HPS Ancient Warfare Series

[Gasbag]

I'd been thinking about getting this title but judging from the negative comments that I've seen I'll probably pass.

[Atle]

I'd been thinking about getting this title but judging from the negative comments that I've seen I'll probably pass.

If you are fascinated by Ancient Warfare, I would surely give this game a try. I would not be put off by some of the remarks seen here or on other boards. I have not had any problems running this game. No crashes whatsoever. There have been some complaints about map scrolling, menus and game play, but these things have more or less been sorted out in the first patch. And even more will be added/changed in the second one. Not that all of this needed to be fixed, but it was only that the developer listened to the players and wanted to adapt his game to some of their wishes. I am sure that more will be updated later.... I have loved this game from day one, and think it is one of the more interesting new titles released by HPS in a long time...

Do you remember how John Tillers earliest games were? BG Bulge/Ardennes any? BG Gettysburg ver. 1.0? And what about East Front? Were these winners out of the box? No, they weren't, but they are all considered classics today

And about the graphics.... I haven't seen any 3D graphics in previous HPS games that are better than the ones in Punic, but this of course comes down to taste...

So give it a try, Gasbag, and I will gladly play a test game with you :smoke:

[Scar]

I just have to jump in here. My copy arrived this weekend and I couldn't wait to load it up...what a disappointment. I don't know what else to say about it. I can overlook slim graphics, so for me that isn't the games problem. Its clunky, hard to operate, and confusing. It has the feel of an old dos game made in someones garage.

Too bad, what a great time period, I hope they can fix it, but it would need a lot to get it up to par imo.

Scar

[matxer]

Are these comments related to the original or after the v101 patch?

Dog Soldier,

My comments were related at the original version, but it will not be one or two patches that will solve the game's problems.

It does not make sense to test a game without the latest patch, especially the v1.0 of a new series, and having in mind that the patch was released more than 40 days ago...

As Atle put it, it takes time to tune a wargame. Smolensk 41 has been patched 14 times... so far.

I agree that the 3D graphics are ugly. But at the risk of being flamed by the John Tiller fans, I would say that ALL HPS games have ugly graphics. Probably their way to be different from competitors... ;)

The game is not user-unfriendly if you take the time to get used to it. And it is being improved by patches. Same for bugs: they are being corrected and are not that messy.
The first scenario / tutorial is too difficult and that may repeal some players. A tutorial is supposed to be confidence building, not crushing. :)
Added to the fact that the second scenario is buggy (river crossing issues), it may be disheartening. But go on ! The other scenarios are great. And the tutorial should be played as 'Barbarian' not Roman.

The we-go system is really great. Its simultaneous effect adds randomness, which is realistic IMO. It really takes hard thinking and planning to try to overcome this randomness.

Overall, a great wargame which is still in its infancy.

It's quite tactical so I'm not sure it belongs to this operational ladder. My suggestion is to put it in the classical wargame ladder and later create a ladder for this Ancient Warfare series if it has the success it deserves, provided the game is not flamed on the ground of version 1.0 and ugly graphics. :)

[Ricky B]

Good info on the game, thanks for the writeup! It is not one that I am looking at myself, but I know there are a number of people looking for insight on it.

As to putting the game in the Classic Wargames ladder, I don't think that would work well just because the Classic Wargames is based, or at least was originally, on older "classic" computer wargames, such as the original The Ardennes Offensive and War in Russia, rather than a period of time or game style. So I don't think that would be a good fit there either, but it is a quiet enough ladder that it would probably work if needed.

As to Smolensk having 14 "patches", that is not really correct in the sense of bug fixes, at the least. The game had few bugs out of the box, and continues without anything significant, if any, although a few have popped up over the years. The vast majority of the patches have been purely updates to the game engine to bring it in line with the latest updates made, so nearly one per game release and you get the current number of patches, which are really updates rather than bug fixes, with a few exceptions.

Rick

[Baelfiin]

Im going to get this game at some point because of all the fun I used to have playing ancient miniatures battles on the table top. I also think the WE-GO system would be intersting to try out.
As for 3D graphic models, are they something that can be changed with a mod a la unit box pictures in other hps titles?


Scott

[Atle]

I don't understand the talk about bad 3D graphics in Punic Wars... It's way better than anything you can find in the other HPS titles. It's not Half-Life graphics exactly, but what wargame do have such kind of graphics anyway...? :conf:

[Volcano Man]

Well, I guess I am late on the poll. Anyway, I just picked up Punic Wars at TC2 and I like it. Sure, it is rough around the edges and needs some polishing up, but it is the first game in the series.

When I first started it up I tried doing things that I am familiar with from playing JT's games but the interface is totally different. That is, of course, understandable since it was designed by two different people. With a little reading of the quick start document, I was then able to play the beginner scenario.

Anyway, I have played the GBOH series (both boardgame and PC) and it reminds me of it a lot (which is a good thing). There are some changes I would like to see (like being able to fire volleys of missiles yourself (in addition to the auto defensive fire), and casualties on the ground (like GBOH:PC). But that said, I think it is a good start for the series.

[Dog Soldier]

A new patch is due soon....rumor at Tillercon. I saw the game with the new patch. It seemed to work quite well.

I will post when the patch is up at HPS.

Dog Soldier

[rahamy]

As for 3D graphic models, are they something that can be changed with a mod a la unit box pictures in other hps titles?

Yes, you can modify the graphics...there's even a segment of the documentation giving you details on how to do it.

With that said though, I don't think they need it.