Squad Battles not dead if I can help it!!

[Warhorse]

Some good ideas coming out from you guys, am working on it, tough to do, but I like doing this. Maybe other guys are as well, but it is a passion with me, Korean War was first, still want to design some more scenario's for that, but this current project is really engulfing me, I like the Blitzkrieg years a lot, so doing that first!! Would be great if JT decided to support it, but even if not, am forging ahead, hope you guys stick around long enough!! The graphics take a long time, but you will not be sorry, I love doing this stuff!

[Compass Rose]

Yes, I agree 100% that would be great to see SB have a resurgence and it would be the "cherry on the sundae" if JTS released new titles!  

[Mowgli]

In my opinion, SquadBattles suffer from one thing in particular:

It's not attractive for multiplayer due to the lack of a custom battle mode. We're stuck with scenarios and these severely limit the options of the defender which is typically played by the AI. In most cases, all the defender can do is to stay put in his cover and choose his fires. That's no fun. For the attacker, by contrast, most scenarios are puzzles that need to be solved (find the correct avenue of approach...).

Things would be completely different if there was a custom battle mode, in which players would need to fight over terrain objectives on a map in fixed roles (attacker/defender) and were otherwise free: They could pick their own forces (and obstacles/mines, etc) and - most importantly - deploy them on the map as they see fit.

As an improvised remedy, it would be cool if there were more scenarios designed for PBEM in mind. Both sides need to offer interesting gameplay.

----------------------------------------
Apart from that, SquadBattles is severely lacking in very basic quality of life features (disruption markers on counters, half effective range indicator), suffers from the apparent refusal to hire a proper artist/UI designer (white text on light blue background...) and its mechanics for vehicle combat which are not liked by everybody.

As someone who is replacing the sub-par unit graphics with my own adaptions, I also have to say it's a pity that "soldier" and "officer" images are used mixed up in the game (I'd like to use full figure graphics for soldiers and portraits for officers, so that the difference is also indicated by the type of picture, not just by the shape of the unit box...).

[Wolfgang]

Great scenario selection though with the updates!

[Embis]

Well I feel quite differently. I have played SB all titles from the first release of Vietnam a long long time ago. And I still play them more than any other game. There are some things I would like to be different, but that's true for every game I have ever owned and played, and SB doesn't stand out from the rest in that regard. I must admit the graphics were awful from the outset, and I never understood why that was ok, but they have improved a lot and the top down mods in the latest updates look great. Reverting to the old graphics isn't difficult even if you can just squint at a monitor, wave around a mouse and bang on a keyboard with your fists. I was very disappointed to learn no more new titles were in the pipeline. 

I hope that with great modders like the late great Ed Pacitto, and Warhorse and the support of Rich Hamilton amongst others we havent seen the last of new titles.

In the meantime I'll keep banging away and thoroughly enjoying every minute of SB.

[TheBigRedOne]

As an improvised remedy, it would be cool if there were more scenarios designed for PBEM in mind. Both sides need to offer interesting gameplay.

The games from Winter War until the end were all designed with both AI and PBEM in mind.  When the testing team put them through their paces, PBEMs were played to try to balance the game from both sides.  The earlier games, (ES, AoTR, VN and TOD, PW and PAF) stock scenarios are not well balanced at all.  A lot of the custom scenarios are.  A rule of thumb in most cases is that if you're playing versus the AI, always be the attacker.  The AI in defense isn't bad, but on the offense, even with good AI scripting from the designer, it tends to do stupid things, especially the longer a game goes.

Back in the day I was told that the % of people who play the game against the AI versus PBEM is very heavily skewed towards the AI side.

[Mowgli]

As an improvised remedy, it would be cool if there were more scenarios designed for PBEM in mind. Both sides need to offer interesting gameplay.

The games from Winter War until the end were all designed with both AI and PBEM in mind.  When the testing team put them through their paces, PBEMs were played to try to balance the game from both sides.  The earlier games, (ES, AoTR, VN and TOD, PW and PAF) stock scenarios are not well balanced at all.  A lot of the custom scenarios are.  A rule of thumb in most cases is that if you're playing versus the AI, always be the attacker.  The AI in defense isn't bad, but on the offense, even with good AI scripting from the designer, it tends to do stupid things, especially the longer a game goes.

Back in the day I was told that the % of people who play the game against the AI versus PBEM is very heavily skewed towards the AI side.

Thanks for the information. Alas this is also part of the problem: I need to go to a forum and have someone tell me which scenarios are worth playing in multiplayer. Just imagine how potential players pick one of the "not PBEM-aproved" titles and get disappointed by their multiplayer experience.  

A proper gold version should add very clear information on how the scenario is supposed to be played in the scenario description. In some titles this is the case, in others, it's not (the same is true for the Campaign series, by the way).

Also, scenarios might be better balanced. But still I wonder if they're fun for the defending side. Often it seems like the defender is positioned in good cover at the start of the scenario and all he can do is to choose which enemy unit to fire at. Particularly for the defending player, a "deployment phase" would add a lot of interest to many scenarios.

[Alpha Zwo]

I totally agree to Embis. I have played so many different and great games but the SqB series is the only one I always come back to. Very fond memories with SqB Vietnam, the first title I have ordered at HPS, delivered by mail to customs authorities.

Hopefully new games will follow or at least mods like the great IronX mods or Warhorse's "The Forgotten Battles" mod for Korean War. Just learned I need the latest John Tiller series version of the Korean War game to play the mod so off to dig for the old HPS CDs, buried somewhere in the attic.

Thanks to all skilled modders bringing new content and life to Squad Battles.

[Warhorse]

As I mentioned in the first post, am working on an all-encompassing game based on the Pacific War title. Right now it covers the Blitzkrieg era, still have to finish adding the British kit, and then Netherlands. I will release it incrementally as I get done segments of in, so folks can hopefully make scenario's. I made a few already, here is a screenie from the adaptation of the ASL scenario Stonne. French tanks with infantry advance on Stonne spearheaded by tanks from the 45th and 49th Battalions of the 3e Division Cuirassée! Made the map using Google Earth with a numbered hexgrid!

[Compass Rose]

Looks really nice Mike!