Is this game dead?

[Rustem35]

This time ill LG get a patch as well like N  ?
Some like me ill not get N until we see a proper working bug free LG as we paid for that game !?

[Montecuccoli]

LG and N share some inner engine, so i think there should be a new patch for LG just after the new patch for N.

[Gunfreak]

I've been following the game since 2003.

Not played for a long time now, I'm waiting for the new unit graphics.

[Warren R Perez]

Gentlemen,
I am new having purchased HW:LG Sept 23, 2014.  I had problems getting a Full screen graphics.  Now this has been solved.  However, I have read the above posts from SIMON and others which in essence state that the development of this game has been going on for years, and in their opinion they feel there are yet too many problems, so they have stopped playing it.  Now my version of HW:LG includes the patch #03n.   DOES THIS SOLVE ALL THE PROBLEMS mentioned in the above posts such as AI upgrade and new UI?  These posts were in June, 2014 only 3 months ago.
I ask this question because as a beginner it will take me many hours of reading and experimenting in order to learn how to play the game.  I DO NOT want to spend all these hours, if in the end I am going to deal with a game that is not functioning properly.

I think this is a fair question.  If the answer is no, and Simon etc., are still correct, then I was duped into spending my money on software that should not be on the market as a FINISHED product.  On the other hand, if all the major problems are in the past, and have been solved since June, 2014, then I will make the effort to learn how to play the game.

I hope I get an honest answer.

Warren R Perez

[sandman]

Gentlemen,
I am new having purchased HW:LG Sept 23, 2014.  I had problems getting a Full screen graphics.  Now this has been solved.  However, I have read the above posts from SIMON and others which in essence state that the development of this game has been going on for years, and in their opinion they feel there are yet too many problems, so they have stopped playing it.  Now my version of HW:LG includes the patch #03n.   DOES THIS SOLVE ALL THE PROBLEMS mentioned in the above posts such as AI upgrade and new UI?  These posts were in June, 2014 only 3 months ago.
I ask this question because as a beginner it will take me many hours of reading and experimenting in order to learn how to play the game.  I DO NOT want to spend all these hours, if in the end I am going to deal with a game that is not functioning properly.

I think this is a fair question.  If the answer is no, and Simon etc., are still correct, then I was duped into spending my money on software that should not be on the market as a FINISHED product.  On the other hand, if all the major problems are in the past, and have been solved since June, 2014, then I will make the effort to learn how to play the game.

I hope I get an honest answer.

Warren R Perez

Thing is that there is a controversy.
There were bugs and bad behaviours of the AI and there were phenomenas that probably were NOT an issue, but people who didnt understand the game mechanics propperly, thought those were issues.
For exemple, an unit executes a movement which appeared to be extremely worthless or even suicidal to the player. But finally the whole thing is a matter of the point of view. As user you have an excellent overview over the battlefield. From the perspective of the certain regiment-commander, who might be situated in a depressed area or a wood, only very limited information is available. So there always are situations which brings the CiC in anger due the "incompetent" subordinates. Furthermore most of the battles wont happen in an appropriate order which allows absolute control and planning. Usually the battles will lead more or less in chaos - sometimes a complete mess.
But since this is a simulation with the aspiration to facilitate the feeling of napolenonic realism, it is exactly what the game longs for.
Pressing f5 while putting the cursor on a certain unit brings you nearly in POV of its commander.

I personally didnt practice the new versions enough to judge about the current state.
I dont think, that all problems could be resolved in a short term context. Simply cos it might be the only strategic battle simulation in this world that provides several levels of AI operating independently and cos there are coming new features to be implemented like 2 more levels of AI and new 3D-models and battle-animations. In my opininion it is simply not possible to perform such complex activities accurately in the very first instant. Not the biggest programmers community of the industry is able to do so, as we frequently learn according every release of all kind of new games.

All in all the tactical AI is very much advanced and allows to perform nice battles. The strategic AI of the computer opponent also lately wasnt a full-valued competitor, cos it wasnt able to adjust operations in the endgame propperly. But for practicing it is fine. Anyway the target is to master an army against human opponents.

Actually I didnt think that the new UI is provided for LG too. I thought it was for HW: N only, but I am not absolutely sure.

I dont really see a quantity of major problems like they were described in single postings. The issues I notice usually dont impact the outcome of a whole battle essentially. But nevertheless they have to be extinguished successivley and these are details the developers permanentely work on in-between.

Thing is, new features or certain improvement can cause new issues, but there is nothing to avoid this, as we all are only humans.

