ROFLMAO Can't Hep it!

[Timskorn]

I hope CEAW becomes a good game. I have to say though I've been a little spoiled with SC2's graphics. One look at CEAW and I can feel my eyesight going.

[Blashy]

Actually I am looking forward to World in Flames, the board game is a huge success. Although I never played it. Might require tons of micro managing.

[SeaMonkey]

Ever read the rules Blashy? This will not be for the feint of heart.

I hope I'm wrong, but just the thought of playing one turn makes me tired.

[Desert Dave]

Originally posted by Agent Smith:

Great thread people.

What's going to happen when Victor releases Advanced Tactics? The game has hexes :eek:

The screenshots at matrix look :cool:

Could this become a never ending thread of threatened 'Fanboys' endlessly bemoaning about competition.

...try remembering back about 5-10 years ago, and think about how few decent wargames were even available, and rejoice in having CHOICES.

First, WHO is this... "Victor," and,

What's the big-deal diff, Smith,

WRT - hexes? :confused:

"Threatened fanboys bemoaning... "

LOLOL!

Look,

I myself KNOW what a superior

WW2 GS game should have in place,

In the way of REQUIRED

Mechanics & schematics,

Variants and "what-if's" besides.

Having played them ALL,

Covering, oh about 50 odd years now.

You cannot name one that I haven't

Closely examined,

If not - played out - cardboard or pixel,

Several or, more times than that, even.

Whether it be ANY of the Third Reich

Series

(... to include J Prados' latest

iteration, which, BTW, I would recommend

if you ain't already got it)

Or World in Flames - FE,

Or Totaler Krieg,

Or HoI (... ACK! I cringe at this

sloppy glop of bottom

of-barrel... garbage :eek: )

And so on and so on and - you git

The PIC, I am guessing.

That OTHER game under discussion

In this particular thread,

Lacks MOST of the MINIMAL requirements

For ANY decent WW2 GS game.

I ain't gonna list 'em

For the previously stated reason:

I ain't got NO interest in helping

Rank amateurs - who are stumblers

And flim-flammers... slumming

At the anti-creation edges,

Who wouldn't know faithful and

Historical precedent

IF it up and bit 'em

On enny appendages,

Ah, IMO - only.

Well, let's see,

You should know what's minimally required, eh?

YOU - apparently like 3R/A3R - since you've

Tried to make a MOD

Using that as a template, yes?

(... ain't it just grand! That

you CAN! Make such-like sort of mod, using

this here UN-precedented Editor, eh? :cool: )

Can you not notice the DIFFERENCE

Between what is superior?

And,

What is immensely - inferior?

Well, shucks podjo, I will ALWAYS be a "fan"

(... though the days of being a "boy"

Are long gone, down-under Dude... ever since

1966, at the least, LOL! )

Of ANY good, reliable, re-playable, and

Mainly attuned to what's historical,

Kind of game.

ANY.

So long as it meets certain criterium.

That other limping lame-game don't,

It's really that simple, and,

As some one has mentioned just recently,

One patch just... ain't gonna get it.

Done.

Like I said way back at the beginning,

Oh,

More like 10-20 patches and

A coupla 3 years.

OK.

Now! New market value of that

Other game dwindles to... 95 cents.

Crank up yer Electro Glide, Agent Smith,

Should you know what that is,

And how youse goes about

Man-handling it... through - ANY

Barricades,

Blue Meanie made, or, no.

Ayup, yer gonna need it.

[borsook]

Originally posted by Blashy:

Actually I am looking forward to World in Flames, the board game is a huge success. Although I never played it. Might require tons of micro managing.

They're doing a PC version? Great to hear! As for micro management, the more the better!

[Blashy]

http://www.worldinflames.com/

Forum: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tt.asp?forumid=110

Looks micro managing intensive, so it will cater to specific type of player. Still, the board game has so many excellent reviews.

[AZGungHo]

Whoa!

Micro management indeed! It looks like they are doing an incredible amount of research and work - but will it be playable?

[Blashy]

The say over 50 hours for a 1939-1945 game for ONE side. MP online will be tedious and from what I am reading people are more looking forward to pbem because of the length of turns is my guess.

