View Full Version : Where would you like to see the series go next?
Don Maddox
27 Mar 06, 10:39
What should be the next subject for Squad Battles?
France '40. There aren't many tactical games from this period and the equipment isn't nearly as one sided as most people think.... :)
trauth116
27 Mar 06, 10:56
Rob's idea is a real good one and I think he is totally correct.
Barring that -I'd like something in North Africa - 1940-42.
TheBigRedOne
27 Mar 06, 11:00
I've always thought that having a more modern game would be fun, having just DL'd Africa at War. In the past I've advocated Soviet/Afghan, Iran/Iraq as well as a bevvy of 'smaller' conflicts that have transpired in the last 20+ years like the Faulklands, Grenada, Panama, Central American conflicts (sandanista/contra), even small battles from the first Gulf War. I know that the SB community seems to not want to delve into current events in Iraq/Afghanastan, but the Steel Panther folks haven't shied away from that. I wouldn't mind seeing scenarios come out *after* a new game is released loosely based on current events.
I would also be open to more 'hypothetical' type stuff, which may not have the historical context, but if written well enough, with ample background, I think it would be interesting, and might spark an increased interest in the game, especially amongst the PBEMers. Conflicts between say a Special Forces A team taking on a Columbian drug cartel and the like. Gamers like historical stuff, but we also like balanced, well-written things that would really be fun to go head-to-head with someone....
Ivan Rapkinov
27 Mar 06, 11:13
when we raised modern SB after doing P&F, John basicalli told us the only way we'd get one was if we did it ourselves and released it as a mod. Wasn't enough interest in it (at that time) - I started Chechnya, Frank started on Sov/Afghan, and I thikn that evolved into A@W.
to be honest though, the success of The Falklands War may have changed peoples minds about a modern variant.
TheBigRedOne
27 Mar 06, 12:03
Interesting, when was this conversation with JT? I think the success and popularity of the Africa at War module Frank made may cause JT to at least re-think that stance, given that there are tid-bit rumors that a potential new game may have a modern slant (since Frank is also involved with its production). Had Frank been given a bit more support, AAW probably could have been made into a stand-alone game that, I think, would have done fairly well
Ivan Rapkinov
27 Mar 06, 12:12
conversation was had with John whilst I was a member of the SB dev team, so anywhere between '00-'04ish I guess - as for rumours of new games, take it with a grain of salt. HPS and John are very big on keeping "mum" about a title until it's ready to be released :)
as I said, he might have changed his opinion.
but keep this in mind; WW2 sells, non-WW2 doesn't. Regardless of how good the AAW mod is, it would never have come close to the sales made by WW2 games :)
as for support; the only support that's needed for a game (if you don't add new features) is maps. I've got a TOD-compatible map of the Ulus-Kert region in Chechnya, and there *are* ways to do it yourself, but if you don't have maps, it makes it rather difficult, unless you go for a bunch of hypotheticals :)
I would love to see the series go several ways -
A Med War version - some desert, fighting for Tobruk, Italy, Greece. Big maps for Monte Cassino, the airborne landings on Crete (Maleme airfield).
Crushing the Reich - the last half of the War on the east, big maps of Berlin and Budapest (among others)
Lost Battles - War in France, Poland, the Low Countries etc.
Infanterie grieft an! - Sure I misspelled that but I like the title - WW1 - Cover Rommel's infantry fights, Gallipoli, some of the Western offensives. Sure they fight for a few hundred yards at a time and only gain a mile or two at the most, but since many SB scens are played out on maps less than 50x50 does it matter?
Fleshing out modern scenarios in Afghanistan and Chechenya would be interesting too.
Sorry for all the spelling mistakes. Off of coffee and only had a half cup of tea this am....
Gary McClellan
27 Mar 06, 12:26
I realize the topic would be likely to start a fair amount of political heat, but I really think an Arab-Israeli game at this level would work well. Lots of good stuff in the 49 War, and then interesting bits and pieces in all the others (though they do get armor happy of course).
Aside from that, Late War Eastern Front, early War Western Front would also be interesting.
TheBigRedOne
27 Mar 06, 12:53
I guess I'm just looking for some new 'toys' to play with, weapons-wise, which is why a modern game would appeal to me, as well as having a little more context as to the battles, being that they aren't that old.
I wonder what the over-all numbes are in sales of each of the games. Are the WWII games twice as popular as say, Vietnam? How did Korea do? That was a game that was really well done in terms of amount of scenarios, the background that went into each of them, as well as the variation on the battles. Being 'The Forgotten War', did people also not have a lot of interest in that game?
Being 'The Forgotten War', did people also not have a lot of interest in that game?
That was the only one I did not have until recently. My interest in the series was at a nadir when it came out, and it just got lost in the shuffle. And yes, I didn't, actually don't, know a whole lot about the war.
TheBigRedOne
27 Mar 06, 13:17
It was my second, after Vietnam, mainly because my dad was there for a year and I wanted to learn more about the conflict....
Third game was Eagles Strike (I'm slow to get into the WWII games) followed by Tour of Duty (VN is my conflict of main interest) and Pacific War (mainly due to the Africa at War mod).
It took me over 2 years to get serious about playing. After I played the beginner scenario in Vietnam and got totally creamed, I stopped playing for like a year. The learning curve is steep, but once I got past it and started to play more PBEM, I'm really digging the games and learning a ton.
Ivan Rapkinov
27 Mar 06, 13:18
I guess I'm just looking for some new 'toys' to play with, weapons-wise, which is why a modern game would appeal to me, as well as having a little more context as to the battles, being that they aren't that old.
adding guns is the easiest thing to do, modding wise.
