HPS Modern Campaigns

[Ivan Rapkinov]

RedMike: it got nixed when we did Korea - I was using the Turks as the Chechens, and russians as russians. John changed the code in the existing TOD.exe which I was using to conform with the Korea.exe code, which caused all sorts of exception errors with the scns that had been created for the mod.

Then Wild Bill left the team for greener pastures and I went o/s after Korea was finished. Frank and I talked about a combined Afghan-Chechen mod, but we never really got into it.

though I must admit I was a bit shocked when AotR was released, given that I and a couple of others had been onboard since the start, and John didn't even tell us he was working on a Stalingrad game, including Wild Bill, who, whether you liked or loathed him, was responsible for a lot of great scns, in a whole lot of games. Why John chose to do it solo (with Joe and Marks help ofc) is a mystery to me when the "SB Raiders" as Louie had termed us were going so well as a team...but it;s his system, his money - his call

as for the map editor...that contentious as hell. you CAN make your own maps, and despite being finicky, they work the same as any other map. However, John got really tchy about people using them - which I was fine with on a customer side of things, but we were on his development team and we didn;t have access to the map tool - maybe wild Bill, but I think he still sent his topo scans to Joe and John. which made for some embarassing situations - like the Nijmagen scn in Eagles Strike that was never included, because the map made was for the wrong area...

SB:Korea was fun to make, but everyone sort of dropped in an out during that one - Ozgar and Frank proved to be worthy additions, and I'm happy they've kept it up By the time Korea rolled around I was frustrated with not being able to my own thing basically, which probably was a bit selfish, but I got onboard the Squad Battles series because it was dealing with post-WW2 games (Vietnam, Korea etc) , and when it seemed like it was just going to keep churning out WW2 games, I lost interest, then RL interfered, with me going to Chechnya, I got engaged, I got a full time non-student related job which I enjoyed, but ate up a lot of time.

never got back into it when I got back form overseas, and then I got more into the more complex milsims keeping in with my studies, and work related interests.

as for the map editor - that was a financial decision by John: give 'em all the tools they want to expand the games (OOB editors, DB editors, scn Editors) but make them dependant on the source for maps. I can't say I agreed with it, but I lived with it since SBV (the good ol days of Scott Clinton, Matt Peckham and myself...sigh) and with every new member that joined the development team, the question was asked and the same answer given. I respect John's opinion on the issue, and as I said before - his series, his money - his call.

just perusing my outlook mailboxes...the SqB one has over 6000+ mails - I still wonder how I got through uni!

 

[RedMike]

So you and "James Rapkins" must be one and the same?

I too (among the multitudes) find the lack of a proper map editor as the single most frustrating thing about designing SqB scenarios. It always boils down to finding appropriate terrain that never is quite right. Still, you ought to try Africa at War if you haven't already. Best SqB imho! I'm working, slowly, on some Portuguese scenarios at the moment. Very hard to find material on the subject. At least in English it is. Plenty of stuff in print in Portuguese. Anyway, it's a lot of fun and SqB does reward the proper implemention of squad level tactics. BTW...Frank drafted me into TF-E4 as well.

RedMike OUT

 

[Ivan Rapkinov]

yah - I am he. (check my profile to be sure)

though I was Ivan here a long time before I was involved in SB. Check out the interview I did with John Tiller re: SB:Vietnam...

TF-E4 does good stuff, I'm glad they've kept it up and kept the interest I've played Africa@War (which is mighty fine) but my focus is on milsims more these days, though I'm glad I had as much to do with SB as I did, as it was an awesome experience in learning about wargaming.

 

[splooger]

The "perfect" wargame for me would have Koger's interface, the Tiller team's scenario research, and SSG's AI.

 

[Dr Zaius]

In the light of the feedback we have received and my own experience with the system, we are prepared to accept Panzer/Modern campaigns into the Warfare HQ family of wargames. As always, we won't do this half-as*ed.

Volunteers instered in being part of the staff should contact me directly for more information. Here are the requirements:

• Have gaming experience with the system and a passion to work with it long term.
• Free time.
• Some webpage experience is helpful but not an absolute must.
• Willingness to work as part of a team.

This is, of course, a volunteer position like all our other positions. You won't be paid for your efforts, however, being part of our staff is a rewarding experience on many levels.

I'm looking for one section leader and one assistant section leader.

 

[Cougar_DK]

Thanx Don.