[borsook]

Originally posted by Blashy:

The say over 50 hours for a 1939-1945 game for ONE side. MP online will be tedious and from what I am reading people are more looking forward to pbem because of the length of turns is my guess.

50 hours? Great! I've always found strategic games too short (with the notable exceptions of PI games), I have quite a few RPGs lasting more than 60 hours, why not strategies? After all it's just two weekends of non-stop play.

[targul]

Well, Borsook try CWIE it takes about 7 months of continuous PBEM for a game. I would say about 10 hours a day mininum to play a game in less then a year.

Yes, I love that game. But it requires serious dedication.

[Guest Mike]

I enjoy playing the Fire in the East scenario for TOAW - 1000 or so units a side, complicated moves can take several hours and represent 1/2 a week.......50 hours for one side of the whole of WW2 is nothing!!

[ChrisND]

I had been wanting to play that but no one would play it with me (Fire/East)

[Guest Mike]

Do you want a game? I prefer playing as Soviets if you're up for it as the Axis?

There's a mod out that makes it a bit more historical but also a bit more complicated (some more house rules) or we can play the standard?

[SeaMonkey]

Ooopps! Sorry ND.

SO...belay that suggestion in the V&D&A thread.

[ChrisND]

Originally posted by Stalin's Organist:

Do you want a game? I prefer playing as Soviets if you're up for it as the Axis?

There's a mod out that makes it a bit more historical but also a bit more complicated (some more house rules) or we can play the standard?

It's been forever since I played TOAW III. I stopped playing because the AI was just no good and I never bothered to find any human players.

You might have to hold my hand and have patience on turn response (taking double over full time summer courses). My email is paintman1066@hotmail.com

[Guest Mike]

You've got mail - but you have to start as the Axis

[Agent Smith]

Thanks DD

working on

my haiku response

[Samichlaus]

Originally posted by Stalin's Organist:

I playtested it for months & I wouldn't buy a full price copy but they gave it to us cheap!!

Oil & Manpower are 2 major advances over SC2 IMO, and there are some "back end" ones that are good too - use of a "shock" combat value for various things is a very good idea IMO.

Supply is much like SC2 IMO, although the mechanisms differ - however it at least represents troop and supply state on the icons, which is very good.

convoys are marginally better than routes because at least you can attack them with planes and surface ships. You can also upfrade minor allies' tech and commonwealth units are not a seperate nationality that gets no tech upgrades!!

The idea that they got icons from SC2 is stupid - there are only so-many ways you can draw a P-4 or a ME-109, and all of them originally come from the original versions not from previous games!! In fact these guys were looking for wargaming models to photograph for their sprites for a while so I expect that is where many of them come from.

However overall it leaves me a bit bored.

I don't like the research system, although IMO the idea that input carries on producing the goods for the whole game IS better than SC2's version. The whole "factories/focus" things just...well....it doesn't seem like WW2.

Leaders are just little icons on units and are easy to overlook and there's nothing like leader units to represent major supply/rear area efforts.

Partisans are only present if a country is notconquered IIRC - so no Yugoslav ones......but you can get Dutch ones in 1940.....sheesh!

Naval warfare is just as bad as SC2.

Overall it's jsut "lacking" as a good strategic level WW2 game. I give it a B on the strength of the original features it DOES have.

[Samichlaus]

I completely agree with Stalin's Organist: the few improvements in CEaW over SC2 and the (more) weaknesses. Still if a further game could merge all the pro's then this would form the best WWII game ever. For the moment I am eagerly awaiting SCII - WaW expansion (and World in Flames of course, but I am afraid this will still take years...)

[targul]

CEAW is a good game but not as polished as SC2. I enjoy both. I find SC2 better in AI and overall plsy but I must admit CEAW draws me constantly because I really prefer hexes over squares. I like the shock and navy convoys are an improvement.

But CEAW is so unbalanced it is unplayable as the allies. AI is horrible if not Russia or France. Totally unplayable without PBEM/IP. But as it stands no replay of PBEM and IP is hard to get it working.

CEAW needs much work but give it the years this game has and patches it could be better but since we are having another expansion this summer I suspect it will fall farther behind.