I wonder what the over-all numbes are in sales of each of the games. Are the WWII games twice as popular as say, Vietnam? How did Korea do? That was a game that was really well done in terms of amount of scenarios, the background that went into each of them, as well as the variation on the battles. Being 'The Forgotten War', did people also not have a lot of interest in that game?
not sure now, but at the time it was very much in the WW2 games favour.
as for Korea...no, not many people had interest in it; then there was a spate of Korea based games, raising interest. As I haven't had anything to do with SB for a while, I couldn't give you any firm numbers, just my recollections.
TOD wasn't popular as people just saw it as a rehash of SBV (imo, it was the best of the series, but I'm biased towards modern and aussies!), P&F was when WB got involved, ES was when the rest of the Raiders got involved in a big way, and you can see the standard of scn go up. For the first couple of games, it John by himself doing the scns, and he'll be the first to tell you he's a better developer than scn writer heh :)
AOTR was done by John outside of the team. And I wasn't involved after Korea was released.
Let me make a few things clear;
all of this is my understanding of conversations had amongst the dev team. I don't claim to speak for John or HPS now, I'm only stating what used to the status quo - it very well could have changed. I've been out of the loop for a long time. :D
also, SB was aseries that John was involved with at a much more hands-on level; PzC and Nappy/ACW tended to not require as much of his time lol :laugh:
Joao Lima
27 Mar 06, 14:05
...
not sure now, but at the time it was very much in the WW2 games favour.
...
It makes perfect sense, but I would still lik to see:
- Warsaw Pact / NATO
In WW2:
- Something with Crete / Malta / North Africa / Italy
- Late Eastern Front
Anyway what I would like to see was not any new titles, but the existing ones progressed to a much higher standard , incorporating for instance, many of the suggestions already given on this forum by me , wodin and many others, that is to me the essential thing, to continue the flood of new titles is ok if they need the money to make the existing ones better, Squad Battles has the potencial, but it's still not there...
Would like to see maybe the series cover ground already done in the Modern Campaign games. Squad level Fulda Gap 85' and Korea 85 etc, maybe a French Indochina game also.
Ozgur Budak
27 Mar 06, 17:17
I would love to see the series go several ways -
A Med War version - some desert, fighting for Tobruk, Italy, Greece. Big maps for Monte Cassino, the airborne landings on Crete (Maleme airfield).
Sure I misspelled that but I like the title - WW1 - Cover Rommel's infantry fights, Gallipoli, some of the Western offensives. Sure they fight for a few hundred yards at a time and only gain a mile or two at the most, but since many SB scens are played out on maps less than 50x50 does it matter?
Fleshing out modern scenarios in Afghanistan and Chechenya would be interesting too.
Mike. Have you tried my crete scenarios I designed for Allied addon ES? It has three Crete scenarios: "crashlanding at tavronitis" , "revenge at kastelli" and "riposte at dusk (galatas)"
I started a Gallipoli mode with help of Greg (Redmike). Most of the graphics and dats were ready when it fell victim to a major HD crash. I am still ashamed that I didnt back it up. However I noticed that a mode like Gallipoli is not that suitable to SB system since most of the battles were mass Hurraahs against machine gun emplacements. Yes very fun but very little room for fire and maneuvre tactics.
Mike. Have you tried my crete scenarios I designed for Allied addon ES? It has three Crete scenarios: "crashlanding at tavronitis" , "revenge at kastelli" and "riposte at dusk (galatas)"
I started a Gallipoli mode with help of Greg (Redmike). Most of the graphics and dats were ready when it fell victim to a major HD crash. I am still ashamed that I didnt back it up. However I noticed that a mode like Gallipoli is not that suitable to SB system since most of the battles were mass Hurraahs against machine gun emplacements. Yes very fun but very little room for fire and maneuvre tactics.
I will certainly look up the Crete stuff (though official is always best!).
I thrrew Gallipoli out there as it is well known and if they don't do it, there will be plenty if 'Hey! WHat about... (Pity about the dats though.) My main WWI interest would be to see Rommel's stuff and some of the big battles in the west. I don't know enough about the East though. Of course the first tanks would be fun to run about - until they bogged down.
Paulinski
27 Mar 06, 20:30
Modern SB. Nuff Said :)
To date, the top 4 SB titles are:
Vietnam
Eagle Strike
Tour of Duty
Advance of the Reich
That's all I can share, but that's official.
:devious:
IS the new optional rule in ToD going to be implemented across all games?
Its the quality modifier.
Eventually, yes, but we're not rolling patches out for all the games just yet...
Joao Lima
28 Mar 06, 12:10
To date, the top 4 SB titles are:
Vietnam
Eagle Strike
Tour of Duty
Advance of the Reich ...
The surprise here is Tour of Duty. It makes sense that Advance of the Recih comes in fourth, when it was released the 'novelty' aspect of Squad Battles had worn out probably and only who by now liked the system bough it...
I still say, I would prefer the present games to be patched to higher standards than to see new titles...
To get the new enhancements there has to be a new title...otherwise there's no incentuive for the work to be done. But, as with all our other games, as new features are added theya re eventually rolled back to the other games in the series, for free.
Joao Lima
28 Mar 06, 16:06
... ...otherwise there's no incentuive for the work to be done. ...
ermmm... ok then.
How many new new games would it take to include all the changes requested?... (rethorical question I know...)
Haven't read through the threads recently, and of course everything requested can't be incorporated (as a general rule) but I would say 3 or 4...we have a history of adding in new things to each title, and occasionally in patches like the recent TOD patch, but we don't add dozens of new features in a single game usually.
There's also government support for this series, so AI programming will be done as well.
Joao Lima
30 Mar 06, 13:38
... but I would say 3 or 4... ...
eh,eh... 3 or 4 more Squad Battles, that would be nice to see...
TheBigRedOne
30 Mar 06, 14:12
Our spouses might not think so....