 

[switch_back]

woooo woooo :banana:

 

[KG_Norad]

Ok guys you got your wish...almost...We will need some volunteer's to make this a reality! I would but I got involved with CM while PzC was still considered implausable and my good friend Palantir needs to have an eye kept on him. :drink:

So who is going to step up to the plate? If someone comes aboard I would be happy to be a "buddy" until you get up to speed.

 

[dannybou]

Ok guys you got your wish...almost...We will need some volunteer's to make this a reality! I would but I got involved with CM while PzC was still considered implausable and my good friend Palantir needs to have an eye kept on him. :drink:

So who is going to step up to the plate? If someone comes aboard I would be happy to be a "buddy" until you get up to speed.

Been playing these games for a few years. Panzer Campaign that is. Wrote a review at ACG on El Alamein. I have no experience with web pages. My area is WW2. I can volunteer.

After thinking about it, I think I'll let the volunteering to those who have been members of WHQ far longer than me.

 

[Dr Zaius]

Wow, maybe not then . . .

 

[Realmzmaster]

Is ME67 a good game

I am looking at purchasing ME67. I need to know how is compares with Divided Ground by Talonsoft. Can anyone give me a comparison overview.

 

[Glenn Saunders]

> I am looking at purchasing ME67. I need to know how is compares with Divided Ground by Talonsoft.

Here is the link your looking for.

http://members.shaw.ca/gcsaunders/ME67vsDG.html

...I was just looking over this forum and threan since I thought there might be more traffic here now that ACG was directing the traffic here. But is seems like the largely TOAW fan club has stronger feeling about the value of PzC and MC - at least they did in the earlier part of this thread. This would really be too bad but there you have it.

Glenn

 

[dannybou]

I am looking at purchasing ME67. I need to know how is compares with Divided Ground by Talonsoft. Can anyone give me a comparison overview.

I own it and it is good. Just make sure if you get it to download the alternate art packs and extra scenarios.

 

[dannybou]

Back to the top for our new members to vote in.

 

[Mini-Me]

I tried Fulda Gap '85. I agree with Don; essentially unplayable.

I don't think anybody will accuse me of shying away from fine details. But that game was out of control. I played the intro scenario with 11ACR, and thought to myself that there seemed to be an awful lot of "chits" on the map for a small battalion-sized engagement. Then I looked at the "grand" scenario.

Are they freaking kidding me? I have to plot paths and actions for every single battalion and no small number of companies in three Warsaw Pact armies or three NATO corps? And do it again every 4 scale hours? And keep track of logistics and fire support down to the level of individual sorties?

I don't think so. Not without a staff.

It reminded me of the "Europa" series that modeled all of WWII at the battalion level. That game (actually, about two dozen of them) was huge, too, but there was one crucial difference: you can see the whole map in one sweeping glance and "grok" the overall situation easily. FG85 had two zoom levels, neither of which was ideal. This sort of situational awareness is one area that computer wargames have consistently failed to even reach parity with, much less improve on PnP games.

There was no large-unit integrity; battalions from entirely different divisions just sort of mushed together with no particular organization, and no good way to view the situation at, say, the division level rather than the battalion level.

I also found the FG85 combat resolution model to be incredibly stingy. I find it hard to believe that a defending company of M1 tanks can engage an advancing Soviet battalion of BTRs for an hour and only destroy a handful. That's certainly not what happens in ATF, for example.

Maybe the engine works for WWII campaigns. IMO it didn't work well at all for FG85.

--- Kevin

This quote is from a year or so ago, but I wanted to give my 0.02. The CG's are VERY playable. Right now I am in the middle of a PBEM for the Germany '85 CG - the one that combines Fulda and NGP. I'm playing as the WP, so at the moment I have a lot more to do than my opponent. In spite of that, it's not that hard to keep everything together.

As for the M1 company not being able to decimate the Soviet motorized infantry...I've had a couple entrenched companies of Leopard II's decimate several battalions of my motorized infantry and T-55s. Got my &*^ handed to me. You can always slide the advantage in favor of the NATO forces. To approximate what would happen in the real world between BTR's and M1's , you would probably have to do that. That would destroy the balance of the scenario though.

There is a good way to view the divisional organization. You have to turn 'highlight unit org' on. Makes it easier to keep units within the command radius of their parent HQ.

 

[Paulinski]

I have been playing Panzer/Modern Campaigns for a while now and own most of the titles with intent of purchasing them all.
Like stated above the game just like any other game has its shortcomings and benefits. Overall I had a many of enjoyable hours playing the games.
Nuff said
Paul