I thought the leaders stats went up after playing a scenario with them and after a certain amount of points in a scenario they maybe awarded medals? However I've played four scenarios with leaders now and when I look at the leader data viewer nothing new has been recorded. I thought this was automatic? It even mentions in the manual that a leader may die and be unavialable. Or is it a feature that hasn't been finished for some kind of campaign system that the manual hints at? 

At the moment awards etc are defunct so is leader progression. 

Not having someone to ask about the game is very frustrating. 

"Not having someone to ask about the game is very frustrating."

That is in my opinion is the biggest drawback of buying a HPS game. The forums are dead compared to other game company sites. HPS has some excellent games, in fact I'm very close to buying another one, but I really have to want the title because there are so few postings about their games.    

Originally Posted By stormbringer3

"Not having someone to ask about the game is very frustrating."

 

That is in my opinion is the biggest drawback of buying a HPS game. The forums are dead compared to other game company sites. HPS has some excellent games, in fact I'm very close to buying another one, but I really have to want the title because there are so few postings about their games.    

 

While I understand where you're going with, with this, it isn't always the case -as the developer for the Ancient Warfare series does answer questions on forums (including this one) - Leonidas is Paul Bruffell - however, I understand that doesn't help much with TU.

With the Tiller material, it almost always dependent  upon the Scenario Designer for a given title (as Tiller almost never - or never engages is that any longer). Usually that mostly depends upon where you can find them (normally they are around at one board or another at the very least - like say the Blitz for SB and PzC, Bill Peters is around hereamong other places, Mike Cox is pretty much everywhere, Ed Williams shows up a few places (including here), Rich Hamilton is all over the place).

So I guess my point is that it depends upon a title's developer (unfortunately I can't answer why that is).

I do agree that AW is the series that seems to get the most support especially to player questions. In fact Roman Civil Wars is one of the titles I'm looking at. I'm considering that or France '14.

The HPS games with which I am most familiar -- Naps, SB, PzC, and Naval -- have never had true progression to my knowledge.

In campaigns, if a leader becomes a casualty in battle there is a chance for him to return and a chance that he will be replaced.

The WWI series (if one game can be considered a series) plays much like PzC at the highest level so I suspect what I said above remains true, although I haven't checked.

I confess I'm little for the campaigns, far preferring MP single-battles or the mega-scenarios (Wagram, Jena, Waterloo) that feel like campaigns.

Best,

Jim

"Cyrano"

:/7)

If you have a question about a specific HPS game, I'd just e-mail their support directly.  You'd likely get a response just as fast or faster if HPS had a forum.

For France '14 Ed Williams has his own site - www.volcanomods.com

For a question about Panzer Campaigns I'd ask at www.theblitz.org although you can get good answers here, too.

Can't speak for the other games.

Well if you look at PoA2 Scott was very elusive. TU has alot going on under the hood and someone on a forum to ask questions would be superb. Especially as it appears that some things aren't working and from my prespective the developer really needs to here some feedback, especially with regards to to many left overs from the PoA2 game that really don't make any sense.

The manual does mention campaigns and leaders in the data viewer have a column for awards and for victories\defeats. It states in the manual these would be filled in and the leader will increase in experience. Yet this doesn't happen at all. 

Originally Posted By jessjsmithie

...especially with regards to to many left overs from the PoA2 game that really don't make any sense.

which leftovers did you discover that doesn't make any sense particularly?

doubt that leaders like 'Manstein' gained a change in their general leading-style-personality from orchestrating a battle of  what... 60 minutes  or couple of them

also IMHO those 'historic names' should be take with a grain of salt. I think there are just in fluff place holders for 'different sets of AI settings' to choose from

Its neither an RTS  nor an RPG  isn't it

Originally Posted By stormbringer3

I do agree that AW is the series that seems to get the most support especially to player questions. In fact Roman Civil Wars is one of the titles I'm looking at. I'm considering that or France '14.

France '14 - no worries with that one, although I don't know how often Ed Williams pops over here (the lead scenario designer), I'm fairly sure he would (leastwise he has been very hands on over at the Blitz since it came out). I'd make sure to direct him this way if all else failed (as I said, I'm not sure if this is one of his regular lurking spots or not).

Or of course, Printshop is right as well (that would be emailing Rich Hamilton directly)... I work with Rich over at SDC.  PzC - the Blitz is a great place to go, as Glenn Saunders seems to frequent there more often than any other board.

