My land warfare dilemma

[Toonces]

Here's the problem-

I am ready to immerse myself in land warfare, but I'm having difficulty in finding the right game to invest the time in to learn properly.

I suppose I'm not sure what exactly I want.  I think I want to play something like Steel Beasts, which I have.  But in a way SB is sort of limiting in that it lacks any sort of air support.  Also, it is very complicated to get into.  I want to boot it up, take control of a Leopard defending Fulda Gap, and not have to worry about much else buy my own tank.  Yet, I can't seem to find that mission; they all seem to be higher in command or designed for multiplayer.

So I picked up Combined Arms for DCS.  In a way I like this a bit more than Steel Beasts because controlling the vehicles is much easier.  However, it is really beer and pretzels- maybe almost too beer and pretzels- and the tactical AI isn't too good. 

Maybe ARMA 2 is the right call.  In many ways it should be because it has everything I want in it, it's less hardcore than SB with more options like infantry to play.  But I'll be doggoned if I can figure out the control interface for ARMA2.  It simply confounds me.  I can't figure out how to command the tank, switch to the position I need, switch to an outside view and then back in, and forget about controlling a platoon...

Ultimately, I need to focus on one game, probably, and just try to get good at that one game.  But I can't figure out which one is going to be THE ONE.

And, to make things worse, I'm not even sure that a "sim" is what I'm looking for.  Maybe I'm looking for a more traditional wargame?

I have Flashpoint Germany, but no matter how hard I try I can't seem to get into it.  It's fairly easy, but I get really bored, seems there's little room for maneuver warfare in it.

So then maybe I need to go more RTS.  I enjoy Wargame:EE somewhat, but the RTS aspect of it turns me off when things get too hectic and it's not very realistically tactical.  Also, the UI frustrates me; setting up a skirmish is not intuitive. 

I bought Operation Star, thinking it would scratch the itch but an hour into the game I just gave up on trying to understand the UI.  I couldn't seem to get out of training/tutorial mode no matter what I did.

Now I'm downloading Combat Mission: Shock Force.  I'm hoping this at least scratches my wargamey itch, even though it won't scratch my sim itch...if that's what I have.

This should be a fairly easy thing to fix, but I'm struggling to figure which game has the features I want so that I can sit down, invest the time, and get good at it so that I can start enjoying myself.

[Longdan]

Decisive Campaigns?  Combat Mission? Red Dorkestra 1/2?  Iron Front?  I can't remember what you like these days..

[eyebiter]

How about panzer elite? Recall this was a decent realistic WW2 tank sim
http://www.gog.com/gamecard/panzer_elite_se

[Capn Darwin]

Toonces,

Can you elaborate on your statement on the original FPG? We are working hard on a new release with a new game engine and we can use any feedback of the original game to help the new one. What do you think makes it so easy to play that it gets boring? Also what are you looking for with Maneuver Warfare? FPG did do some things well but it also had a number of items that made fighting a bit "flat". The maps, though pretty, did not lend themselves well to determining LOS or elevation. A number of folks did not like the high level of infantry abstraction (gone in the new game btw). Hopefully, the new game will be more of the classic wargame you are looking for (no droids).  8)

[Jarhead0331]

Toonces,

Can you elaborate on your statement on the original FPG? We are working hard on a new release with a new game engine and we can use any feedback of the original game to help the new one. What do you think makes it so easy to play that it gets boring? Also what are you looking for with Maneuver Warfare? FPG did do some things well but it also had a number of items that made fighting a bit "flat". The maps, though pretty, did not lend themselves well to determining LOS or elevation. A number of folks did not like the high level of infantry abstraction (gone in the new game btw). Hopefully, the new game will be more of the classic wargame you are looking for (no droids).  8)

Yes, the infantry abstraction MURDERED this game for me from day one.  Glad to hear this is gone in the new game.  I presume this means infantry units will have their own unit counters on the map and will be able to interact with other types of units, ie. helo and mechanized/motorized transport...

In the first game, the abstraction was a real shame because some of the other features were revolutionary, ie. Electronic Warfare concepts such as emissions detection and the handling of chemical warfare.

[Jarhead0331]

Toonces...the trouble I'm having in making recommendations is that your tastes seem to be all over the place.  Do you want an FPS? A TBS? An RTS?  Something tactical? Strategic? Operational?  All of the above? None of the above?  You've mentioned some fabulous titles that you seem to be struggling with and it may be that you are not enjoying the because they simply are not the style or type of game you are itching for.  Let me know.  Help me help you, brother...

