thewood Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 I am very interested in Histwar. Haven't looked at it recently, but its one of those games I hope is very successful. Phillip, ever read any of the Sharpe's novels that were mostly about the Peninsular war. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted November 30, 2007 Author Share Posted November 30, 2007 I may have been more interested in infantry, but I proved to be so bad at handling it in the CMx1 games. Give me a couple Hetzers and tell me to stop Pershings and Sherman Jumbos, that's where I shine. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 Definitely. Great books. I honestly also have a fondness for Sean Bean's Sharpe -- those are good shows, although they can't (for obvious reasons) hold a candle to the books. I'm currently reading The Recollections of Rifleman Harris, on the non-fiction side of things, a book I've heard about but never gotten round to. If you haven't, it's worth a read just for the small details. It's almost completely unedited, just a couple hundred pages of the musings of a man who remembers far too much. Honestly, I've been sort of dancing around the idea of Napoleonics for a while -- modern warfare has always captured my attention more readily. The more easily-grasped levels of complexity, the ingenious campaigns, and the volumes of available works on the Napoleonic era have drawn me in again, though, over the past couple years. I spent my childhood reading Sharpe, then watching Sharpe as those came out, and finally playing Fields of Glory and other games for FAR too long, owning way too many Osprey books and other treatments -- but all in all I still feel very much a neophyte. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 Rick, I'm just the opposite. Hand me four M1s and a Brad company, and I'll give you a dozen smoking friendly hulks inside of five minutes, with the rest following shortly thereafter. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewood Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 Can you recommend a good book that covers the more military side of the wars of napolean? The ones I find in the local stores in the states tend to focus too much on the grand strategy and politics. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted November 30, 2007 Author Share Posted November 30, 2007 The difference in peoples abilities with these games is interesting. The only thing I do well with infantry is if I'm defending I can usually do a good job of making sure that my enemy's tanks don't have good infantry support. I think my weakness is that I'm lousy at foreseeing all the possible locations my enemy might have automatic weapons that will quickly cause me heavy casualties. Oh well, at operational level games I'm just not very good, period. I'm torn as to my feelings toward them too. I like how you can see your impact on the battle better than in a game at CM's level, however, my main interest in the military lies in the equipment and you get to play around with that stuff directly in a CM level game. My main interest is actually naval aviation, but I've never found an air warfare game that I've really been happy with. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalem Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 Originally posted by thewood: Can you recommend a good book that covers the more military side of the wars of napolean? The ones I find in the local stores in the states tend to focus too much on the grand strategy and politics. Actually I think the Sharpe's Rifles series is a great place to start. And funner than all get-out to boot. -dale 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hev Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 Totaly off topic but have you tried Falcon 4.0, its not carrier based but it is HARDCORE! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewood Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 read em all already. Looking for non-fiction 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoColdInWinter Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 Originally posted by Hev: Totaly off topic but have you tried Falcon 4.0, its not carrier based but it is HARDCORE! That game is rediculous! I tried to learn to play it but I didn't have time to teach myself! I ended up building guns-only scenarios with lots of slow moving fighters and jetliners!! There's also a nuke in that game that you can drop on unluckies.... IL2 1946 has much less steep learning curve but is just as challenging... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted November 30, 2007 Author Share Posted November 30, 2007 I haven't tried Falcon 4.0. Does anyone have a good idea of where to get a reasonably good force feedback joystick that connects via USB or firewire for a reasonable price? There doesn't seem to be many around anymore, and the ones that are, are quite expensive. Because I would love to try either Falcon 4.0 or the game where you get all of UbiSoft's like Il2 and Pacific Fighers in one package, but my joystick won't connect to my new computer. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveDash Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 Allied Force, which is the re-release of Falcon 4.0 makes Faclon 4.0 look like childs play. It's one of the most serious war sims around. The game simulates in real time an entire modern conflict such as a modern day Korean war, and top of that has an incredably complex and high fidelaty simulation model for the F-16. I mean if you go real hard core you have to go through the proper engine procedures and what have you just to taxi to the runway. In Allied Force the cockpit is almost entirely clickable, with real modelled buttons and the graphics have been improved. I've played a lot of flight sims (including Falcon 3 back in the day) and it took me about a week of practice just to master BVR combat and the F-16 radar. In the real time campaign too you know you're in a high intenisty conflict. The sky is filled with planes doing various missions and all around you war is raging, land, sea, and air. Bomb an airfield and it has to get repaired, etc etc. None of this static mission bollocks. So yeah. Allied Force (Falcon 4.0 improved) absolutely rocks, but you have to be REAL hardcore. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spindry69 Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 A game to keep an eye on is Fighter Ops, it could well be the spiritual sucessor to Falcon 4. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkEzra Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 Originally posted by Rick: The difference in peoples abilities with these games is interesting. The only thing I do well with infantry is if I'm defending I can usually do a good job of making sure that my enemy's tanks don't have good infantry support. I think my weakness is that I'm lousy at foreseeing all the possible locations my enemy might have automatic weapons that will quickly cause me heavy casualties. Oh well, at operational level games I'm just not very good, period. I'm torn as to my feelings toward them too. I like how you can see your impact on the battle better than in a game at CM's level, however, my main interest in the military lies in the equipment and you get to play around with that stuff directly in a CM level game. My main interest is actually naval aviation, but I've never found an air warfare game that I've really been happy with. I really enjoy the infantry The game's graphics are a CONSTANT reminder of just how great a leader I am! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 thewood: Honestly I've been away for so long that I'm getting back in on the ground floor. I've read that The Spanish Ulcer is a great book on the Peninsular War in particular. Actually there's a thread on the HistWar forum that lists just about EVERY good book ever written on Napoleonic matters, including mini-reviews, recommendations, and details. I looked around there a couple weeks ago and found a bunch of great books to order / find. Good place to start! Rick: I'm pretty sure most folks who do well with infantry have done the job before. It's something you need an eye for. At any rate, I learned a lot from www.nasaga.org/webx/resources/resources/close_combat_marine_workbook.pdf which is actually a great tutorial on basic infantry tactics. The good bits begin with the Modules. If you have some version of Close Combat, try setting up the scenarios they outline and playing them out, or just thinking about them otherwise. They're really useful -- it's easier to spot MG positions when you know where *you'd* put them, right? Also, read the introduction, it's a neat view on learning tactics (if it's the right version -- there're about eight of them floating around). I always wanted to try Allied Force. I played Falcon 3.0 until my hands bled, always figured AF would be some fun. Awesome thread, by the way! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melnibone Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 Originally posted by thewood: Can you recommend a good book that covers the more military side of the wars of napolean? The ones I find in the local stores in the states tend to focus too much on the grand strategy and politics. Campaigns of Napoleon by Chandler is considered THE book by many. It's big - but extremely readable. I'm about halfway through it at the moment. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'Card Posted December 1, 2007 Share Posted December 1, 2007 You know... I tend to be a guy who gives developers a lot of slack when it comes to bugs. I usually think "Well, there's no way they can anticipate every possible hardware configuration." -or- "That's probably something that didn't crop up in testing because you wouldn't normally get into that situation." Driver problems, display problems, even balance issues seem to me like things you can't reasonably expect a developer to fully know about until the rubber meets the road, so to speak. But none of that sort of logic applies here, does it? That's the part that bothers me. The game didn't just ship with bugs. It shipped with bugs that were obvious, serious, and in some cases (multi-player, for example) crippling. It shipped with bugs that BFC simply had to be fully aware of when they released it. That bothers me. In fact, it bothers me a lot - because someone, somewhere, had to make the decision to go ahead and roll it out the door that way. The explanation about having to live up to a contractual obligation makes sense, but it's an explanation that was delivered after-the-fact, after-my-money-had-been-spent, and in some ways that just made it worse than no explanation at all. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted December 1, 2007 Author Share Posted December 1, 2007 Another case of perspective I agree with those facts for the most part, some of the bugs were the type that could've easily been missed, many it's hard to imagine that they could've been. I'm not angry about it though. Maybe it's because I haven't had nearly as much time to play the game as I'd like and I find it quite playable now, although still needing improvement. I certainly hope they never let that situation with a distributor pop up again. I can totally see how that could happen. That's why with the book project that I am now working on I haven't even started looking for a publisher until I knew for sure I could deliver. I have now confirmed that to myself, so I will begin to search for a publisher. Granted I can make the book better with more time, but I probably have the material I need to go to press in a month or two, if I an write that fast. Anyhow, doesn't anyone have a solution to my joystick dilemma? I actually read an internet article about this somewhere, where it was discussed how good joysticks are few and far between now because of the shrinking popularity of combat flight sims. What I would ideally like to see is something like the Battlefront guys' earlier air war games but with some sort of easier to manage control system. I've yet to see a game of that type with an intuitive method of controlling the planes. Not that I would know how to set that up. Combat flight sims hold a lot of promise if I could solve the joystick availability thing and find one that the game really emphasizes tactics. Most seem to emphasize hand/eye coordination. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hev Posted December 1, 2007 Share Posted December 1, 2007 Ok, i use a saitek x52, its got no force feedback but i dont even miss it. The joystick is fully loaded with functions, it feels solid to fly with and it even has a clock! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spindry69 Posted December 1, 2007 Share Posted December 1, 2007 Personally I like the CH products, especially for modern jet sims. Saitek are good too. Here's a review between the two. http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/ch_products_saitek_x52_review/ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paper Tiger Posted December 1, 2007 Share Posted December 1, 2007 Mark: Look what they did to my boy. A fan of the Godfather perhaps? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkEzra Posted December 1, 2007 Share Posted December 1, 2007 Ahhhh so you caught it. That was actually sent during my PBEM with Max Molinaro (Ruhr River). He is VERY good a "photoquips" hmmm have I just invented a word? And I was responding to one of his. But while it was all in fun. The medics are one of my real favorites. A visual reminder of the cost of war. And my true ignorance of the nature of combat.... Saw a post of yours elsewhere: Here's a thought by Old Winnie: "When you are going through Hell...Keep Going!" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paper Tiger Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 Best movie of all time mate. With a cracking sequel to boot. Not so sure about no3 but still love it. Yup, agree with that sentiment. I travel back to Indonesia tomorrow and I'm very happy about that. It's too dark and cold here and that's not helping my mood. Lots of sunshine, tropical heat and friendly, smiling people for another year, lovely. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveDash Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 Originally posted by 'Card: You know... I tend to be a guy who gives developers a lot of slack when it comes to bugs. I usually think "Well, there's no way they can anticipate every possible hardware configuration." -or- "That's probably something that didn't crop up in testing because you wouldn't normally get into that situation." Driver problems, display problems, even balance issues seem to me like things you can't reasonably expect a developer to fully know about until the rubber meets the road, so to speak. But none of that sort of logic applies here, does it? That's the part that bothers me. The game didn't just ship with bugs. It shipped with bugs that were obvious, serious, and in some cases (multi-player, for example) crippling. It shipped with bugs that BFC simply had to be fully aware of when they released it. That bothers me. In fact, it bothers me a lot - because someone, somewhere, had to make the decision to go ahead and roll it out the door that way. The explanation about having to live up to a contractual obligation makes sense, but it's an explanation that was delivered after-the-fact, after-my-money-had-been-spent, and in some ways that just made it worse than no explanation at all. Welcome to the gaming industry. Where have you been the last 9 or so years? The ONLY way to avoid this is to have small little developers who BF once were release a back-yard game with minimal funding because they -have- to do it rigt. Now with publishers who dictate everything games need to be released ASAP so revenue can be gathered - and don't worry - we'll patch it later. I'm not saying I agree with it, but this is how the gaming industry IS now. You need the big bucks to survive and produce quality games. In fact, CMSF could have done with more. Blaming the developers in all this is extreme naive, more than likely the blame rests at the publishers feet. Give it another few more years and when console gaming completely rules the pooch we will return to the old days of quality, engaging games. PC gaming will of course become far more niche, but that is not nessesarily a bad thing given the Music-Industry like trends big gaming is now following. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sirocco Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 Originally posted by DaveDash: Blaming the developers in all this is extreme naive, more than likely the blame rests at the publishers feet.How so, when the developers knew the terms of the contract when they signed it? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.