change o' pace

[Velociryx]

Since version 1 of the strat guide came out—man that was a long time ago!--many people have questioned me privately (e-mail) wanting more specifics about how and why SMAC is a relatively weak “War Game.”

Recently I was browsing through theunderdogs.org and happened upon a note about a freeware Gary Grigsby game. This should make war gaming enthusiasts drool, because in wargaming circles, the name Gary Grigsby packs every bit as much impact as the name Sid Meier does here. He’s quite simply the best at what he does.

So, if you’re curious to see the differences between a fine empire building game (SMAC/AC) and a fine war game, I invite you to follow this link. It’s a big download, but if you’re even a little bit interested in war games, you’ll not be disappointed.

And, if there is even a faint desire by the folk making civ3 to add more realistic war elements to what is already an outstanding game, they could do a LOT worse than taking a peek inside this guy’s playbook.

http://www.matrixgames.com/Games/SP-WorldAtWar/

-=Vel=-

[Velociryx]

Beta Testing Opportunity....

....and also, quite possibly something of interest to SMAC/AC fans.

This quote was taken from the underdogs site. I mention it here because the programmer in question has worked with Mr. Meier in the past, and though I've not yet downloaded the game-in-progress, I would suspect the economic model to bear at least some similarities to current S. Meier designs.

Anyway, it stands to be interesting, and I intend to start fiddling with it a bit this evening. If anybody else would be interested, I'm sure they'd be happy to have other volunteers!

-=Vel=-

Quote from the Underdogs' Page:
Welcome to the Stalin's Dilemma download page! Many oldtime wargamers will surely remember Ed Bever,designer of many classic wargames such as Command Series (with Sid Meier) for MicroProse and No Greater Glory for SSI. After a long hiatus from commercial PC gaming, Mr. Bever has resurfaced with Stalin's Dilemma, a game about Soviet economic development between 1928-42. He intends to make the round revision of the game (which was designed for classroom use) and offer it free to the gaming community. Here is what he wrote us:

"After a few twists and turns in my career, I'm now teaching European history at SUNY College at Old Westbury, and a couple years ago I got a modest grant from the NSF to create a computer simulation of Soviet economic development 1928-42. The basic goal of the game is to prepare the USSR to fend off the Nazis at less human cost than Nazi conquest is likely to involve. The sim is geared to classroom / homework use (ie, it's a pretty small and unadorned program/game compared to commercial computer strategy games (which is why I find them difficult to integrate into courses, much as I'd like to (which inspired me to make it))), but it was suggested to me that it might be of interest to people who get games from your site. Furthermore, part of my grant requirements are to distribute the game as widely as possible, and, finally, I'm about to do a round of revision to the game, and would like feedback from anyone interested in giving their reactions and/or suggestions. Therefore, I was wondering if you'd like to offer it as a free download from your site as a promotion and/or service to the gaming community."

Of course, we can't refuse our favorite designer-- especially when this is about his brand new project that we would love to play We therefore invite anyone who's a fan of Mr. Bever's games, or have an interest in history/economic development, to download the current version of Stalin's Dilemma, play it, and post comments about it in this discussion thread in our forum. Mr. Bever will join in the discussion and incorporate players' comments into the final release of the game, which will certainly be reviewed and inducted into the site proper.

So, please download the game [91KB] and the overview (text format, 5KB) and join the discussion. It's a small game, but very interesting Help spread the word-- and see you in the forum!
****End of Quote****
The information came from the following link, which also contains a link to the game download and the forums, for comments. I hope to see some of you guys there!

http://www.theunderdogs.org/stalin.php

[Verrucosus]

Version 1 of Strategy Guide?

[Exit Velociryx. Flourish]

I noticed that starting with this line is almost forum protocol for someone to post after the great Velociryx. Anyway, he referred to Version 1 of his strategy guide. Like most people here I am a huge fan of the guide, never able to decide between just reading on and trying out the suggestion I just read about. I have read Versions 2 and 3 of the guide in the top post and on the Spartan Chronicles site. It was interesting to see how the guide has evolved from one version to the next. Does anyone know whether Version 1 is still posted somewhere?

[Velociryx]

::blushes several shades of red::

Nawwww Verrucosus…..you give me more credit than I’m due, good sir! (but I’m glad to hear that you enjoy reading the guide so much!)

‘bout the strat guide’s initial version…..that’s a good question. I’m not sure if it exists anywhere anymore. IIRC, the initial collection of essays was archived in the old Apolyton forum (pre-upgrade), but I’m not sure if it was anyplace else.

BTW, I attempted to download the game that the link above points to, and keep getting an out of memory error….that’s funny, given the game’s small size and the fact that my computer has sufficient memory to run the thing about a hundred times before even coming close to running out of memory. Anybody else having trouble with that?

And, anybody know ‘bout if/where a copy of the eldest of the strat guides might be found?

-=Vel=-

[rwprice]

How many of you play wargames?