My advice is: try it out yourself. Make your own experience and get as much information as you can to finally judge for yourself. It is a matter of affinity, of personal taste.
I dont think that it can be a waste of time, because there are so many great different things not seen before to examine. The positive aspects overlap the negative by far.

Everybody, including me, who hopes for a very high grade of accurate game-performance mostly in detail, has to wait. There is no other way! Thats the legitimacy of evolution.

BTW you dont really have to perceive the learning curve as a science. The delegation system makes it rather easy to start. Learning to issue single orders is pretty much easy too. The worst thing that can happen is loosing a battle.
The advanced tasks like giving complex well coordinated and timed orders to several corps taking the terrain, weather, abilities of units and leaders into account, primarily is a matter of game experience anyway.

Finally its a matter of enjoyment. If you have fun and see the potential and believe in the game´s evolution, its your thing. Otherwise leave it, and check it again after a while, if you can.

I use to buy stocks which I believe are a good investment. Everytime I do this when I see good reasons for them to succeed. Not all of them lead to the desired result. I can only evaluate the chances from my point of view in a certain moment according the available information.
As long as I benefit in a sufficient amount of cases it is a rewarding strategy. If I dont see that an investment promises the desired chance to become a success, I have to keep an eye on it and rate it again when time passes and criteria change.

[MarshalJean]

Gentlemen,
I am new having purchased HW:LG Sept 23, 2014.  I had problems getting a Full screen graphics.  Now this has been solved.  However, I have read the above posts from SIMON and others which in essence state that the development of this game has been going on for years, and in their opinion they feel there are yet too many problems, so they have stopped playing it.  Now my version of HW:LG includes the patch #03n.   DOES THIS SOLVE ALL THE PROBLEMS mentioned in the above posts such as AI upgrade and new UI?  These posts were in June, 2014 only 3 months ago.
I ask this question because as a beginner it will take me many hours of reading and experimenting in order to learn how to play the game.  I DO NOT want to spend all these hours, if in the end I am going to deal with a game that is not functioning properly.

I think this is a fair question.  If the answer is no, and Simon etc., are still correct, then I was duped into spending my money on software that should not be on the market as a FINISHED product.  On the other hand, if all the major problems are in the past, and have been solved since June, 2014, then I will make the effort to learn how to play the game.

I hope I get an honest answer.

Warren R Perez

Hello, Warren!

I purchased HWLG back in 2011.  I purchased HWN when it was released last November (2013).  At the time, HWN had several game play bugs that did affect the outcome of battles...things like artillery batteries mysteriously moving from one part of the map to the other...almost invincible cavalry regiments...then cavalry regiments that would NEVER charge an undefended artillery position, etc.  But these bugs, as I can see, have largely been fixed both in HWN and with the newer patches to HWLG.  In my opinion, both games work well enough AS IS to justify the cost. 

BUT...

I only have this opinion because (and this is really the main point of the whole controversy, as I see it)...my DESIRE for a realistic Napoleonics game AND my EXPECTATIONS as to what that should look like meet very well in Histwar Napoleon/Les Grognards.  In other words, if someone is looking for a really big version of Napoleon Total War, then one will be disappointed with HW (now, and in the future when all the promised features are delivered).  Why?  Because HW never has, and never will, aspire to be NTW.  And I, for one, am very grateful for this!  NTW is an arcade game...there is very little in the game that is historical at all when it comes to Napoleonic warfare.  I have been studying the subject in depth for years, I have downloaded and played all the major mods for NTW (many, quite good) and NONE of them even come close to simulating a Napoleonic battlefield, simply because Creative Assembly was never trying to do so, and no amount of modding can really make up for this.  But, if a casual arcade player who likes NTW comes to HW with the expectations that they are purchasing just a larger version of the former, and hoping this is the case, then they will be disappointed...BUT NOT BECAUSE Histwar has failed, but because they have judged a product by their own expectations, not by the standards set out by the creators.  As Sandman said above, Histwar requires that time be put into understanding it.  NTW does not.  Histwar requires a person to learn what Napoleonic warfare was all about, learn how it was conducted and why certain things would go wrong on a battlefield, and what made certain things go right, and why smaller forces could sometimes win over larger ones, etc, BEFORE properly judging the game's merits.  NTW requires none of this.  (I continue to use NTW as a measure of comparison because it, and Histwar, are currently the best 3D Napoleonic games out there). 

