Barthheart's review

Started by GJK, January 18, 2015, 09:33:41 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


Ok - thanks for the update on DC


Quote from: Killjoy12 on January 19, 2015, 02:33:46 PM
Can you elaborate a little more on how this compares with the Decisive Campaigns engine?   I really liked WtP and would like to know how WWIIE compares with that engine.

Quote from: spelk on January 19, 2015, 07:49:55 AM
I suppose Decisive Campaigns system is quite close to it, and is a bit more UI friendly and nicer to look at. But it doesn't quite have the boardgamey feel of this title. WWIIE is the rougher diamond, but it still is worthy of a look-see if operational wargames are your thing.

Feedback is much, much better in the DC games AFAICT. You have to rely on text lists of battle hexes with results for each fight in WW2E. Apparently seeing units move and engage each other would interfere with FoW, although it doesn't seem to cause any problems in DC or any other PC wargames that I know of. For me, this strikes down immersion significantly.

The 2 or 3 times that I've tried to start a scenario in WW2E I've been utterly flummoxed by the interface. I can't tell if it's buggy, or if I just can't figure out how to use it. The manual takes the form of several Internet Explorer pages that I've found kind of obtuse so far.  I wait in the hopes that patches or improved (PDF?) instructions may come about.

WW2E to me is a much better looking game. I love the counters and the map and admire Ron's passion and dedication. I just wish I could get into the game.  :'(
"If you have always believed that everyone should play by the same rules and be judged by the same standards, that would have gotten you labelled a radical 50 years ago, a liberal 25 years ago, and a racist today."

- Thomas Sowell


Quote from: Barthheart on January 19, 2015, 11:26:22 AM
Really, if I had a choice I'd play board games and not computer games. Over the years space, opponents and time became the killers of that dream.
Having the board game experience on the PC allows me to play when I have time, gives me an opponent who is always ready when I want to play, and doesn't take up any table space.

The "board game experience", for me, is being able to understand everything that is happening in the game. Most PC monster games now days include so much minutia that it's near impossible for the player to have an idea of how it all works together. To look at the counters and know exactly what they can and cannot do at a glance. To know what the combat model looks and acts like.
I'm not explaining this very well because I'm a bit rushed but here's more to it than what I've blurted out. 40+ years of board war gaming gives one a certain love for the "feel" of the game.

Quite the contrary I think you just explained it very well. I fully agree with what you just said, and it is what makes me spend half my gaming time downloading VASSAL modules and hankering after that old board game feeling. Leaving aside things like combat mission which area different beast I think what you said is why I don't get that same thrill from most computer war games as I used to from board games, which alas I am not sure I have the mental agility to play anymore.
"you are the rule maker, the dictator, the mini- Stalin, Mao, Hitler, the emperor, generalissimo, the MAN. You may talk the talk and appear to be quite easy going to foster popularity, but to the MAN I say F*CK YOU." And Steve G is F******g rude ? Just another day on the BF forum ... one demented idiots reaction to BF disagreeing about the thickness of the armour on a Tiger II turret mantlet.


If I had a monitor the size of my game table so that I could take in the entire picture of the game at once, that would go a great distance in helping me feel more connected to PC games as I do board games.  Yes, you can zoom out but then everything is near microscopic and you can't tell what is what aside from red and blue dots.  With the boardgame, you lean back in your chair and you take in the entire breadth of the battle. 

Also, with a boardgame, nothing gets done unless you do it so you have to intimately know the game's mechanics and thus you know exactly the outcome of battles and who is in supply and who isn't and what reinforcements are due and where they'll be coming from.  With a PC game, I lose focus and concentration because all that I want to do is click to engage in battle.  I don't bother with the odds, the supply status, or anything.  I see that I'm a "9" and the enemy next to me is a "6" so I attack.  I then see my "9" go to an "7" and the enemies "6" to a "3" and it moves back a hex.  I don't what the odds of the attack were nor do I really care even though if I click enough buttons I can probably get a full battle report.  With a boardgame, I have 2:1 odds and I roll a 5 and I see the results and I apply it.  I know how and why it came out the way that it did and I feel like I am in the game.

And sorry, that was a bit of a PC vs boardgame rant that has little to do with Ron's game.  I played his earlier games and it was closer than a lot of other games as far as feeling somewhat like a boardgame but frankly, I even feel disconnected in VASSAL games now because of all the scrolling that needs to be done and when things get screwy with the log files; such as what I'm experiencing in a pbem game now.  We missed a step and now we have to figure out what log to go back to in order to unsort it all and I just lose interest.  Maybe it's just old age and a failing attention span.  :)
Clip your freaking corners!
Blood Bowl on VASSAL - Ask me about it!
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life, son."

-Dean Vernon Wormer


I think our first game went smoothly enough. But before we start up the second match, does anyone have any concerns about the rules as they now stand? Are there any suggestions to new rules, or for changes to existing rules?