Rebirth of SC

[JerseyJohn]

SeaMonkey -- Our retirement years, now there's a chilling thought -- I've just gotten used to the 1960s! ;--)

I have an idea what you're saying, and an idea of what Kuni's saying too, about your post seeming contradictory, but I think that's because you're looking long term and some of it in an abstract sense.

My take on your posts is that Hubert is directing the gains he's made in this game system and he can't make advances in both the hex type game and the tile type game simultaneously. By the time he's brought the tile type to its highest level there will be little or no point in Hubert turning back to work on hexes because there will be too great a gap. That seems reasonable, though I really don't know much about either programming, or artificial intelligence.

No problem with any of that. It will be interesting to see what comes out of it. As you said, if all these things can be done with tiles then it will certainly be worth waiting for. :--)

[SeaMonkey]

Kuni, think about "here comes another one". We've got one. You want to go over and nursemaid CEaW and RTV until it gets to where SC is now?

You are well aware, read the threads of each, that even though there may be some redeeming features in each games mechanics, they will be a far cry from the refinement we have here at SC.

Go on over, really, I would love for some dedicated SC fans to take a look at the mechanics and make suggestions here. I plan on getting Supremacy at Sea and I will bring my thoughts for SC improvements back here.

Thing is...I'm not willing to start over. Hubert is as receptive a designer as we will ever see. He seems pretty resilient to me....how about you? My philosophy is if you take something that has a good foundation and work on it, it becomes better, rather than having to destroy it and start from scratch.

I'm not talking about SC here, I'm talking about Hubert Cater, he's the foundation. Hubert is an artist, he has the capacity to mold, evolve into a master wargame creator, if he isn't already.

Let's help him.

Kuni, I'm willing to start with SC3, but is Hubert? I don't think so. If he is, then let him say so and I will get to work. If not, I don't want to waste my time making suggestions that will have to be rehashed when he is ready.

You guys....look at us...we've been here a long time, so I don't question any of y'alls commitment, we're all lacking a bit in enthusiasm and patience from time to time, but I know....you know ...when its time we'll all be together.

Thing is.....is it time?

[xwormwood]

Hi folks, i would like to add something as well.

First: if ever possible, i would truly and honestly like to get hexes back instaed of tiles.

BUT i would really like to add as well, that SC2 with all its additional expansions is a a TRULY GREAT GAME. And in my eyes there absolutly no doubt about this.

It is easy to learn, includes tons of fan suggestions and has a very decent AI.

Sir Jersey, i'm right behind you when it comes to editors and / or programming the game with it.

I want something complete to play, not a promise to buy. And as you know i would prefer hexes as well. Tiles are ok in their way, but it is not the same.

@SeaMonkey

It is somewhat cheap to "mock" hexes as eye-candy. We gamers and hexes share history, we wargamers and hexes belong together since we declared them our unsplittable love when we bought our first board games.

If hexes are our bride 1.0, than tiles are not our secret girlfriend 1.1 or our bride 2.0, but our ugly stepsister 1.0.

Tiles are substitutes compared to hexes. They play like subsitutes, they look like substitutes, and why should someone use a substitute when he could get the trusted original?

SeaMonkey, please don't feel offended, because i am on the other hand all on your side when it comes to the concept you explained which makes stacking (what i disgust in computergames) completly obsolete.

[SeaMonkey]

And JJ, its not so much that the tiles and hexes are different, in my mind, they are the same, a basis for orientation on a map. My feeling is that anything that can be developed on hexes can be done on tile also and vice versa and the adaptation to one or the other as far as game features shouldn't be that difficult.

So with that perception or misconception in mind I profess to move beyond the basis of orientation to the things that are more important, some of the things you just touched upon, like stacking, retreats and advance.

These are the things that are worthy of our discussions.

[Kuniworth]

If hexes are our bride 1.0, than tiles are not our secret girlfriend 1.1 or our bride 2.0, but our ugly stepsister 1.0.