;)
Where I would like to see the series go next? That's easy... Forward... With new titles... New enhancements to the engine... WW1, WW2, Modern... I would buy the new games(s) whatever topics are covered. Maybe something from the early part of WW2? Scandinavia...? Poland...? Would love to see some of the clashes between Norwegian/British infantry and Germans in the narrow mountain valleys.... :smoke:
The most important thing that I think this series needs is a map editor. Without such an editor modding and historical scenario creation are almost next to impossible and there's only so much you can do with hypotheticals before it gets boring. A Squad Battles Creation Kit with guides and editors would keep this series going just as long as Steel Panthers. The lack of a true map editor is the one thing that's holding this series back. There is a huge amount of talent in our community. Given the proper tools to work with they could really make this series shine. Just look at Steel Panthers as proof. That game is basically ten years old and yet it's still being played. Why? Because the gaming community was given the tools to keep it going.
Rifleman95th
03 Apr 06, 01:41
To date, the top 4 SB titles are:
Vietnam
Eagle Strike
Tour of Duty
Advance of the Reich
That's all I can share, but that's official.
:devious:
I'm obviously in the minority here, but I find Korea the best of the bunch. Some of the other games in the series are a bit lopsided but in Korea both sides tend to have some decent hardware to play with.
The most important thing that I think this series needs is a map editor. Without such an editor modding and historical scenario creation are almost next to impossible and there's only so much you can do with hypotheticals before it gets boring. A Squad Battles Creation Kit with guides and editors would keep this series going just as long as Steel Panthers. The lack of a true map editor is the one thing that's holding this series back. There is a huge amount of talent in our community. Given the proper tools to work with they could really make this series shine. Just look at Steel Panthers as proof. That game is basically ten years old and yet it's still being played. Why? Because the gaming community was given the tools to keep it going.
Well, I can appreciate the desire for it, but SSI is also out of business, so that wasn't exactly a good move for them - among others. :OHNO:
Simply put, as I mentioned above, if new games don't come out, there's no further engine enhancements, hence no further support. So that would really kill the series quicker, not prolong it. :dead:
TheBigRedOne
03 Apr 06, 12:35
I think the two could somehow go hand-in-hand. I think a lot of the buzz about the current games happens when a new scenario comes out, which has been a bit spotty with the turn-over in the ranks of the top guys. Perhaps a common ground can be found to have a limited map editor to spurn the creative process for new scenarios, which would foster excitement for the series, give the players new things to chomp on, and also give HPS a chance to see who some of the new scenario designers are and use this as a recruiting tool to infuse the design staff with new talent. Could be a win-win for everyone involved if done correctly....
I'm obviously in the minority here, but I find Korea the best of the bunch. Some of the other games in the series are a bit lopsided but in Korea both sides tend to have some decent hardware to play with.
I agree, and it's generally considered, that Korea is the best out of the box SqB title. Most scenarios and pretty well balanced. Just always seems to be the forgotten war.
I think best SqB period is Africa at War mod.
I'd like to see an official modern Fulda Gap '85 title. That would be fun!
RedMike...out
Well, I can appreciate the desire for it, but SSI is also out of business, so that wasn't exactly a good move for them - among others. :OHNO:
Simply put, as I mentioned above, if new games don't come out, there's no further engine enhancements, hence no further support. So that would really kill the series quicker, not prolong it. :dead:
Being the new guy here I'm not trying to stir up a huge debate or cause trouble but I disagree with you. SSI did not live or die due to their decision to include map editors with some of their games. Look at the games and that have included complete tools. TOAW, Combat Mission, ATF and Steel Panthers come to mind. All are still being played today due to the editing capabilities. Now look at the games that make it difficult. Squad Battles and POA2 are good examples. The Squad Battles series has been rather stagnant for some time and the scenario list for POA2 is very limited. Is this just an HPS thing?
Of all the the HPS/Tiller series, the Squad Battles series is the one that really needs a complete editing package. I doubt very seriously that including a complete map editor will cause HPS or Tiller to go out of business. It might even boost sales. New games are still viable as they could add new features to the editors, ehancements to the engine and new weapons packages. It is doable if HPS/Tiller would bend a little. New games are nice but I want the ability to create mods and scenarios for conflicts that are of interest to me. There is a nice list of conflicts in this thread that HPS/Tiller may never release a game for. A map editor would enable those interested to create those conflicts.
Being the new guy here I'm not trying to stir up a huge debate or cause trouble but I disagree with you. SSI did not live or die due to their decision to include map editors with some of their games. Look at the games and that have included complete tools. TOAW, Combat Mission, ATF and Steel Panthers come to mind. All are still being played today due to the editing capabilities. Now look at the games that make it difficult. Squad Battles and POA2 are good examples. The Squad Battles series has been rather stagnant for some time and the scenario list for POA2 is very limited. Is this just an HPS thing?
Of all the the HPS/Tiller series, the Squad Battles series is the one that really needs a complete editing package. I doubt very seriously that including a complete map editor will cause HPS or Tiller to go out of business. It might even boost sales. New games are still viable as they could add new features to the editors, ehancements to the engine and new weapons packages. It is doable if HPS/Tiller would bend a little. New games are nice but I want the ability to create mods and scenarios for conflicts that are of interest to me. There is a nice list of conflicts in this thread that HPS/Tiller may never release a game for. A map editor would enable those interested to create those conflicts.
EXACTLY!!
I think a map editor for SqB series would IMPROVE sales.
