Hearts of Iron, as it is relevant to Strategic Command

[Les the Sarge 9-1b]

HolzemFrumFloppen, I have an advantage I suppose is fairly unique, being I am disabled and on a pension, and don't have a lot of things to clutter my day, I can read a large swath or forums on a large swath of sites fairly fast (nothing to impede me doing so but some dishes most days).

As for my seeming mood shift on HoI yes it is true, I went from quite happy to quite unexcited, to completely uninterested to completely unsupportive to disgusted in rapid order.

I did so on the word of my fellow gamers, you guys. In short I took the collective word of people I assume can be trusted, people that have the game, have played it, and said it sucked.

As such, I consider my opinion, even if one that was rapidly transformed, to be an accurately arrived at one.

As such, I guess, the only alternative, would be to tell everyone to shut up, never discuss a game ever again, and let us all buy oodles of more wargames each year, including the garbage ones.

I don't have HoI and I am thankful for the myriad opinions of the gamer community, that have allowed me to not purchase this expensive waste of plastic.

I am currently in the process of ordering Century of Warfare, as it seems a good notion, if my fellow poster is right. That with the right effort, it will like XP enough to matter.

I have Operational Art of War volume 1 Elite edition, the second best game in my inventory (my opinion). But I have tried it all, it doesn't like XP. I think enough of this game to spend an additional 40 bucks US to get what is essentially the same damned software I already own. The game is that good (in my opinion).

It will eat all of my disposable income from now till who knows when in the new years. I won't mind a bit.

I have softened my disinterest to SC as of late, but Operational Art of War is a game I already like, SC will likely just have to wait to be SC2 to draw me in.

[John DiFool]

Note that I don't have to buy a game to form an

opinion on it [that's what demos are for-but alas

HOI has no demo]. For me I have seen enough, on

Usenet, review sites, AARs, etc. to know that it

isn't for me (can't speak for Sarge). It may

very well be true that there are hidden 'gems' in

the game which I am undoubtedly unaware of, but

it is also true that I have seen enough info on

the interface, game engine, AI, etc. that I have

decided to give it a pass.

And given the iffy return policies many stores

have, I'm not about to chance not being able to

return it. Sorry.

John DiFool

[Nippy]

And given the iffy return policies many stores

have, I'm not about to chance not being able to

return it. Sorry.

Nothing "iffy" about it where I live. You buy and open it, it's yours till death do you part. No refunds, no exchanges. Which is why when a game is released in a half-finished and buggy state the message boards tend to get more than a little hostile. When I go to work, my boss pays me for the work I do, not for my "potential". I expect games to be the same way.

Les the Sarge 9-1b:

My Situation is the exact opposite of yours. I'm a Young College Student with little extra cash and free time. Like you, I hate getting burned by bad games. Which is why I have a strict "No-Demo = No-Purchase" policy. User reviews at places like Ebworld.com can help you get a feel of a game too, but you still have to be careful of crap like this.

Never buy the hype, always try it yourself, and never ever get involved in a game of "Pay and Patch."

[Les the Sarge 9-1b]

I guess my posts could be seen as "hype" vulnerable, just as easily.

I will acknowledge that.

Although in my case, I never listen to "hype" per se. I measure my opinion on key areas.

Is the game quoted as buggy or not. No talk of bugs at all is good. Lots of bugs is a good way of saying the designer hasn't a clue at even the basics of the craft, programming, let alone game design. "Some" bugs are inevitable, "lots" of bugs are not.

Does the game attract the interest of people that actually "hate" this style of game, yet willingly say it is ok in its genre. A hostile witness that can say something positive is very convincing.

Is the game beng spoken of well or is there a lot of "well they could have done this" comments. Because when you edit out all the default nice comments, is the gamer actually happy with what they got.

What's the opinion of the interface, because a computer game that isn't easy to play is pointless.

Are there any features that have no point beyond making the game look "cute". Cute isn't required of a wargame, credible is.

Mode, when you get right down to it, turn based games can be screwed up as easily as RTS games. Was the mode used worth it.

Demos are tricky, I am not sure on demos, I guess it depends on what the demo does. I think allowing a demo sure helps the buyer see the game as it actually is.

But the demo should be no better than an ad, not an option. I think a good demo demonstates how a game runs, and what is required to run the game. I don't see a need for it to be a mini game.

[ December 14, 2002, 08:23 AM: Message edited by: Les the Sarge 9-1b ]

[Hueristic]

I can't comment. I'd have to look up what "sychophant" means, and i'm too lazy.

[Henri]

Originally posted by J P Wagner:

I wasn't planning to stop at HOI before packing it in for the night...thanks for the heads up....the patch is up and running!

The 1.02 patch has improved the game considerably. In particular, a much tougher USSR and a tougher France. Be wary of making opinions based on a single game: certain events have random probabilities, and ahistorical things can happen.

I have played a number of AI vs AI games, and although most have had some rather curious turns, some have been very realistic.

The Allies usually win, and usually without any significant action from the USA. This is probably due to the reluctance of the Japanese to go after the Dutch colonies, which was the original reason for the war with the US. without that, there is no Pearl Harbor, and with no Pearl Harbor, no 1941 German declaration of war from Germany on the US.