Vel, the Steel Panthers World at War game you mentioned is one that I also stumbled upon. I've downloaded it, and it looks great, but I haven't yet taken on the challenge of learning it. My question is: how many people who like games like SMAC and Civ2 also like wargames like SPWaW? I'm intrigued by Gary Grigsby's games, but they look like they're tremendously intricate and detailed. Obviously, warfare in the Civ games is way too simplistic, but is it too hard in Grigsby's games? Have you played these games, and what did you think? Is it possible to play them without attempting to become an expert on WWII mechanized warfare? I'm curious to know what you think.

[Velociryx]

Hello rwprice! Good questions ‘bout the complexity of Grigsby’s games. My advice is…don’t be daunted by it. It’s true that the combat engine and unit level of detail is VASTLY higher in this game, if you stand that level of complexity shoulder to shoulder with the SMAC economic and resource management model, you’ll find a pretty similar learning curve, I think.

I’ve played many of Grigsby’s older titles, and I can tell you that as time has marched on, more and more of the technical stuff is handled by the code itself, behind the scenes (which is a very good thing from a playability standpoint!).

I’ve never played this particular title before, but I downloaded it last night, and I’m expecting to see combat impacted by such things as: Line of Site, Fuel and supply, facing, unit fatigue, morale, the presence, absence, and/or distance from a command center, an extensive point based movement system with at least six, possibly as many as a dozen variable costs for different terrain types, and all sorts of goodies that have become more or less standard fare in classic war games (not to mention armor and ammo types, with varying effectiveness for certain weapons vs. certain armor categories….similar to what they were gonna implement in SMAC).

As far as the learning curve goes, I’d figure out how to move and fight with your units and not worry over-much about the particulars of what works best against what…..just start moving stuff around and mixing it up with the AI to see what happens. That way, you don’t get bogged down reading the 11 Meg (!?) manual, so you don’t have to feel like a walking encyclopedia of WWII knowledge.

-=Vel=-

[LodeRunner]

I was wondering whether anyone here has played the Close Combat series of war games? They are not quite as detailed in some areas as what Vel's post describes, but it seems other areas are more detailed. This series of games in small unit action, so you do not get the overall picture of the war. About the most number of soldiers you can command is around 90 to 100 for any one battle.

The games have exquisitely detailed overhead maps of actual towns and battlefield locations of WWII. Each map is broken down into small squares of, I think about 10 pixels each. Each one of these squares has a terrain attribute choosen from a list of over 200 different types of terrain. The terrain type has many different attributes associated with it, such as cover, protection (from different angles), and LOS. There are hundreds of units to choose from and the level of detail is tremendous. The game calculates each soldiers moral, experience, health, proximity to leaders, LOS, and so on. You have to use teamwork and strategy to conquer you opponent. It is a real-time type game, but it is very slow, which allows you to make adjustments easily. It's not one of those real-time games where the fastest clicker wins.

If anyone has played both the games that Vel's post referred to and the Close Combat series, could you compare the two? Being spoiled by the eye and ear candy of the CC series, would I still enjoy the other war games out there? Thanks.

[Velociryx]

GRRRR….man, talk about a tough row to hoe! I remember a thread not many moons ago extolling the virtues of a planned economy….sheesh….you guys gotta try this beta “game”….it’s a real eye-opener. I either wind up starving my peasants to dramatically ramp up my industry, or I spare the populace but don’t gain any significant ground. It’s tough, but I’m loving it.

Some things I’ve noticed so far though, that might prove helpful for anyone who’s also interested in testing it:

1) Tractors have the same basic effect as “goods” where peasants are concerned, increasing total food outputs by one, where goods decrease consumption by one. That’s useful, cos you can use your factories to crank out a liberal number of tractors and (theoretically) boost food production in the long term.

2) Energy – I usually have it coming out of my ears….everything needs it, but I’ve never run short, and I’ve only spent minimal resources increasing my total outputs, so I think I’m on the right track there.

3) Industry – that’s a little trickier….balancing increasing industry with increasing metal production (without which, your factories can’t do squat).

4) Any unallocated population points I end up with invariably get shoved into military (which have been, in my test games so far, terribly underfed and thus, not really effective).

My best result so far:
Industry: 28, Stability, 1.0, and Military 36

That’s a far cry from the 48, 1.0, 66 that the win condition requires, but I’m enjoying the experiment!

Sorry I can’t help you, LodeRunner….I’ve not played Close Combat, but I hear it’s a fantastic game!

-=Vel=-

[Sikander]

I've played close combat, and I think it's a good game. It's kind of like a very simplified 'Squad Leader' where the simplification is for the player rather than an oversimplification of the concepts.