:smoke:
RedMike...out
Ozgur Budak
03 Apr 06, 14:29
While I agree HPS' decision to not give map editor in titles like PzC I cant see the reason in systems such as SB series. A map editor in PzC can seriously affect the future releases since the only thing preventing the community from producing any operation on any date is the absence of map editor. However SB system is quite different. Every SB title has a narrow geography, time period and army/weapon structures. Having a map editor doesn lead to absolute ability to produce anything from any theatre or war. For instance lets assume we have map editor in SB:ES and we want a 1940 French campaign scenarios. It is still impossible to do it without juggling with the dat files (so few people know the nuances of dats) since the game doesnt have the OOBs, weapons, vehicles and art of 1940 campaign. On the other side having a map editor in ES will allow players to edit custom scenarios freely within the range of the title. As a scenario designer I have difficult time finding suitable map sector for the historical context and I find it only as a unneccasary hinderance. Sorry Rich :)
While I agree HPS' decision to not give map editor in titles like PzC I cant see the reason in systems such as SB series. A map editor in PzC can seriously affect the future releases since the only thing preventing the community from producing any operation on any date is the absence of map editor. However SB system is quite different. Every SB title has a narrow geography, time period and army/weapon structures. Having a map editor doesn lead to absolute ability to produce anything from any theatre or war. For instance lets assume we have map editor in SB:ES and we want a 1940 French campaign scenarios. It is still impossible to do it without juggling with the dat files (so few people know the nuances of dats) since the game doesnt have the OOBs, weapons, vehicles and art of 1940 campaign. On the other side having a map editor in ES will allow players to edit custom scenarios freely within the range of the title. As a scenario designer I have difficult time finding suitable map sector for the historical context and I find it only as a unneccasary hinderance. Sorry Rich :)
Yup.
RedMike...out
Joao Lima
03 Apr 06, 16:03
... As a scenario designer I have difficult time finding suitable map sector for the historical context and I find it only as a unneccasary hinderance. Sorry Rich :)
That's very true. It is specially notable since , even though verybody will say otherwise, the series seems to be on the cooler. A patch is not enough to say that the series is being boosted again, I thin personally that SB failed to live up to the commercial expectactions placed on it, but someone should reflect why. And the reason is not just that there are several things missing from the engine. One of the most obvious flaws is the absence of a map editor. Specially because given the way that the series was made, it could very well have supported a map editor, there is one title for western front, one for eastern front, 2 for vietnam, 2 for pacific and the odd one, korea. If the series developed like 1 title for each setting, it could very well have included a map editor.
But I think this is a lost argument, there will probably never be a map editor, until someone outside HPS makes one, if POA2 doesn't have one and everybody will agree that it's the most noteworthy flaw on a generic system like that, then none of the specific titles will have one...
Don Maddox
03 Apr 06, 17:52
I think it is fairly clear that many wargame development houses have come to the conclusion that offering a map editor is harmful to their long term bottom line. I have said time and again that grognards prefer "wargame systems" over titles that simply cover one big battle or campaign. This is most certainly true, but it's also fair to say that what is good for grognards is not always what is good for the company which created the product.
Unless I am way off target -- which I do not believe I am since I communicate with many developers/publishers daily -- I believe the days of the mega-wargames like TOAW, East Front, Steel Panthers, and Combat Mission are coming to a close. In this niche market developers simply cannot afford to go two-three years in between major releases, and they generally see editors as an issue which drives down their overall sales.
The new sales model is more likely to resemble Highway to the Reich, Korsun Pocket: Decisive Battles, Panzer Campaigns, Distant Guns, etc.
I think it is fairly clear that many wargame development houses have come to the conclusion that offering a map editor is harmful to their long term bottom line. I have said time and again that grognards prefer "wargame systems" over titles that simply cover one big battle or campaign. This is most certainly true, but it's also fair to say that what is good for grognards is not always what is good for the company which created the product.
Unless I am way off target -- which I do not believe I am since I communicate with many developers/publishers daily -- I believe the days of the mega-wargames like TOAW, East Front, Steel Panthers, and Combat Mission are coming to a close. In this niche market developers simply cannot afford to go two-three years in between major releases, and they generally see editors as an issue which drives down their overall sales.
The new sales model is more likely to resemble Highway to the Reich, Korsun Pocket: Decisive Battles, Panzer Campaigns, Distant Guns, etc.
Well be that as it may, in the case of SqB I think they're shooting themselves in the foot. It's a major turn off for a lot of potential purchasers.
RedMike,
Task-Force Echo Four...out
Joao Lima
03 Apr 06, 18:40
...Unless I am way off target -- which I do not believe I am since I communicate with many developers/publishers daily -- I believe the days of the mega-wargames like TOAW, East Front, Steel Panthers, and Combat Mission are coming to a close. In this niche market developers simply cannot afford to go two-three years in between major releases, and they generally see editors as an issue which drives down their overall sales.
The new sales model is more likely to resemble Highway to the Reich, Korsun Pocket: Decisive Battles, Panzer Campaigns, Distant Guns, etc.
Maybe. Actually, yes it's true, that's a reasonable approach from a company point of view, if it will work, probably yes, HPS launched a wide array of Panzer Campaigns even with some misses , most them were obvious hits, either by the novelty factor, or by the chosen battles, but SB seems to me to be a completely different story, I still think the modular approach would work well, at least better on the long run, if after 3 years you had 200 scenarios and 100 maps for SB Eagles Strike, people would still buy the game, now as it is , how many sales does SB Eagles Strike makes per month?...
Don Maddox
03 Apr 06, 21:43
I'm not saying that it's either good or bad. But I am saying that it seems this is the way PC wargames are going to be released in the future.
It's clear that HPS feels they can be more successful if they limit the Panzer Campaigns and Squad Battles series to individual actions rather than whole wars or fronts like East Front or TOAW.
Let's face it, if they released a version of Panzer Campaigns or Squad Battles tomorrow that complied the entire series to date along with the full suite of editors, a lot of gamers would then never make another purchase for any add-on disks that might be released in the future.
It boils down to this: grognards are an impossible group to please, and more than a few developers have gone out of business by trying to do so. Grognards always want more and more detail, more features, and unlimited access to the editor tools. I understand this because I often find myself wanting the same thing. But giving the grognards want they want (or trying to do so) is a surefire way to limit any future potential the system may have had from the finanical standpoint.
