Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Hopes for this game

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Tigers on the Hunt >> Hopes for this game Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Hopes for this game - 2/8/2016 11:20:10 PM   
RobertMc

 

Posts: 133
Joined: 5/10/2000
From: Birmingham, Alabama, USA
Status: offline
Hello Peter, I'll be supporting this game 150 percent...have been waiting for an "ASL"-type computer game for a long time. A few things I hope will be in an expansion--and I'm hoping the game will sell enough to rate an expansion--would be walls, hedges, two-story or larger buildings, ability to set fires (of course!) and something that maybe only I would like...the ability to name your leaders for a more personal touch. Looking forward to the game's release!
Post #: 1
RE: Hopes for this game - 2/9/2016 12:51:13 AM   
tigercub


Posts: 2004
Joined: 2/3/2003
From: brisbane oz
Status: offline
you can play the AI or hotseat thats it!....hot seat and this kind of game a very HOT seat!

Tigercub

_____________________________


You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life

(in reply to RobertMc)
Post #: 2
RE: Hopes for this game - 2/9/2016 4:16:39 AM   
RobertMc

 

Posts: 133
Joined: 5/10/2000
From: Birmingham, Alabama, USA
Status: offline
Fine with me. I only play solo anyway, and I like it that way. Cheers!

(in reply to tigercub)
Post #: 3
RE: Hopes for this game - 2/9/2016 7:02:20 PM   
waltero


Posts: 209
Joined: 1/24/2008
From: Alaska
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RobertMc

Fine with me. I only play solo anyway, and I like it that way. Cheers!


That way you never lose

_____________________________

"WELL ~ Mrs. LIncoln,
other than that, How was the play?

(in reply to RobertMc)
Post #: 4
RE: Hopes for this game - 2/9/2016 7:12:19 PM   
Ron

 

Posts: 506
Joined: 6/6/2002
Status: offline
I don't know, single player and hotseat only for this type of game raises eyebrows. I'm assuming the file exchanges are the obstacle to overcome? Others have solved this so am unsure why not here. More of an odder design choice is the lack of walls, hedges, bocage etc, and assuming again no bypass movement has been modelled? Read that firegroups can only be formed from units within the same hex also which again seems like a really odd restriction. The initial ASL comparison is an attraction but will have to wait and see the tactical game fleshed out more before committing.

(in reply to RobertMc)
Post #: 5
RE: Hopes for this game - 2/10/2016 4:02:39 AM   
Rosseau

 

Posts: 2630
Joined: 9/13/2009
Status: offline
I do admire the dev's policy of "full disclosure" in these videos. Maybe my memory is bad, but other than static AAR's, many games don't show you exactly what you'll be getting in advance.

Obviously, with all the sub-segments, pbem file transfers would be impractical. Lots of mouse clicking - way more than HPS fare, which allows you to let AI move your units if you get lazy. Looks like some serious work here, unless you're playing the smallest scenarios. Still, I can't pass this one up based on the level of detail, etc.

(in reply to Ron)
Post #: 6
RE: Hopes for this game - 2/10/2016 5:03:22 AM   
Gerry4321

 

Posts: 874
Joined: 3/24/2003
Status: offline
The only way to get over file exchanges would be for Matrix to set up a server to play live. Could be you just play an opponent for an hour and finish the next night or you might be able to finish a small scenario in one setting. It would be great. Nothing like PBEM for these tactical wargames. Hope Matrix will look into some avenue for us. As I said before I am not a player that will be happy playing the AI. There is something special about playing a human opponent.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron

I don't know, single player and hotseat only for this type of game raises eyebrows. I'm assuming the file exchanges are the obstacle to overcome? Others have solved this so am unsure why not here. More of an odder design choice is the lack of walls, hedges, bocage etc, and assuming again no bypass movement has been modelled? Read that firegroups can only be formed from units within the same hex also which again seems like a really odd restriction. The initial ASL comparison is an attraction but will have to wait and see the tactical game fleshed out more before committing.


