Panzertruppen maddox

Yes, well done.

Hi all. This is just a short note to let those who are interested know that the new Warfare HQ scenario archive is open for buisness. If you have a quality CM scenario you would like to share, please stop by and pay us a visit. Enjoy! http://www.warfarehq.com

If you have TacOps scenarios that you would like to share with others, please feel free to visit Warfare HQ's new Scenario Archive. The archive just opened today so there aren't any TacOps scenarios yet, but that will be changing shortly. Also, be sure to check out the TacOps ladder which is part of the "Military Simulations" section. Enjoy! http://www.warfarehq.com [ November 08, 2002, 03:09 PM: Message edited by: Panzertruppen maddox ]

If anyone comes up with any really good TacOps maps, Warfare HQ will host them. Also, if you haven't already heard the Warfare HQ TacOps ladder is rolling. It it listed as the "Military Simulations" ladder. Good place to find opponents.

Thanks for the interest. TacOps is part of the "Modern Military Simulations" section. The ladder is now up and ready for sign-ups. To register for the ladder simply click on the "Join" button at the top of the main Warfare HQ page and complete the form. I have created an area for articles and AARs for TacOps and the other sims included in the section, but I'm a little short on material right now. If you have TacOps related material that you would like to see posted, send it on over and I will take care of the rest. Warfare HQ is a club, and as a resource it will only be as good as the members help to make it. Hopefully, we'll have some more TacOps available soon.

Thanks for the support. Warfare HQ exists to support the wargamers. We'll do our best to get some new players interested in the system.

I agree that this does tend to happen a lot. However, we have had excellent luck with that at Warfare HQ for the last two years. The vast majority of our members are considerate gamers who are interested in intelligent debate about strategy & tactics, or they simply want information. If any flame wars crop up, the Warfare HQ staff quickly put an end to it although I can't remember having to do that for a very long time. Because we're a relatively small community compared to some others we're able to control that type of thing much better. We have dedicated forums for each one of the games we support, and also have a general discussion forum which is intended for some of these hot political or military history topics. At any rate, the forum is available as a resource if needed.

Thanks a lot for the info.

Warfare HQ has recently added a forum to our existing forums dedicated to nothing but modern military simulations such as TacOps, BCT, BCT Commander, Armored Task Force, and Decisive Action. We're also currently evaluating the demand for a combined modern military simulations ladder. So far the feedback has been limited, but we feel there is sufficient support for these games to justify an additional ladder devoted solely to these games. This is a great way for TacOps to be exposed to wargamers who may not be familiar with this system. MajorH, you're certainly welcome to post any news, info, or announcements you may have on our forum. If it's something more important, send me a note and I'll be more than happy to post it on the main Warfare HQ news page. Hope to see some TacOps action at Warfare HQ soon!

Are there different levels of victory possible in TacOps? Such as significant victory, overwhelming defeat, etc...

Looking forward to the demo. Hope it shows up soon.

There are some good Combat Mission scenario archives out there. The Warfare HQ archive has recently been dramtically improved with new search and sort options and a host of other small improvements. This archive allows scenario authors to enter a password of their choice and upload their own scenarios to the database. The author can then update the scenario later if necessary. There is a database for both standard scenarios and operations. If you are a CM scenario author, then you may want to consider the Warfare HQ scenario archive as a host. http://www.warfarehq.com

Warfare HQ might be interested in fielding a team. Contact Scipio. scipio@warfarehq.com

I just wanted to let those who may not know it yet that Warfare HQ has an automated scenario archive. Scenario authors can upload and update their CM scenarios for the benefit of the community. There is also a section for operations. http://www.warfarehq.com Don "Maddog" Maddox Warfare HQ General Editor formerly "Panzertruppen"