LOL

classic.

[SeaMonkey]

OK damnit Xwood, I do prefer hexes, but wth, its like you said

a "TRULY GREAT GAME", and this editor is fricken awesome.

One more thing...if you guys haven't figured it out yet....I have to present an arbitrarian viewpoint, even if I don't actually believe in it.

It has to be done....someone has got to represent an opposing persceptive, ....for the sake of examination, hypothesis, theory...whatever....it helps minimize the hindsight., more efficient generation of creativity

If no one else does...then ......Kuni.. ..as you asked.....I will step up to the plate.

[Kuniworth]

Kuni, think about "here comes another one". We've got one. You want to go over and nursemaid CEaW and RTV until it gets to where SC is now?

You are well aware, read the threads of each, that even though there may be some redeeming features in each games mechanics, they will be a far cry from the refinement we have here at SC.

Go on over, really, I would love for some dedicated SC fans to take a look at the mechanics and make suggestions here. I plan on getting Supremacy at Sea and I will bring my thoughts for SC improvements back here.

Thing is...I'm not willing to start over. Hubert is as receptive a designer as we will ever see. He seems pretty resilient to me....how about you? My philosophy is if you take something that has a good foundation and work on it, it becomes better, rather than having to destroy it and start from scratch.

I'm not talking about SC here, I'm talking about Hubert Cater, he's the foundation. Hubert is an artist, he has the capacity to mold, evolve into a master wargame creator, if he isn't already.

Let's help him.

Kuni, I'm willing to start with SC3, but is Hubert? I don't think so. If he is, then let him say so and I will get to work. If not, I don't want to waste my time making suggestions that will have to be rehashed when he is ready.

You guys....look at us...we've been here a long time, so I don't question any of y'alls commitment, we're all lacking a bit in enthusiasm and patience from time to time, but I know....you know ...when its time we'll all be together.

Thing is.....is it time?

Well you certainly got a valid point here, who have the strength to refine a new game. That's true. And Hubert is solid that we all know.

But as Xwormwood wrote , unless you have a crush on an ugly stepsister we need some improvements. For me hexes are good because everytime I play a game which got them suddenly you can have a coherent frontline and no speedy movement west-east as with tiles. With tiles in sc2 it's more of a gang mob than sc2 strategy, that's also the reason why I think sc2 works better with divison sized scenarios like Bill's Poland where you got more of a tactical feel than just the strategic one.

Think of it this way, I see you're from Texas. Now imagine you want a juicy t-bone steak and the chef in the steakehouse is named Chuck Norris. You know Chuck well, he can make great steaks and once you ate a splendid stake which have had you come back year after year. Sometimes at your visits you want some extra peppar on the steak and Chuck was just happy to fix the steak after your wishes.

Now one day Chuck tells you there will be a new enhanced t-bone steak to be served in the steakhouse. Happy as you can be you ordered it and find it to be tasty but in a different kind of way. To your surprise you realise that Chuck has not barbecued the steak at all but fried it. So politely you ask Chuck what happened to the barbecue and suddenly Chuck's friends who work in the kitchen attacks you with phrases of how good this new steak are, how well peppered it is etc. You try to say yes it's perfectly salted but...and then once more Chuck's pals attack you and keep saying that you should make the best of it and that in the end the steak will fill up your stomach anyway.

So you say to Chuck, hey Chuck can't I have my old steak back with just some extra pepper? Chuck does'nt reply just post this symbol at you and then continue to talk about how good his next steak will be based upon the recepie of the fried steak. Then you become baffled so you speak to other customers and many among them also think the new fried steak is great but misses the old one. Some have left for other restaurants but you keep coming back to Chuck because he have not let you down before. So now in a vain attempt you lobby to get Chuck to barbecue his next invention like the first steak you had, but all you get is this symbol and promise of how much similar the fried steak and the barbecue steak taste. But you know the difference. Now what do you do? Do you speak up to Chuck because the customer is always right, or do you let him do his walker texas ranger dance?

