spelk

I have no information, I used the phrase flippantly and without backing, other than being part of the wargaming community and purchasing a bucketload of titles from Matrix. Essentially Matrix price to the market they know and sell to. They've recently just released an expansion for UoC, Red Turn, that is also available on Steam. I don't really know how well UoC has done on Steam, but it's the global exposure, more than purely the revenue stream that raises the profile. I'd imagine with a title like UoC it is expandable into the Western Theatre of operations fairly easily. If the heightened exposure and sales on Steam back it up, I can't really see them cooling off if theres a market there, but who knows.

I guess it would depend on whether 2x3 Games and Matrix thought those useful numbers would be worth enticing by a) making a demo sufficient enough for these floating players, or price it down enough that it makes the purchase more of a reality. Matrix has a Christmas sale on at the moment, and WiTE is part of that - it's down to $52.99 - not sure whether that puts the title more in the range of folks like yourself. http://www.matrixgames.com/news/982/Matrix.Games.Holiday.Sale.is.Here! But Matrix has quite a history of not having demo's for games, one or two of the newer titles (mainly Slitherine titles) have demos, like Battle Academy and Panzer Corps, but most of their collection are demo-averse. Which is a shame, but then again, a lot of the titles are very niche, and so are their UI's, not sure the general gaming public would be willing to put up with some of the UI's wargamers have to suffer - it seems. I agree totally. A good AAR or a lets play video series would do wonders to open the door to WiTE, and it more or less took a fan released "Guide" (called Operational Boot Camp) on the Matrix forums to get everyone up to speed to play the game. http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2649216 I think WiTE could be made marketable for a wider audience, but I suspect the effort involved in making it so, wouldn't outweigh the extra revenue pulled in. Which is why a lot of the game is opaque even to wargamers and a the price is suitably high to maximise revenue. Just to throw in another Eastern Front game, that is very entertaining, and boardgame orientated, but which is 11 years old and the graphics might not cut it for players nowadays is Schwerpunkt's Russo-German War. I did an AAR on the Crimean Scenario, that takes you through play, step-by-step - if anyone is interested. The good news is that Ron (the Dev) is currently working on an updated title, that takes in the entire World War II (effectively marrying his RGW game and the Anglo-German War game). His WWII game is probably due out next year some time.

Whilst WiTE is more accessible, it's still a "monster" Grisby wargame. As was mentioned on the podcast, it's pretty much sold to an already captivated but very small and niche audience. I guess they could dish out one of the smaller scenarios as a demo, but even the three turn tutorial is more about mechanics, than any "bigger picture" operational wargame. It's sad, but I'm not sure many players who have been introduced to wargaming by Unity of Command would grasp or embrace WiTE even if it was a more reasonable price. There is so much data behind it, and so much that is unknown of the mechanics, anyone who bathed in the puzzle-like beauty of UoC and it's transparency, would probably shrink away from the depths involved in WiTE. Having said all that though, it is possible to play WiTE at the more "superficial" level, and just move chits around, and "play at war". UoC players looking for a deeper experience on the Eastern Front should definitely look towards Decisive Campaigns: Case Blue first. I'd like to see more wargames opened up to the bigger gaming public, I'd like to see them get more attention on distribution platforms such as Steam, at affordable prices - and not just exorbitant prices to milk the captivated audience! It is happening little by little, UoC on Steam, Wastelands Interactive games on Desura, Battle Academy and Battle of the Bulge on iPad. But the likes of WiTE (and most of Matrix Games catalogue) are still well out of reach of such channels.

Really enjoyed this episode, I could listen to Bruce talk authoritatively about Operation Barbarossa all day long - with his Quarter to Three Game Diaries blending game and history and cold hard analysis all in one sweep. War in the East is a monster of a game, but it layers the monstrosity, so that you only peel back as much as you can take. Whilst not as accessible as Unity of Command, it can still deliver a lighter operational game, than the leaden tables of "drill down" detail imply. A game that could straddle the position between the accessibility that Unity of Command holds, and the OCD depths of War in the East, would be Victor Reijkersz' Decisive Campaigns: Case Blue. It's got enough weight behind it, and it's steeped in history, but it is also fairly easy to grasp. I wish the world was big enough for a dedicated PC wargaming podcast to discuss these games all the time, 3MA really is about the only podcast willing to tackle these sort of games... although it has to be said since Unity of Command hit Steam, it did get some wider exposure. Looking forward to more, more, more - and the 200th episode! Must be considered a major milestone in 3MA's success story, surely?!