[MengJiao]

Here's the problem-

I am ready to immerse myself in land warfare, but I'm having difficulty in finding the right game to invest the time in to learn properly.
Maybe ARMA 2 is the right call.  In many ways it should be because it has everything I want in it, it's less hardcore than SB with more options like infantry to play.  But I'll be doggoned if I can figure out the control interface for ARMA2.  It simply confounds me.  I can't figure out how to command the tank, switch to the position I need, switch to an outside view and then back in, and forget about controlling a platoon...

Ultimately, I need to focus on one game, probably, and just try to get good at that one game.  But I can't figure out which one is going to be THE ONE.

And, to make things worse, I'm not even sure that a "sim" is what I'm looking for.  Maybe I'm looking for a more traditional wargame?

I have Flashpoint Germany, but no matter how hard I try I can't seem to get into it.  It's fairly easy, but I get really bored, seems there's little room for maneuver warfare in it.

So then maybe I need to go more RTS.  I enjoy Wargame:EE somewhat, but the RTS aspect of it turns me off when things get too hectic and it's not very realistically tactical.  Also, the UI frustrates me; setting up a skirmish is not intuitive. 

I bought Operation Star, thinking it would scratch the itch but an hour into the game I just gave up on trying to understand the UI.  I couldn't seem to get out of training/tutorial mode no matter what I did.

Now I'm downloading Combat Mission: Shock Force.  I'm hoping this at least scratches my wargamey itch, even though it won't scratch my sim itch...if that's what I have.

This should be a fairly easy thing to fix, but I'm struggling to figure which game has the features I want so that I can sit down, invest the time, and get good at it so that I can start enjoying myself.

My only experience is with CMSF, which I think was a fine game, and the ARMAs.  For the ARMAs I'm irrationally fond of the ARMAs.  They have a reputation for being realistic, but they are at their best in portraying just plain nutty events on islands and in ARMAIII (which is in Alpha and you can buy it on steam) you can swim under water -- not really a major aspect of land warfare.

CMSF -- I played this quite a bit quite a while ago.  I think it is a better representation of modern war than ARMA, but the ARMAs are more fun.

[Ashcloud]

Toonces,

Can you elaborate on your statement on the original FPG? We are working hard on a new release with a new game engine and we can use any feedback of the original game to help the new one. What do you think makes it so easy to play that it gets boring? Also what are you looking for with Maneuver Warfare? FPG did do some things well but it also had a number of items that made fighting a bit "flat". The maps, though pretty, did not lend themselves well to determining LOS or elevation. A number of folks did not like the high level of infantry abstraction (gone in the new game btw). Hopefully, the new game will be more of the classic wargame you are looking for (no droids).  8)

Yes, the infantry abstraction MURDERED this game for me from day one.  Glad to hear this is gone in the new game.  I presume this means infantry units will have their own unit counters on the map and will be able to interact with other types of units, ie. helo and mechanized/motorized transport...

In the first game, the abstraction was a real shame because some of the other features were revolutionary, ie. Electronic Warfare concepts such as emissions detection and the handling of chemical warfare.

Please could someone explain "infantry abstraction" for me.

[Jarhead0331]

Toonces,

Can you elaborate on your statement on the original FPG? We are working hard on a new release with a new game engine and we can use any feedback of the original game to help the new one. What do you think makes it so easy to play that it gets boring? Also what are you looking for with Maneuver Warfare? FPG did do some things well but it also had a number of items that made fighting a bit "flat". The maps, though pretty, did not lend themselves well to determining LOS or elevation. A number of folks did not like the high level of infantry abstraction (gone in the new game btw). Hopefully, the new game will be more of the classic wargame you are looking for (no droids).  8)

Yes, the infantry abstraction MURDERED this game for me from day one.  Glad to hear this is gone in the new game.  I presume this means infantry units will have their own unit counters on the map and will be able to interact with other types of units, ie. helo and mechanized/motorized transport...

In the first game, the abstraction was a real shame because some of the other features were revolutionary, ie. Electronic Warfare concepts such as emissions detection and the handling of chemical warfare.

Please could someone explain "infantry abstraction" for me.

There are no infantry unit counters in FPG.  Rather, they are "abstracted" as part of other units.  In other words, the offensive and defensive strengths of IFVs factor in attached infantry units without actually representing them as separate entities on the map.   

[Longdan]

You know Toonces I think you just threw that out there and went surfing.