Bill Peters (aka Sgt Rock here) takes questions for the Napoleonic Battles series ( well his projects there, and is very knowledgeable about the series - there were 2 that he didn't do the design on - that being Napoleon's Russian Campaign, or Campaign Waterloo (Waterloo was done by Rich Hamilton - who frequents these boards -aka Rahamy, and I don't think the person that did NRC is active any longer -Charlie Cutshall' leastwise I have never run into him).

Me? I'm just a tester with an unofficial support site that has worked with all of those guys- so if I see something, I try to point it out, if it sits for awhile (although technically SDC is 'unofficial'). . . I just have sources is all.

___

Yeah I understand that it would be helpful for TU to have someone on a forum to address questions; and the HPS support person did mention he'd pass along the request to the development team; however , in the absence of those people here to address those questions, the next best alternative is to write it down and submit it to the email address provided above. Unfortunately there isn't much I can do other than suggest that.

I think jess is talking about the damage window. I could be wrong though. That to me is the most obvious left over. like I said I've seen some odd boxes ticked and sometimes boxes that are greyed out and say not in use are also ticked.

Also the manual does state that defeats and wins would be recorded in the Leaders data aswell as awards if they amanged to get enough points (decided by the game) At the moment nothing is updated. Not really bothered about stats going up for the major leards but you can add lower raning leaders who after severla battles would improve. None of this seems to be the case though. It also mentioens campaigns. If you add aload of corporals and greifters to your leadrs and then give them roles in the scenario in the setup it does add a little extra to the game, if it worked.

Jess can reply and say if I'm right about this or not. 

Originally Posted By trauth116

With the Tiller material, it almost always dependent  upon the Scenario Designer for a given title (as Tiller almost never - or never engages is that any longer). Usually that mostly depends upon where you can find them (normally they are around at one board or another at the very least - like say the Blitz for SB and PzC, Bill Peters is around hereamong other places, Mike Cox is pretty much everywhere, Ed Williams shows up a few places (including here), Rich Hamilton is all over the place).

 

So I guess my point is that it depends upon a title's developer (unfortunately I can't answer why that is).

You see, what I don't understand is that the games are sold under HPS banner, but they are supported in such a disparate and disorganised way, theres so many fan sites here and there, that are at different stages of development, different levels of currency. HPS's own site is quite a dinosaur as it's set up. Obviously its a labour of love for someone, but its definitely not touched by the hands of a web designer. 

If your primary customers, your community are fractured over so many sites with little or no quality control, or information being passed down, it results in absolutely zero consistency, and absolutely zero chance of forging a new community. 

I realise a lot of the games are worked on by a lot of different scenario designers, so their interests often lie in different directions, and different websites. What I think HPS need is a solid web presence, that commands a single place for people to go, to get the official line. Forge a community, where the games are sold. Forge a community, where the games can be supported. Having to rely on third party communities to provide "the buzz" or the self-support necessary, just leaves regulars with many places to check for little tidbits of information, or beginners completely lost.

It doesn't take a massive outlay to start a community, but it does take a lot of effort to nurture it to fruition, and you'd need committment from HPS and their designers, and their modders. But if they did make the push, I'm sure people would flock there. I suppose Tiller's break towards JTS and his own site has fractured the already fractured. But if there are still strong ties between the two companies, perhaps a joint effort could be made. 

Renting space on wargamer.com forums, or The Blitz, or SDC, only keeps the communities for the titles in a dispersed state - and ultimately a single email account for support isn't enough nowadays. People clamour for help on all these separate sites and often come away with less that satisfactory answers, unless they scour the length and breadth of the third party places.

Consolidation, nurturing, and a proper responsive web presence would do so much for the Tiller game catalogue, for both HPS and JTS.

I mean we're talking the core of wargaming scene for the past 20 years and its still so amateur and fragmented. 

Anyway, just my two penneth.

MikeGer leftovers I mean what benpark and wodin have mentioned. Also even in the turn resolution you get things like missile and IR checks but my biggest bugbear is the damage tab. Not only doesn't it look like it's not working properly I've never bought a WW2 game yet that has modern damage possible. I hope they put some more work into this sim as it does need the developer to really work hard to smooth out it's rough edges as it sometimes feels to me as if certain aspects have been poorly implimented or totally untouched from the PoA2 release. Which makes me a little sad. As for me it's been a bright spark this year. If they had spent a couple of months to check through the game and make sure everything is relevant to WW2 then it wouldn't leave me feeling like it's been half done. Even so it is still a great sim so far and I'm enjoying it. My husband walked past and saw me playing it and just tutted

Still it is a great sim. I am enjoying it. 

