least, take a crack at adding some real enhancements to the PC engine.
Once again, loyal fan here. No complaints, but a long wish list.
Cheers
Paul
Haven't seen either of these titles on HPS' website. Any idea when they will be officially released? Rich?
KG_RangerBooBoo
21 Jun 05, 10:31
I believe they are scheduled for release on July 1st.
I believe they are scheduled for release on July 1st.
Hey Canada Day!!
printshop
21 Jun 05, 11:19
So you don't think PC could benefit from a bit of a facelift? C'mon man, face up to it. The game is old. It was excellent when we were all just happy to not have to roll dice, write everything down on paper and move hundreds of counters while trying to keep our little sister away from the map for weeks on end, but those days are over.
Jim Cobb, who reviewed France '40 on the Armchair General site, says it a lot better than I can.
"Tiller’s series of games have been labeled as products of cookie-cutters and sausage makers. People making such statements obviously need new system “fixes” when buying games instead of good historical studies. The Panzer Campaign system provides the flexibility to portray grand tactical situations throughout World War Two, allowing talented designers such as Guegan to illustrate periods that have escaped the attention of develops catering to the lowest common denominator. France ’40 is entertaining, simple to play, erudite and insightful. If these be cookies and sausages, bring more on!"
Paulinski
21 Jun 05, 12:09
I don't care about ppl complaining. I like PzC and will continue to purchase as the titles come out. I had lots of fun (and frustration while playing the games) plus all the friendly ppl you play with.
My 0.02
Printshop,
Thanks; it's nice to know when a piece is being read.
I attended Tiller Con this weekend and attended discussion groups on various Tiller series. The amount of effort being put into these games by designers and testers as well as Tiller's openess for correction and improvement was impressive.
I think the next new system from HPS will come from Scott Hamilton himself with a WW II version of PoA 2.
Danny & all,
The games won't go on the HPS site until the 1st, as we do not take pre-orders. We made an exception for our resellers this time, since we were releasing them to the people attending Tiller Con.
Regards,
Rich
Printshop,
Thanks; it's nice to know when a piece is being read.
I attended Tiller Con this weekend and attended discussion groups on various Tiller series. The amount of effort being put into these games by designers and testers as well as Tiller's openess for correction and improvement was impressive.
I think the next new system from HPS will come from Scott Hamilton himself with a WW II version of PoA 2.
Yeah, I remember him saying that a while back. Man, I hope it becomes reality. POA-2 had and still does have a lot of potential.
In response to the point about PC being fun and made of sausage and such...well, ok, sure, it is not made of sausage and it is fun. What is your point? Something is not just bad or good. PC is a good game, but HPS does a lot of work on WWII titles based on an aging engine designed to be simplistic by necessity. Well my brothers, my little droogies, that necessity is no longer a factor. Simplicity, as it were, is no longer needed. And gameplay need not be sacrificed on its bloody altar.
Cheers
Paul
printshop
21 Jun 05, 19:54
In response to the point about PC being fun and made of sausage and such...well, ok, sure, it is not made of sausage and it is fun. What is your point? Something is not just bad or good. PC is a good game, but HPS does a lot of work on WWII titles based on an aging engine designed to be simplistic by necessity. Well my brothers, my little droogies, that necessity is no longer a factor. Simplicity, as it were, is no longer needed. And gameplay need not be sacrificed on its bloody altar.
Cheers
Paul
This has to be one of the most bizarre things I have ever read. I can't tell if you're trying to be funny or are under the influence of something.
Yeah, I remember him saying that a while back. Man, I hope it becomes reality. POA-2 had and still does have a lot of potential.
In response to the point about PC being fun and made of sausage and such...well, ok, sure, it is not made of sausage and it is fun. What is your point? Something is not just bad or good. PC is a good game, but HPS does a lot of work on WWII titles based on an aging engine designed to be simplistic by necessity. Well my brothers, my little droogies, that necessity is no longer a factor. Simplicity, as it were, is no longer needed. And gameplay need not be sacrificed on its bloody altar.
