Why this game is not going to be more detailled or complicated.

[Greywolf]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Why this game is not going to be more detailled or complicated.

Originally posted by Johnny Canuck
Yes they are historically accurate. Perfect? As I said, probably not, but very close to being accurate. A significant amount of historical research went into the OOBs - it was not just a case of saying state X should have twice as many divisions as state Y, so lets give X 20 & Y 10.

What specific cases of historical inaccuracies do you see?

OK to be short as I already have posted and posted and posted about it:

Japanese and French sub number.
French and Germany armored units number, Polish one too.
German at start land tech advantage, and army advantage.
Communist China being depicted as 2 area of control and Warlord as one full state ( Sikiang ).
Many others one but I just dont care about making the research once more to point on them precisely, I am not supposed to be beta tester or game designer, so I just call from mind those I did remember more.

And about the tech tree dont get me started:

- Just tell me any country with a port that dont know about Transport ships ?
- Any major country that doesnt have art gun of above 70mm ?
- Tanks tech are just as silly.

Tech tree is a gaming artifact where player invest IC to get combat advantage, having it named about real technology to give him historical taste is just silly.

 

[Darkrenown]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Why this game is not going to be more detailled or complicated.

Originally posted by Greywolf


And about the tech tree dont get me started:

- Just tell me any country with a port that dont know about Transport ships ?
- Any major country that doesnt have art gun of above 70mm ?
- Tanks tech are just as silly.

I view those techs as tooling up your factories to build transport ships or big guns rather than some guys sitting about saying "Ok, ok, ok, check this out: Its a ship that people can go inside!!!!:O "

 

[grumbold]

Yes we discussed these points elsewhere. I know you aren't happy about the realism of it, but for people who can't tell Enigma from Magic or Ultra and don't understand the difference between a 24L70 and 40L70 having names that are instantly recognisable is a big help. Some of the tech tree is still pretty ..um.. technical but these sorts of simplifications do help broaden its appeal.

For at-start techs of the countries, all you have to do is edit the starting files to your own preference.

 

[unmerged(7156)]

Originally posted by grumbold


For at-start techs of the countries, all you have to do is edit the starting files to your own preference.

There's going to be someone that will make a "perfect history" mod for this game for 1936, of that I am sure. Greywolf, maybe you could start it off? (Unless it's already started, I haven't visited the mod forum for a while...)

 

[Johnny Canuck]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Why this game is not going to be more detailled or complicated.

Originally posted by Greywolf
OK to be short as I already have posted and posted and posted about it:

Japanese and French sub number.
French and Germany armored units number, Polish one too.
German at start land tech advantage, and army advantage.
Communist China being depicted as 2 area of control and Warlord as one full state ( Sikiang ).
Many others one but I just dont care about making the research once more to point on them precisely, I am not supposed to be beta tester or game designer, so I just call from mind those I did remember more.

I am sure it would be helpful to post some of these issues in the bug reporting sub-forum, so that Paradox & the betas can take a look at exactly what the issues are & see if anything can be done about it. Look at Paradox's track record - they are response to concerns from gamers.

 

[Johnny Canuck]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Why this game is not going to be more detailled or complicated.

Originally posted by Darkrenown
I view those techs as tooling up your factories to build transport ships or big guns rather than some guys sitting about saying "Ok, ok, ok, check this out: Its a ship that people can go inside!!!!:O "

This is exactly the point! Many techs reflect not only theoretical knowledge, but the practical ability to build something - look at all the tank prototype test techs, or the Large Naval Shipyard tech, for example.

 

[State Machine]

I might add that Transport tech is only given to countries that had major shipyards. Of course, Costa Rica would be able to build big ships. All they need to do is import some engineers and build a massively expensive shipyard.

So, technically, the game fails in this measure since Costa Rica could research the tech, then start pumping out Transports. But, then all the small minors are very poor... Perhaps Costa Rica would not be able to afford to even research the tech, or build the Transports if it did research the tech.

 

[Greywolf]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Why this game is not going to be more detailled or complicated.

Originally posted by Johnny Canuck
I am sure it would be helpful to post some of these issues in the bug reporting sub-forum, so that Paradox & the betas can take a look at exactly what the issues are & see if anything can be done about it. Look at Paradox's track record - they are response to concerns from gamers.