So what is the developer/publisher to do: listen to the grogs and starve, or produce fun but limited games that produce a viable revenue stream?
Ozgur Budak
03 Apr 06, 21:59
It's clear that HPS feels they can be more successful if they limit the Panzer Campaigns and Squad Battles series to individual actions rather than whole wars or fronts like East Front or TOAW.
I understand but the absence of a map editor limits 3rd party scenario releseas even in a narrow theatre approach. I dont expect HPS to release a western front SB title. Just a map editor to provide flexibilty to make scenarios within the historical/geographical borders of the SB ES. So it is not a good idea even with HPS' rationale. For instance I have been planning a bulge fight which happened around the Belgian village of Sadzot. All data is available and the fight is within the scope of SB ES but I cant find a good map that reflects the situation during the Sadzot fight.
So what is the developer/publisher to do: listen to the grogs and starve, or produce fun but limited games that produce a viable revenue stream?
If HPS/Tiller depend on sales from just the Squad Battles series I would venture to say that they're starving already. This series is pretty stagnant and it's going to take a lot more than a few enhancements to the engine or a new release to get it going again. Again I use Steel Panthers and Combat Mission as examples. There are literally hundreds of scenarios for each. Steel Panthers is a ten year old game and yet people still play. The Squad Battles series could have that type of life too with a functional map editor. I understand the reasoning for no map editor with the other series but a tactical series needs a map editor. That's why this series is so stagnant. There's only so much you can do with the tools provided and playing the same scenarios over and over again, no matter how fun, gets boring after awhile.
Ivan Rapkinov
04 Apr 06, 00:02
ever since the series started, this issue has been raised. 99% of the stuff that Rich forwarded on to me in the early days (thanks for that buddy! :D ) were questions about map editors and the like. John never wavered from his position, and I doubt he will now.
Ozgur mentioned that no one understands the dats, So giving people extra maps doesn't hurt the series, because they can only expand, not replace. I won't agree/disagree, but the dats aren't hard. My Chechnya mod, and Franks A@W created dats from the ground up. All the flags and stuff were found through trial and error (though John did help a bit iirc), and the artwork was easy enough to replace/add to.
Ozgur Budak
04 Apr 06, 07:14
Sure one can alter the game using the dats James. I even edited an existing map file in notepad to make a brend new one ("crashlanding at tavronitis" has a heavily modified map) in some scenarios but it is very time consuming and quite hard to make without errors. One wrong space or letter will result file error. Thats why only few people can use them. And as far as I know nearly all of the them have close relations with the HPS so they would not get into way of future releases. However a large 3rd party scenario designer community requires an easy to use interface.
Joao Lima
04 Apr 06, 13:24
...
So what is the developer/publisher to do: listen to the grogs and starve, or produce fun but limited games that produce a viable revenue stream?
eh,eh... WOuld you say that SB at present are a 'viable revenue stream'?
I concede, as I said before, we will never see a map editor for any of the Tiller games, if that's good or bad, time will tell, because wether you like or not, Panzer Campaigns will at some start to go sideways, there is a finite number of commercially viable battles, and also, some of the available WW2 attles are not that viable in PzC's engine, as it was recognized already at this forum, back to the point, I concede that we do not have a map, but will SB someday incorporate some of the most wanted features by the players? Because if we are dependant like it was sadi before in having 3-4 new releases before all the major requests are incorporated then, quite honestly I dont see a great future for it, I for one, would go for a new SB title only if it incorporates some seriously new features, as it is, more of the same , well...
Joao Lima
04 Apr 06, 13:31
That is one of the big things letting down the series, sure there good and plen of maps with every edition, but if you look the extensive possibilities that a simple utility like the one that allows to 're-create' some ASL maps for ES and AofR gives and I would certainly like to see in each edition a bunch of historical maps, say for instance AofR, you would get the Stalingrad map, probably more 2 or 3 selected large areas with each you could create loads of scenarios, and then a set of 10 or so small thematic maps that could be combined to form new sets of more generic maps to cover other battles. This small set of maps would be thematic according to the game, that is in a Vietnam release you would get 10 small jungle type maps, plus the 3 larger ones, on a ES you would get 10 small European terrain maps, plus 3 larger ones and so on...
I left this idea regarding maps months ago, maybe it could implemented , it wouldn't be so detrimental of future sales as a map editor.
That is one of the big things letting down the series, sure there good and plen of maps with every edition, but if you look the extensive possibilities that a simple utility like the one that allows to 're-create' some ASL maps for ES and AofR gives and I would certainly like to see in each edition a bunch of historical maps, say for instance AofR, you would get the Stalingrad map, probably more 2 or 3 selected large areas with each you could create loads of scenarios, and then a set of 10 or so small thematic maps that could be combined to form new sets of more generic maps to cover other battles. This small set of maps would be thematic according to the game, that is in a Vietnam release you would get 10 small jungle type maps, plus the 3 larger ones, on a ES you would get 10 small European terrain maps, plus 3 larger ones and so on...
I left this idea regarding maps months ago, maybe it could implemented , it wouldn't be so detrimental of future sales as a map editor.
Have you looked at the files that shipped with AOTR?
Balta.map - 342 x 170 hexes
Stalingrad.map - 494 x 114 hexes
Mogilev.map - 200 x 300 hexes
Beschenkovitschi.map - 258 x 224 hexes
Maloyaroslavets.map - 374 x 148 hexes
Selizharovo.map - 262 x 226 hexes
Borisov.map - 256 x 222 hexes
Yartsevo.map - 234 x 200 hexes
Senno.map - 200 x 300 hexes
So that's 9 really big maps that shipped with a single game, all of which can be chopped up into any number of sub-maps using the included sub-map editor. That's 510,444 unique hexes that can be fought over...in a single title.
Now granted, Eagle Strike doesn't have as many nor as big of maps that shipped with it, but the biggest is 256 x 175 hexes. But John supported the creation of at least 10 ASL maps for use with the game that are free to everyone with the game.
