Grognard/Sim Levels of different Games/Developers/Publishers?

[Cheimison]

I've played a whole lot of Paradox' main titles (EU3/4, HoI 2/3, some CK 1/2 and Victoria 2), and I was having a discussion with someone on AGEOD games vs. Paradox games, which was more simulationist and complicated. In my experience Paradox games are VERY easy to take off the rails. I don't mean to create ahistorical outcomes, I mean creating absolutely batty outcomes like the Khanates conquering the world and becoming hyper-advanced republics before 1700. That's some weird shite that doesn't seem to comport with any alternate reality within 10 universes of us. The combat is also very weird, with YUGE amounts of artillery, I mean my average army has 25-50 thousand men just running the artillery, not sure what is going on there.

AGEOD games are more boardgame like and seem less simple on the surface, but also require a lot more planning due to the lack of moment-to-moment control. They also seem to prevent such whackadoodle events from happening, though in part that's because they're narrower and more railroaded (i.e. hard historical recruitment limits, whereas in EU army support limits are just a number that can be expanded and exceeded with little effort by the player).

The most grognard and simulationist games seem to be the operational level games such as Operational Art of War or, God forbid, War in the East. John Tiller's tactical games are also extremely unforgiving and detail-oriented, though I am assured they are entirely possible to learn and play.

Just wondering what thoughts you all had.

[RyanE]

Strategy game players never seem to be happy...GG's War in the whatever, AGEOD games, HoI XX, TOAW, etc.  Its either so guided and driven as to give the player no options to deviate from history, or its so wide open they complain about unrealistic results.  I am not sure developers can ever win.

I remember when I used to play War in the Pacific.  I hated the Matrix forums.  There were people just virtually screaming in one thread that the Japanese should be allowed to pull out of China and refocus the war.  There was a thread right below it of people screaming that Japan was not behaving realistically because they weren't forced to send their best army units to China.  The devs seemed swing back and forth between those two camps with every patch.

[mirth]

Strategy game players never seem to be happy...

ftfy