Slitherine

[quote="DSWargamer"] I know someone had to have the rights for when that abomination PC game was released. It had the name on the box, but it has zero to do with the name on the box and the software was beyond worthless as well".

Why can't the game rights for the as you say the "abomination PC game" of squad leader be obtained and that game rebuild by slitherline, Matrix and its developers. I for one would like to see Gary Grigsby rewrite the code or develop a squad based wargame with add ons.

VonRyan wrote:

DSWargamer wrote: I know someone had to have the rights for when that abomination PC game was released. It had the name on the box, but it has zero to do with the name on the box and the software was beyond worthless as well".

Why can't the game rights for the as you say the "abomination PC game" of squad leader be obtained and that game rebuild by slitherline, Matrix and its developers. I for one would like to see Gary Grigsby rewrite the code or develop a squad based wargame with add ons.

Not such a totally unprecendented notion actually. It has actually been done before.

This coooould cause a shit storm, but well I happen to know the details at any rate. Hasbro OWNS outright Advanced Squad Leader aka ASL. MMP is their licensed source.

There is a company that decided it would play loose with the whole legality issue of copying/cloning ASL by simply legally buying a game, beating the snot out of it, and essentially making an ASL rip off, that was ASL in all the ways needed, yet legally wearing another game's name, and being suppoooooosedly just an 'advanced' form of the game, that just seeeeeemed like ASL. Well A. I own the original game (Tobruk by the way), B. I have seen the 'advanced' version of the game, and C. I have been with Squad Leader since it was released. Advanced Tobruk could just as easily been called F**k You Hasbro. But that would not sell as well

The only real problem with buying Squad Leader (the software) and remaking it into Steel Tigers (because Panthers would be legally a bad idea), is that game was soooooo utterly contemptibly shitty, that no amount of PR will remove the stain. It's the worst program I have ever heard of that I have actually had in my hands too, in 20 years.

What would be the point of spending cash on a name that was that badly burned in the software world, when a designer really just needs to start making their own game from start to finish and name it whatever they want? Steel Tigers for instance.

Any designer worth squat, that could convert the code of one game, can make ALLof the code from beginning to end.

I'm confused. If Paradox have the rights to make a PC Squad leader (which they bought\acquired) surely they are the ones who can either make a game or not. Or do they just have the rights to make a PC Squad Leader but not a PC Advanced Squad Leader?

If only HASBRO can make a PC Squad leader what on earth did Paradox buy!!?

All confusing. Maybe it's two separate entities ASL and SL for a PC game. Though even SL and it's expansions used as the foundation for a PC game would be excellent. Just use the PC for the paperwork and spruce it up abit and make it look good. I'd buy.

As far as I understand it, they bought the electronic rights to everything from SL through to the last vestiges of ASL and everything in between.

Suficiently so that MMP can't even so much as offer a pdf file of the print manual they sell.

Well done paradox, then they just sit on it...pah..I was interested in their next Rome game, second thoughts now.

DSWargamer wrote:As far as I understand it, they bought the electronic rights to everything from SL through to the last vestiges of ASL and everything in between.

Suficiently so that MMP can't even so much as offer a pdf file of the print manual they sell.

And by sitting on the rights and therefore the game, a computer version of SL and ASL will fade away............. as do the old gamers that once played the greatest board game every designed. By not producing the game or games they are also letting a large amount of money disapear. Most, if not all gamers that have played SL and ASL as a board game remember the great battles they have fought, and wish that someboby could bring that feeling to computing gaming. Yes, there are many great wargames available but most do not have the feel and look of the old favorite. However, Conflict of Heroes and a couple of other wargames are a good start in the right direction.

Happy wargaming

Would love to see a remake of Steel Panthers but have lost faith in Matrix Games. There handling of Combat leader and Close combat served as a warning. I no longer believe anything they say and think twice about buying their products.

Nothing but praise for Slitherine though

soldier wrote:Would love to see a remake of Steel Panthers but have lost faith in Matrix Games. There handling of Combat leader and Close combat served as a warning. I no longer believe anything they say and think twice about buying their products.

Nothing but praise for Slitherine though

While I do not like saying it, I now purchase more games from Slitherine then Matrix and when a new game is released by both companies I will purchase it from Slitherine as they provide greater support.

I think it's obvious to everyone who needed the merge the most. For Slitherine it was a way of getting into the States but I doubt they needed to merge, more an expansion.

Wodin wrote:I think it's obvious to everyone who needed the merge the most. For Slitherine it was a way of getting into the States but I doubt they needed to merge, more an expansion.