Heck, in the Pacific games there's entire islands mapped, that I haven't seen an abundance of custom scenario created for. In fact, there's a distinct lack of custom scenarios floating around out there (except for Vietnam & the content at TFE4) - and I find it really hard to believe that the release of a map editor would suddenly have designers coming out of the woodwork. If people were making scenarios left and right then I could see it as a valid complaint that they were running out of territory to use and this issue was big. As it stands I don't think that's the case.
I say all this as a fan of the Tiller games as a whole...I've been playing them & designing scenarios for them since '97 - and continue to do so outside of my work with HPS. Additionally I use my influence within the organization to pack as much as I reasonably can into each title...just look at what French & Indian War & Campaign Waterloo shipped with...not to mention the free expansion pack we issued for Waterloo shortly after its release. I will continue to do so, and be an advocate for the on-line community that is the most vocal group of the customer base. But man, guys...use the tools that have already been given to you to their fullest before you beat us down and tell us we aren't giving you enough...please!
Oh, and one last comment...as of about a month ago I will have a direct part in the creation of future Squad Battles titles...so I can be a part of the decision making process, and influence the content that goes out on each CD. Additionaly, some of the designers working on those games will be reading these boards...so we do have every intent of improving the product and making it worth the hard-earned money you guys spend on it. Whether its worth it or not will be for you guys to decide.
Regards,
Rich
Have you looked at the files that shipped with AOTR?
Balta.map - 342 x 170 hexes
Stalingrad.map - 494 x 114 hexes
Mogilev.map - 200 x 300 hexes
Beschenkovitschi.map - 258 x 224 hexes
Maloyaroslavets.map - 374 x 148 hexes
Selizharovo.map - 262 x 226 hexes
Borisov.map - 256 x 222 hexes
Yartsevo.map - 234 x 200 hexes
Senno.map - 200 x 300 hexes
So that's 9 really big maps that shipped with a single game, all of which can be chopped up into any number of sub-maps using the included sub-map editor. That's 510,444 unique hexes that can be fought over...in a single title.
Now granted, Eagle Strike doesn't have as many nor as big of maps that shipped with it, but the biggest is 256 x 175 hexes. But John supported the creation of at least 10 ASL maps for use with the game that are free to everyone with the game.
Heck, in the Pacific games there's entire islands mapped, that I haven't seen an abundance of custom scenario created for. In fact, there's a distinct lack of custom scenarios floating around out there (except for Vietnam & the content at TFE4) - and I find it really hard to believe that the release of a map editor would suddenly have designers coming out of the woodwork. If people were making scenarios left and right then I could see it as a valid complaint that they were running out of territory to use and this issue was big. As it stands I don't think that's the case.
I say all this as a fan of the Tiller games as a whole...I've been playing them & designing scenarios for them since '97 - and continue to do so outside of my work with HPS. Additionally I use my influence within the organization to pack as much as I reasonably can into each title...just look at what French & Indian War & Campaign Waterloo shipped with...not to mention the free expansion pack we issued for Waterloo shortly after its release. I will continue to do so, and be an advocate for the on-line community that is the most vocal group of the customer base. But man, guys...use the tools that have already been given to you to their fullest before you beat us down and tell us we aren't giving you enough...please!
Oh, and one last comment...as of about a month ago I will have a direct part in the creation of future Squad Battles titles...so I can be a part of the decision making process, and influence the content that goes out on each CD. Additionaly, some of the designers working on those games will be reading these boards...so we do have every intent of improving the product and making it worth the hard-earned money you guys spend on it. Whether its worth it or not will be for you guys to decide.
Regards,
Rich
Sorry Rich I still disagree concerning the map editor. While it's nice to have the big maps you listed, the problem is that those are chosen by the interests of the designer. Using the submap-editor I may not be able to get the exact type of map I want for scenario creation. Not trying to beat a dead horse but things are so much simpler with a fully functional map editor as seen in Steel Panthers and Combat Mission. I can create pretty much any type of map I want with them. With the Squad Battles series I'm limited.
I'll give an example. I'd like to try to create a scenario of the '68 US embassy attack during the Tet Offensive. Given the maps in the Vietnam games that's pretty difficult to do without "fudging" the map. A full fledged map editor would give me options that I don't have now. I may still have to "fudge" certain things but I should be able to create a map that is a pretty good facsimile of the embassy grounds. With the submap-editor I have to take certain liberties and hope that I can get a good submap. I don't want to be limited to the maps that the designer, HPS or Tiller decided to include. I want the ability to create my own.
Don Maddox
04 Apr 06, 23:46
The problem here is that I understand the motivations of both sides. Developers have real financial considerations that simply can't be ignored, while gamers will only support those titles that have the features they desire.
This is a thorny issue, no doubt about it.
If we were discussing any other genre of games, I would have to say it would be difficult to side against the gamers. Why? Because they hold all the cards in the long run. You can spin it however you like, but it is unlikely that you will ever convince gamers that purposely withholding features and utilities is "good" for them. In short, companies make money by responding to the needs and desires of consumers, not by attempting to block consumers from getting what it is they're really after.
Wargamers like to tinker, that's a fact. One could put forward a compelling argument that experimenting with different battles, situations, and conditions is half of what makes wargaming interesting. I know numerous players that spend a lot more time creating and tinkering with scenarios than they ever do actually playing. And that's hardly unusual.
Games like Sim City, The Sims, MS Flight Simulator, and Civ IV are popular precisely because these systems are open. The developers recognized that providing a way for players to experiment and tinker is not an add-on or afterthought, it's a major portion of the games' appeal. If you took away my ability to fool around in Sim City, I would likely never touch that product again.