While technically Hasbro might be legally correct in taking action against every single CM player who converts an ASL scenario, I have to wonder what the potential gain would be for them. Exactly my point. I'm not arguing that Hasbro didn't have a legal right to make fools of themselves, I'm simply arguing that it was a self inflicted wound. Like I stated before, wargaming is a very very small community. As far as the individual game companies go we don't need them, they need us. They can see that it's in their own self interest be a little flexible here and there. If they can't, then it's a lessen the gamers will teach them the hard way. Their corporate suits can yak all day long that they alone control the product. In actuality, then may own it, but they don't control it at all. We do. Piss off the grognards and their "property" won't be worth spit. Anyone that's been in the game industry for more than thirty seconds knows that all successful PC games share one thing in common: a healthy add-on or mod community. Look at all the top games - QuakeIII, SimCity, flight simulators, etc. None of them would have lasted anywhere near as long as they have without the support and devotion of the gamers. Smart gaming companies go out of their way to foster this because they know it's good business. In some cases I've even seen companies offer assistance to mod-makers. id Software is notorious for the aid their senior programmers have given to the gaming community. That's one of the big secrets of their long-term success. Of course there is a line in the sand. If someone were to take a bunch of CM mods, burn them onto a CD and sell it as a Combat Mission expansion pack, that would be wrong without BTS' blessing. In this case they would be justified to protect their work and I don't think many people would object. The heart of a successful game system is a good relationship with the gamers, and a healthy add-on/mod community. Hasbro may have been technically "right," but they may find in the long run that they were wrong.

Just remember something folks, the wargaming community is very small, very bright, and have a memory like an elephant. We're talking about people who remember how many track links an obscure fighting vehicle produced in 1939 had! Grognards are some of the most stubborn people on the planet. No wargame company has any control over its own destiny. None. Nadda. Zip. On the other hand, the gamers have TOTAL control over their eventual fate. Walmart and McDonalds and big corporations like that can get away with tramping all over their customers and still make a pile of money. Wargame companies don't dare make that mistake. If they are foolish enough to seriously piss off the gamers, they pay a immediate price. It's called bankruptcy by most people. A wargame company that carefully builds and nurtures its relationship with the gamers (the way BTS has done) will soon have a very dedicated, ferociously loyal following. These companies understand that due to the nature of the beast they need to show a little flexibility because it's in their own long-term financial interest. Don't get me wrong, I don't think people should go around blatantly ripping off other people's work. Mutual respect is the best approach. There are three cardinal rules for wargames: 1. Never invade the Soviet Union. 2. Never piss off the grognards. 3. Never ever do both at the same time. A lot of companie spout slogans like "only for wargamers" or "by wargamers, for wargamers." When companies like Hasbro clamp down like that, that's when the wheat is separated from the chaff. Just my 2 cents worth.

True, we won't see those graphics for some time to come. But, we will see them! Look at how much PC graphics have improved in the last 10 years (a very short period of time). Hmmmm, what did they look like in 1991? Crap, crap and double crap! It won't be as long as you think gentlemen. The future's so bright I gotta wear shades! [ 06-17-2001: Message edited by: Panzertruppen maddox ]

Stalin's Organ wrote: Well DUH! The graphics that come with the game are perfectly adequate for that - the mods don't add anything in terms of interactivity - they are pure candy. It's true in this case the mods don't actually add any "features," they simply add a great deal to the experience. Are they necessary? Absolutely. Want to find out? Let BTS release CM2 with the ability to mod the vehicles and the terrain <u>removed.</u> The game would be reduced to a following of only the true hardcore. Every member of this forum has watched great wargames get kicked to the curb and vanish from the face of the earth for that very same mistake. For the life on me I've never been able to understand why some wargamers seem to actually resent better or more detailed graphics. :confused: "It's just eye candy" gets repeated almost as a mantra in some circles, despite every indication of the opposite. Guys I've got to tell ya, it's a moot point! We live in an age where a 1.2 Ghz PC with all the options sells for just over a grand. PC wargamers have always had to suffer with horrible graphics almost like some kind of unwanted stepchild of the gaming industry. That time is past. All other segments of the gaming industry understand that to be competitive a game or simulation must continue to strive to be as good as it can be in every area. No one expects to hear "Wow, Quake IV is the best game I ever played! Unfortunately I won't be playing any more because it looks like crap..." If it makes you feel any better to point out that a new Porche is just "eye candy" compared to a new Pontiac, then so be it. But at the very least it's a ridiculous observation. If you're saying that even it CM:BO looked really really hideous you and five other guys would still be playing...well, I'm sure BTS sleeps better at night knowing that. As for the remainder of us, I would say the amount of obvious effort that goes into the "eye candy" mods shows he true score. Opinions will vary. That's just my 2 cents worth.

