Realistic war games?

[JakeRS123]

So which ones do you know? Doesn't matter if it is a strategy, fps,etc, as long as it is at least somewhat realistic, modern ones are preferred, but it can be even ww1, a editor is a huge plus.

I always wanted to be able to say which country would win in a hypothetical war, so I started looking at modern strategies, games in which I can play out scenarios I create myself and simply see ,,which side would win", here are some games I found

Combat mission series, which is one of my favorites

Men of War with the modern mods, it has a kind of realistic armor system, but a terrible distance system, since all weapons can only fire to a very, very small distance, even howitzers and mortars.

World in conflict, but that's way more of an arcade, than a simulator

Point of Attack 2, it a absolutely awful interface, for example in CM games it takes you just a few seconds to make a quick battle, but in Point of Attack 2 you would need at least some 5 minutes, maybe even more just to create a simple scenario, then you have the turn system that is all, but nice to look at, however it does have a realistic armor system, which is the only reason why I even played it, well that and a huge database of vehicles and weapons.

Decisive action

Toaw 3

So which ones did I miss?

 

[AttorneyAtWar]

Graviteam Tactics.

[JoMac]

- Battlefronts: Combat Mission-all WWII series ( could care less about Modern ).

- John Tiller's: Campaign Series ( each Unit=Platoon ).

- Arma 2-3 ( WWII Mod ). 

Joe

 

[Michael Emrys]

If you really want to get in deep, you might take a look at HoI3. Playing the full length scenario might keep you in front of your computer for a week or two of 6 hour+ sessions. It sort of realistic, though it stumbles in a lot of places. I think a v4 is in the works. I should check on that.

Then there is Unity of Command, which is more or less at the other end of the spectrum. Not especially realistic, but great fun to play. Many of the scenarios are quick to play through, but there are also campaigns for those who go for that kind of thing.

Michael

[lordhedgwich]

Combat Mission, Graviteam Tactics, and Scourge of War are the only ones I like

[Michael Emrys]

I think a v4 is in the works. I should check on that.

It is. I looked it up and a v4 is definitely in the works. But from my point of view, they are continuing to go in the wrong direction. What I long to see is a more streamlined game with only the detail that requires the gamer's constant attention much more carefully chosen. Right now, I feel like the only people who could really love this game are obsessive-compulsive meth freaks. It would also help if they would go through and correct or eliminate the scores of minor inaccuracies that stick in one's craw. I recall my chief impression of v2 was that whoever designed it didn't really know much about WW II but had taken a crash course and hadn't sorted it all out yet. v3 did nothing to alter that impression. Too bad, in the right hands this could have been a real winner and worthy of respect.

Michael

[Vanir Ausf B]

Flash Point Campaigns: Red Storm

Modern Air / Naval Operations

Command Ops

[StieliAlpha]

Gary Grigsby's various grand strategic games from Matrix Games. 

[tagge]

All from DCS. You might start with this: http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/products/world/

PS Dunno if I can link this, please erase if I´m doing somefink I'm not supposed to do...

[tagge]

BTW... Where are the forumrulez again? Cannae find them...

[Michael Emrys]

BTW... Where are the forumrulez again? Cannae find them...

Right at the top of the first page it says:  (NO POLITICS, NO COMMERCIAL LINKS, NO SPAM). You posted a commercial link, which will get you a bad mark if you don't remove it before the Powers That Be discover it. Parenthetically, I feel obliged to say that the game looks nice, but I don't suppose they have a Mac version.

Michael

[tagge]

So I reported my own post. I guess that was a Commercial link... :-(

[tagge]

Michael! Take a look at this not Commercial link. Rather long but you get a grasp of what the game is all about:

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAcoHPbeRCk

[Battlefront.com]

Don't worry about it.  The rule against commercial links started many years ago when people joined our forum specifically to "pimp" a game to our large and established bunch of nutty customers.  That's not very nice!  A commercial link posted by a real Forum member (yes, we do count Finns as "real" ;)) for a game that doesn't directly compete with something we make is fine.