Enjoyed this episode, with just a trio of the "originals" at the helm. It was good to hear Levee en Masse get some love, it's part of the States of SiegeTM boardgame range, whereby similar mechanics are employed in a whole range of themed games - but some play better than others. The one I absolutely love is Zulus on the Ramparts, which does a spiffing job of melding the frantic "underdog" defense of Rorke's Drift against the Zulu horde. It manages to incorporate a lot of "hero" character cards with a more rewarding dice based volley fire to keep the Zulu's out. Similar mechanics, but suits the theme (at a more personal tactical level) much better IMHO. I ran an after action report on sugarfreegamer of a game of tabletop Zulus on the Ramparts, interjecting narrative with each draw and roll. I think interest in the theme with these sort of games really does go a long way to draw the player in, and if you're ambivalent to the theme, the actual mechanics might not have the same draw. Since I have a strong interest in the Anglo-Zulu War, I'd have much preferred the effort of development of Levee en Masse go towards a Zulus on the Ramparts title, simply because it would have more an intimate setting, and anyone who has seen the film Zulu would instantly relate to the desperate plight of men involved. I would imagine a similar more broader appeal would also happen with their Alamo title. The high production values of Levee en Masse was very encouraging, and as a short pick up and play boardgame that doesn't involve very complex rulesets, I think it does a cracking job for a quick blast lunchtime game with tension, some choices with limited actions, but with lady luck always breathing down your neck on the battle rolls. The game has historical card draws (in a set order), or random - providing some replayability, and as you progress through the event deck, it goes through the colours of the french flag, increasing the modifiers against you, accelerating the pressure you'll be under to hold it all together. Might not be the best choice for the States of Siege series, but it's a good effort, and I'd hope sales would encourage bringing more of these titles to the tablet platforms. (for Tom) There is an American Civil War themed game, called The Lost Cause - although I haven't played it so I can't comment on whether it's worth the effort.

Interesting card based RPG, with some nice artwork - turn based deck building setup with an RPG narrative tying it together. http://northmark.rakeingrass.com/ Worth a look see. Theres a demo. http://youtu.be/nig4Cofsl_4

Really good to hear Chris talking about the progress of AI War, and especially how successful its been! I feel particularly proud in being one of the evangelists for the game in the early days, spreading the good news around forums like Gamers With Jobs, Quarter To Three, Rock Paper Shotgun and anywhere else I could get a mention in. It's a game I've followed avidly, although haven't played a lot of recently. Like Michael, I keep an eye on the patches and expansions, as well as following Chris' blog posts on all sorts of Arcen topics. I think its a testament to the "Arcen way" that AI War is so successful and has so much longevity. I look forward to seeing what's next for all the Arcen projects.

Excellent show, I can't begin to describe how chuffed I am to have the old crew together again (minus Julian), it really doesn't matter what game you talk about, it's just thrilling to hear the familar folks chatting again. I thought Derek did an excellent job of explaining some of the design decisions and some of evolution the game has gone through. Since the initial release of Elemental, I've been less than enthusiastic for Fallen Enchantress. Warlock delivered what I thought Elemental should have done. I didn't think anything fresher could come from that cauldron again. I haven't played much of FE, beyond installing it and seeing if it still played reasonably on my hardware. I did wonder whether two years more development and enhancements, would shave the performance off my cob-webbed PC. But surprisingly, it still plays smoothly. After listening to the show, I'm now positively buoyant with enthusiasm for the game! Perhaps there is life beyond Warlock? When the discussion dipped into "lack of tactical variation", I couldn't help but have Conquest of Elysium battle flashbacks, and I'd take anything Fallen Enchantress could deliver over minute sprites lined up in a black void, watching blurred damage numbers scroll up the screen. I remember Elemental's tactical combat being quite sparse, and uninteresting, but the bottom end of my tolerance to "tactical" battles has been set so low by CoE that I'm quite ready to forgive Fallen Enchantress of many of its pupating predecessor's sins. Thanks again for a very interesting show, and I hope the old team makes more regular visits to 3MA, because they add extra icing/frosting to an already tasty cake! "I'm with yah, and if I'm not with yah, I'm a'gin yah!"