Now, having said all of this, I will admit (as will the creators) that promised features have been long in coming, and most still have not come.  But this, as is one's complete evaluation of the game, is also a matter of expectations.  Honestly, when the time table was thrown out for new features last year, I took it all with a REALLY big grain of salt...believing that the features would ultimately be added, but also believing that they would take forever to be added, as has been the case.  But I bought the new version anyway.  Why?  Because I wanted the improved graphics to a game I already loved as it was because there truly is no better historically rooted 3D Napoleonics game out there.  And I bought it because I highly esteem JMM who is working with a few other creators and not a multi-million dollar development company to design a game that has been beating all others in the realm of historical realism.  AND, because I'm a history buff.  I don't like wasting time and money playing games that may be beautiful but leave an empty feeling after you're done because you know it did not resemble early 19th century warfare much at all. 

In summary, there are fair ways to evaluate HW, and unfair ways.  It is NOT okay to judge it by one's own standards that have little to do with what the game was supposed to be in the first place (I see posters to this forum doing this all the time, honestly...NOT that I am implying that you are, necessarily).  And then there are fair ways to evaluate HW, namely, according to the stated goals and standards set out by the creators.  In my opinion, if the game(s) are evaluated in this way, then there is obviously still more to do...but also still a lot to enjoy while we wait.

Thanks!

MJ

[Warren R Perez]

Sandman,
Thank you for your comments.  My overall evaluation of your remarks is that the game is still evolving because it is complex, and as such it requires time to get it right.
However, most of the game works well, so why not give it a try.

Sandman, I have done extensive reading on the internet regarding this game.  Something I should have done before I purchased it.   What I conclude is that this game has been under development for numerous years.  That there was a break from --------- and JMM etc., went on their own.  That most of the "development" is done by one man, JMM.  That financing seems to be a problem because of the lack of a sufficient player base.  That the development process continues. 

Sandman, in the final analysis, this is basically a game.  I know that many software when first sold has some bugs.  These are corrected and you have a finished product.
However, the process does not take years.  I am into flight simulation, and there are hundreds of aircraft, scenery  and related product software.  Many times when a product is first launched on the market there are bugs.  A patch or two are issued, the bugs corrected, and you have a finished product.  On the other hand some products cannot be fixed, and these do not sell well.

I just received an e-mail from a former player (in France) who told me he stop playing the game, but keeps reading the forum in the hope that someday the project will be completed. 

I just cannot devote the time to learn such a complex game, and then have to deal with a product that is still evolving.  Sorry.
Warren R Perez

[Warren R Perez]

MJ,
I understand your remarks.  I am almost 80 years of age.  I served in the 9th Infantry Division of the US Army in Germany as occupation force after WWII.  Our area of concentration was in the Ulm, Neu Ulm area, and then near the Czech border.  I became interested in Napoleonic times since at the time the US Army took its unit structure from the Napolenic armies.  That is platoon, company, battalion, regiment, division, corps and army.  I done much reading regading Napoleonic times and warfare. 
In fact I was just re-reading parts of David Chandler's "THE CAMPAIGNS OF NAPOLEON" where he writes in detail about Napoleon's philosophy of war and his strategic and battle methods.  Mr Chandler was a military historian, and senior lecturer at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst in the UK.
I am not therefore totally unfamiliar with warfare as carried out in Napoleonic times.  I am not looking for an arcade game where the one that kills the most of the other side wins without regards to the tactics of the time etc.  My point is that I am looking for a finished product, or close to it.   I do not want to deal with a "work in progress" simply because it has a goal which, when achieved, will emulate closely the military of the Napoleonic times. 

Warren R Perez

[Gunner24]

Answer to the question : No, not dead.

MarshalJean : Loads of good comments, I have to agree with them.

Warren R Perez : I believe this game is closer to "finished" than many people (perhaps you ???) appreciate.

General comment : I still think too many people are expecting too much from the AI if fighting battles "solo".......if not wanting to "fight" real people in MP format, then for me, the ONLY way to play is as solo "both sides"......this allows the player to set up situations, and give sensible orders that each side might have given in that position -  and then see what happens !!!.

My biggest complaint is nothing to do with the game, only that JMM has not got the time, money, or large enough customer base to make HW|N a TRUE MP game, by having some kind of central HW server. 

The game (except for a few little bugs) is exceptional, and better than the best of any other Nap game available - in my opinion.

[sandman]

Sandman,
Thank you for your comments.  My overall evaluation of your remarks is that the game is still evolving because it is complex, and as such it requires time to get it right.
However, most of the game works well, so why not give it a try.

Sandman, I have done extensive reading on the internet regarding this game.  Something I should have done before I purchased it.   What I conclude is that this game has been under development for numerous years.  That there was a break from --------- and JMM etc., went on their own.  That most of the "development" is done by one man, JMM.  That financing seems to be a problem because of the lack of a sufficient player base.  That the development process continues. 