And yes... flight sims have come a long way since I played Flight Simulator on a Compaq Portable back in the early 1980s!

Steve

[BletchleyGeek]

If you're into tactical air and naval stuff, Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations is quite good. You may need a quite beefy multicore CPU and Windows 10 for optimal performance. 

They released recently a quite interesting battle pack called Northern Inferno, covering aeronaval battles in the mid 70s between NATO and the Soviet Union over and around northern Norway.

You can check the unofficial tutorials by an überfan on this playlist :

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLgRuKky0mojZkb5tSIpJgEy0WR4rzt6tA

 

[AttorneyAtWar]

If you're into tactical air and naval stuff, Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations is quite good. You may need a quite beefy multicore CPU and Windows 10 for optimal performance. 

They released recently a quite interesting battle pack called Northern Inferno, covering aeronaval battles in the mid 70s between NATO and the Soviet Union over and around northern Norway.

You can check the unofficial tutorials by an überfan on this playlist :

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLgRuKky0mojZkb5tSIpJgEy0WR4rzt6tA

 

I can concur with this...

But those TU-22 Back fires...ouch.

[General Jack Ripper]

You could always try out Silent Hunter III or 4.

There's even total conversion realism mods if you want to go completely crazy. I once spent 16 hours real time trying to escape 3 destroyers in GWX.

[StieliAlpha]

Interesting discussion, by the way.

The question, once again, is quite unclear. I was tempted to delve into board games, but then realized the answers at least are about computer games.

Then: What means "realistic"? Any game can, at best, be a model. And as such can portray only certain aspects of RL.

Finally, the discussion nicely portrays the huge range of games. From micro tactical simulators to grand strategic games. From air to naval to land combat. Or all of that in one. And we did not even cover the huge time range. I could list many  " realistic" ancient, medieval, napoleonic, you-name-it games. Not to speak about many "realistic" SiFi- or Fantasy games.

Great hobby, isn't it? Keeps me occupied since 40 years now. ?

[BletchleyGeek]

The question, once again, is quite unclear. I was tempted to delve into board games, but then realized the answers at least are about computer games.

Then: What means "realistic"? Any game can, at best, be a model. And as such can portray only certain aspects of RL.

We can have that discussion if you want Let me start say that I agree that there are inherent limitations to what can be achieved. But the main limitations I see may surprise you: they're money-time and the emotional investment in the subject matter.

Take for instance the, by far, most popular operational / grand tactical war games, John Tiller's Panzer Campaigns. In those games you get extensively - most of the time - researched orders of battle. But the portrayal of the constraints imposed by communications, supply distance and terrain are a joke, a mere place holder which doesn't hold a candle to systems like The Gamers' OCS. The bald truth is that it is "cheaper" to have volunteers do the research work (come up with OOBs and maps) investing probably hundreds of hours, than the professionalised work of actually having a simulation that actually tries to represent the subject matter adequately. Note that John Tiller air/naval games (the Midway one is reportedly very good) conserve the interface (mostly) but the engine is a pretty accurate real-time simulation of air and naval combat. For whatever the reason, a choice was made not to invest very much on one kind of game than the others (my guess, JT was personally more interested in the air/naval sim).

I was involved for some time in the development of Command Ops (as a volunteer, of course). And I tell you, the main challenge weren't the programming problems to be solved, but how to best use the very limited human resources at hand and contain the inevitable entropy that catches up with software as years go by. I remember several heated discussions regarding what was good enough, and how the stance of the participants depended highly on whether they were an "armour" person or an "infantry" person. Combat Mission, like Command Ops has a very long history - over 15 years! and CMx2 1.0 came out in 2007 packed as CM Shock Force. People complain of stagnation, but they fail to realise that if you put your chops on the realism fire, other aspects of the games will suffer, and that the volume of sales just doesn't support sizeable teams working full time.