It was a bit of a weird show, in that much of the discussion was about specifics to character builds, coupled with talk about how teams and "celebrities" performed. It was a bit of a shame the game wasn't explained and presented to the audience first - most strategy gamers might have heard about it, and even know the basics of the Defenders of the Ancients (DoTA) style mechanics, but still lane talk and "jungling" wasn't really explained - and having unknown champion names thrown in the discussion with their powers in some shorthand code was a bit confusing to me - and I've played some League of Legends! My biggest gripe with League of Legends is that the online game is quite hostile to newcomers. I've dabbled a little bit, enjoyed some matches, but ultimately - even low down in the rankings - matches with other players often leads to lots of communicated abuse. I tried, but there doesn't seem to be a place you can play the game, to enjoy it as a co-operative team experience - simply because of the competitive nature of the game's outcome. When learning the game, exploring the mechanics of a particular champion, you can encounter a tirade of abuse, because you didn't play the min/max expected way, or you did something a little off and you end up getting a bucketload of textual abuse. Nice intro. Unless you have a crew of friends who just enjoy playing the game together, regardless of skill level or outcome, I think you're in for some ribbing. It just spoilt the whole feel to the gameplay for me. It was an interesting divergence from the normal podcast, but I feel there should have been a lot more discussion about the games design, mechanics, and games of a similar ilk. Instead, we have a nitty gritty "nerd out" on details that only mean something to players who are very familiar with the game. It would be like talking about Magic the Gathering at the card interaction level. If you don't know the cards, you really won't appreciate the discussion all that much. Looking forward to the 3MA Scourge of War multiplayer game!

Listened to the cast earlier on, and I enjoyed the fog of war talk. Not sure you can apply the same premise to the 2d platform stealther, but having played the demo of Mark of the Ninja, you can broadly see that it does cloak parts of the screen with uncertainty. So, I'll take the massaging of 'Ninja into strategy game talk on the chin. I'd like to see scouting and intel gathering become integral to strategy and wargames in the future. I was totally in agreement with the likes of Panzer Corps becoming a bit of a "trial and error" gauntlet that just sucks the life out of the wargaming. RUSE was mentioned in the previous post (I think Wargame:EE is from the same dev), where scouting was required to anticipate incoming forces in both size and composition. But also the ruse's themselves were tied into either dispelling the FOW for a region, or increasing the FOW in a region - which is really the "cool" concept behind the whole game. To go off on an tangent, scouting can take place in the likes of co-operative team matches in FPS games such as Battlefield 3, where your team has the ability to mark up potential targets. The rest of the team can use situational awareness coupled with this extra information to make decisions about where to make a stand, or how to assault a position or even counter an immediate threat. More games should do this sort of thing. Especially strategy games. In comp stomps, there should be team based intel gathering mechanisms at play. I rarely write up wargames as AAR's with FOW on, mainly because I'm trying to make a teaching/thought process example of the play. But I do like the added thrill of having to perform recon, before you can formulate your plans, and I like the way the "slow reveal" forces you to often re-evaluate your position and tactics. Chromehounds was mentioned and I was taken back a few years to a time when stompy mech teams worked together. I spent a long time playing Chromehounds, and to this day it is one of the finer mech multiplayer games out there. It's a shame they pulled the plugs on the servers. Intel was essential, and the local sensors on different mech units, with one of them being the Commander unit co-ordinating the rest of the teams firepower was just sublime to play. The Armoured Core mecha titles just never came close to being as good as Chromehounds. Here's hoping Hawken has some sort of team based Mech loveliness. Chromehounds led me onto thinking about the Front Mission series, basically tactical mech combat, similar in nature to the X-Com series, very popular on the original playstation. I'm sure they had FOW in that game. Lastly, Rob was talking about a scenario in Take Command 2nd Manassas whereby you would control your troops at a certain level and have NO idea about the rest of the battlefield. I'm sure I read Scourge of War has an option to lock your view to the current command only. So you can't view to map from above, and see the other positions, other than your level of command. If you're having a bash at co-operative multiplayer Scourge of War, it might be worth looking into that option, to see exactly how "real world" FOW settings and a reliance on messenger riders affects play.

