Panzer Tactics, is it a new direction for wargaming?

[lesthesarge]

I began my wargaming years with Tactics II waaaaaaay back.

It led me to become an active board gaming wargamer. And the key was it was FUN damnit.

But they soon lost sight of this reality and board games started to become mired in pretty detailing. Frankly I wish I could go back in time, and show the man who gave us Squad Leader, and warn him about ASL. Maybe he could have taken the other fork in the road and kept it as just Squad Leader.

Games such as Europa demonstrated we wargamers are idiots when we aren't watching. Ever set up a full set of this unrealistic monstrosity?

Computer wargames started off much like their board game elders.
And rapidly they have taken the same route, and now they are too pretty and too big.

I bought Matrix Games War in the Pacific. I must need some addiction counseling. The game for all the fan buzz is a dumb waste of money. It's basically the same dumb waste of money that Europa is. You might sell X titles, but chances are more than 50% of the sales won't be getting played. They'll end up like my copy.

They're just not FUN damnit! Their WORK!

Hmm I play games to have fun, I can't say I know your reason(s).

Well anyway, I have a new and likely better alternative now.
Thanks to Panzer Tactics (finally man what a wait), I now have a fun, and simple, and easy, and portable go any wargame. It's not a shooter pretending to be a wargame either, it's a real wargame. It has hexes and turns and IT'S A WARGAME.

Now the next move is to get some others out there doing the same thing, making quick easy simple wargames.
Squad Leader, I want to see Squad Leader on my DS !!
Well likely not Squad Leader, just think of the copy right issues and you'll understand.
But It could just as easily be a variation of HPS's Squad Battles titles for that matter.

I just want to play a turn using squad based tactical wargame next. Not a darn shooter, a game that could be mistaken for Squad Leader. And ideally I think it's possible.

And I want other time periods too.

I personally think the first company that boldly grabs the bull by the horns on this one can likely steel all the market up in one go as well. Because we wargamers seem to be that way. We seem to defiantly support a chosen wargaming messiah company like it was a religious thing.

I'm a 40 something wargamer, I am the dominant wargamer demographic. Our games are mostly played by my age group and generally made by my age group.
And I am saying that ideally a hand held game device is what works the best for my day.
It's anywhere and any time. And most of us need that flexibility. Because we are not teens with all day weekends or summer vacations and after school hours to play games hour after hour day after day.

The Nintendo DS is NOT just a kids toy any more, with the arrival of Panzer Tactics, we adult wargamers can now say it's an adult entertainment tool as well!

Now get out there and do your part to bring MORE attention to the hand held gaming scene for wargaming

[jdm]

Very interesting Mail, and is something we have been turning our attention to over at Slitherine.

You might have missed our announcement at the beginning of October.

THE HISTORY CHANNEL® and Slitherine Strategies are proud to announce the expansion of their licensing relationship. Plans call for the creation of a new product line, THE HISTORY CHANNEL® Pocket History, a new series of games developed for the Nintendo DS game platform.

These games are intended to tick most of the boxes you have highlighted

Regards
JDM

[lesthesarge]

Oh I saw the announcement

And I plan to collect on your interest in supporting the Nintendo DS

But in a supportive way, I also would gladly see Slitherine support the PSP just because a lot of DS players could just as easily be PSP owners too. Well at least in my experience most of my friends own both a DS and a PSP, so they can't be claimed to be a fan of either, they just like the option of a hand held.

The fact that the DS can communicate with the widely popular Wii and the PSP can communicate with the PS3 also makes them a good option for designing games that are not always just the usual hand held fare.

Essentially I require straightforward designs that don't try to be overly clever. It IS after all a game device with a relatively small screen, so graphics need to be iconic, and not too dependent on too much data. Although with the DS, the upper screen is a good secondary data display option. Panzer Tactics and Age of Empires carried this function out rather efficiently.

Battles chosen need to be picked for their ability to display well. Frankly I have wondered what's on the mind of the creators of the shooters on the market. Brothers in Arms and the recent Call of Duty 4 have very impressive graphics. But, they require more input than is logically humanly possible (especially from a post teen age group). You need to control direction with the left thumb, while managing the fire control with the front buttons, while being able to control facing of the character with the stylus. All while observing two screens, and all of this is 100% non stop simultaneous action. Personally I can't see shooters on the hand held made for the DS being overly realistic in comparison to their normal platform choice of PC or full size console.

I won't resent it if a great number of games come out, and all seem only to have differing graphics libraries, but essentially the same interface design and core programing.
It would be grand to choose from battles of the ancient era, Napoleonic choices, civil war, WW2 or modern settings, and have the same basic feel of Age of Empires or Panzer Tactics.

Games of dexterity such as Tank Beat can be limited amounts of fun, but they don't perform as well as the more placid less intense, not so demanding physically speaking designs. Steel Horizon managed to combine a limited form of "action" into an otherwise casual turn using concept. I have found that B-17 Flying Fortress has displayed a reasonable amount of arcade like action without requiring more manual dexterity than is logically reasonable.
I have found titles such as Advance Wars Dual Strike can be engaging even if not as serious.
And I think over all that games such as Front Mission make it plain that a game based off of miniatures is not impossible.

It has seemed in the last few years, that the only true challenge to wargaming, is just getting wargame making operations to want to produce the titles for the market. Yes, indeed the profitability of producing a title for wargaming will be less than that which might be possible for the bigger flashier mainstream names of renown. But, I have also not missed out on how I have not as of yet ever needed to fret over patching any of my DS games either. And THAT has to be something game makers must think could be appealing.

[Redpossum]

Les, I read you 5 by 5.

I go way back too. My first wargame was AH's 1914, and my first subscription issue of Strategy & Tactics was #36 "Destruction of Army Group Center". I still remember how pissed off I was when I got it, to have missed "Armageddon" (the game in S&T #35), by one issue. Thirty-six years later, I'm still more interested in tactical ancients than WWII Eastern Front.

As far as Gary Grigsby games, I share your sentiments, and I won't say any more, since my last post on the subject sort of disappeared

Actually, I will say one thing more. If Big Jim Dunnagan was here to see, he'd laugh his ass off

Anyhow, I share your sentiments on the issue of complexity. Steve Jackson was probably the ultimate advocate of the "KISS" principle in game design, and just look at the classics he churned out -

One Page Bulge
Ogre
Car Wars

All three of those were giant, trailblazing games at the time, all three used unbelievably simple game mechanics, and yet all three contained enormous depth, subtlety, and gameplay complexity. Note the distinction - simple game mechanics, yet complex game play.

Furthermore, each of those three games came in a plastic box the size of a paperback book, and sold for about five dollars US in the dollars of the early 1980's. Some smart johnny econ major can calculate what that is in the nearly worthless US dollars of today.

Now, Steve Jackson, for all his undeniable genius, was a one-of-a-kind; they broke the mold when they made SJ. And I'm not suggesting that all games should be that simple, only that more of that starkly minimalistic approach should infuse the modern gestalt of computer games design.