Sandman, in the final analysis, this is basically a game.  I know that many software when first sold has some bugs.  These are corrected and you have a finished product.
However, the process does not take years.  I am into flight simulation, and there are hundreds of aircraft, scenery  and related product software.  Many times when a product is first launched on the market there are bugs.  A patch or two are issued, the bugs corrected, and you have a finished product.  On the other hand some products cannot be fixed, and these do not sell well.

I just received an e-mail from a former player (in France) who told me he stop playing the game, but keeps reading the forum in the hope that someday the project will be completed. 

I just cannot devote the time to learn such a complex game, and then have to deal with a product that is still evolving.  Sorry.
Warren R Perez

I am glad, that I could be conducive to make your choice!
The best of luck for yourself and for finding an entertaining product that complies with your personal standards.

[[NBC]Friant]

Actually Warren you have bought HW probably when it is now to all intents and purposes playing at its very best, especially regarding ai.
HWLG which you have has only been recently updated to the mechanics of HWN, there have been times in the past when the game was for some, especially beta testers, lets say, not enjoyable. The trouble is with something of this complexity one subtle change here or there can then cause major problems else where, and much of the problem along the road was because some kept to a version that they found to be good and then did not test the beta. I think somewhere down the line communication was lost and JMM assumed everything was ok, and made some changes that were not enjoyable, but over the last few months big headway has been made in correcting these until we now have probably a HW which plays better than ever imo.

I do not want to deal with a "work in progress" simply because it has a goal which, when achieved, will emulate closely the military of the Napoleonic times.

I can understand this comment in a way, but some of the changes that a coming along are now the icing on the cake, and there is nothing wrong in making a good thing better...
I have like many followed this game for years, and have now been playing on and off for over 4 years, and all I can say to you is that no other game has intrigued me more than this. I am constantly still amazed at what has been implemented in this game. I bought the manual separately and that is a masterpiece in its own right, reproduced in excellent English, and has provided me with hours of entertainment on its own. Like I say I am still learning. There is no other game that I have stuck with for this long, yes there has been some ups and downs, but this game is a Napoleonic Battlefield God!
You compare your flight sims to this, but take a look at the credits and see how many people are involved in building these games, then compare that with the HW team.
What we need now, is some screenshots of the up and coming graphical changes, this wets peoples appetite more than anything, news and a comprehensive list of updates as ai changes are made... But this takes time, which in hindsight would be better spent improving the game. I for one hope the changes keep coming, campaign maps, extra theatres of Napoleonic wars, add on's etc, etc.
I will wait for as long as it takes, there isn't now, and I doubt whether there ever will be anything to compare...
Where else could you get scale like this?

[Warren R Perez]

NBC,
Thank you.  I understand your comments as to the progress of HistWar over these many years.  I will go to the sidelines, and keep looing in from time to time
to see what progress has transpired in the future.  In the meantime I shall keep the game in Limbo.

Thank you for all your help to my many questions.

Warren R Perez

[Holdit]

I'm very relieved to read this thread. For a long time, I've considered the problems I have with HLG and often wondered if maybe it was just me. I see at last that I'm not alone in my dissatisfaction, nor my reluctance to spend more money on what is effectively the same game, and yet, paradoxically, my hope that it will actually reach its potential. It's certainly good to see that the response to criticism is no longer just to shout it down and condemn the heretics.

I've played the demo of HW:N and stuck with it for longer than I was able to with HLG. The landscape is gorgeous...just gorgeous (with the unfortunate exception of built-up areas), like a painting almost, and the 1:1 and 1:2 representations are pretty impressive. But here's a thing: HLG was always supposed to be about more than just the eye candy, yet when I look at the differences between HW:N and HLG, that's really what I see - apart from the necessary improvements to the UI, which is indeed a lot better. Even so, I still would have preferred to see improvements to the game itself rather than the interface. The old one was pretty bad, but you could work with it. Unlike say, Matrix Games' Campaigns on the Danube. You won't find any bugs in that game because the UI does its utmost to make sure you never even get a game started! Seriously.

So, well done to JMM for the beautiful maps (I also like the "table" look around the edges), and well done for the improved UI, but I won't consider this game ready for prime time until it has the following:

1. The ability to start Marengo with the French actually holding the line of the Fontanone, the ability to start Borodino with the Russians already in possession of the Grand Redoubt and the Bagration Fleches etc...you get the idea. The ability for a scenario designer to schedule reinforcements to arrive anywhere on the map.

2. Division and brigade AI with with divisional and brigade generals displayed and/or the ability for the player to manually control divisions/brigades. A stupid AI can be worse than no AI.