I enjoyed the show, and it even inspired me to grab the original version - just to give it a try again, and remember what it was I liked about X-Com all those moon ago. It's funny because when X-Com was originally released, I didn't fall in love with it. I was more interested in the atmospherics, than the mechanics. There's just something about the music, the loading stills, and the eerie fog of war darkness that hides these invaders in the dusky twilight. I remember the stark atmosphere of the original Syndicate game in a similar way. Something about art and music that just worked to create a mood. I always hear many strategy gamers gushing over X-Com, and it's obvious from the hype surrounding this up coming title that there is a lot of interest in the game. But over the years I never understood why other turn based tactical games didn't warrant the same sort of admiration. Jagged Alliance. Silent Storm. Even some recent titles, like Team Assault - Baptism of Fire or Star Sentinels Tactics. These games all provide a similar experience, mechanics-wise, but they seem to lack that atmosphere of battling the unknown. The Alien menace. Based purely on my recent nostalgic euphoria after playing some of the original, I've pre-ordered this new title. I didn't think Bruce's comments were disrespectful at all. In fact his X-Cover comment was quite amusing, I thought. Bruce is well suited to playing the devil's advocate on many issues, and the new angle of questioning and reasoning he can bring to the conversation often ignites discussion in a positive way. Unless it's a discussion about Mark Walkers Lock N' Load game I thought Jake did an admirable job of giving insights into the design process, often humbling himself, and owning up to all the mistakes along the way. It's like having honest and interesting designer notes in a manual, only they're spoken, and they can be quizzed on certain issues that they raise.

A game I meant to mention, tying into the use of blast doors to force unwanted intruders to exit your space vessel, was the game Evacuation, a sort of puzzle game where you have to plan the jettison of nasty monsters in your spaceship by opening and closing different coloured blast doors. You can play it on the web for free, or you can get it for iOS too. http://www.foddy.net/Evacuation.html I tried to use this sort of tactic to rid myself of intruders in FTL last night, but it didn't go down all that well. I'd huddled my men into the medbay, and opened a doorway path to the outside, where the intruders where. But they made a bee-line for my O2 generator and they took it out. So we were all suffocating slowly regardless of my blast door shennanigans. I rushed my men to the O2 bay to try and fix it, but there were intruders waiting there to spank them. If the O2 was on, I'd have overpowered the invaders, but sadly, by the time my men had won the fight, they were also passing out and dying around the O2 generator.

