Airborne Assault: Highway to the Reich

[Tzar]

Hello all,

Anybody here is playing Airborne Assault: Highway to the Reich? I have been playing it continuously since a couple of months and it is the operational-level wargame I have enjoyed the most in my life. The refreshing chain of command concept of this wargame (where you don't have to micro-manage all your units) is its most important feature, as well as the order delay and the fact that you are playing over a digitalized topographic map rather than the traditional hex grid.

Fighting in the game is resolved men by men and weapon by weapon by taking account historical TOEs.

Go there to get a Virtual Tour of this game and understand what it's about. A detailed but short AAR is also available here

 

[CPangracs]

We are going to be evaluating it here at the CGSOC for possible use of a modern combat version. We should receive our copies here next week. Looking forward to it!

 

[Tzar]

We are going to be evaluating it here at the CGSOC for possible use of a modern combat version. We should receive our copies here next week. Looking forward to it!

This is great !

Tell us how it is going.

 

[Redwolf]

I like it.

The only reason why I didn't get into it to a major degree is that I currently prefer modern wargames over WW2, no to mention I am in several larger games or tournaments.

The only thing I noticed is that artillery and CAS targetting seems to be very smooth, to a degree where it is very powerful.

 

[Crimguy]

Terrific game. I'm a big fan, and have found myself playing HTTR more than any other wargame currently on my computer. That is, until Steelbeasts II comes out

 

[Ivan Rapkinov]

Another brilliant aussie product.

Dave mentioned a possible Vietnam game; if they DO make a modern combat game, make sure it gets released civilianally.

 

[Blackcloud6]

I tried the demo when it first came out and the game drove me nuts. Units running all over the palvce doing their own thing. I guess I'm just too much of an old fashioned hex gamer... :cheeky:

 

[screamer]

want it want it, want smash up my own hometown...drooool

 

[Priest]

I would agree with Blackcloud6, played the demo and it made me feel like I was an observer instead of a participant.

 

[KG_Norad]

The chain of command is the best in gaming in my opinion, whats great about it though is you can issue orders to any element in the chain of command including individual company's. So you can micormanage if you want. It is a pity that they could not implement a pbem element though. Real time is hard on my real life.

Very cool game though, and rather then seeing the same old WWII battles depicted (and I LOVE WWII era games)(although North Africa might be cool with this game system) it would be really cool to see vietnam and other conflicts.

 

[CPangracs]

Terrific game. I'm a big fan, and have found myself playing HTTR more than any other wargame currently on my computer. That is, until Steelbeasts II comes out

Funny you mentioned SB II,...I am running the demo of SB Professional right now, and it looks absolutely awesome!!

 

[CPangracs]

Another brilliant aussie product.

Dave mentioned a possible Vietnam game; if they DO make a modern combat game, make sure it gets released civilianally.

Hmmm, somehow I don't think "civilianally" is a word,...at least not a PROPER word, as it sounds to me like you are trying to do something rectal to a civilian!

We will be discussing things about the HTTR engine and its use in a larger-scale modern combat arena. But, I will make darn sure that the new game NEVER sees the light civilianalitinous! :cheeky:

 

[Arjuna]

I would agree with Blackcloud6, played the demo and it made me feel like I was an observer instead of a participant.

I take it you are referring to the demo for our first release in the Airborne Assault series - Red Devils Over Arnhem ( RDAO ). We did not put out a demo for HTTR. The main reason for this being that we found many people who downloaded the demo never bothered to play the tutorial let alone read the pdf tutorial manual provided. Not surprising then that many said they could not work out what was going on or like you didn't know how to get the most out of the game.

For HTTR we designed two very good tutorials. The first walks the player through the basic game mechanics and focuses on micro-management of units. The second focuses on macro-management, where as commander you are ordering HQs around, allocating fire support etc. They work very well. Ideally we would like to incorporate a fully interactive tutorial into the game. This would obviate the need for users to read the manual and let's face it most never do. Resource limitations prevented us from doing this for HTTR and so we decided this time not to release a demo. Without the interactive tutorial the demo is counter productive.

So the upshot of what I am saying is "don't judge HTTR by the RDOA demo".