Gary Grigsby's games are great. I especially liked Pacific War and War in Russia. They aren't all that tough to learn, but having a wargame background is a big help. These strategic and operational level games all have simultaneous turns, which is more realistic and a hell of a lot of fun. Thus you decide which aircraft and tanks to produce in your factories, where to put you newly built weapons and newly recruited troops, which units to assign to which formations, which commanders to assign to which formations etc. Then you give orders to your troops and hit the end of turn and pray. A lot more like being in charge than actually fighting the battles yourself. And simpler while still being detailed.

It sounds like Civ III is going to do a little better with the warfare aspects of the game, adding leaders and a ZOC system based upon relative mobility and firepower. Good. Grigsby's games show how much can be done with a good design to preserve detail and realism while simultaneously retaining playability.

[Velociryx]

This is probably OLLLLD news to everybody here, but I only just discovered it, and since this thread started off pretty much off-topic, I figured I may as well help keep it that way....

The name of the game is Seven Kingdoms II. Published by Enlight/UBI and developed by Trevor Chan of Capitalism fame.

It's available at...you guessed it, underdogs.org (see above for a working link to that site), and I have to say that after having spent two solid days immersed in the 7k2 world, I'm totally hooked!

It's RTS, but don't let that frighten you away, if you're a diehard TBS gamer, cos this game has incredible depth for an RTS....and having said that, do NOT expect "just another C&C/Warcraft clone" because the tried and true "rush" game is remarkably less effective in 7k2--I know...I tried, and wound up with my entire kingdom in rebellion and about a third of my mercenary force switching sides in the heat of battle....not a pretty site!

Good resource management system--requiring you to set caravan routes between marketplaces to generate coin, a variety of different unit types with a good mix of special skills, a decent number of "techs" to research, allowing for truly branching strategic approaches to winning the game, but perhaps the most fascinating aspect is the highly developed Espionage feature, which enable you to spy, counterspy, steal tech, sneak a peek at sensitive kingdom-specific information, bribe units and/or generals, assassinate particularly nasty opposing generals....a whole lot of options here!

In fact, one of the chief complaints about the game was that it contained too much depth for an RTS, but I have not found that to be the case....especially with the occassional use of the "pause" feature, to take a moment to plan and rest the mouse hand!

Two days into it, and I'm a believer....so if you're looking for something else to glue your eyeballs to, I'd recommend this one highly....

-=Vel=-

[rwprice]

Seven Kingdoms II

Vel, I checked out the site, and this game looks pretty good! I'm going to try to check it out. Thanks for the tip.

[Velociryx]

No problem, rwprice! I've been to a few of the gaming forums for SK2, and as expected, they've mostly dried up.....not many new posts, so I added a couple, hoping to breathe some new life into them....truly an outstanding game!

My early favorite tribes are:

Egyptians - They begin with a ranged attack, and their chariots are decently fast enough to make hit and run raids....but the biggest selling point is the special ability their Seat of Power gives....Isis can add 20 population points to any town you target for a mere 100 Magic Points....meaning a fully charged "SoP" will give you 60 extra peasants....Yow!

Carthagenians - Not so much for the troops--which are okay--but their "Greater Being" Baal is just heinous! Who needs a big army when you can simply earthquake your opponents into oblivion!?

Mongols - The cavalry just rocks! Fastest unit in the game, and they've got a good special power from their SoP besides....makes conquering neutral towns a LOT easier.

Celtic - Druids just ROCK! Slow, but insanely strong!

Other Solid Choices:
Viking - Fun to lead into battle, but watch out....they're all attack and no defense!

Romans, Greeks & Normans - All solid, well rounded armies....the Roman Greater Being is a little weak, and the Greek one is hard to use effectively, but they're all decent.


Weak choices (IMO):
Chinese - good at hand to hand, but as their soldiers get better trained, they get this totally USELESS ranged attack (minimal damage) which they ALWAYS use! It'd rock otherwise.....::sigh::

Japanese - A marginally useful special power (amounting to radar), but a really weak special unit (ninja). I was kinna disappointed in these guys.

*The monsters are fun to play too, but almost too easy like playing the aliens in SMAX....

Ahhhh, but perhaps the best selling point of all....you certainly can't beat the price!

-=Vel=-

[rwprice]

Vel,
Did you have any trouble getting the game installed? I'm getting an error message that says that the file named dinput.dll is missing. Now that I think about it, I'll bet that's a directx file. I'm installing first on a test machine with only the base Win95 files, so I bet I need to install a newer version of directx. I'm assuming that the Seven Kingdoms installation probably did not include the directx install. I'll let you know.

[Velociryx]

::nodding:: Quite right....when I installed it on my machine, it did not load any of the directx stuff, but it is listed in their system requirements.

Good luck, and good hunting!

-=Vel=-

[rwprice]

DirectX did the trick!

Yep, I needed to install DirectX. I took a quick look at the game. It looks pretty good! As if I didn't have enough to keep me busy...If this game is truly a cross between Age of Empires and Civilization, this will be awesome! Thanks for the tip.

By the way, did you know that you can also download an advanced manual for the game, as well as a strategy guide, both in pdf format?