But we are talking about wargames here. And wargames are such a small niche that the players do not have the kind of clout that gamers of other genres do. There simply isn't enough money in this tiny segment of the gaming market for developers to be overly concerned with pleasing the players. And grognards have not done themselves any favors as a group by consistently being pigheaded and notoriously difficult to deal with.
And so wargamers will get the games that developers decide they should get.
Ivan Rapkinov
04 Apr 06, 23:56
while I don't completely agree with Don, I'd like to expand on one point. It was borught up (by whom I can't remember - or choose not to say ;) ) that the SB series was developed with the "silent majority" in mind - these are guys (and girls I guess) who buy the game, play it, never go onto the net looking at forums, maybe might dl the patch, never play PBEM, and are happy to play the game "out of the box", if you will.
For every internet gripe about X, there a lot more guys just playing the games. I definetely don't fit into the catgetory, and to me it seems a bit of waste of money if you're not going to squeeze the game dry, but to each his own.
a (ver) rough analogy would be the guys that buy Oblivion, play the game,never dl mods for it, never look at a forum, but they make up a sizable chunk.
Don Maddox
05 Apr 06, 00:05
Ivan is right in his basic point: grogs do not have nearly as much power and influence as they like to think they do.
In the old days, wargames were nearly always designed with the grognard in mind, because that is who played wargames. But developers tired of attempting to please them and have moved on to new formulas.
From where I sit this discussion isn't really about SB, HPS, or John Tiller. Because what they are doing is becoming commonplace among all the wargame developers, and I simply don't see anything that is going to significantly alter the equation much.
TheBigRedOne
05 Apr 06, 13:35
Consumers always want it all, and want it for free, when it comes to cars, houses, electronic, *and* wargames!
Rich's comment on the number of scenario designers is interesting. Is it a 'chicken or the egg' scenario, where if there were map editors, we'd have more new scenarios coming out? Hard to say. I do agree that I'm not sure that if released there's be a flood of scenarios coming out. I guess being a late comer to the HPS world, I've been somewhat disappointed with the amount of new scenarios coming out over the past year or so.
Maybe it's just the perception that more new stuff came out during the Wild Bill's Raiders/Echo-Four era. Any old-timers care to comment on that? Is there less activity in the SB world now compared to say, 3-4 years ago?
I laid myself off in early 2003 as the real life got too hectic. I introduced Bill to JT and Bill ran with SB from PATF til the time he left. I only worked on Bill's first title (PATF). Prior to that I was too busy with PzC to work on SB. The same reason is why I stopped SB after PATF, too busy with other stuff. It was crazy then, PzC, Modern Campaigns and SB. I tried to dabble in all of them.
Not sure why the slowdown in SB but things are gearing up though. Being out of it for three years has left me out of the loop but I see things picking up again soon.
But we are talking about wargames here. And wargames are such a small niche that the players do not have the kind of clout that gamers of other genres do. There simply isn't enough money in this tiny segment of the gaming market for developers to be overly concerned with pleasing the players. And grognards have not done themselves any favors as a group by consistently being pigheaded and notoriously difficult to deal with.
And so wargamers will get the games that developers decide they should get.
I can see both sides to this issue but find it difficult to understand the niche market reasoning. It's true that wargames are a niche market but other companies are able to provide complete editing packages with their games. Battlefront and ProSim are good examples. How do they do it? While new titles and enhancements are nice, I'm sorry to say that it's not enough for me anymore. There's always going to be a been there done that feeling since I only have a finite number of scenarios to play. That's the difference. With ATF, CM or SP there are plenty of scenarios and the tools are there for me to make my own if I can't find exactly what I'm looking for. The submap editor works with the other series rather well since they are operational but this is a tactical series. Submaps aren't going to cut it because it limits the types of scenarios that I can create. Rich alluded to the fact that not many people are creating scenarios even with the maps included. Having to use submaps could be the reason why.
Ivan Rapkinov
05 Apr 06, 22:33
Maybe it's just the perception that more new stuff came out during the Wild Bill's Raiders/Echo-Four era. Any old-timers care to comment on that? Is there less activity in the SB world now compared to say, 3-4 years ago?
more games came out. I wouldn't say there was ever a huge scn development community - mainly guys working on the series dabbling - best example I can think of is when Neil Stalker joined. He got either ToD or SBV to learn the system on and you saw him pump out a few scns within a few weeks of recieiving the game. That's aside from his developmental stuff.
Hey, we're still making new scenarios at TFE4. It's just slowed down a lot due to being busy with multitudes of various projects. But there's some new Africa scens ready to post and I'm working on revamping some P&F scens specifically for H2H play. The one I'm on now is being difficult playbalancing. I've re-done the sfx for P&F too. Very atmospheric now. Good stuff brewing.
On the map editor business, I have to say as a scenario creator that the lack of an editor is the biggest pain in the proverbial. There's only so much you can do with regurgitated real estate.
RedMike...out
On the map editor business, I have to say as a scenario creator that the lack of an editor is the biggest pain in the proverbial. There's only so much you can do with regurgitated real estate.
While I will not argue against a user master map making utility, I will say that the real estate is hardly regurgitated. In fact, 3rd party scenario designers have really only scratched the surface of what is available to them.
What got me back in to the series recently was working on some ASL scenario conversions for KG Pieper I/II. I think only one stock scenario uses the Stoumont map. I don't recall seeing many (any?) scenarios at TFE4 that depict KG Pieper action. The base map is 230x99 hexes - 36 KM2 of area. Total area included in Eagle Strike? 513.6 KM2. And only SB: Korea has less real estate.
So there is plenty of real estate there. (4647 KM2 to be exact) However you have to hunt down scenario ideas that happen in the areas covered. (I am not a big fan of trying to figure out a corner of a map that is close enough to what you want - my eyes get bleary.) Even that can get frustrating though I have more than once found the perfect scenario inspiration only to look it up on the master map and find that I need another 10 hexes the west to cover the situation...