Stalin's Organ wrote:</p> What a load of hokey!! The reason it's good is that it's good - forget the mods, the eye-candy - the game'd be just as good without it. Well, Combat Mission is a great game, but I have to disagree with that. Graphics are an integral part of the game. After all, what is the primary method that you interact with your PC? Feel? Sorry, there is no force feedback available in Combat Mission. Sound? Sorry, although sound adds greatly to the experience it is not an absolute. Smell? I guess that depends upon where you PC is located. Taste? Let's not go there...</p> The primary way that you interact with your PC is visual. A big part of the Combat Mission experience is the immersion in the feel of the battle. No other tactical WWII game does this nearly as well (for modern stuff Operation Flashpoint looks very promising). It's ridiculous to think that CM would be anywhere near as successful as it is without the nature of its 3D interface. Just look at the enormous amount of "visual" mods that are available for the game. How many sound mods are there? Only a handful. How many statistical or informational add-ons are there? There are a few charts, lists, and break downs available, but nothing like ASL. Combat Mission relies upon its graphics and the simplicity of its interface to excel. That doesn't mean it's not an excellent warfare simulation under the hood. It is, but it's hard coded information is not readily available the way some other games are. There is a lot going on in each turn of CM, but most of it is invisible to the player. That's my point! Unlike ASL or something like TOAW the player relies almost completely upon a visual appraisal of the battlefield in CM. Therefore the more detailed and realistic that battlefield is, the more information is available to the player as well as greatly enhancing the feel of the simulation.</p> Saying that Combat Mission would be just as good without the graphics is like saying a brand new sports car would be just as nice if it looked like a rusted 73 Pontiac. Ridiculous! Don't underestimate the importance of graphics in a PC game. Many wargame companies have made that mistake in the past and the internet is littered with their bones. Combat Mission enjoys almost a complete monopoly of its segment of the wargame genre. Big Time Software has done a very good job of listening to customer feedback and working to go a step further with CM2. Let's hope they continue to do that because it's only a matter of time before one of the big-name PC companies tries to move into this territory. CM has brought a lot of fresh blood into the wargame segment because it appeals to not only traditional grognards, but also gamers who have never touched a "wargame" before. </p> Before Take2 gutted Talonsoft they were already working on something similar to CM. Most companies would never even consider producing a "wagame," (almost a four letter word to many game companies). But now that BTS has shown the first glimmer of what can be done in this arena it's bound to draw attention. I for one hope that CM is ready for the competition when it does arrive, and arrive it will. As I said, a big pull of CM is the graphics. It would be a shame to lose some of those players to a game that looked better, but didn't have a true wargame under the hood.</p> For another interesting point of view on wargame graphics check out "Coming Out of the 2D Closet" in the articles section of <a href="http://www.warfarehq.com" target="_blank">Warfare HQ</a>.</p>

Those Japanese Tiger I images were pretty good. The artist has some great attention to detail. How would you like to see images of that quality in a 3D model? Can't be done? Yes it can! A man named Gary J. Nemeth has been doing it for quite some time. He is a very talented 3D artist that creates trains, airplanes and some superb military weapons. I have seen his Pzkw III, IV, V, and VI and well as a KV-I, T-34, and a very impressive MG-34. His webpage has been restructured, at one time there were even more 3D images in the "art" section featuring WWII vehicles. </p> Big Time Software should take notice of what kind of work this gentleman is capable of. CM3 or CM4...</p> To see some of his work check out the information on the <a href="http://www.warfarehq.com" target="_blank">Warfare HQ</a> Combat Mission forum under the title "Good graphics? You ain't seen nothin yet!" Trust me, these images are worth everyone's time to look at. Very impressive.</p> <font face="Copperplate Gothic Bold">Don "Panzertruppen" Maddox Warfare HQ General Editor</font></p>

Those Tiger I images were pretty good, but how would you like to see material of that quality in 3D? Sound interesting? Check out the pics I posted on the Warfare HQ CM forum under the title "Good graphics? You ain't seen nothin yet!" Someone from Big Time Software should pay attention to what this guy can do!</p> :cool:

<p align="center"><font face="Impact"><a href="http://www.warfarehq.com">Warfare HQ</a> is proud to present the Combat Mission Quick-Battle League Tournament. This is a round-robin style 3-phase tournament. Players will be randomly assigned. For more information stop by the Warfare HQ tournament page or contact Scipio.</font></p> <p align="center"></p> <p align="center"></p> <p align="center">www.WarfareHQ.com</font></p>

Hello all. Warfare HQ is now officially open. We have Combat Mission, Panzer Campaigns, Campaign Series, and TOAW material as well as general wargame information and news. Stop by and see what we have to offer! <p align="center"></p> http://www.warfarehq.com Don "Panzertruppen" Maddox Warfare HQ General Editor