Cheers
Paul
IMO PzC is just fine the way it is. Gameplay has been improved via the patches that come out regularly. Personally, I don't need a bunch of flashy stuff distracting my one track mind while I'm trying to avoid getting stomped in a PBEM game. :)
This has to be one of the most bizarre things I have ever read. I can't tell if you're trying to be funny or are under the influence of something.
Read it again. This time with your glasses on.
Cheers
Paul
My point is that the age of the engine is irrelevant if the game meets its goals.
Additionally, it continues to be enhanced, as customer feedback is gathered. Every new installment in the series add's more features to the engine, and will continue to do so.
I understand what you are trying to say Paul, but games at this level of detail just can't be played in real-time, nor do I think "wego" has enough to offer to warrant a mass transition to it. With every format there's are positives and negatives.
Additionally, it continues to be enhanced, as customer feedback is gathered. Every new installment in the series add's more features to the engine, and will continue to do so.
I understand what you are trying to say Paul, but games at this level of detail just can't be played in real-time, nor do I think "wego" has enough to offer to warrant a mass transition to it. With every format there's are positives and negatives.
Sure, I agree. There's nothing wrong with turn-based or even hex-based (although I could personally do without it). I think my wish list has grown long while waiting for certain features to be implemented. Generally I am more concerned with having the engine get into a bit more detail. Not flashy graphics, which are irrelevant, but an honest attempt to reflect the reality of WWII.
However, just so that there are no more misunderstandings, I am not saying PC is a bad game. I think what I am missing are options that would have been available to the commander. Particularily, artillery and air and, generally, more advanced control over my units. Of course, the AI needs a serious overhaul, but that is not as important to the PBEM community.
In other words, instead of asking for an endless list of new features to be added to PC, I think it is time for a new engine in order to attempt to include many of the features that gamers are looking for. Just my opinion.
When I play wargames I like to think in terms of the options that would have been available to an actual commander. The measure of any game is how often I am forced to do something because of a lack of any other sensible option available within the confines of the game. PC has some freedom (mostly due to the excellent OoBs), but is very rigid in its design.
Or better said, true immersion into a game results from not having to think about the "game" at all. You, as the player, have only to think about command decisions and the results of those decisions. The closer you come to reality, the better.
In all fairness, there are few games, if any, that are a whole lot better at the operational level, but a fella can wish, can't he.
Cheers
Paul
[QUOTE=Cabron66]Sure, I agree. There's nothing wrong with turn-based or even hex-based (although I could personally do without it). I think my wish list has grown long while waiting for certain features to be implemented. Generally I am more concerned with having the engine get into a bit more detail. Not flashy graphics, which are irrelevant, but an honest attempt to reflect the reality of WWII.
However, just so that there are no more misunderstandings, I am not saying PC is a bad game. I think what I am missing are options that would have been available to the commander. Particularily, artillery and air and, generally, more advanced control over my units. Of course, the AI needs a serious overhaul, but that is not as important to the PBEM community.
In other words, instead of asking for an endless list of new features to be added to PC, I think it is time for a new engine in order to attempt to include many of the features that gamers are looking for. Just my opinion.
When I play wargames I like to think in terms of the options that would have been available to an actual commander. The measure of any game is how often I am forced to do something because of a lack of any other sensible option available within the confines of the game. PC has some freedom (mostly due to the excellent OoBs), but is very rigid in its design.
Or better said, true immersion into a game results from not having to think about the "game" at all. You, as the player, have only to think about command decisions and the results of those decisions. The closer you come to reality, the better.
Hi paul
What kind of things are you looking for specifically? I would be interested to see what kinds advanced control over units you are looking for at this scale. What else can you have artillery do? Maybe some sort of "harrassing fire" type mission that puts an "interdiction" marker into a hex that maybe stops road movement, or causes units to expend more movement points while traversing the hex? Possibly having an option that defending units shoot once and then withdraw to adjacent unit? What do you think?