One thing that HPS could do is draw attention to the map.hlp file included with some of the titles (and make them available for the ones that don't have it). Eagles Strike and AotR both include windows help files that include jump maps for the master maps, as well as descriptions of the maps and notes on actions in the area covered. When I stumbled on them, I was quite pleased.
I have posted this before elswhere, but I made a spreadsheet that lists all the master maps - not submaps that are included with the games. It has map hex size, actual location and area covered in KM2.
Either this file or the one below will work. Both are correct.
While I will not argue against a user master map making utility, I will say that the real estate is hardly regurgitated. In fact, 3rd party scenario designers have really only scratched the surface of what is available to them.
What got me back in to the series recently was working on some ASL scenario conversions for KG Pieper I/II. I think only one stock scenario uses the Stoumont map. I don't recall seeing many (any?) scenarios at TFE4 that depict KG Pieper action. The base map is 230x99 hexes - 36 KM2 of area. Total area included in Eagle Strike? 513.6 KM2. And only SB: Korea has less real estate.
So there is plenty of real estate there. (4647 KM2 to be exact) However you have to hunt down scenario ideas that happen in the areas covered. (I am not a big fan of trying to figure out a corner of a map that is close enough to what you want - my eyes get bleary.) Even that can get frustrating though I have more than once found the perfect scenario inspiration only to look it up on the master map and find that I need another 10 hexes the west to cover the situation...
One thing that HPS could do is draw attention to the map.hlp file included with some of the titles (and make them available for the ones that don't have it). Eagles Strike and AotR both include windows help files that include jump maps for the master maps, as well as descriptions of the maps and notes on actions in the area covered. When I stumbled on them, I was quite pleased.
I have posted this before elswhere, but I made a spreadsheet that lists all the master maps - not submaps that are included with the games. It has map hex size, actual location and area covered in KM2.
If the file did not upload, drop me a note and I would be happy to forward it to you.
Ah, the infamous Mike Cox, howdy!
As for regurgitation, it just depends what game you're designing for. Some have more suitable terrain available than others. Especially for historically accurate scenarios where everything has to be just so and not just representative. As for SL conversions there is the Geomapper program, which is great. Although a few of the maps need repair as they are incorrectly sized and do not open. I'll get to it eventually though. I have a lot of ASL conversions in the works.
I'll post it up at TFE4, thanks Mike.
Regards,
RedMike
Cool. Upgraded to infamous. :laugh: Thanks! BTW, I caught an error in the file after posting. I will delte the above one and attach a corrected one below. (Actually more KM2 nearly 4884!)
On Historical ASL, with the exception of Veritable, A Bridge Too Far and Pegasus Bridge (British/canadian modules), the historical modules all are contained (well nearly) in stock maps. KGP I/II, Blood Reef Tarawa, Red Barricades, and even a couple of the ASL Annuals/journals (ASLA 97 had Nphum Ga that had historic maps. Most of this is unmined to my knowledge (exception being RB and even that is pretty deep in untapped potential).
While talking ASL - I would like to see the Geomapper expanded a bit to cover all 52 boards...
One thing for aspiring scenario designers (myself included) to remember is that it needs to be approached differently than other games. Rather than reading a book and then saying - hey what an interesting situation, I 'll make that into a scenario. You need to look at what is available - say Mortain - and then go look for books/info on the fighting there...
Cool. Upgraded to infamous. :laugh: Thanks! BTW, I caught an error in the file after posting. I will delte the above one and attach a corrected one below. (Actually more KM2 nearly 4884!)
On Historical ASL, with the exception of Veritable, A Bridge Too Far and Pegasus Bridge (British/canadian modules), the historical modules all are contained (well nearly) in stock maps. KGP I/II, Blood Reef Tarawa, Red Barricades, and even a couple of the ASL Annuals/journals (ASLA 97 had Nphum Ga that had historic maps. Most of this is unmined to my knowledge (exception being RB and even that is pretty deep in untapped potential).
While talking ASL - I would like to see the Geomapper expanded a bit to cover all 52 boards...
One thing for aspiring scenario designers (myself included) to remember is that it needs to be approached differently than other games. Rather than reading a book and then saying - hey what an interesting situation, I 'll make that into a scenario. You need to look at what is available - say Mortain - and then go look for books/info on the fighting there...
OK...got the updated file. Thanks.
I'll post it up with the next TFE4 update which is brewing.
Cheers!
RedMike...out
I just added it to the SB downloads section here, under the Misc files.
Thanks Mike!! :salute:
How about the WW1 Mesopotamia campaign? My grandfather took part in this campaign and was besieged at Kut and subsequently taken prisoner by the Turks, so I've a personal interest in seeing this covered. Also it's one of the more fluid WW1 theatres with far more potential than the Western Front or Gallipoli. Besides, although an obscure campaign which few people seem to know about, it probably has greater relevance today than any other WW1 (or WW2 for that matter) campaign. So forget about yet more WW2 or modern titles, since this is something that's both fresh and more relevant.
Ozgur Budak
18 Apr 06, 12:45
How about the WW1 Mesopotamia campaign? My grandfather took part in this campaign and was besieged at Kut and subsequently taken prisoner by the Turks, so I've a personal interest in seeing this covered. Also it's one of the more fluid WW1 theatres with far more potential than the Western Front or Gallipoli. Besides, although an obscure campaign which few people seem to know about, it probably has greater relevance today than any other WW1 (or WW2 for that matter) campaign. So forget about yet more WW2 or modern titles, since this is something that's both fresh and more relevant.
That would be a great title though I am not sure the commercial potential. Maybe as a 3rd party mod. You are quite right about Gallipoli inadequate for SB. Basra and Iraq front has many good opportunities for company sized engagements, the usage of machine guns, tactical usage of artillery, cavalry flank moves even amphibious operation from rivers.
vBulletin® v3.7.0, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.