Tunisia '43

[eastwindrain]

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl

ORIGINAL: Lowlander

On reflection all my PBEM opponents without exception game in 2D[...].

There's no data on the counters in that view.

All that's conveyed is unit-type and nationality.

The counter data is only available, on-map, in the 3-D view.

Edit: Here's the example of the 3-D view that I posted earlier:



So, if players want to take advantage of the data, that's the view that they're stuck with.

All the counter info is displayed in the hex info area , futhermore if you right-click on it the units org will be displayed.

[eastwindrain]

Once you've changed your drawers [:D] - I wasn't referring to a 3d game but I was mentioning one at the JT PzCampaign scale. I didn't want to start plugging another series but since you asked [:)] Panther Games has created Airborne Ops and now Command Ops, which you can get through Matrix. If you ever get your hands on it fire up Joe's Bridge from their Highway to the Reich, the 1st battle I think or something from Battles from the Bulge. Then fire up the similar one in HPS Arnhem '44 or Bulge '44. A picture is worth 1,000 words and that did it for me. But it's not just the graphics. That's all I'm saying. I no longer have any PzC on my computer so I can do a comparison for you. In the end it all boils down to whatever you prefer.

Regards,
[/quote]

I have looked this over but cannot see the 3D graphics, the map and counters are very good but l'll stress IMO the map contours are not very well defined and therefore as a whole the terrain looks rather flat, which is a shame but I don't own the game so I may be wrong.
Also am I correct in stating it's only various scenarios/battles and not the whole campaign.

On the plus side I would agree it looks like a nice bit of kit and l'll try out the demo over the weekend.

[Prince of Eckmühl]

ORIGINAL: Lowlander

All the counter info is displayed in the hex info area , futhermore if you right-click on it the units org will be displayed.

I don't want to view the data in the "hex-info area."

I want to view it on the map so that I can plot movement and attacks.

Does ease-of-use mean nothing to you?[:)]

And do you realize that the image that you posted above doesn't display the units in question on the map itself?

From the very beginning, I've proclaimed that I can live with ugly.

What I can't endure is that which undermines my ability to play effectively.

The 3-D view simply doesn't cut it in that regard.

And what you seem to be suggesting is that players don't need a zoomed-in view at all.

They can simply use the 2-D view with it's obvious limitations.

Question: Why do you think that Tiller include the 3-D view, given that even a fan of the games like yourself doesn't appear to use it?

[V22 Osprey]

simple: Sometimes terrain is hard to distinguish in the 2D view, especially with dense areas of swamp, trees, or cities. 3D helps you put a perspective the terrain, and yes, most PzC players use the 2D view.

I'd also like to add I like his approach of graphics on France '14. Superb Game.

[Prince of Eckmühl]

ORIGINAL: V22 Osprey

simple: Sometimes terrain is hard to distinguish in the 2D view, especially with dense areas of swamp, trees, or cities. 3D helps you put a perspective the terrain, and yes, most PzC players use the 2D view.

Do you find the image below easy to interpret?



I don't. [:)]

Rather, I find it a recipe for confusion and mistakes, something that I can't abide in a game that I want to play competitively.

[eastwindrain]

Do you find the image below easy to interpret?



I don't. [:)]

Rather, I find it a recipe for confusion and mistakes, something that I can't abide in a game that I want to play competitively.
[/quote]

Isn't that the difference between a good general and a bad one !!!.

[V22 Osprey]

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl

ORIGINAL: V22 Osprey

simple: Sometimes terrain is hard to distinguish in the 2D view, especially with dense areas of swamp, trees, or cities. 3D helps you put a perspective the terrain, and yes, most PzC players use the 2D view.

Do you find the image below easy to interpret?

Actually yes,

[Hertston]

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl
Question: Why do you think that Tiller include the 3-D view, given that even a fan of the games like yourself doesn't appear to use it?

I suspect it was just public demand. The first I bought was SB Vietnam which didn't have it, and in games across several series (although I pretty much only play the ACW ones now) I've rarely used it. The 2D graphics for that series are quite acceptable, and there are usually mods available for SB, PzC and MB to bring them up to scratch.