(in reply to Ron)
Post #: 7
RE: Hopes for this game - 2/10/2016 9:17:48 AM   
IainMcNeil


Posts: 2788
Joined: 10/26/2004
From: London
Status: offline
We have the PBEM++ system available to all our developers but its not always as easy as it sounds to implement multiplayer so this is entirely down to the game and its design. Sometimes there are technical issues (It could be that it was always assumed one side would be AI controlled) and other times design issues (are there any decisions points in the enemy turn - this prevent PBEM style play).

_____________________________

Iain McNeil
Director
Matrix Games

(in reply to Gerry4321)
Post #: 8
RE: Hopes for this game - 2/10/2016 12:56:37 PM   
Peter Fisla


Posts: 2480
Joined: 10/5/2001
From: Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rosseau
Obviously, with all the sub-segments, pbem file transfers would be impractical. Lots of mouse clicking - way more than HPS fare, which allows you to let AI move your units if you get lazy. Looks like some serious work here, unless you're playing the smallest scenarios. Still, I can't pass this one up based on the level of detail, etc.


This is the reason why I didn't implement PBEM, too many files to be exchanged between players because of the nature of the game design. The way the defending player can respond with defensive fire against an enemy unit moving, it just makes it very impractical. Note that there is a way around this by simply sending the saved game file between players so the game does in a way indirectly supports PBEM.

< Message edited by Peter Fisla -- 2/10/2016 1:57:40 PM >

(in reply to Rosseau)
Post #: 9
RE: Hopes for this game - 2/10/2016 1:09:19 PM   
harry_vdk

 

Posts: 338
Joined: 6/10/2014
From: Drachten
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Peter Fisla

quote:

ORIGINAL: rosseau
Obviously, with all the sub-segments, pbem file transfers would be impractical. Lots of mouse clicking - way more than HPS fare, which allows you to let AI move your units if you get lazy. Looks like some serious work here, unless you're playing the smallest scenarios. Still, I can't pass this one up based on the level of detail, etc.


This is the reason why I didn't implement PBEM, too many files to be exchanged between players because of the nature of the game design. The way the defending player can respond with defensive fire against an enemy unit moving, it just makes it very impractical. Note that there is a way around this by simply sending the saved game file between players so the game does in a way indirectly supports PBEM.


Peter,

Perhaps you can use BitTorrent Sync as a tool for sending/sync the files.

There is a API for setup a folder structure and I think the responds is sufficient. And easier to implement.

Harry

(in reply to Peter Fisla)
Post #: 10
RE: Hopes for this game - 2/10/2016 2:16:37 PM   
Peter Fisla


Posts: 2480
Joined: 10/5/2001
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: harry_vdk


quote:

ORIGINAL: Peter Fisla

quote:

ORIGINAL: rosseau
Obviously, with all the sub-segments, pbem file transfers would be impractical. Lots of mouse clicking - way more than HPS fare, which allows you to let AI move your units if you get lazy. Looks like some serious work here, unless you're playing the smallest scenarios. Still, I can't pass this one up based on the level of detail, etc.


This is the reason why I didn't implement PBEM, too many files to be exchanged between players because of the nature of the game design. The way the defending player can respond with defensive fire against an enemy unit moving, it just makes it very impractical. Note that there is a way around this by simply sending the saved game file between players so the game does in a way indirectly supports PBEM.


Peter,

Perhaps you can use BitTorrent Sync as a tool for sending/sync the files.

There is a API for setup a folder structure and I think the responds is sufficient. And easier to implement.

Harry


It's not the technology that's the challenge, it's the nature of the game that makes it difficult to implement PBEM.

(in reply to harry_vdk)
Post #: 11
RE: Hopes for this game - 2/10/2016 2:43:03 PM   
aaatoysandmore

 

Posts: 2854
Joined: 9/11/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RobertMc

Fine with me. I only play solo anyway, and I like it that way. Cheers!