[Hubert Cater]

Gentlemen, a very interesting discussion and I think, well from what I have understood here so far, is that the consensus is that SC2 is a very good game and for those that prefer hexes, it could be even better.

Good news is that I am always listening so you never know what you might see one of these days down the road

[Hubert Cater]

Kuniworth,

Thanks for the post and all I have to say is....

[SeaMonkey]

We always knew you were and will HC.

Good one Kuni, but in the end, if a Texas Ranger wants to dance, its better for your health if you let him.

But yes, if the TR is CW then choose your words carefully and use positive reinforcement to get that ole BBQ steak back.

[jon_j_rambo]

SC1 is ancient, it was fun, there were some really good dynamics, ie.simplicity, but its time to move along. SC2 is better, better combat interaction, better naval, diplomacy, better air and a really comprehensive editor.

There were some experiments with SC2 that perhaps are questionable, they've been mentioned and if we decide to go for SC3, then we can elaborate further. Priority, in my mind, is get the PTO aspects down, and this will require more experimentation so obviously the logical progression is to modify SC2.

Going back to SC1 features, other than the simplicity aspect is regression, serves no useful purpose, nostalgia not withstanding. SC2 represents a head and shoulders improvement, its wasteful to cast the lessons aside, the journey will continue, so get over it!

The naysayers will lose their contribution and will litter the path to the future. SC is not at a deadend, it may travel a few cul-de-sacs, but you vets that wish to hang on to the past.....well we'll put a gravemarker and flowers at the deadend we left you at. Goodbye!

@SeeMonkeySpank --- Dude, what are you doing even alive in Corpus Christi, thought the Lord brought you guys a juicy Hurricane to play with? It's not about "living in the past", it's about "why was it fun"? Do you even understand the addictive factor of SC-1? This game had a Top-10 list of players going no stop, skipping work, neglecting their families, sleeping thru golf tournaments, name it. How can you explain the phenom of it all? So SC-1 is in the past, so is Elvis Presley, but he's still the king.

SC-2 had all the bells & whistles, but where's the Legends? Where's the following? The anti-Christ will be cool too, but I ain't going to follow him.

[JerseyJohn]

@SeeMonkeySpank --- ... It's not about "living in the past", it's about "why was it fun"? Do you even understand the addictive factor of SC-1? This game had a Top-10 list of players going no stop, skipping work, neglecting their families, sleeping thru golf tournaments, name it. How can you explain the phenom of it all? ...

Now it makes sense to me, Hubert didn't want to be responsible for all these people getting fired and sleeping behind the steering wheel, etc., so he broke the addictive cycle. Bless your basic decent humanity, Mr. C. :--)

-- Mr X, great post. You were absolutely poetic!

-- Kuni, terrific story about the steak. I had something similar happen with a young waitress who told me I had to try something when I wanted another dish that I really love. I took her recommendation and couldn't eat more than two bites.

[jon_j_rambo]

Seriously, SC-1 really can't be explained, I think it was luck that it was fun. There was a dozen grown men playing SC-1 CONSTANTLY!!! There were leagues, there was offshore tourneys, then came PanzerLiga......Hell (Heaven), there's even Buntaland forum!

SC-2 is good, but just missed out on playability, let alone hexes.

Repeating my stance: SC-1 was just luck that it was fun. Remember how bad it was at the beginning? There was no balance, no TCP/IP at first. Then all the exploitable bugs came in. SC-1 was "luck" that it was fun.

We loved SC-1, just like a cat likes to play with a paperbag, it was fun. You can buy kids new toys, but their classic favorites are always those made up playground games.

Are you kidding me? I could get on ICQ at anytime, and find Americans & Buntas online wanting to play. They'd skip work! They'd play at work! They'd start mirror games, PBEM games, bids, tourneys, smack, name it.

