Schwerpunkt games?

[Zulu1966]

I've supported Schwerpunkt since his DOS games. Ron will talk with you about games over the phone.

BTW, he's a head NASA engineer so good games DO need a rocket scientist!  :)

Yeah - I have always wondered how he has  a job like that and still has time to program a game.

[Grim.Reaper]

Spelk, I have to say you do an awesome job with you aar reports....really helps get a person interested in the games...thanks for sharing and I enjoyed reading them.

Thanks for the kind words, the amount of time I've spent doing these things, to hear folks actually get something out of it, is the best reward I could wish for.

I can see myself buying the me game in the near future.  Do you know when his newest Europe game will be out?

I don't think there's been a date set as such, Ron just keeps plugging away at it. He posts status reports now and then in his Scwherpunkt sub-forum over at Wargamer.com

Here's the latest news...
http://www.wargamer.com/forums/posts.asp?t=584761

He's running playtests with a select few, so its a case of him crafting the scenario's and then getting them out to playtest. I'm hoping it is released this year sometime. Looking forward to seeing how the interface has further evolved.

While I'm at it...

Bootlegger267 did an extensive AAR in MDE on the Yom Kippur War over at Wargamer.com
http://www.wargamer.com/forums/posts.asp?t=583926

Thanks for posting bootleggers aar...pretty impressive and lke how he tells the story....really interesting...just wonder why these games weren't more discuused

[DicedT]

I have tried to like the Schwerpunkt games. But the interface makes Grigsby's War in the Pacific look easy.

As I recall, to move a piece, you first have to click a button to select the a unit's movement mode, then you have to select the unit to be moved, and then click the destination hex. Rinse and repeat. It might be okay for a small scenario, but for the larger campaign games, it's just too clunky.

The game engine is good, and the retro board game feel works well. I don't how hard it would be to buff up the game with a modern interface. But the result would be fantastic for grogs.

Michael

[LongBlade]

As I recall, to move a piece, you first have to click a button to select the a unit's movement mode, then you have to select the unit to be moved, and then click the destination hex. Rinse and repeat. It might be okay for a small scenario, but for the larger campaign games, it's just too clunky.

That sounds similar to how Pat Procter's games used to work. He did that because, being a military guy making a military wargame, he was following the structure of how orders are given. You given an order to move, then tell the units who needs to follow them.

Problem is, it's a clunky game design, even if it's an accurate sim.

[Grim.Reaper]

Hhhmmm...that concerns me if this game is tedious to move a ton of units.

[Bismarck]

Not tedious;just allowing accuracy. Comments like that make me question if all posters here are true frogs.

[mikeck]

Grim, it's not tedious. I have played both the 1967 and 1973 scenarios and never felt like it was tedium. I did feel that way with WitE. It is only clunky until I get used to it. Once you play a scenario, it makes sense

Here is an example: in most games, you click a unit and then tell it to attack something. In MDE, you click an enemy unit to be attacked and then select the units that wi take part in the attack. I find the latter much more realistic

[DicedT]

Because true grogs like the historical accuracy of having to make multiple mouse clicks to move each piece. It's what Rommel did on his laptop.

Incidentally, War in the East handles multi-unit attacks through this newfangled interface technique called shift-click.

[Nefaro]

Not tedious;just allowing accuracy. Comments like that make me question if all posters here are true frogs.

I didn't think there were many French frequenting this place.

:P

[spelk]

I've played all the Schwerpunkt games, and they are an evolution on the previous version, but I don't recall thinking the interface is what stood in the way. There are several types of movement, and phases of movement, but with Ron's games almost everything is out in the open, or in a right click menu for you.

The only aspect I remember being a bit quirky is the selection of units in a multiple stack - it could be done by various shift and ctrl key combinations - but in the later games he now has a side panel that shows the units and makes them available for selection there.

In combat, you start by selecting the enemy unit you want to mount an attack on, and then you include the surrounding attackers you want in the offense, then you click back on the enemy unit to execute it.  I'm not quite sure how you would selectively choose units to take part in an attack, by using the Shift or Ctrl keys to cut down the number of clicks. Basically you're clicking to select.

I know War in the East allows two forms of attack (swift, and planned) with the right-click and shift-right-click, and you can have three units in a stack max.

The Decisive Campaign games, also have a similar mechanic to Schwerpunkts in designating the enemy, and then selecting the attacking units, you then just select an Attack confirmation button to make the attack (rather than click on the specific enemy again).

In fact I'm sure the Wastelands Interactive boys and all their games use a similar method.

[Toonces]

I just read through this whole thread again and I'm really struggling with the decision to get this versus TOAW. 

I like the idea of a purpose-built game to simulate the middle east.  On the other hand, it's physical copy only and is going to run 50 clams with shipping.  That's a lot for a fairly old game centered on one conflict...a fairly, relatively unknown game compared to WiTP for example.

I just don't know that it's that much better than TOAW considering both are operational in nature.

[spelk]

Its a difficult decision to make since you can't really try out a demo and see which one you like best. I prefer the Schwerpunkt games over TOAW based on how it plays.

With TOAW you have a massive scenario bank to draw upon, so in terms of amount of operational conflicts you can play through, it's probably going to give you more hours of play.

I like the simplicity in design of the Schwerpunkt titles though, and yet the operational options available to you as you play through it. There are usually 50-100+ scenarios to play in each Schwerpunkt title.

There's bound to be Middle East scenarios available for TOAW.

I suppose the best way to assess the games without actually having demos to play yourself, would be to watch a vid or two.

TOAW III - Kasserine Pass

There don't seem to be any Schwerpunkt titles videos so I can only offer up an AAR such as my Crimean Break In - for their first game Russo-German War.
http://sugarfreegamer.com/?p=2598