For my part this series of game meets my every expectation. I dont think any flashy changes to graphics or interface is anything that is needed for this type of game. What exactly can this game do to " reflect the reality of WW2" ? Are you looking for performance of specific weapon systems? Certain units having an advantage of special weapons or a doctrine that allowed them them the flexibility to adapt to changing battlefield conditions faster than their opponents? I think that all of those things are factored in to the unit values and the PDT's of each game. Check out some of the german PG units in Korsun 44. There are a couple of them that have big numbers in their attack values, reflecting the battlehardened veteran soldiers that made up those units.
Just some of my thoughts, Id be interested to see what kind of ideas you have 8)
Scott
Combatengineer
22 Jun 05, 05:31
I don't need a engine redo, but one feature/change I would like would be to have units composed of Vehicles and Men. Currently its either or. This might be a change that be done because its built in to the engine, I don't know. This is really important to the MC series. Units just don't fight as pure battalions now and in WWII there was a lot of Bn TF with combined arms. Just my 2 cents worth. Thanks.
Hi paul
What kind of things are you looking for specifically? I would be interested to see what kinds advanced control over units you are looking for at this scale. What else can you have artillery do? Maybe some sort of "harrassing fire" type mission that puts an "interdiction" marker into a hex that maybe stops road movement, or causes units to expend more movement points while traversing the hex? Possibly having an option that defending units shoot once and then withdraw to adjacent unit? What do you think?
For my part this series of game meets my every expectation. I dont think any flashy changes to graphics or interface is anything that is needed for this type of game. What exactly can this game do to " reflect the reality of WW2" ? Are you looking for performance of specific weapon systems? Certain units having an advantage of special weapons or a doctrine that allowed them them the flexibility to adapt to changing battlefield conditions faster than their opponents? I think that all of those things are factored in to the unit values and the PDT's of each game. Check out some of the german PG units in Korsun 44. There are a couple of them that have big numbers in their attack values, reflecting the battlehardened veteran soldiers that made up those units.
Just some of my thoughts, Id be interested to see what kind of ideas you have 8)
Scott
Well, to be sure, at this level, a lot of the finer points are more easily abstracted. But remember that we are talking about a game that pits company-sized units against each other. In other words, anything that does not effect the firepower or mobility of a company need not be discussed here.
Now, what do I want? Well, here goes...
1. Battle groups such as the German Kampfgruppe or American Regimental Combat Team that can be formed and ordered to operate together until further notice. The ability to "attach" units to others.
2. Firepower I can distribute more effectively to different parts of a battalion or regiment. In other words, an attempt to simulate the actual roles of heavy weapons platoons, infantry guns or AT guns.
3. A better system for combining or breaking down units. This was a process begun by PC but never finished.
4. A much more detailed command and control system that reflects the amount of work required of a given staff, the strain placed on that staff and the subsequent likelihood of failures.
5. A more detailed combat model that goes beyond simple hard and soft attack values and high and low casualty values. I want to see the relationships between various types of weapon systems modeled within the game. In other words, attack with tanks unsupported by infantry into urban areas and watch out. Run AFVs up against poor AT weapons and expect to lose the guns. Run AFVs up against 88s and expect to lose the AFVs.
6. Supply. Both air and ground. Not just a simplified system, but AI or player controlled supply columns that can be interdicted and disrupted/destroyed/captured.
7. MUCH better control over air units and more attention paid to the air war. I think this one is self-explanatory.
8. Increased coordination between artillery and ground units. Arty should be deployable in historical roles, including both indirect and direct fire depending on the situation. Artillery can be used in many more ways than a simple barrage. Similarily, naval fire needs to be retouched.
9. The role of men and machines, as previously mentioned. For example, do you lose crews or just the machines? I would like the engine to keep track of equipment and soldiers separately. Units are not just measured by the number of warm bodies. There is a vast difference between a small number of well-trained men with adequate weapons and a large number of poorly trained men with only rifles and pistols.
10. A more detailed psychological model that takes into account the way humans react under fire, makes the relationship less linear, and allows for certain weapon systems to have effects beyond their simple explosive power.
11. More attention paid to range and terrain. In other words, adios to the days of hex-based engines.
Note that, once again, my original post was hinting at a new engine. PC, as a stand-alone product, is fine. I feel that all of the above features (and more) are now possible and reasonable using modern computers. Especially if the engine is light on graphics and more aimed at realism.