When SC-2 got here, in came all the editor dudes. In came dudes wanting features that sucked at playing.

SC-1 is over. "That mission is long gone Johnny". Just park it in the memories with Elvis Presley.

It was about the Phenom cult like family feeling that made it. Even with a "great SC-3" game, doesn't mean the Holy Spirit will be in it.

[SeaMonkey]

Well you want to put the "Holy Spirit" into SC3?

Here's my suggestion.....well one of my suggestions...but this is the starting point.

Go to the matrixgames forums and look in the sticky thread at the top in "WW2 Road to Victory" game forum that's labeled "Mods & Scenarios".

The specific thread is "Classic Counters Mod". Read it and notice the graphics done by a poster named GJK.

Hubert...if you're reading this..go get this guy for graphics/art for any additional games you do. This will help instill the "Holy Spirit".

Now anyone want to bet that SC3 can't recapture the game that SC1 was????

Don't be foolish Rambonehead....it can be better.

[JerseyJohn]

... Now anyone want to bet that SC3 can't recapture the game that SC1 was???? ... it can be better.

Of course! And the things is, that's the only assumption I've made right from the start. Hubert is constantly improving his work, gaining from experience and utilizing input from the users. I was really knocked over by the way he kept improving SC-1, and sharing the various disappointments with us, such as "Unfortunately I can't get the computer to send units around Africa." I'd be very surprised if SC-3 wasn't as much of a breakthrough, and as easy to play, as SC-1 in its heyday.

-- Okay, I haven't asked for anything in the past three or four posts, uh, two or three, so now I'm going to ask what happened to those little emoticons we were able to put in the text, and not just in the title? (I noticed it done in another post but don't know how to do it.)

I mean, the things were mindless, but I sort of got used to them.

-- Then there was bold and italics etc -- not that I'm not saying this format isn't better -- because it is! ;--)

[SeaMonkey]

Damn it :mad: JJ, I think we now have to type them in , not like it used to be when we could just cursor and click.

Check out the FAQ for posting and we're limited to three.

[JerseyJohn]

SM, Type them in? -- When I right click the things for properties I just get a link. Tried three or four different ways but it obviously only works for Canadians, Swedes and chemists. ;--)

[SeaMonkey]

Yeah like your ;--) except remove the two hyphens and you'll get HC's patented reply,

Go to the FAQ for posting to see what notations coincide to each emoticon

[jon_j_rambo]

Okay, we've got the discussion started. If this is going to pick up steam, we'll need to hear from Yodl & the rest of the Panzerliga folks.

[Ottosmops]

JJ, you can go to

User CP

Edit Options

Miscellaneous Options

and change the editor interface to

Enhanced Interface

Then you can insert the smilies with a mouse click.

[Sombra]

I think everyone loves SC1.

But seriously : "Commander Europe at war" an A grade?

- The game balance is not even there

- Diplomacy "nada" "rien"

-Fixed entry dates regardless what you do

- Game is a resource hog on the computer and needs more than 1GB of ram to run smoothly.

- Has few units

-Unit blancing is bad too....

Regarding SC2 (waw):

Even after playing lots of games and having much fun with SC2 I still dont like siome features:

- Squares (Is till hate them)

- The building of killer units (For example Stukas)

- I hate some of the scripted events: switch of Englsih captial to Egypt (takes out the need to defend England at all), The more or less fixed entry of fully build of Siberian troops, the building up of the "home defense army in the US.

-The french campaign simply isnt fun (so the first major battle not much fun)

That these events are even necessary looks to me like that the game mechanics are very well balanced at sme points and that ham fisted "corrections" with events must be made to mantain game balance

There are many things to love in sC2 :

-Many different units

-Weather

-Improved maps : Roads and railways

[jon_j_rambo]

Hey SomeDude, welcome back! Very good points. I agree, except the weather is a little heavy for me.