However, while Matrix games may not be prefect, I would rather that they still develop and support wargaming. Do Matrix Games still develop their own war games or do they just retail war games from other developers?

However, while Matrix games may not be prefect, I would rather that they still develop and support wargaming. Do Matrix Games still develop their own war games or do they just retail war games from other developers?

I agree. Its beter to have them around, even as they are than not at all.
As for weather they actually develop there own games anymore ... I know not

Don't get me wrong i too would rather have Matrix around than not. They are involved in the Panzer command games I believe. Shame...I'd rather have them done CL than PC Ostfront games. Thouh hopefully if they do a Panzer Command 2 they really improve the infantry.

When I see the name Matrix Games I see one of two things.

Forum, couldn't care less if it was there, they let it die several years ago, it's been the undead for a long time. Granted, that is aimed mainly at anything other than a new game release, which eventually dries up once the paint is dry on the new product. Matrix Games was originally just Steel Panthers, and as such, Steel Panthers was all that was discussed. That awesome game is now really discussed off Matrix Games as much as it is on Matrix Games. Then again, SP Camo is also Steel Panthers too. And they are still beating out the occasional update.

The store. I have no beef with buying their games, as Matrix Games is not just the be all and end all of what is on sale there. Granted Panther Games is not really Matrix Games, and they could always walk and be able to sell where ever they appeared. But they I guess like being where they are enough to be there. Strength in numbers.

When Slitherine partnered with Matrix Games, the numbers became a lot better for both sides.

But I was already a solid customer here at Slitherine before the merge.

I do agree that the way Combat Leader went, indicated loud and clear that David Heath has a nice publishing operation, but he doesn't automatically own the services of the industry's best wargame programmers. Some of the rebuilds though, have been and like will always be limited by what they began as. Close Combat can not evolve any easier than any of the other 90s era games. I think in most cases, it is usually hardware based challenges. Heck the only thing about Steel Panthers that bothers me, is the mouse controls. Which matter in a game with considerable mouse scrolling action.

It's idiotic to think recreating Steel Panthers is an unsurmountable challenge. What would make it hard, is trying to recreate Steel Panthers WaW version 8 from a standing stop and be better. Recreating the scale, the feel, the design style would be idiot simple if the programmer was worth squat. But odds are you would need to use a Panzer Corps approach. Or in other words, pick a nation (likely the Germans as always) pick a front (like Russia as always) and make it so you were NOT expecting to have it do everything with everyone and with every piece of kit and unit type ever used. Although the fools in our hobby likely think that is a simple challenge. If it was though, I'd already own the &*%$#^^ game now wouldn't I?

God I wish Slitherine would just quietly hire someone to just do it.

Matrix Games has had a few outright turkeys. Eric Young Squad Assault, what a disaster.
Close Assault, even thinner a vapour than Combat Leader.
And until I see it actually hit the light of day, no one thinks World in Flames is coming any time soon. And the AI is likely the reason for the delay, and it likely plays like a retard. Just so long as the game can play hotseat me vs me I will be ok. Otherwise it will be up there with gross disappointments.

But Matrix Games has brought us the works of some great designs. And if all they had even given us was the Mega Campaigns, that would have been enough.

I agree that Matrix Games and other wargaming companies are not just the be all and end all of what is on sale. We need all wargaming companies to remain in business, without strength in numbers, our hobby will fade away..........

I have purchased WITE etc and while enjoyable, I would like to able to play squad size and scale war games, such as Squad leader, steel panthers, close combat etc.

Is the ultimate problem not that grognards are tight fisted and difficult to please? On the other hand disco-boys are only looking for visual effects and are easy to separate from their cash. Any company serious about producing simulations, as opposed to wargames, is always risking bankruptcy.

Talorgan wrote:Is the ultimate problem not that grognards are tight fisted and difficult to please? On the other hand disco-boys are only looking for visual effects and are easy to separate from their cash. Any company serious about producing simulations, as opposed to wargames, is always risking bankruptcy.

I think the biggest danger facing wargaming, is Hollywoodosis.... a refusal to adapt to the changing technologies appearing often rapidly is a good comparison to Hollywood refusing to accept that the internet has changed the rules whether legal or not. No one really needs theatres much any more, and with 80inch TVs now become less than unique saying you need a big screen is rapidly losing value. Considering so many films lack any real worth when made into a large image.

So too with wargames. The grogs shout out 'needs a large screen' I respond with they already have them, and they are called TVs and you can play on one from a laptop or a tablet too, these devices are rapidly learning to talk to each other. So stating a wargame can only be played on a PC (because of a large monitor which is small next to even the common for now 40in TV), is really just highlighting a person's lack of knowledge. Needs a mouse, hmm not even going to go there, the comment is retarded.