The game system is such that you can do very little if you so wish. But that type of play is not recommended. Moreover, you can manage every single unit but again we don't recommend wholsale micro-management either. The most enjoyment and realism is derived by playing the game as a real life commander would. Personally I tend to focus at least two levels down. So when playing a Corps level scenario I usually order my Brigades. When the action in a particular area hots up I may start to order Bns around. I'll even give direct orders to my recon companies and the odd company level blocking force.

For most of the scenarios eash side has multiple objectives to achieve which require the player to increase the span of control and involvement. Moreover, the crucial thing as a player is to develop a good plan, monitor progress, reassess and replan as required. Sure in some phases, such as an advance to contact their may be little action for a while. But then being a pausable continuous time game means you can always increase the speed and then slow it down once contact is made or even pause it if you need time to take stock.

Overall the reaction to HTTR has been brilliant. We're continuing to enhance the system with each new release and our policy is to provide a minimum cost upgrade for earlier releases ( from HTTR onwards ) which will bring them up to the same standard as the latest release.

 

[Ivan Rapkinov]

Dave: do modern and you've got a confirmed sale right here

I know from experience how much of a market grabber WW2 is, but us modern fellas like the system too.

I have RDOA, and never got HTTR, mainly because I wasn;t interested in another WW2 game (that's across the board, not just Panther Games stuff )

Arab-Israeli would be tres bien

 

[Arjuna]

Ivan,

If we do a modern version it would be initially for the Defence market. So it would be very contemporary - ie 2000+. We would want to piggy back on that development.

With that in mind I would be interested to hear what type of "modern" scenarios peoples would be interested in. Joint ops, army with a bit of air support, naval/air? And at what scale? Our engine is best suited for moving company sized line units around but could be adapted to go down a level to platoons. It would take some extensive revision to go up a notch.

Thoughts...?

 

[screamer]

arab israeli war's.......
Former Yugoslavia
iran iraq
vietnam
fictional Vs North Korea or Iran

or trow in a couple of EXERCIZES..between nato countries...or maybe even some US vs EU scenario's




just my 2cents

 

[Ivan Rapkinov]

Dave,

if you are piggybacking on DD contracts...

Iraq II
Golan Heights '73
Pakistan vs India
Ethiopia/Eritrea
Haiti
East Timor gone Wrong
Sierra Leone
Hypotheticals

probably be better going down scale or maintaining as is, as you won;t get too mnay large confrontations out of it otherwise

looking forward to it when it is released. I have HTTR, but because it is WW2 and my interests run elsewhere, I haven't given it the attention it deserves

 

[Full Monty]

I would agree with Blackcloud6, played the demo and it made me feel like I was an observer instead of a participant.

Well I was playing HTTR again last night and I was thinking about that very issue. I like the fact that the battle proceeds without the player having to continually issue orders. Of course I have the option to intervene at any stage and at any level of command, pause the action and take my time over issuing fresh orders, but I don't have to. Not that I don't enjoy turn-based wargames too but HTTR is a game that continually 'draws me in'

 

[Aries]

I would love to see some modern applications of HTTR.

But please, leave out the modern events where the US shows up and mauls the never had a chance opponents.

Korea 1950 would be nice.

A few select Vietnam battles maybe.

Conflicts involving the Arab Israeli conflicts maybe (not all of them will interest me).

And I won't play anything involving Nato vs never happened Warsaw Pact conflicts. During the 70s - 80s it might have been possible to sell that setting, but it never happened, and would be a waste of computer programing skills today.

 

[Redwolf]

If we do a modern version it would be initially for the Defence market. So it would be very contemporary - ie 2000+. We would want to piggy back on that development.

With that in mind I would be interested to hear what type of "modern" scenarios peoples would be interested in. Joint ops, army with a bit of air support, naval/air? And at what scale? Our engine is best suited for moving company sized line units around but could be adapted to go down a level to platoons. It would take some extensive revision to go up a notch.

I always have a weakness for a 1982-1989 clash on the inner-German border, after the introdution of the M1 MBT but before widespread availability of PGMs.

This (comparably) symmetric conflicts works a lot better for wargames than scenarios like Vietnam where very uneven opponents clash.

It is also well-thought over with books like Red Thrust, Red Army and countless training models, not to speak of tanknet archives

Helicopters (both transport and attack) should be an interesting challenge to model in AA.