Me too. Too many games ruined by PBEM and multiplayer anyways I think.

(in reply to RobertMc)
Post #: 12
RE: Hopes for this game - 2/10/2016 6:57:22 PM   
waltero


Posts: 209
Joined: 1/24/2008
From: Alaska
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: aaatoysandmore


quote:

ORIGINAL: RobertMc

Fine with me. I only play solo anyway, and I like it that way. Cheers!


Me too. Too many games ruined by PBEM and multiplayer anyways I think.



Why would a game lose its flavor by allowing multiplayer compatibility?
You will always have the AI...regardless.



_____________________________

"WELL ~ Mrs. LIncoln,
other than that, How was the play?

(in reply to aaatoysandmore)
Post #: 13
RE: Hopes for this game - 2/10/2016 8:11:48 PM   
pad152

 

Posts: 2871
Joined: 4/23/2000
Status: offline
If you watch the play video, there are interrupts/opportunity fire that happens during the enemy movement phase, you can't do interactive opportunity fire with PBM files.

(in reply to waltero)
Post #: 14
RE: Hopes for this game - 2/10/2016 8:27:49 PM   
Gerry4321

 

Posts: 874
Joined: 3/24/2003
Status: offline
I realize this is the way the game is set up. But ASL is the same and they have a VASL Server that can be used to play live or by PBEM. In live play as the opponent moves a unit one hex you say "k" for them to keep moving (like you do by pressing the button here) or you fire on them. The server system would have to be created to tie in with the game I realize.

(in reply to pad152)
Post #: 15
RE: Hopes for this game - 2/10/2016 8:41:41 PM   
Paullus

 

Posts: 1054
Joined: 6/9/2015
From: Sweden
Status: offline
The VASL PBEM isn't good, it is just okay. You would still have to send the file after every move or come up with a houserule.

_____________________________

For my part, I shall do my duty as a general; I shall see to it that you are given the chance of a successful action. /Lucius Aemilius Paullus

(in reply to Gerry4321)
Post #: 16
RE: Hopes for this game - 2/10/2016 8:45:08 PM   
Gerry4321

 

Posts: 874
Joined: 3/24/2003
Status: offline
Jorgen, you don't have to with live play. Yes, with PBEM.

(in reply to Paullus)
Post #: 17
RE: Hopes for this game - 2/10/2016 9:57:28 PM   
waltero


Posts: 209
Joined: 1/24/2008
From: Alaska
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Paullus

The VASL PBEM isn't good, it is just okay. You would still have to send the file after every move or come up with a houserule.



I would gladly settle for "Just OK" oppose to nothing.
Defensive Firer could be preset to fire on predesignated target hex?
Auto-set might have to include some random behavior...that's OK!

If it wasn't for hot seat I wouldn't even bother with this game.
Thank god for hot seat.

Are you really that hopeless in trying to develop and advance the multi-player game




_____________________________

"WELL ~ Mrs. LIncoln,
other than that, How was the play?

(in reply to Paullus)
Post #: 18
RE: Hopes for this game - 2/10/2016 10:39:51 PM   
Ron

 

Posts: 506
Joined: 6/6/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Peter Fisla

This is the reason why I didn't implement PBEM, too many files to be exchanged between players because of the nature of the game design. The way the defending player can respond with defensive fire against an enemy unit moving, it just makes it very impractical. Note that there is a way around this by simply sending the saved game file between players so the game does in a way indirectly supports PBEM.


Why not a form of automation - SOPs to name one? This isn't the first time this has come up and others have "solved" it. Smacks of poor design to me.

(in reply to Peter Fisla)
Post #: 19
RE: Hopes for this game - 2/11/2016 3:09:14 AM   
tigercub


Posts: 2004
Joined: 2/3/2003
From: brisbane oz
Status: offline
this game is not going to work PBEM way to slow.

But multi-player game is what is badly needed.
broke my hart when i saw only Hotseat!