Entertaining podcast as usual! Really enjoying my time with FTL, although I haven't plumbed the depths or made hardly any progress without being utterly slaughtered from out of the blue. It's got a hint of rogue-like about it, but that's just mainly tied in with the procedural generation and the perma-death I feel. The games biggest strengths are that you personally control a crew and they interact with (in a meaningful way) with the ships systems, which you can then tweak to your hearts content depending upon your success. So there's this coherence between the disparate mechanics, which a lot of other games just mismatch. I've found playing FTL solo to be rewarding, but sometimes feels like your'e gaming the system, trial and error style, just to make it a bit farther than you did last time. However, a big difference which put a lot more emphasis on the narrative and the outcomes, and my personal enjoyment - was playing alongside another person. And having a discussion about the decisions made, or the path through the sector to take, and how many more jumps can we squeeze in - just made the playthrough come more alive. Like Kirk having Spock to confer with. It just felt a better experience. Playing it, made me contrast the game with something more traditional like Nexus the Jupiter Incident, whereby you control your ships systems, but you have very little control over your crew. Obviously that game is mission based, and very visual - but ultimately it serves a similar need in the sci fi gamers lust to just boldly go where no man has gone before. Imagine the Nexus engine, with planning/crew controls of FTL, and a procedurely generated sandbox to go and explore. I'm going weak at the knees just at the thought of it The simplistic combat reminded me very much of a game such as Smugglers 4, abstracted, but having a quick-fire recharge timer based mechanic that kept it interesting enough. Niels Bauer's game lacks the UI polish of FTL, and it's very clicky on the mouse to play, but it does have a lunchtime play aesthetic that I also get from FTL. Smugglers does more traditional stuff like trading and what not. The discussion lead on to general rogue-likes, and I'm very love/hate with most of them. If they're too deep and steeped in their own self importance, it's difficult to break the barrier and enjoy the experience. I think it's to do with the amount of time and effort you have to invest to get anything out of them. I prefer much more immediate games, such as Cardinal Quest, or The Eye of Maj'Eyal (TOME). One of my all time favourite rogue-likes (more party based dungeon crawl) was a game called FastCrawl. It was very stylish, simple to pick up, but had enough depth to make a short burst of it satisfying. I get the same sort of buzz out of the combat in Winter Wolves' Loren: The Amazon Princess, but that has a lot of story and anime characterisation romance going on in the background too! Similar but less polished combat is also found in their earlier Poser modelled RPG card game Magic Stones. Anyway, I'm digressing big time here, from rogue-likes to more quick blast turn based strategy RPG's centered around combat. The last game that come to mind as I was playing through FTL was Digital Eel's Strange Adventures in Digital Space and their Weird Worlds Return to Infinite Space. They are space exploration games that run about 20 minutes long, and have a rogue-like feel to your movements across the starmap. It's just a shame I didn't click with their combat components at all. So fingers crossed the FTL guys get to enhance and further develop their game, expanding it with even more of your average sci fi gamers rewards. I'm sold on the concept and am in for the long haul. I just need to make sure I have Bruce at the tactical helm. Today I found out you can rename your crew members... now you too can pilot the starship 3MA, with Troy, Rob, Tom, Bruce and Julian manning their stations. With Hermes the Comms droid keeping everyone calm and coherent.

After I'd listened to the cast, I immediately went and bought the book on Kindle, with the anticipation of reading it sometime soon. I'm fascinated by the historic link between wargaming and roleplaying games. Plus I have a keen curiosity towards early wargaming, mainly to see how the hobby developed and to try and glimpse the joy of the Golden Age of wargaming, that I missed out upon, and that so MANY wargamers nowadays refer back to almost constantly. I seemed to have missed out on all the wargaming foundation years, in a similar manner as the Nintendo Mario years on consoles. I sort of jumped from Vic-20/C64 to PC gaming in the early 90's. My first console was an original Playstation (PSX)! Anyway, a year or two ago I read a book called Achtung Schweinehund which is sort of a look back at a wargaming hobby through Harry Pearsons life, and it was an interesting journey through miniature wargaming and a boys fascination with war. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Achtung-Schweinehund-Story-Imaginary-Combat/dp/0349115680 I'm looking forward to being educated by an extensively researched tome on the history behind TWO of my favourite hobbies, wargaming and fantasy roleplaying. Troy and 3MA, thanks for introducing me to Jon Peterson's work!

I do AAR's of wargames mostly. Because I write them up blow by blow, and try to explain what is happening, and why I'm doing something, it takes me an eternity to do them, so ultimately a lot of them are in a limbo and they need finishing. But as long as the enthusiasm carries me along, I try to get them done. It was really down to Troy's Flash of Steel blog, his encouragement and the inspiration gleaned from listening to the 3MA podcast that set me on my way, I prefer to ride my enthusiasm through an AAR playthrough, than try and play at unbiased pros and cons reviewer. I just enjoy the enthusiastic flow of gaming, rather than having to plod through games for the sake of a balanced critique that so many more talented reviewers can do so much better than myself anyway. If even one of my articles lights a spark of enthusiasm in someone, and they try out the game, then my job is done. I like to think of myself as opening the door to wargaming for the strategy gaming masses. Simply by taking people along, on my personal journey, towards appreciating the bean counting battle fatigued niche that wargaming is to strategy gaming. http://www.sugarfreegamer.com