Spelk I agree totally. Sending reprots of things you percieve are bugs or need chnaging to HPS support isn't really a brilliant wya of cutsomer input. There is no feedback about what you've noticed or whether certain aspects are going to be changed fixed. I sent off a long email today but I have no idea if anyone else has pointed out the things I've noticed nor will I know if there going to be fixed or are WAD.

All good points Spelk; I don't think that they (either HPS or JTS) are hurting for hosting ; so it would have to be about manpower -and  I don't think it can be simply about getting someone to volunteer to handle it -as I can tell you in my own experience, that volunteers are tough to come by, and reliable ones are even tougher. I don't think that you can place yourself in a position where a guy can just be over something and then drop off the face of the earth -otherwise you can argue that it is worse than not having one.

Originally Posted By trauth116

All good points Spelk; I don't think that they (either HPS or JTS) are hurting for hosting ; so it would have to be about manpower -and  I don't think it can be simply about getting someone to volunteer to handle it -as I can tell you in my own experience, that volunteers are tough to come by, and reliable ones are even tougher. I don't think that you can place yourself in a position where a guy can just be over something and then drop off the face of the earth -otherwise you can argue that it is worse than not having one.

Yeah, you'd need a paid representative, and a backup minion of some sort. You'd have to put money into it, for it to work. But, the benefits *should* bring more money to the table, and more interest in the games. I guess it depends upon whether this is fiscally worth it. With a very large collection of games, and a recent move into digital downloads, I'd say forming up an online community around these new developments would be a very worthwhile pursuit. Particularly if they can generate a buzz in the wargaming community, and they provide the tools necessary for players to come together, discuss, arrange PBEM games, mod their titles, and its all under the HPS/JTS "Official" banner. With their developers, designers, modders in one place, reading and participating. I'm sure folks from all the third party community sites would be itching to join an official Tiller community, that has credibility and backing.

Perhaps its a naive view, or I don't have the history behind certain decisions in the past, but it certainly seems like the time it right, with HPS branching into downloads, JTS trying to improve their download service - would be stupid NOT to forge a single authorative community, with a dedicated man/men at the helm. With forums and community comes great responsbility, but if it can generate exposure, buzz, and expand their niche market, whilst harvesting valuable loyal customer feedback, and uniting their modding designers with the real designers - it's got to be a good thing! Hasn't it?

I realise its easy for me to sit here and spout on about all these plans for expansion, without any real knowledged about or investment in the company - but I can only go on what I've seen in other genre's with other game companies, and in my experience, fostering a reliable community is one of the real ways to reach more players and more revenue and add more value to your IP.

Take Arcen Games for instance, initially a one man indie strategy title - AI War - initial release led to little exposure, but once word of mouth began to take hold, they were inundated with purchases - and the biggest factor for the growth (in my opinion) wasn't the game itself, it was the devs willingness to take on board and nurture a community surrounding the game, and the games future development. Arcen took this project and with honesty, transparency and care grew it into a multi-person company, whose reputation and standing has it held in high regard from many gamers. 

I'm sure HPS/JTS already have the loyal following that could be galvanised and co-ordinated into a community, from the off. 

"jessi"

maybe you missed what i wrote to Wodin / Somme (and now ?  ) in another thread   ...well was before you got TU i guess

concerning 'leftovers'     

you never heard about our Secret Vergeltungs Weapons right ;-)

I think, its cool to generate a 'dirty bomb', or a semi functional (1kT 

(also database-modder can easily take the action to the Pacific theater ...and lets see, what would had happened if Little Boy or Fat Man were dropped on troupes ... even a usage in Germany in fictional late 45, would not be to far fetched to wargame its outcome)   

a lot of equipment that casual ppl think are modern, are not so modern at all, they got already invented in WW II by both sides of the conflict but with different momentums so.

(Germany falled back on RADAR and the Führer stopped/delayed lots of stuff in R&D, because his imagination was bound to his personal experiences in WW 1 ...so it was all about 'bombing and terror' in the early years...

for example ME 262 had to be able to drop bombs in th role of a JaBo instead of a Jäger / interceptor, which gave additional stress to the landing gear, which delayed the project ...up to 2 years!)    

did you know there were MCLOS ATM missile and also radio controlled free falling bombs already in R&D in Germany, so jamming radio, chaffs, what ever... is ok for me too.

