A Gettysburg Game

EB has this posted:

http://www.ebgames.com/ebx/product/2...

From the forum talk at Wargamer, hard to say anything about it but it's cheap.

You can play an hour demo of it at Comcast.net games section (I have not).

It 'might' be interesting for that amount of money, but I can't see another CWBR-like surprise happening again so soon.

I think I saw some ss of this about 2-3 weeks ago...looked cool, Ill check out demo this weekend and report, sir.

"Larsson" wrote:

I think I saw some ss of this about 2-3 weeks ago...looked cool, Ill check out demo this weekend and report, sir.

Much obliged Sir.

I will try too. From the Wargamer forum it just might
be o.k. AI evidently recognizes flanking and the
graphics look good. But again, proof''s in the pudding

Well I''ll be dang if I can find this on the Comcast.net game section. But here is the developer link (but don''t see demo there either, but some cool pic''s of game):

http://www.catdaddygames.com/

Does anybody remember the old ssi terrible swift sword game that had like 10 maps and thousands of counters??

when i was a kid i played it for literally a year(solitaire btw- how pathetic)...
but i loved moving those counters around and on our ping pong table...

it took me about a year of real time to really get the battle going then my cat jumped on the ping pong table and massacred thousands....and that was it...

years later our basement flooded and that was it...

btw - how many here would kill to see there collection of old games and baseball cards again after losing it all in stinking flooded basement...or am i just too old?

"wagawadad" wrote:

Does anybody remember the old ssi terrible swift sword game that had like 10 maps and thousands of counters??

when i was a kid i played it for literally a year(solitaire btw- how pathetic)...
but i loved moving those counters around and on our ping pong table...

it took me about a year of real time to really get the battle going then my cat jumped on the ping pong table and massacred thousands....and that was it...

years later our basement flooded and that was it...

btw - how many here would kill to see there collection of old games and baseball cards again after losing it all in stinking flooded basement...or am i just too old?

I have Terrible Swift Sword too (from when it first came out
a long time ago). I can''t remember who made it (and it was ''the bomb'' in those days as a ''monster game''. I never played thru, more a ''look at that map, counter''s, those rules.''
kind of thing. Probably a scenario or two. But you SSI reminded me of a computer game that was called Gettysburg (first really nice, big one) of maybe 10-15 years ago and another classic. I played that almost till the 5 1/4 melted:)
Can''t remember the vendor on that one either, but want to say SSI.

Yep, SSI made the Gettsburg game...you can still find it *around* I''ve got it...it''s still alot of fun!

it has to be better than Gods and Generals- historically bad!

Man, I still play the Sid Meier game now and then. That game has aged really well. And it scares me that Mills here mentions the Gods and Generals game. I reviewed that sucker for Computer Games Magazine and the pain still hasn''t gone away! Mills, you didn''t pay money for that game, did you?

Were those games on 5 1/4 disk the SSG games by the guys who make warlords??

I think they made a bunch of civil war games that were very very good in those days.

you were right about the counters..took forever just to sort them but thats exactly what i did...what else would i be doing at the age of 14, certainly didnt want to hang with those icky girls!!!!!!!!!

Is anyone still playing that Bull Run game and can I get some linkage on that?

Guys I know I sound like Matrix Games'' pimp and all, but the engine used in World at War will be used to make a ACW Grand strategic game. They''ll be making some interesting changes like adding leaders and such.

Also, they have signed a company called http://www.doubleshotdesign.com/news.htm that is currently working on a Nappy Game but I understand that after that I understand they are working on an ACW game.

You guys are hardcore - not only am I the first person to mention Sid Meier''s Gettysburg in a thread titled ""A Gettysburg Game"" but when I do, nobody shows any love 24 hours later. Have I stumbled upon the valley of the grognards? Not that there''s anything wrong with that.

No, No. I played and loved the hell out of the game. I have tried playing it a few times after ShotgunPhil was able to show me how to get it to run. I like it a lot, but I have played all of the fights so many times.

Anyone play the Talonsoft ACW games? I played Chickamauga. They play well, but have not aged well.

They haven''t aged well, I''d argue neither has Sierra''s old Civil War Generals. It''s time for these games to come back. I''ve got high hopes for this new one.

"wagawadad" wrote:

Were those games on 5 1/4 disk the SSG games by the guys who make warlords??

I think they made a bunch of civil war games that were very very good in those days.

you were right about the counters..took forever just to sort them but thats exactly what i did...what else would i be doing at the age of 14, certainly didnt want to hang with those icky girls!!!!!!!!!

Those SSG games were a series called ''Decisive Battles of the Civil War'', and at that time something very unique and you either loved them or hated them (the argument continued to rage for many a year). SSG is known as making excellent AI, and these use that to the max. It''s somewhat common now (and I know of late, but can''t think of the games), but you controlled a commanding general and he told the troops to go here and there, then they would execute the order the best they could. But varying circumstance, local leadership etc. could very well make the do many other things and you had to constantly try (there was a ''courier'' lag and such if I remember correctly) and get them where you wanted them. But of course enemy contact etc. could make it all a bit chaotic to say the least. Anyway, they were pretty cool and should you the trials and tribulations of command.

"SwampYankee" wrote:

Is anyone still playing that Bull Run game and can I get some linkage on that?

Guys I know I sound like Matrix Games'' pimp and all, but the engine used in World at War will be used to make a ACW Grand strategic game. They''ll be making some interesting changes like adding leaders and such.