_____________________________


You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life

(in reply to Ron)
Post #: 20
RE: Hopes for this game - 2/11/2016 2:32:44 PM   
blazej

 

Posts: 76
Joined: 4/17/2007
Status: offline
I'm perfectly happy playing the AI. It's never easy to find a human opponent. Everything of course depends on how strong the AI is. In the gameplay video posted earlier this week we can see the AI on the offensive and doing a very good job. So I would say - kudos!

Michal

(in reply to tigercub)
Post #: 21
RE: Hopes for this game - 2/11/2016 4:06:47 PM   
waltero


Posts: 209
Joined: 1/24/2008
From: Alaska
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tigercub

this game is not going to work PBEM way to slow.

But multi-player game is what is badly needed.
broke my hart when i saw only Hotseat!




Mine too

I think I will take a pass on this one...all hope is lost ("hope for this game").


< Message edited by waltero -- 2/11/2016 5:09:33 PM >


_____________________________

"WELL ~ Mrs. LIncoln,
other than that, How was the play?

(in reply to tigercub)
Post #: 22
RE: Hopes for this game - 2/11/2016 6:01:22 PM   
rickier65

 

Posts: 14205
Joined: 4/20/2000
Status: offline

I wouldn't give up all hoope yet. If this game offers a hot seat mode, then it might be possible to incorporate a network play mode. where two players can play 'hotseat' over a network connection.

Programming the connection might be a challenge, but if it has mechanism for hotseat, it might not be too hard if perhaps the programmer can get support from an expert network programmer. Maybe Matrix might know some expert who worked on their own PBM server.

I will probably play against the AI myself. But if i were other I wouldn't give up hope.

Thanks
Rick


(in reply to waltero)
Post #: 23
RE: Hopes for this game - 2/11/2016 9:12:01 PM   
waltero


Posts: 209
Joined: 1/24/2008
From: Alaska
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rick


I wouldn't give up all hoope yet. If this game offers a hot seat mode, then it might be possible to incorporate a network play mode. where two players can play 'hotseat' over a network connection.

Programming the connection might be a challenge, but if it has mechanism for hotseat, it might not be too hard if perhaps the programmer can get support from an expert network programmer. Maybe Matrix might know some expert who worked on their own PBM server.

I will probably play against the AI myself. But if i were other I wouldn't give up hope.

Thanks
Rick




That is what I thought.

According to some of the previous (above) posts, I do not think it is ever going to be part of the plan.




_____________________________

"WELL ~ Mrs. LIncoln,
other than that, How was the play?

(in reply to rickier65)
Post #: 24
RE: Hopes for this game - 2/15/2016 6:05:23 PM   
idjester

 

Posts: 369
Joined: 12/22/2011
Status: offline
Just an option.... there is always a work around if the need arises.

Skype has an option to share your screen with the person your talking with. You setup your skype so you can chat and view the game and therefore can play. You would disable fog of war so you can see both sides of the units.

This let you taunt your opponent before you blow up his tank...

(in reply to waltero)
Post #: 25
RE: Hopes for this game - 2/15/2016 7:31:13 PM   
MrsWargamer


Posts: 1658
Joined: 6/18/2014
Status: offline
90% of my war gaming has been just me and the game.

The day I sold my ASL it felt like I was selling the hobby. But the thing is, ASL is a lot of physical hassle. Storing almost 75 maps, storing more counters than I want to think of. Storing several binders of rules and charts and scenarios. It was just too much bulk and too much effort.

If Tigers on the Hunt gives me 90% of what ASL was, and none of the bulk, and is destined to be just me sitting here yet again without a human opponent I will be as happy with Tigers on the Hunt as I was with ASL. You won't satisfy every person in war gaming, but I have yet to see a war game since Tactics II that satisfied the entire war gaming crowd.

We say the game is modeled on ASL, but I'm guessing it will be as fun as original Squad Leader if it plays as easily as Squad Leader due to the machine taking care of all that made ASL a chore.