3. Artillery batteries can no longer knock each other out at extreme range in the space of a few minutes.

4. What you see in 3D is actually what's happening in the game engine.

5. Units behave in a plausible way e.g. infantry marching at 90 degrees to an enemy line within musket range (self-enfilading!) .

6. A more usable (i.e. zoom-able) 2D view. Alright, that's a nice-to-have, assuming the 3D issues are sorted out.

The Histwar development team may be a small operation, but the product isn't priced as such. HW:N is a pretty expensive game, weighing in at nearly €50 for the most basic version. A customer is entitled to expect something worthwhile for this. I read a suggestion in another thread that retrofitting improvements to HLG should be discontinued in order to concentrate on fixing HW:N. I can certainly see the logic of this line of reasoning, but it ignores the fact that many people who paid for HLG still don't own a playable game, and not because they really wanted a "BIG NTW" (can we please put this canard to bed once and for all?), so effectively saying to them "buy the game again to get the fixes"  just wouldn't cut it. What might be worth considering would be to allow HLG owners to buy HW:M at a heavy discount, and then forget about all further development of HLG and, in the spirit of military common sense, reinforce success rather than failure.  I must confess to having an interest here as one of the things that puts me off buying HW:N (apart from the fear of buying another dog with the same bunch of fleas) is the price. As a HLG owner, I might pay up to...hmm....let's say €25.00 for HW:N in its current state. A bit cheeky, you might think, but for Histwar, it represents a choice between getting €25.00 of my money, or none of my money.

The Napoleon's Battles miniatures rules set (originally by Avalon Hill) is due to be re-released very soon now, and to be honest, that is more exciting to me than claims about what HW:N will provide, and at the moment, it looks like that where my money will be going. Believe it or not, NB gives me a more satisfactory Napoleonic grand-tactical game than HLG, even though I have to do the engine-work myself. I take no pleasure in this state of affairs. I've always wanted Histwar to succeed ever since it was first announced on ---------, where I read the description and saw that this was the Napoleonic game I'd always wanted. It still has the potential to be that. I think. But that doesn't mean I'm going to don blinkers and pretend it's something it isn't.

Finally, a word about the HW:N demo. I know I've made this point already, elsewhere, but really. I have a spreadsheet of about 90 Napoleonic battles suitable for games with the brigade or regiment as the basic manoeuvre unit, such as Napoleons' Battles or Age of Eagles. 90+ battles to choose from. Why does the HW:N demo not depict a historical engagement - with the units in their historical start positions? At least meet the gamer halfway by giving him something that will allow him to make some meaningful comparisons. Bagowhatto? Seriously?  Wouldn't it be much better to provide something medium sized like, for example (considering the French v Russians/Austrians limitation), Gorodetschna, Sacile or Heilsberg?

Ultimately, I don't suppose any of what I've typed above will make any difference. It never has before. I guess every so often I just need to get my HLG frustrations off my chest. It's like therapy... 

[MarshalJean]

The basic disagreement still stands.  Those who still play the game are not blind to what has been promised, we just find enjoyment enough with the game as it is to be content with waiting.  Those who bought the game and don't still play it do so for a variety of reasons.  Obviously, whatever reasons they may be, they add up to not finding the current state of the game enjoyable enough to give it their time.  I'm not sure any other reasons given by either side are really needed.  An agreement to disagree is fine with me.   

[tony scrase]

I bought the game about 6 months ago and I am very happy with it - I have more that got my monies worth. I would have no trouble recommending it..

a) Yes there are some bugs BUT I DO NOT BELIEVE THEY EFFECT THE RESULT OF ANY BATTLE

b) Graphics I recently Played Total War Medieval 2  and actually the landscape in Histwar is better

c) As said before you can not compare Total war with Histwar - If you want an arcade game which is not a realistic simulation of commanding a Napoleonic army Then that is your game. Even with any bugs that affect individual units Histwar IS FAR MORE AN ACCURATE PORTRAYAL OF COMMANDING A NAPOLEONIC ARMY, Can anyone tell me of a more realistic game Because I will buy it.

d) I have just recommended it to an historian who has written several books on the period - Hopefully he will buy it and gets time to give it a bash - If he does I will post his feedback.

I am a big supporter of the game as you can tell from the above - But I think players should look at the overall picture and not the bugs that really do not materially affect the outcome of any battle. This is a simulation of the  difficulties of commanding a napoleonic army  and the problems of committing or maintaining reserves at decisive moments and at decisive areas of the battlefield with realistic delays in communicating orders. Which can lead to a very satisfying conclusion when you get it right !!! It does it well enough for you to properly understand what a brilliant commander Napoleon really was (when the game is played at advanced level)

I can not think of any other game that comes close to doing this