The main problem is that mentioned earlier, that the graphics don't scale and you are just left wanting a further level that will accommodate counters with much more info on them. Ironically, despite looking cr*p, the 3D zoom levels are fine for 1920 x 1080 because they were always far too 'zoomed' at the resolutions the engine was designed for; 3D normal was completely useless.

Solution... I usually play Tiller games on my netbook, where they look perfect! [:)] The DRM isn't a total killer for me, but it is a huge disincentive and JT will have to produce something both other than more-of-the-same and better than the competition before I'll think about buying.

[dudalb_slith]

ORIGINAL: Vyshka

ORIGINAL: SuluSea

Tiller has some interesting titles but the dated art and from what I understand a DRM makes his games in this day and age a no buy for me.

I could live with the graphics if the title was up my alley (I play his guadalcanal)but not the DRM.

Do you not buy Matrix Games then? His DRM is no more onerous than what Matrix does. In fact, in some ways his is less so because with Matrix you have to enter in the SN every time you patch the game. People are making way too much out of this.

Difference is that if I keep a copy of the serial number safe on a backup CD with the installer, c, Matrix could vanish from the face of the earth and I could still play the game, but if Tiller's company goes under I am SOL with one of his games.

[Anonymous]

[Deleted by Admins]

[rahamy]

ORIGINAL: V22 Osprey

ORIGINAL: Vyshka

ORIGINAL: SuluSea

Tiller has some interesting titles but the dated art and from what I understand a DRM makes his games in this day and age a no buy for me.

I could live with the graphics if the title was up my alley (I play his guadalcanal)but not the DRM.

Do you not buy Matrix Games then? His DRM is no more onerous than what Matrix does. In fact, in some ways his is less so because with Matrix you have to enter in the SN every time you patch the game. People are making way too much out of this.

Let's see, His DRM requires a 'phone home' and you are limited to 2 installs. I don't see how Matrix is just as onerous just because you have to put in a serial number for patches when after I put in the Serial Number, I own the game, no phone home, I can install it on all my computers no problem, I can do what ever the heck I want with it after I put in my serial number. Yet, for something YOU paid for, John Tiller has complete control over it. Please explain you logic because it's not making much sense.

There is only an initial activation - so no "phone home" is required. That implies it checks the web server every time you play the game which is simply not true. The only way you have to reactivate is if your hardware changes - and most other systems will require that as well, for example, Windows...

And limiting installs? 2 computers at any one time is too limiting? If you get a new machine simply move your install to the new one and you are off and running...seems pretty good to me. Its not like you get 2 activations period, so its really not very limiting, IMHO.

[rahamy]

ORIGINAL: dudalb

ORIGINAL: Vyshka

ORIGINAL: SuluSea

Tiller has some interesting titles but the dated art and from what I understand a DRM makes his games in this day and age a no buy for me.

I could live with the graphics if the title was up my alley (I play his guadalcanal)but not the DRM.

Do you not buy Matrix Games then? His DRM is no more onerous than what Matrix does. In fact, in some ways his is less so because with Matrix you have to enter in the SN every time you patch the game. People are making way too much out of this.

Difference is that if I keep a copy of the serial number safe on a backup CD with the installer, c, Matrix could vanish from the face of the earth and I could still play the game, but if Tiller's company goes under I am SOL with one of his games.

It is part of the business plan to release updates for all games removing all checks if the company closes its doors...so shy of a complete economic collapse of our country you are covered. And if it all goes down the drain I venture to say you wont be worried about playing wargames of any sort...

[E]

ORIGINAL: rahamy
There is only an initial activation - so no "phone home" is required.

An "initial activation" -->IS<-- a "phone home."

ORIGINAL: rahamy
It is part of the business plan to release updates for all games removing all checks if the company closes its doors.

Yep. Sure. Uh-huh. Until you get there, that is something you cannot promise (read: been there, got the tee-shirt).