[Toonces]

Toonces...the trouble I'm having in making recommendations is that your tastes seem to be all over the place.  Do you want an FPS? A TBS? An RTS?  Something tactical? Strategic? Operational?  All of the above? None of the above?  You've mentioned some fabulous titles that you seem to be struggling with and it may be that you are not enjoying the because they simply are not the style or type of game you are itching for.  Let me know.  Help me help you, brother...

I think this is the root of my problem- my tastes are all over the place and, frankly, I don't really know what it is I want to play.

I'm not really looking for a new game.  I have a ton of games.  I'm trying to figure out which game I already own is "worth it" in the sense that I'm going to sit down and really invest the time to figure out how to play it right. 

I think of all the games I mentioned, ARMA2 is probably the closest to what I want to play.  What I think I'm looking for is an infantry/armor sim that is lighter than SB:Pro, but is still heavy enough for me to simulate interesting stuff in a meaningful way.  Like I said, I waffle between ARMA2, SB, and DCS:CA because at the end of the day, when I finally have the game figured out, I want the pay off to be worth it.  ARMA2 just plain confuses me, though.  I can't figure out the control scheme, and it doesn't have a quick mission builder like DCS:CA has so the investment to get playing is higher.  I've used that website to create missions but I've had poor luck creating a mission that is any sort of fun.

On the other hand, if I can figure out ARMA2 then that opens up Iron Front as well, and IF could be an up and comer. 

When I first booted up Brothers in Arms I thought "yes, finally, this is what I've been looking for!"  Small units, a very, very intuitive interface, and I didn't feel overwhelmed by the scope of the game.  However, in working through the first couple of missions in the Road to Hill 30 campaign, it feels incredibly scripted and linear.  I don't feel like I have any room for thought and every mission (so far) seems to be- get a squaddie to lay down suppressing fire, while I run around the barrel/hedge/wall and kill the bad guy.  Maybe it gets better later on, and I haven't tried the skirmish mode yet.

I guess I'll simplify my question a bit and ask, of Steel Beasts Pro, Combined Arms, and ARMA2, which would you recommend sitting down to get good at and why?

I'm really liking Combat Mission Shock Force, but damn I wish I could drill down and drive one of those vehicles!

[Toonces]

Toonces,

Can you elaborate on your statement on the original FPG? We are working hard on a new release with a new game engine and we can use any feedback of the original game to help the new one. What do you think makes it so easy to play that it gets boring? Also what are you looking for with Maneuver Warfare? FPG did do some things well but it also had a number of items that made fighting a bit "flat". The maps, though pretty, did not lend themselves well to determining LOS or elevation. A number of folks did not like the high level of infantry abstraction (gone in the new game btw). Hopefully, the new game will be more of the classic wargame you are looking for (no droids).  8)

This is going to be hard for me to answer meaningfully, but I'll try my best.



(I tried to crop that down, but I gave up on Paint...)

This is turn 17 of the BAOR scenario 1.  I'm basically an hour into this game and I think the only maneuvering I've done (playing NATO) is to move that one recon unit down the highway towards my lines while my armor units blast every WP unit that shows it self across the river.  Looking at the scenario map there, I'm not really sure what kind of "maneuver" warfare I can even conduct.  I'm hamstrung behind the river and on the city without any really meaningful movement choices that I can see.  Maybe 30 turns futher in it gets more interesting...I don't know.

The handful of times I've played the game it always seems to bog down to this.  Also, the turns take a REALLY long time.  I just booted FPG back up to take the screenshot and now I see there's an option to change the delay speed.  I really need to tighten that up because the back and forth firing between units just seems to take forever (I have it set to 0.6 seconds). 

It's not a bad game and it's not too simple at all...it's just not any fun (in my opinion).  Maybe it's just the nature of the scenario.

I've played the game several times now, and I've tried a few different missions. 

[Con]

I have FPG as well and I think what prevents me from playing it more often is that the maps and grids make your options seem a little simplistic.  There is less tactical thought than you would get for something where you have to take more terrain features into account (hedgerows, different levels of forrestation, suburb, isolated house etc).  I think the level of granularity is lacking for this game where it stops at least for me being a tactical exercise where I am trying to decide how best to combine arms, position units, recon etc to instead it being almost more of a card game and just place my counter and fire at anything it sees.

My wish would be to have something like Command Ops set in 1980's Germany (I keep hearing rumors that someday Panther games will do this) but alas nothing ever seems to come about.

Con

[Toonces]

Well said, Con.  I agree with that assessment.

[Toonces]

I forgot to mention that I also have Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising and Red River, if it makes a difference.  I haven't tried either of them yet.