Except I am currently far too pissed off by the reaction of BiB and some other testers to actually wasting my time doing so if Paradox is apparently not willing to go in that direction.

Frankly I will just take the game as it is, wait for some patch to have a more decent AI and play it as a funny little game to play between serious gaming session.

There is far too much to be done in core engine for an EEP project to be successful. I will probably try to help but as I have a job I just cant benevolate. I'd better keep on beta-ing Computer WiF and playing 2by3 games, even 12'' O'clock higu...

When Paradox will put HoI2 in the work I will try to have something to say in the way this time they make the game core engine or work, now it is too late.

Basically HoI now is lacking a trades system, a diplomatic one that isn't tied to 3 ideology, a victory condition that doesnt only work on who conquer the world in the end, multiple nationality tech trees, fully fledged systema for partisan and minor factions acitivities, partial rework on invasion, air bombing retuned ...

That is what I expect for HoI2, HoI I will settle for an AI boost and bug fixes.


------------------
------------------

And for tuning the industry to produce Transport ships or Canon that just SILLY !!! ( except perhaps for special kind like "Liberty Ships" ). Germany use gun models dating back from WWI, just like everybody else, except for AA and AT guns that were more recent, even if the vast majority where just conversion of actual naval artillery. For the artillery the only progress where mad ein the shell, fuse and fire direction.

-------------------
-------------------
And Germany shouldn't been given for free all the pre-war and early-war technology. And ntot he leader ratings, all that they gain in 1936-1939 field training in Spain. In 1936 german army is on the verge of remilitarisation and is officier is certainly not already trained for full scale operation, not to speak of his army.
France should be given the same submarine technology than Germany too as they have built an extensive and modern sub fleet ( 75 modern higu sea sub in 1940 !!! ) in order not to invest too much in full scale navy.
Germany start 1936 with technology of tank gun of 30+ mm while they have NO TANK equipped with such a thing !!!
While France with tank with 47mm gun isn't even given the 20mm tech !!

-------------
-------------

Just basical example on how innacurate the naming is given, and how much work need ot be provided to righten the whole thing while trying to make it historically sound.

Maybe with intensive use I will manage to not pay too much attention to this, but currently it is really hard. In EU2 tech categories were standard enough not to be chocking, in HOI they are precise enough to be silly.

And it take into the game balance too...

Basically in 1936 Germany start with nothing BUT the tools to achieve his development. In HOI Germany start in 1936 with all their technological and military development from 1936-1939 and all their ressources and time avaliable to kee researching even further... Wich wouldn't been so bad if France and England doesnt start with their 1910-1930 technology level.

Currently the game play Germany 1940 against Allies 1930, no big deal some people complain about things being far too easy. ANd that is even before trade and Ai weakness show up.

 

[unmerged(11849)]

I have been enjoying HOI for the past day but, truth tell, I'm still a turn based guy at heart.... reading these posts only confirm my belief that with a game of this magnitude, turn based would better serve its' needs....if Strategic Command and World in Flames were to ever merge into one game, I think many of us would rejoice heartedly!!

 

[unmerged(10959)]

Well I think you put it pretty well

I have not played enough to speak on the AI issue. But even after a couple games the economic system and trade system make any talk of strategic warfare rather silly. Actually the RTS label kinda made me hestitant as real time and stragety are not exactly bedfellows. I was hoping for something that would push the edges of current stragetic warfare. But this is not it, that said its entertaining in its own right. And to be honest I would have bought anyways. Although without a more realistic economic system I will probably stay away from number 2 as well. Like you said its an axis and allies with more features. Keep your figures crossed the full version of pacific war should be out in early 2003.
As for Paradax I am impressed with there after sale efforts in EU1/2. Keep up your good customer service.

 

[State Machine]

Greywolf, it's obvious you wouldn't like this game even if it was bug free and completely balanced. And therefor HoI2, should it ever happen, won't be anything of interest to you either.

So you should be content to wait a few more years for the computer WiF with AI, should it ever happen, since it appears that HoI wasn't the answer to your dreams. Sorry...

 

[unmerged(11957)]

I agree with Graywolf in the most part.. But i still love the game.. somehow

Never played that WiF game, but i would gladly if i got together with someone that knows it

Btw.. Gimme diplomacy and 7 friends right now!!

 

[State Machine]

Originally posted by nolby
...

Btw.. Gimme diplomacy and 7 friends right now!!