Also, they have signed a company called http://www.doubleshotdesign.com/news.htm that is currently working on a Nappy Game but I understand that after that I understand they are working on an ACW game.

CW: Bull Run is a gem! Link:

http://madminutegames.com/

The Grigsby WaW engine wil be interesting to see as a grand strategic ACW game. Deal is, I''m sure it will look sweet, but I know Frank Hunter is working on upgrading his opus of year''s ago and he did a fine, fine job (but not that pretty).

Anyway, I''m just stocked that all of a sudden after a lull we''re seeing many ACW and Napoleonic titles.

"GamerDad" wrote:

You guys are hardcore - not only am I the first person to mention Sid Meier''s Gettysburg in a thread titled ""A Gettysburg Game"" but when I do, nobody shows any love 24 hours later. Have I stumbled upon the valley of the grognards? Not that there''s anything wrong with that.

This was a great game and many, many folks still play it and the couple after it by Breakaway (using the same engine). I''ve read of late tho'' that Civil War Bull Run has finally taken the mantle from many a ACW grognard as best ACW game. But probably not for many mod''s and refinement have been done to SMG. But still Bull Run is pretty darn good from a couple independent''s that did it on their own time. Damn good.

I would just like a Grand tactical game of Gettysburg to come out that would offer scenarios of part''s of the battle. I love the intial contact one with Buford.

Bull Run is indeed great. I''ve played once or twice a week for the last few. I''d play more, but frankly, I don''t need the stress. I always feel responsible for the little guys, and I hate messing up. And it''s only $20. Can''t be beat.

The ACW demo is disappointing.

This is just a traditional Talonsoft game with the option of zooming down into a 3D landscape. The game is hex-based and turn-based, with a replay of each turn as it plays it. But unlike CM, which uses a similar model, the resolution of events occurs at the start of each turn.

Each unit will perform a task during it''s turn. It will move, fire, or fortify. Within a turn, it''s impossible to react to the enemy, just like in a standard table-top hex-based game. So the replay is just a dragged out combat resolution.

And the resolution is predictable. I tried one training scenario where I messed up and was fired on while moving. That took me from 400 men to 139 men. Then I tried a different tactic, and while moving to a different spot, I was fired on. Guess how many men I ended up with that time? You got it...139. Gee.

If you forget to assign a unit to fire, they will just fidget as they take casualties. This is unforgivable, in that I was able to march a unit up to engage, the next turn they were in flank and firing on a unit, then I just hit the Done button to continue - and they just stood there while the enemy returned fire!

So while in CM your units will react to movement and attack targets of opportunity, nothing like that happens in Talonsoft''s ACW. It still retains the foibles of the old games, but with a 3D interface that removes them from the comfortable context of ""well, that''s IGO-UGO"". Instead, it looks like something it''s not - a continuous time resolution game. That''s crippling for me.

There are a few other oddities, like the tutorial that advises you that as you mouse around, heights will be shown so you can judge them and pick the high ground. Sorry. The mouse continues to show cover percentages, instead (either 10, 20, or 30, nothing else). So you have to play games with the camera to winkle out the little rises you can take advantage of.

If you want this kind of game done right, in spades, full hand of royal trumps and joker, try Bull Run instead. Talonsoft is still showing the marketing savvy of a pithed frog, after all these years, and while consistency may be a virtue, this game is the consistency of old banana pudding.

My first set of wargames were by Avalon Hill. I had one about the German invasion of Crete and another about WWII in the Pacific. But, I am an only child so the games were rather wasted on me.

Then in college I became addicted to SSI's game Gettysburg, the Turning Point (played on a Commodore 128). In that game I found that Union cavalry was absolutely lethal to Confederate artillery early in the game- play without the fog of war and attack with melee and you could eliminate entire batteries.

A few years ago I got a copy of Sid Meier's Gettysburg and was utterly disappointed. I found it impossible to wargame a battle like Gettysburg in real time- too many units in too many places. I then got a copy of Talonsoft's Battleground 2 Gettysburg, but this game is only a marginal improvement. First of all the game map is not oriented on a north-south axis like any standard map should be and the way maps in history books usually are presented. So you had to practically learn the entire battle over again. And then no paper map came with the game.

I also don't like Talonsoft's idea that the cavalry cannot fight while mounted. The SSI game did allow the cavalry to fight from the saddle and I have found no historical authority that says cavalry had to fight dismounted. Does anyone know one way or the other?

Now, today I found another Gettysburg game by Talonsoft. Does anyone know if what I saw today is a new game entirely or is it simply a newer version of the Battleground 2?

I believe cavalry were used almost exclusively as recon, to locate and report on enemy units. But at Gettysburg, they did fight dismounted, on the first day, if I remember correctly. That was the usual way for cavalry to fight. One man of every 5 would hold the horses, the others would function as skirmishers (essentially), since cavalry units were smaller than infantry of the period. When things got hot, they'd not stand, but rather mount and tear away.

I don't think there were very many instances of mounted cavalry fighting in the ACW. Certainly the classic sabre-waving charge was not common. They were not shock troops.

Have you tried Bull Run? That's a fantastic game, and only $20. SMG was not scaled to the entire battle, but it did small pieces of it in a fun way.

On the topic of SMG. I love that game, and tried to install it on my new box, running XP.

No go. Anyone know if its me, or does SMG have problems with XP?

You need a special .exe file.

ShotgunPhil can help you with that, I believe.