| Napoleonic Wargame Club (NWC) https://wargame.ch/board/nwc/ |
|
| NIR Project https://wargame.ch/board/nwc/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=6191 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Tim Cavallin [ Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:12 am ] |
| Post subject: | NIR Project |
Hello my friends. Just wanted to canvas people's thoughts on the work of the NIR Project. I recently got my filthy grubs on 12 CDs fully packed with all the Napoleonic battles and files from the NIR Project. (I have played several games of Leipzig over the past 3 years, originally downloaded directly from the site... but I thought I may as well get all the battles for good!) It appears to me that there are nearly 200 different battles (each with multiple scenarios), sets of maps, battle files, etc. They just need to be installed once a battle has been chosen. Only thing is: Are there any other people out there playing NIR Project games?? I realize a large portion of people have moved on to the HPS series (which I will too one day... I have all the CDs!), but I realize there is still a large population who enjoys the BG series (whose gaming engine is the one that NIR Project tends to run from). So, I ask the questions: 1. Who is playing NIR Project scenarios? 2. Which scenarios? 3. Anybody want to play one with me? Thanks for your input... talk to you soon! Lt. Tim Cavallin, AdR |
|
| Author: | Andy Moss [ Wed Jan 26, 2005 5:32 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Hi Well Nirproject has done a lot for extending the life of Bg games. I've played them all. My opinion is that a)LoS is very buggy on all the maps b)the French army is mostly Q6 and above until 1813 and c)the artillery are just killing machines. A few bugs with maps and some historical errors in some scenarios, easily corrected as I've done with Leipzig. My view is that the games are worth playing but only after some serious revisions. I know Paul Wakeman is also working on corrections to the pdt etc. Bear in mind that there are hundreds of scenarios so they cannot have been properly play tested for balance etc. Hope that helps. |
|
| Author: | Tony Malone [ Wed Jan 26, 2005 7:11 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I have played many of them, and it always gave a good mix of play, I thought they were and still are a great asset to this club. Maréchal, Baron Tony Malone: 1ere/1ere Fusilier Chasseurs; CDR III Corps Armee Du Nord "The Guard may die, But it never surrenders". 
|
|
| Author: | Tim Cavallin [ Wed Jan 26, 2005 7:55 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Andy, I do remember some LOS issues at Leipzig... sounds like you fixed all that. We should go another round with your new updates to LOS, maps, historical authenticity, etc. We can also make simple changes to the .PDT file to get the artillery back into historical scope. Let me know if you are interested, and then you can send me the revised files. As far as play balance is concerned, I don't find that an issue if the game itself is historically accurate, because more times than not, the actual battles were usually unbalance affairs anyway (at least that is my impression). I've always liked the unit graphics of the BG series, and I do like fighting a good set piece battle.... most of my "cardboard counter" wargames are set pieces... Any other thoughts out there? Lt. Tim Cavallin, AdR |
|
| Author: | Burr [ Wed Jan 26, 2005 6:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I play them. I would also be interested in a game. <b><font color="gold">Ensign</font id="gold"> A. Burr</b> <b><font color="red">2nd Jaeger Fresnel Division</font id="red"> I Korps Austrian Army</b> |
|
| Author: | PAW1800 [ Wed Jan 26, 2005 6:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I play them and fix them for NIR. We can discuss this offline. Send a courier. Cheers, <b><font color="gold">Lt. </b></font id="gold">Paul Wakeman <font color="beige">2nd Light Rgt</font id="beige"> <font color="orange">2éme Brigade 22éme Saxon Division <b>VII Saxon Corps</font id="orange"> <font color="red">Armée du Rhin</b></font id="red"> Paul_Wakeman@yahoo.com |
|
| Author: | Richard [ Wed Jan 26, 2005 9:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I was a member of the NIR Project club before joining this one and a few years back was mainly playing their games. There are a lot of scenarios so they can't have all been play-tested adequately (I know this for a fact because I'm responsible for the Crimean mod and a few other scenarios as well). I agree about the LOS problem - this seems worse for those scenarios using the BGW/PTW engine rather than NIR. Same for the troop quality and artillery. However, the collection is extensive and well worth having. I'm glad that PAW is now revising them - hopefully they'll get a bit of play-testing and, where necessary, balancing too. Incidentally, there are still some advantages of the old BG engine over HPS - such as square forming and counter-charging in the defensive phase. Lt Rich White 4th Cavalry Brigade Cavalry Corps Anglo-Allied Army |
|
| Author: | Andy Moss [ Wed Jan 26, 2005 11:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Tim Not quite finished the Leipzig corrections but it's based on New Settings Project ethos. Corrections to LoS, OOB, PDT, main.map. New leaders and units bmp. All done. Still working on the scenarios, the current ones are historically inaccurate, particularly as regards the battles around Mockern and the North of leipzig. I use the Leipzig 2 map, Leipzig 3 is prettier but there are some serious geographical errors with it. Should have been done last summer but sort of ran out of ooomph, especially as I assumed that nobody played the games any longer. Please give me your current email address, your cogeco one is no longer valid. Send to a.g.moss@bham.ac.uk Richard is right as regards maps. The BGW and PTW - based games have more serious problems with regards to LoS, I think this is caused by using the wrong algorithm combined with not including chateaux and walls data from the pdt. in the calculations. To an extent this has been corrected by a guy called Bill Shows. And scenarios, particularly the "what if's?" have never been play tested. I also agree with Richard that Bg has certain advantages over HPS in certain regards to gameplay. Overall Nirproject games are worth having the whole lot. Will be great when they are all modified. This was, and I assume still is, an evolving project. |
|
| Author: | Tim Cavallin [ Thu Jan 27, 2005 4:31 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Andy, Sounds like you've done a ton of good work on Leipzig. Allow me to be your opponent or playtester for this one! Also, I'm glad top hear that it is based on the New Settings... I thought that was a major improvement! Let me know if you want me to research or assist you in creating the Leipzig scenarios. As far as play balance is concerned in this particular battle, I still believe that the "historical" scenario (at least beyond Oct 16) should ultimately be stacked against the French from a physical perspective... perhaps this is balanced by forcing the Allies to obtaining more objectives or something like that. By the way, my new email address is tcavallin1@cogeco.ca Talk to you soon, Lt. Tim Cavallin, AdR |
|
| Author: | 1182 [ Fri Jan 28, 2005 5:05 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Tim Cavallin</i> <br />Andy, As far as play balance is concerned, I don't find that an issue if the game itself is historically accurate, because more times than not, the actual battles were usually unbalance affairs anyway (at least that is my impression). <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote"> I have to agree with this statement! Would it be best if victory conditions were set accordingly? I mean that even if an army was defeated, it still could get a "Minor Victory" for doing better than historical outcome? [url="mailto:pyguinard@hotmail.com"]Lt Pierre-Yves Guinard[/url], 6e Division, II Corp 
AdN |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|