By the way, did you give Obama a hug & clap while he was touring your country? Thankfully you dudes (or that chick running the Fatherland, lol) didn't let him make a photoshoot at the Branderburger Gate.

[JerseyJohn]

Gentlemen, many thanks!

-- SeaMonkey, -- appreciate the tip; followed Otto's directions for getting an enhanced posting screen and it's exactly what I like. I'm sure you'd prefer it too over typing in the symbols. There are other very useful formatting abilities as well, right on the screen.

Otto's Instructions:

JJ, you can go to

User CP

Edit Options

Miscellaneous Options

and change the editor interface to

Enhanced Interface

Then you can insert the smilies with a mouse click.

Thank you, Otto. This makes posting a lot more fun. :cool:

[justanotherwargamer1]

Unfortunately there is always a limit a breaking point, a spot where it's time to quit.

Unsure what else can be said which I have yet to utter in my previous post.

And I have said much and I have said it elsewhere as well. And the wise person doesn't limit themselves to just one source of input. And some input is warm and fuzzy and some input is frank blunt and without kid gloves.

And opinions are free.

And the biggest hurdle, is how to be authoritative and clear and concise, and not end up sounding rude offensive and arrogant. That, and attention spans of forum dwellers likely fizzle right about now.

So how to convey a useful message, say something new or at least useful, get it read and not be dismissed out of hand as an opinionated know it all.

My number one beef with wargame designers as of late, would likely be how most seem unable to use that which works in another's game, in their own. Especially maddening, is when wargame designers seem incapable of using great ideas that work from other designs.

Why are we not playing all our wargames in WEGO?

It's the best of the best in usable turn based cheat proof gimmic proof reasonable simulation.

IGOUGO is ok, it's just not the best.

Real time is ok if you keep it squad level. Above that it becomes increasingly worthless.

If it isn't broke, don't fix it. So why do so many designers insist on taking a success and "fixing" it when it wasn't required.

Hexes for instance didn't need to be replaced in SC1, yet you just had to screw with it.

And you are not alone in ignoring what works Hubert.

Road to Victory is sounding like it will be serving SC2 up a large dose of dust in a years time.

But I find it interesting that no one at Matrix Games is not berating them for the worst interface in grand strategy wargaming. How they managed to justify the interface it has is beyond me.

Tutorials. The Tutorial in the recent Nintendo Civilization is in my opinion unmatched. Every time you do something new, you get a helper that explains it and a choice to turn off the helper when you have heard it all before.

In Road to Victory, apparently the concept of Tutorial is lost on the designer.

The above two comments wouldn't exist if they had looked at SC1 and seen how to make an effortless interface I suppose.

If not for the forum comments, alluding to features I have yet to experience, because learning how to run the game let alone playing it is so difficult, I would be greatly regretting buying it about now.

For those obsessed with real time, and of the curiously idiotic notion that 6 years simulated in 6 hours has anything to do with real anything, I wonder, why isn't everyone at least copying Panther Games? In their design, changing your mind continuously is punished. The chain of command is simulated excellently. Orders are not instantaneously transmitted as fast as you can click your mouse.

3d. The only actual 3d in wargaming is on a table top wargaming table. Otherwise, it's 2d being graphically faked. And what exactly is the purpose of 3d iconic images in a 2d based game? What is the point of marketing a game in pretty 3d when the demographic couldn't care less? The younger set that play the graphically demanding first person shooters are not interested in our dull old school boring simulations of historical what if. You won't be winning them over with pretty icons. So why waste your time drawing them?

What's the first mod that always seems to show up after a game is released? It's the damned Nato icon set. Doesn't it say enough? Is it not obvious enough? We like the Nato icons.

Stop listening to the 10 or 15 people that will enter a forum and wail and whine about how the Nato icons are old school and boring. Or is 10 or 15 people worth that much in decision making?

HPS seems to be doing plenty fine releasing game after game after game after game using old school maps and old school counters with dull old school interfaces which are at least functional and self evident how they work.