Histwar got to a point where it was stable and it played ok, but for me the user interface was so obtuse, I spent more time wrestling with the oddities and nuances of the interface than I actually did playing out the manoeuvre warfare. It's very detailed in terms of uniform colours, and troop composition, but ultimately the fight you had with just controlling the game was too much for me to enjoy it. I'd sort of resigned myself to keep an eye on Scourge of War's development, especially the Napoleonic Mod idea that was floated on their forums. I agree that folks looking to sample Take Command's pleasures should try out Scourge of War: Gettysburg, since it's just a newer, more friendlier and better looking game. Matrix/Slitherine have just taken it under their wing, and have removed the online DRM activation scheme previously used. It now falls under Matrix's offline activation with a key code (AFAIK Matrix, build the key into the install file you download). With future updates requiring the key to apply them. Command Ops gives you control at the highest level possible, and you plan out the actions, and then let the (very capable) sub-ordinate AI take over. This macro-management is very rewarding, and present a much truer state to the commander in the field, than does the "move every man in the mud" style play of many wargames. I thought Scourge of War gives you command at only a single point of entry in the heirarchy, and you have work with your sub-ordinate branch of the OOB. Whereas Command Ops, allows you to plan out at ALL levels of the OOB if you want. But the actual movement, resting and firing is always under AI control.

I'd like to see a Napoleonic wargame done from an overview planning map where troop placement and movement was affected by timing and logistics. So I guess you could even call it a mash up between casual time management game, and a troop manoeuvre game. The ground would affect movement speeds, and supply rates. Basically two functions would affect the outcome of the battle, position and timing. It could be done in slow time or even be simultaneous turn. Essentially, I think I'm looking for something like the Panthergames titles, but in the Napoleonic era, with supply heavily involved, rather than adbstracted.

Levee En Masse is a worthy boardgame translation of a States if Siege solo game for the iOS and Android. Simple, quick to play, but with event cards and historic or random timeline its interesting enough in and playable in short bursts. Personally I'm wishing they would make a conversion of the Zulus on the Ramparts States if Siege game also. http://victorypointgames.com/details.php?prodId=209

I would add AI War: Fleet Command http://www.arcengames.com/w/index.php/aiwar-features Solium Infernum (P.S. 50% off all Cryptic Comet titles using code: OCCULT for the next 10 days!) http://www.crypticcomet.com/games/SI/Solium_Infernum.html Unity of Command http://unityofcommand.net/ Atom Zombie Smasher http://blendogames.com/atomzombiesmasher/ Sid Mier's Gettysburg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sid_Meier's_Gettysburg! Majesty 2 http://www.majesty2.com/ I could go on listing powerful strategy/war/indie titles worth looking at that have been mentioned on 3MA, it's difficult to stop.

Enjoyed the episode, good to see Cliffski get some exposure. I am a gamer who struggles with high levels of customisation in a game. Ultimately, I want to play the game and be gently led into the mechanics, I want to explore the design first, until I totally understand it, and am totally familiar with it, I never feel able to begin the customisation of the units. If the customisation is limited at first, and you're taken through how things make differences, then I can handle that. Having a wealth of options just thrown at you, go play and make it work, I crumble. Both of Cliff's recent titles overwhelm me with options right at the beginning. GTB was a little more approachable than GSB. Chris Park's AI War has evolved into so much with almost infinite variety that I start it up and am lost again. I think it could just be the way I enjoy games, I enjoy the journey, the progression, the dawning realisation. I don't enjoy the thrown in the deep end, work it out yourself approach. For me to play the game, it has to have a draw of understanding, playability and payoff. Thrown in a complex sandpit with endless options, there's just no payoff, no plans to follow, no clue on how to start. Ultimately, you're beaten down more often than not, for not totally understanding the mechanics at play, and that's when I walk away. I think customisation in moderation to begin with, is brilliant. As long as you are shown the ropes. Once the mechanics have been imparted, and you're hooked, then open the customisation up to the "Creative" level. Progression first, lavished with feedback and Understanding, then Customisation to reward those who really do want to challenge themselves within the myriad of options.