Sorry rahamy,

Until those two posts, I _really_ thought you had some legitimacy. But those two posts are completely "corporate." And to be realistic... they're insulting to our intelligence (c'mon, trying to say a phone home "initial activation" is not a "phone home"!? ...wtf?).

[Hertston]

ORIGINAL: E

Yep. Sure. Uh-huh. Until you get there, that is something you cannot promise (read: been there, got the tee-shirt).

Agreed. That particular claim cannot be relied on no matter who makes it, and no matter how well intentioned they are. The 'business plan' tends to go out the window when suddenly an administrator/liquidator/trustee in bankruptcy is the only person able to access company assets, tangible or not. 'Complete economic collapse' is not required!

[rahamy]

Sure, 15 years in the industry of supporting the products above and beyond any other company lends no credibility... JT was releasing upgrades for the Battleground series after he left Talonsoft & supports HPS titles now too. Sure, no precedence there... what ever guys...

[E]

ORIGINAL: rahamy

Sure, 15 years in the industry of supporting the products above and beyond any other company lends no credibility... JT was releasing upgrades for the Battleground series after he left Talonsoft & supports HPS titles now too. Sure, no precedence there... what ever guys...

Misdirection.

Updates for an admittedly long while in some cases is one thing. But promises made in an uncertain future is a completely different thing.

Please explain again how a phone home scheme doesn't count unless it does it ALL the time. Please explain how an "initial activation" is not a "phone home."

And when exactly was the last Battleground update again? And the last Talonsoft update?

C'mon rahamy, I've honestly tried to see both sides and have pointed out the long term/ongoing support, but this line you "seem" to be taking is over "the" line of credibility. You might want to re-think it in terms of... even what the economy has gone through. It took a beating to do it, but people learned not to believe on nothing more than past performance. Not to mention "promises."

[Hertston]

ORIGINAL: rahamy

Sure, 15 years in the industry of supporting the products above and beyond any other company lends no credibility... JT was releasing upgrades for the Battleground series after he left Talonsoft & supports HPS titles now too. Sure, no precedence there... what ever guys...

No, it doesn't add the slightest bit of 'credibility' or any precedent, because it has no relevance. You do not seem to understand the issue. Is is not whether JT (or whoever else has made the same claim or similar) would want to issue DRM removing updates - nobody disputes that - but whether they would actually be able to do so.

Let me outline a possible scenario. Developer John Doe's company is wound up at the petition of it's creditors and a liquidator appointed. The liquidator discovers that the primary assets of the company are the games it has developed and are selling (note these belong to the company, not John Doe the individual). Tasked as he/she is to recover the maximum amount of money for creditors, the liquidator investigates the possibility of selling the rights to those games to another publisher for the maximum sum possible. In the meantime, John Doe would have as much legal right to release a no-DRM patch for those games as you or I have to release one for those same games tomorrow. The liquidator would only consent to such a release if he/she were certain it would not reduce the value of those assets.. and the very fact that John Doe thought DRM necessary in the first place is likely to be strong evidence that it would do just that.

[Bison36]

I bought Kharkov 43 through the JTS DD.&nbsp; It was an easy, friendly process.&nbsp; Now I don't necessarily like the DRM at all, but I just don't see the guys at JTS screwing over fans if they found themselves insolvent down the road.&nbsp; Rahamy does have years of helpful, friendly service to back up what he says.&nbsp; I for one give him the benefit of the doubt on this issue.

[berto]

ORIGINAL: Bison36

Rahamy does have years of helpful, friendly service to back up what he says.

Quite true. I can personally vouch for that.

[Prince of Eckmühl]

What's missing in this conversation?

Well, remember when wargamers collected things, games perhaps?

In that exact same context, I'd humbly suggest that this model is a dead-on-arrival proposition.

Kill off the collectors and the game in question will never thrive among wargamers:


Note that the guy has purchased two of everything, a play copy and one for his collection.

Are he and I the only folks on the planet who operate this way?

Obviously, I think not.

Proponents of DRM who support this whole rental-ethos are simply doomed in this market.

It will never work, and I've got the MC receipts and games to prove it.

NO RENTALS, PLEASE![:-]