So why exactly everyone else is trying to make their interface look all pointlessly graphically clever looking escapes me.

Our games are universally judged to be dull and boring, so what. I think every MMO on the market is incredibly dull and repetitive too. But I am not the one being marketed to.

So if I say I want something the old school way, and I am part of the majority of the target demographic, then to hell with the 10 or 15 guys that loudly don't like the content.

Be ready to just tell them they are not representative.

I'm sticking by my assessment of SC2. We were all shocked when you dumped hexes.

The tiles not only look like crap, they are hard on the eyes and frankly the map is ugly.

You could have just tweaked the SC1 map, you "fixed" something that wasn't broke.

You went with cute counters that no one required and I am sure it took a lot of time to arrive at all those images no one needed.

You added in a great editor and forgot that most wargamers just want to play the game.

I couldn't care less if it has a great editor. I've never used a game editor for a single wargame in over 20 years. It doesn't make up for the tiles, ugly map and unnecessary cute icons.

The battles feature was a good notion.

But several important short comings with SC1 weren't even given the slightest acknowledgment. The battle of the Atlantic never happens, instant failing grade.

The strategic bombing campaign never happens, instant failing grade.

Germans invading America instant failing grade. I don't do scifi in my serious wargames.

No unit stacking, major let down.

No multiple location based attacks leading to WW1 syndrome, major let down.

You're not alone though. Much as I like Commander Europe at War, it too doesn't have stacking and it too doesn't use multi location based attacks. If I can simulate this in another wargame, then it's not impossible to code.

WEGO would likely make a lot of our wargames massive online hits.

I think there is a reason Combat Mission attracts the following it has.

WEGO separates the losers from the winner really quick.

SC1 was so easy to cheat in, that only a complete clutz couldn't figure out how to do it.

It utterly and irrevocably ended my interest in competitive play online.

WEGO could make a game a complete runaway success.

So why is it so many avoid it?

It's not like it is hard to understand the how, it's actually been done before. The V4Victory titles for instance.

Our designers really that uninterested in stealing other's great ideas?

I want fun first, simple second, challenging third, and accurate last.

I want all 4 but I want them in that order.

I won't play it if it isn't fun.

It won't be any fun if it isn't simple. Work is work.

I need a human for it to be a challenge, and I want it to be impossible to cheat.

And I want the fantasy left out.

If you want non historical, fine, go with red vs blue. It doesn't have to be WW2.

And one last dig, get the hell off the PC. Grand strategy is possible on the console market.

Stop pretending it's too expensive and impossible.

Panzer Tactics proved it is possible.

Slitherine appears to think it is doable too.

There's more to wargaming than the PC, and most of our titles would port just fine.

Most of our games don't require demanding graphics.

And if you weren't aware, the Nintendo DS demographic is kids and mature adults.

Guess what, mature adults is the same demographic that buy your wargames.

70 bucks to buy a GOOD DS wargame, not a seconds thought.

I couldn't care less how many teens go and utter "I ain't paying 70 bucks for a DS game" Who cares what the teens think about the price, they ain't going to be playing it.

[SeaMonkey]

Les, this is by far the best post I've ever read from you. Lots of accurate conclusions, IMO, and we know what those are worth. I won't pick apart the things that I don't agree with here, which are few, but I will strongly disagree with the grade assessed to SC2 and leave it at that.

One thing I will strongly commend you on is your statement about the use of the things that work by other designers, surely would shorten the process.

And that's just it, it's a process. Same one that's been going on for millineums, a slow refinement, evolution, if you wish. Some of us have visions of quantum leaps of progress, others prefer the status quo, and no one has the crystal ball required to deduce all the consequences.

I guess in the end, you just have to have faith, the indomitable human characteristic of hope that it will get better, however slow. In each of us there is a certain amount of contribution, I would like to think that we all, "do what we can", and would like to do more.