I've on a few occasions pondered hunting down a copy of Squad Leader and just playing it. Because 90% of my playing of SL/ASL was playing Squad Leader actually. And it was because it was simpler and easier to play.

Sometimes you can put on too much make up and just look like a bad joke eh guys. More is not always better.

_____________________________

Wargame, 05% of the time.
Play with Barbies 05% of the time.
Play with Legos 10% of the time.
Build models 20% of the time
Shopping 60% of the time.
Exlains why I buy em more than I play em.

(in reply to idjester)
Post #: 26
RE: Hopes for this game - 2/15/2016 7:58:54 PM   
Paullus

 

Posts: 1054
Joined: 6/9/2015
From: Sweden
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MrsWargamer

90% of my war gaming has been just me and the game.

The day I sold my ASL it felt like I was selling the hobby. But the thing is, ASL is a lot of physical hassle. Storing almost 75 maps, storing more counters than I want to think of. Storing several binders of rules and charts and scenarios. It was just too much bulk and too much effort.

If Tigers on the Hunt gives me 90% of what ASL was, and none of the bulk, and is destined to be just me sitting here yet again without a human opponent I will be as happy with Tigers on the Hunt as I was with ASL. You won't satisfy every person in war gaming, but I have yet to see a war game since Tactics II that satisfied the entire war gaming crowd.

We say the game is modeled on ASL, but I'm guessing it will be as fun as original Squad Leader if it plays as easily as Squad Leader due to the machine taking care of all that made ASL a chore.

I've on a few occasions pondered hunting down a copy of Squad Leader and just playing it. Because 90% of my playing of SL/ASL was playing Squad Leader actually. And it was because it was simpler and easier to play.

Sometimes you can put on too much make up and just look like a bad joke eh guys. More is not always better.

As a SL/ASL player since the 1980s I know you will be satisfied. I've had a lot of fun designing the scenarios for this game and still have. It has a great feeling and it can be very intense. You just have to look at Xaviers AARs to see that.

Jorgen

< Message edited by Paullus -- 2/15/2016 9:00:09 PM >


_____________________________

For my part, I shall do my duty as a general; I shall see to it that you are given the chance of a successful action. /Lucius Aemilius Paullus

(in reply to MrsWargamer)
Post #: 27
RE: Hopes for this game - 2/15/2016 8:18:58 PM   
Gerry4321

 

Posts: 874
Joined: 3/24/2003
Status: offline
Jorgen:

Might ye guys be doing scenario packs? Themed packs would be great - might get me to read a bit of history.

(in reply to Paullus)
Post #: 28
RE: Hopes for this game - 2/15/2016 8:27:14 PM   
Paullus

 

Posts: 1054
Joined: 6/9/2015
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gerry

Jorgen:

Might ye guys be doing scenario packs? Themed packs would be great - might get me to read a bit of history.

Nothing decided as of yet. Expansions/scenario packs are a definite possibility.

_____________________________

For my part, I shall do my duty as a general; I shall see to it that you are given the chance of a successful action. /Lucius Aemilius Paullus

(in reply to Gerry4321)
Post #: 29
RE: Hopes for this game - 2/15/2016 9:15:59 PM   
Richie61


Posts: 584
Joined: 3/2/2009
From: Massachusetts
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrsWargamer
If Tigers on the Hunt gives me 90% of what ASL was, and none of the bulk, and is destined to be just me sitting here yet again without a human opponent I will be as happy with Tigers on the Hunt as I was with ASL.


I feel it will do this for you. Beta testing brought me back to the '70's board gaming feel I really enjoy HPS Squad Battles WWII titles, but this game just feels like a time machine!

quote:


I've on a few occasions pondered hunting down a copy of Squad Leader and just playing it. Because 90% of my playing of SL/ASL was playing Squad Leader actually. And it was because it was simpler and easier to play.



Agree!


_____________________________

To fight and conquer in all our battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting.

Sun Tzu




(in reply to MrsWargamer)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Tigers on the Hunt >> Hopes for this game Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.383