If I had to say how many companies are exploiting technology properly, I'd be inclined to say 'well I know Slitherine is', and with Matrix Games tagging along, they get to reap the benefits of Slitherines brave steps forward. Otherwise too many sources of what we term 'wargames' ie look like something other than a shooter, are simply not trying hard enough for their own good.

Comments like dummied down are just as damaging as saying wargamers are all inherently smarter than most average persons. Granted, I think the term 'dummied down' is retarded and I tend to react to the term as if the speaker is drooling and incapable of better than small words. Calling games 'lite' is the same as dummied down.
My oft mentioned example Chess, is not a dummied down game for having few pieces, nor is it lite for having a small number of actions per turn. That is merely the design required, and if you think it is an 'easy game best suited for beginners', try beating someone good at playing it.

The difference between playing a monster game like WitE and something like Panzer Corps, is really that a good player will take months to tell you he wiped your butt off the map playing WitE, while a good player can let you know you suck playing Panzer Corps potentially in a single sitting. It's all about the challenge level, is it challenging?

I've played games that were massive and simple to learn and easy to play, but being a massive game, it took a long time to finish a turn. The Longest Day (board game) a monster game of thousands of counters sitting on a board 5'x5.5' is easy to play, and has a simple rules read of only a few pages. What makes the game hard, is finding a 5'x5.5' space. Go ahead, see if you even have a space that big let alone a table that shape. You can't even buy a common 4'x8' sheet of playwood and have the needed size.
As far as I am concerned, that game is 'easy' and 'lite' by my own definitions of the terms easy and lite. It is also tedious, tiring, and will take you months to play it. Takes me about 6 hours to set it up alone.

I'll wager WitE is actually easier than Battle Academy. Because BA possesses a lot of qualities you find in Chess. You need to really understand your terrain, and you need to know precisely when to move each unit, and it takes genuine skill to play it against a thinking human opponent. But BA can be played on a PC and a tablet identically. So as far as marketable is concerned, WitE is not doing wargaming any REAL favours, regardless of how many idiots (like myself) went out and knee jerk bought it thinking it was the holy grail (and thus sending the WRONG message to the guys that made it and those that produce it). I WANT to play it, I just don't think I ever will. Can you remove my purchase from your total please? It isn't reflecting how successful it was.

I think bringing Conflict of Heroes to tablet would be a good idea. Why? Well it is a recognized ideal introductory wargame. It is very finite in play time duration. It is not drenched on counter management. It is clearly not a complicated design, but it can still be a challenge vs a human opponent. Games like CoH will be doing more for our hobby than knee jerk buying silly monster designs that were also illogical in the 70s-80s board gaming era. If you want to SUPPORT the hobby, don't just buy every damned wargame made, demand that every wargame made be something visible to non wargamers and appearing on THEIR devices. For the developers, get over it, if the PS3 is the place to be, then be there, don't talk to me of cost. Designing for a technology in decline (and that is what PC as a choice is becoming, it is not the only place to be), and refusing to expand and adapt, is refusing to expand and adapt.

It's not working for Hollywood regardless of the money they make, when you consider how much more they COULD be making. Picture releasing a film and on day one, you could spend 11 bucks in a theatre or via a service you pay a decent sum per month so that you can watch it at home with your own munchies that came from your kitchen and didn't cost an arm and a leg. Currently my Netflix is costing me 8 bucks a month. Netflix with the addition of day one movies, and lots of them, would be worth 80 bucks a month and Netflix wouldn't need to worry about paying off Hollywood for the access. 80 bucks a month is insane you say? It's just 7 movie tickets eh. Assuming you went alone too. If it is you the wife and a friend, well it isn't even 3 movies. And Netflix delivers to me a lot more than 3 movies in a month.

Much as you hate to hear it, Steam is defining how games are sold. I hate it for the DRM angle. I hate it for being unable to play my Civ 5 game off line. But I can't refute the power of it's sales. I simply can't produce a counter to a game selling thousands and thousands of units, and for a fraction of the unit price most of our wargame makers insist is required. I don't know how many units WitE has moved, and I would be really shocked if they ever got the nerve to tell me. I doubt they are counting the sales in 10s of thousands though. I wonder what has the larger profit at the end, 50k units at 50% of the unit's full price, or what they have gotten for what they have sold to this point? It would be interesting to know. I wonder what has sold more, the PC Battle Academy or the iPad release? And I wonder how close the numbers are.

I don't think it is the actual designs I am wanting on my wish list, I am thinking it is more about where they are selling it for that counts.