(a pulse is 15 sec, but could be set to shorter intervals, so having bombs, missiles, projectiles (maybe  even a V2 used in a tactical way not for terror) in transit its not a leftover.... its a necessity!         

also did you know the famous Panther had a Halon fire extinguisher, turret turned with hydraulics, and some had early gen nigh vision, IR-optics and a IR beam to illuminate, i am sure there were some kind of air-filters for the crew-compartment (NPC protection) and at heating too,  ...but no air condition style cooling. IIRC

... alll these parts could be dammaged in combat              

so what leftovers are left over to explain Jason ( ...i ve  got your name i ve got yor ass   )  

IMHO every feature thats in POA2 should be in TU also

so every bug found in TU's engine would improve POA2 too, ...and vis versa

I'm not sure what happened to the OP - his av suggests it was something bad - anyways, Spelk, I'd sent a PM your way, suggesting that we consider making the discussion its own topic.

The other thing is, I don't want to misrepresent myself; I work with HPS/JTS in testing -so I do know and have had contact with most of the guys involved with both companies. I haven't ever had any direct contact with Scott Hamilton, or John Tiller. Also as a tester, I am not at all suggesting that I have any input into business decisions (or their business decisions, to be more precise). 

SDC works with material from both companies, and if other companies supply me with material to work with -I am open to anyone's material - but, at the moment I work with what material that I have; the site has the same weight as say Glenn Saunders' site insofar as what Glenn writes or posts there is not representative of company policies or decisions -it is 'unofficial' as they say.  I have a backlog of material to work with -but can see at some point also working on material that I have for AGEOD, as well as some of the Europa Universalis family's material - but something like that is a long way off. It is an unconventional site, in that it is not intended as a news or a review site.

I can set up a messageboard there in about 5 minutes, and spend the rest of the day organising it. I might do it; but the thing is, I can't guarantee participation like what you are wanting. Actually I would expect it to be looked upon as just one more place to go.

I thought about investigating wiki type software where the guys that worked on titles could add their own material (thing is with this internet thing -many people expect it all to be handed to them - so you can be in the position where everyone is for your idea -but you have to be the one to do it all - that situation I don't think ends up as being workable - plus I have to learn the software). I do think that the EU people have done a great job with their Wiki, as it explained a lot about gameplay indiosynchracies with Victoria and Victoria:Revolutions to me. Who knows, but I might go that route eventually .... but -still would have to leanr the software.

Ok, now getting down to the brass tacks: as far as my own experience goes; I don't think that modder participation is workable -as it requires vetting, to avoid some potentially massive legal issues with modders that lift copyrighted material. I know at least one out there that has written to the effect that anything copyable off of the internet is fair game (which I doubt is true - certainly it didn't work that way for peer to peer music file sharing -- and moreso it didn't do it in a very public manner -i.e - it was tough to miss.). So in effect what inviting modders in, is basically the same thing as taking on responsibility for a modder's concept of legality... knowing what I know now, I wouldn't trust my fan site to those types without having a good idea of who I was working with and what I was hosting - I can't see anyone in business ever doing that. 

Which isn't meant to say that modders don't have a place in the hobby- not at all, but rather, I think they might be permanently a fixture of the fansites (and even then not all of them).

Another aspect with modders, too are that there are some of them that purposefully circumvent programming to do things like create OOBs (in cases where the OOB files have been locked - e.g. Tiller's CWB series (although it is my understanding that at some point in the future they will be unlocked which iirc is after the next 3 CWB titles are out -when Tiller has decided he is done with that series), map files ( e.g. - the Napoleonic series, as well as the CWB series, and others) - as a company I can see where you would need to vet people so that your business decision to make certain file types inaccessable means anything at all. The point being, not that it can't be done, - but who do you get to do that? And you have to consider that for no one in any of those companies, are those companies' work anything but a part time venture.

I agree that the centralisation is an issue, and one that can have a lot of benefits. I don't think that the decision has been to not have one per se, but rather not finding the right mix. I can't speak on behalf of anyone making decisions there -only for myself, and the running of my site. It is a consideration there; I am pretty happy that I get to call the shots there (I've been there and done that -in terms of messageboard moderator and even admin for awhile at a couple of different places; it was time to let other people have those positions.).

---Afterthought, as I was in concluding mode; the only viable messageboard at the moment that remotely fits the description of a company run messageboard would be Rich Hamilton's board. I believe (but no one has told me this -so it is just an educated guess), that control of dissemination of information is a factor. What I mean by that is that it is a well known (and long discussed -if you are into search engine searches), policy of Tiller and HPS (practiced to different degrees), of not discussing material in development; that is something that I think that they would want to keep control over -so while I don't know exactly the extent of my limited admin permissions there- I can find out.