Henri

[J P Wagner]

They have scripted some events such as the occupation of the Rhineland, Anschluss, and Czechoslavakia. Perhaps some additional options should be scripted, such as Pearl Harbor...I haven't played as Japan yet, maybe Pearl Harbor is already scripted....anyone know for sure?

[ December 15, 2002, 10:49 PM: Message edited by: J P Wagner ]

[Scorpion_sk]

The new patch is a major step forward and the game can now be classified as "releaseable".

Frankly , I am surprised of how much those two swedes in such a short time.....

The next patch ought to fine-tune the game, this one was a major emergency patch.

Not to mention that the community has gone above and beyond the call of duty in modifying the game to be better already....

Clearly this is an example for SC2.....MAKE IT EASILY EDITABLE!!!

[Grotius]

I agree, HOI has improved quite a bit with 1.02. I just finished a game as Australia, and Japan played more or less historically: did well in China, invaded the Phillipines, took Indochina (well, after rebuffing a French offensive from Vietnam), took half the Dutch East Indies, took Guam and Wake and some NZ possessions, and at game end duked it out with me on New Guinea. I held Port Moresby -- barely. Mostly I played badly: spent way too much time researching useless techs, didn't build enough units, miscalculated techs I needed for a CV, etc.

The campaign in the west was a bit less historical. Germany annexed Austria and Czech fine, and it rolled thru Poland and the Low Countries, but it got bogged down on the French border. Franco invaded southern Spain, and then the French counterattacked and conquered Spain! In fact, France ended up with half of Europe and half of Africa. The USSR declared war on Germany in 1941 and conquered it in May 1943.

My favorite "fun" moment: when a New Zealand cavalry unit showed up on the Maginot line.

[Tuomas Seijavuori]

Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1b:

I have Operational Art of War volume 1 Elite edition, the second best game in my inventory (my opinion).

I'm curious, Sarge: which is the best computer game in your inventory, then? UV? SPWAW?

[Les the Sarge 9-1b]

I have ever variation of Steel panthers that I think a normal search will locate.

I own the original versions of Steel Panthers including, the base game Steel Panthers; Steel Panthers II Modern Battles; Steel Panthers III Brigade Combat. I have all the versions of the game that are essentially updates of the above.

I have a lot of add on notions for Steel Panthers WaW including all 3 Mega Campaigns.

I play it because I am first and last an ASL gamer (Advanced Squad Leader), and Steel Panthers looks just like ASL.

I will almost certainly want Combat Leader which is not Steel Panthers 4 or any such thing. Combat Leader is to be the evolution of the turn based drive the tanks around type game is all.

I am assuming it will have teething troubles like all software.

I am familiar with UV Uncommon Valour, but I do not own it. My views on it are all based on studying the thoughts of known forum posters that have established manners of opinion.

Bill Macon for instance being a die hard A3R player is more likely to keep my interest in SC2 than anyone else perhaps.

But as I have not played Uncommon Valour, it is a victory by default for Steel Panthers.

I am not prone to like RTS or shooter type games (as is likely known to many). So when I say anything positive at all about one of those genres games, you can assume it has passed a brutal opinion test.

[BriantheWise]

To Les the Sarge:

Uncommon Valor: My thoughts, if I may....

It's a great game. Really. But...It kind of slogs, sometimes, and makes you (not you, but the gamer), dull out. It requires patience. It is very realistic. Like all Gary Grigsby games, there are a lot of numbers going on.

But the interface is easy.

My issues of the game (and it's alot better after the patches) are...

Ok, here's how I approach it. I get my ships, I get to really like them, especially my carriers. The daily air battles/bombing against Port Moresby by the Japanese, become tedious. Same goes with the other ports/airfields.

Then you finally get your carriers in place. You are ready for the battle, the big battle. Sometimes, it's a squat. Sometimes it's a Midway for good or ill (depending on how you look at it), sometimes it's a draw where you both lose a carrier or two.

But when the carriers to finally get into the battle, it's screaming frustrating (sometimes), when they don't find there target and their planes find you, and bang!, you lost your carriers. Game over.

You know history, and you know the order of battle, And you can understand that Grigsby follows that order of battle very closely (he does have some randomness involved).

When I play (hard level) I hide my carriers, no battle of the Coral Sea. And we dance and dice and I run, waiting for my carriers. They eventually come, but still I like them so it's dance and dice, till the final moment of decision. I have five carriers (you know their names: Enterprise, Yorktown, Lex, Wasp, and Sara). They have theirs. And then again, dicing and dancing, it comes down to weather, luck, chance, grimmaces.

It's great, but by now, You have played 18+ hours of game time.

It's good, and still on my hard drive, and I play it, when I'm watching TV, since every single day of that dice and dance, takes about ten minutes to figure out all those other bombing raids, searches, etc.

The interface is easy. But the game is still a bit slow, and sometimes just not as interactive as I would hope. SC is bashing, from the get go. UV requires alot of patience and time. (and the AI is very good too).

My opinion only...

thank you.