Generally, I want more intuitive units. Units that take and hold orders over a period of time and can operate with some autonomy. The more the game does this the more I can concentrate on organizing drives or massing troops for a breakthrough or whatever. Making the command decisions for even the smallest of units is taxing to say the least. How much better would it be to be able to apply orders to a given unit and then leave it alone until some later turn. That is what I am referring to by "increased control".
Not to mention a more flexible system for controlling the depth and width of a unit and the tactics that unit can employ. A battalion, for example, can be deployed in any number of ways depending on the mission or situation and that same battalion's ability to attack or defend would vary accordingly.
I would think most of this would be self-evident.
Cheers
Paul
trauth116
23 Jun 05, 13:14
Am waiting on the screen shots for this one ... Crete too .. sounds interesting the fact that we got an article posted already for Campaign Shiloh - is getting my drool up a tad more even :smoke:
Yes Salerno, Anzio and Crete.... also anxious.
Hello folks,
Big fan of Tiller's work here.
My only busy-parent wish for the future: that I would not have to make 2,319 clicks to play 1/3 of a campaign. Many of my tactical blunders in a typical PzC game are due to just exhaustion. As JAW suggested in a recent thread back at wargame.ch, I wish of a friendly AI that can guide my divisions to battle, through battle and after battle.
I generally agree that PzC's engine, despite dated, it serves very good. But I agree with Cabron66 that many times during PzC games I find myself thinking more about geometry and game rules (hexes, ZOCs, combined arms penalties or bonuses, mobility costs) rather than on operational command . This spoils the game immersion to a chore of Euclidian mastery and I stop thinking as a commander and start thinking as a lawyer.
Cheers,
Glenn Saunders
24 Jun 05, 13:57
> I wish of a friendly AI that can guide my divisions to battle, through battle and after battle.
There is AI controlled units for AI moving friendly units and recently - with the F40 release we made a change so the AI no longer mover other units which were not issued AI Orders. So it works much better than before - have you tried it?
Note however when you want to delete an AI Order you must do that from the menu item.
Furthermore if you don't want to trust the AI to move your units we added Divisional Movement to allow you to move several units in divisional formations up a road with a few clicks - again our thought here was to reduce the clicking needed. Please do pay attention to the rules when you try these as *if* you have a unit selected you will issue an AI Order and see a red Arrow on the map. But if you don't highlight a unit, but put your cursor in a hex with a unit(s) and then right click on a target hex, the unit will go into T move and move off as ordered. Sometimes using a couple clicks is better than one long jump. In any case Divisional Movement happens right away.
This info is covered at the end of the STARTED.HLP write up.
> I find myself thinking more about geometry and game rules (hexes, ZOCs, combined arms penalties or bonuses, mobility costs) rather than on operational command . This spoils the game immersion to a chore of Euclidian mastery and I stop thinking as a commander and start thinking as a lawyer.
I don't know what to say to this - I certainly don't find myself focusing on these issues. I play the game and launch attacks based on gut feel without trying to do the mental math. So I am not sure specifically what I could suggest wrt this point.
Glenn
Hi Glenn,
Yes, I have tried that new feature and surely it helps to ease the management. In the Ardennes, for example, I cannot imagine life without this new feature.
What I was referring to is a divisional AI order like "attack" this (group of) hex(es). As it is now, the AI doesn't do a very good job once resistance is encountered.
Cheers,
You want to play a game or just watch, Chelco?
Hi Jim,
Sorry if it sounded too complainish.
I was thinking how great a command feature like the one in Highway to the Reich was implemented in Tiller's Games.
Cheers,
You want to play a game or just watch, Chelco?
What does this mean? It sounds like you are implying that improved friendly AI will reduce the player to a spectator.
Cheers
Paul
p.s. Glenn is quite correct. Quite a bit has been done to facilitate game play. Working within the confines of the engine I think HPS has done well to make these battles/campaigns playable.
vBulletin® v3.7.0, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.