Another example of Rob Pollard's project, Ancient Armies. He's attempting to deliver the uber realistic Ancients tactical war game in his spare time. He's a pro freelance developer, so he knows how to organise his time very well (unlike others ). Now he's got to a point where he has got formations moving over a map... and I have been following him since early 2011!

Edited March 16, 2016 by BletchleyGeek

[Pak40]

A new 3D tactical game is in the works by a new developer. I just saw an article about it over on wargamer.com. It's being pitched as a true 3d successor to Close Combat although it has nothing to do with the current developers of the Close Combat line. I'm not holding my breath because I've heard this pitch before from games like GI Combat and Squad Assault West Front. However, I will say that if they can deliver and execute what they're pitching then it should be a fun game. It's definitely a competitor to Combat Mission so I'm not posting any commercial links to it. Also, Slitherine is developing a 3D Close Combat but this has been in the works for at least a couple of years now. There's not too much information about it.

[BletchleyGeek]

What they have looks interesting. My understanding is that they're starting of a branch of the original Atomic Games/CSO Simtek codebase, so I think there's an actual game. There was a far bit of drama when TACKOM appeared, which was interesting to read, and made Slitherine and the devs of the most recent Close Combat games look quite bad. Since they're being featured on Wargamer.com I guess Sulla has smoked the peace pipe with the current holders of Close Combat rights.

[gnarly]

4 hours ago, Pak40 said:

A new 3D tactical game is in the works by a new developer. I just saw an article about it over on wargamer.com. It's being pitched as a true 3d successor to Close Combat although it has nothing to do with the current developers of the Close Combat line. I'm not holding my breath because I've heard this pitch before from games like GI Combat and Squad Assault West Front. However, I will say that if they can deliver and execute what they're pitching then it should be a fun game. It's definitely a competitor to Combat Mission so I'm not posting any commercial links to it. Also, Slitherine is developing a 3D Close Combat but this has been in the works for at least a couple of years now. There's not too much information about it.

Interesting, thanks for the headsup.

Question though, as I really don't have any knowledge/experience outside CM and ARMA: this comment below in  the wargamer article on the new game doesn't mention CM? Is that because CM is for the most part played WEGO (and is not truly a 'real-time tactical)? Or am I missing the obvious?

 

" The Tactical Art of Combat will be an entirely new type of game; the only real real-time tactical simulations are Close Combat and Graviteam Tactics, which are both very different. "

 

[Pak40]

13 hours ago, gnarly said:

Interesting, thanks for the headsup.

Question though, as I really don't have any knowledge/experience outside CM and ARMA: this comment below in  the wargamer article on the new game doesn't mention CM? Is that because CM is for the most part played WEGO (and is not truly a 'real-time tactical)? Or am I missing the obvious?

 

" The Tactical Art of Combat will be an entirely new type of game; the only real real-time tactical simulations are Close Combat and Graviteam Tactics, which are both very different. "

I also noticed this, but that particular quote was from the developer's official website. The article itself does mention CM in the last paragraph as having "tactical supremacy" i.e. the game to to beat. In any case, I kind of thought that was an insult to CM even though it's primarily played in WEGO. It works just as well in real time (at the scale of Close Combat battles). However, once you get to a couple of companies worth of units, then real time becomes a real chore. Close Combat would have the same issues if it actually allowed that many units in the game. The Tactical Art of Combat seems to be aiming for small scale battles along the lines of Close Combat. I think they're still ironing out the details according to the posts I've seen on their forum.

Edited April 5, 2016 by Pak40

[A Canadian Cat]

I just spent some time looking at their forums too and it seems interesting.  But it is not clear to me how things will work.  They simultaneously say they will have more detail and better animation and that the camera will not go down too low since that is not necessary for a tactical game. Then they talk about the size of the map and again say they will be big but not to many units at any one time.  Until there is an actual scenario to look at it is hard to tell what it will really be like.  They are in a fun place right now where they can say they have their cake and say they get to eat it too.  I'll watch and see what things look like once they have to make the hard choices.