Ahhh, the best game ever made (board only). But surely you only want 6 friends...

BTW, there is an ongoing Diplo game reported in the OT forum.

 

[Dark Knight]

Originally posted by State Machine
Ahhh, the best game ever made (board only). But surely you only want 6 friends...

Maybe they're playing with a GM.

 

[Maximilian I]

Originally posted by State Machine
Ahhh, the best game ever made (board only). But surely you only want 6 friends...

BTW, there is an ongoing Diplo game reported in the OT forum.

6 "dispenasble" friends, to be correct

oh... I`m going off-topic myself

 

[Korpo]

Waiting for Mr. Right...

Hello!

After reading the posts to this thread, I'm pretty much convinced the people behave like the main actresses in a very bad Hollywood movie.

Each one of you is not content about a single detail of the game, or a few ... remember a glass may be half full or half empty anyway, you should very well know the subtle difference in this classic example.

1) If you aren't convinced about the OOB in the scenarios, I may remind you, that this game ships with fully editable text files and a scenario editor. You may correct inconsistencies.

2) So Germany may not stand a chance against the US? Funny, that the USSR could stand an arms race spanning half a century, so why would it be illogical for a Germany that beat the USSR (in the game) to compete with the USA at all?

3) People that do not acknowledge that a game may need balancing, may know a lot about history, but not about how to make games. You must compensate for the fact that any decent wargamer knowing its history lessons will outdo Hitler or Mussolini, at least in times of their worst decisions. Germany originally declared war on the USA (the dumbest move of Germany), but in most if not all computer wargames the US declare war on Germany... that's not historical, but no player will see any need to declare war on the US (dooming its fate if doing so, while still fighting the UK and USSR). The alternative would have been to let some events more be forced on the player, and even less "What if" factor in the game.

4) More freedom in victory conditions or even a lack of them may actually be good. Some wargames even automatically finish the game, if you defeat all your momentary adversaries (on the basis that the UK will hold out very long). In those games Germany needs to attack the USSR while capturing the last victory areas of the UK. So less strict conditions are not for the worse IMO.

5) Comparing a board game to a computer game is crap. Either you directly deal with a human opponent or you play a game against an AI or you play MP with the rest of the world covered by AI. These three kinds of games cannot be compared: Human interaction cannot be modelled completely in computer game, neither with the AI, nor with other players. Modelling a board game to the computer wastes the complexity a computer can handle while watering down the complexity possible with a human opponent.

6) Perhaps wait for WW2 - the movie in full length...

7) The near-complete asynchronity of a real time game (down to hour level) cannot be modelled at this scope (whole world, divisions-korps level) in a turnbased game - or only by watering it down. Neither were leaders able to do all decisions at optimum or take all decisions consistently, so real time with limited pause (on players' discretion) is realistic... If leaders during WW2 would have days to plan the next few hours for the whole world, well... they probably would have played chess per mail instead.

8) The game concept sounds valid, but improvable, neither completely grognard nor mediocre. But perhaps you wait for Mr. Right...

 

[Greywolf]

Originally posted by State Machine
Greywolf, it's obvious you wouldn't like this game even if it was bug free and completely balanced. And therefor HoI2, should it ever happen, won't be anything of interest to you either.

So you should be content to wait a few more years for the computer WiF with AI, should it ever happen, since it appears that HoI wasn't the answer to your dreams. Sorry...

Well actually I did like it somewhat, as I keep saying !

But I wonder what I could have to rant for if some of the topic I mentionned were seen.

Also remember than now is the only time for me to show my consideration about the game engine and so on. You others beta testers have had many more month to speak about them so you already are tired talking about or agreed on compromise. Cant you let us other people do the same ?

And about CWiF, in fact I just dont care at all for CWiF to be provided with an AI !!! it is turn based so I can play it all alone and still have fun. And I am fairly sure no decent AI could be possible for a gameof such scale.

HoI In the other hand is a fairly simple game, it can seems complexe for people used to computer RTS but for ones that come from AH, GRD, GMT and other wargaming era it is a fairly basic game. Someone say that Risk were checkers and HoI chess, that is not true : Risk is Pachisi, HoI is checkers and WiF is chess.

Funny how Johan like to computerize his favorites games ( Eu and DoD/WiF ).

 

[Maximilian I]

closed upon request of the thread starter.