Panzer General II - equipment files
Brian Haight
noticed that there a couple of different versions of equipment
files on the web. Was wondering if anyone had any insights as too
which equipment files are the "best" - most accurate etc. Any
input is appreciated. Thanks.
--
Have a good one;
Brian
ICQ: 8028898
Mike Cunningham
Brian Haight wrote in message <6qumqc$os0$1...@mur2.odyssey.on.ca>...
>I have re-installed Panzer General II on my system. I have
>noticed that there a couple of different versions of equipment
>files on the web. Was wondering if anyone had any insights as too
>which equipment files are the "best" - most accurate etc. Any
>input is appreciated. Thanks.
The author of the original equipment files is vehement that
his stats are correct. He mentions specific (and numerous)
flaws in the alternative files and, on the face of it, it's
difficult to find fault in his arguments. Sorry, can't find the
URL for his rebuttal right now.
When I first came across the alternate files I thought that
SSI had done a "standard" lazy job and that the new files -
that seemed to be produced by obsessive WWII junkies -
must be more accurate. Now I'm less convinced and I've
gone back to the original files.
Mike
Raymond Schroder
and he did "vehemently" defend his work - understandably so, as it is
obvious that a great deal of time and effort were spent on those equipment
files. I would like to point out however, that his rebuttal (which is posted
at the Wargamers site), is directed primarily at one specific authors
equipment file. With only one minor exception (and we are allowed to
disagree, right?!), his comments and the Zerstorer's equipment file are in
complete agreement.
While I haven't been in contact with Mike since he left SSI, the Zerstorer's
Ultimate Equipment Files have been constructed following the same general
guidelines as set forth by SSI, including the using the "official" prestige
formula. The Zerstorer's files build on the original excellent work Mike did
for SSI.
However it should be noted that the original files are not error free and I
naturally highly recommend all the Zerstorer's Ultimate Equipment Files.
While the Zerstorer's files correct typos, data entry errors, spelling and
unit values, they also add many additional units.
But should any player choose not to use the Zerstorer's files for PG/AG,
Bill Haering's modified files would be an absolute must. Unfortunately for
PacG there is no real choice. The original game file is in terrible
condition (not Mike's fault) as is the only alternative file currently
available. However in just a few more weeks I expect to complete a six month
project and release a Zerstorer PacG file with 1500 units (that's twice the
number of units available in PacG... over three times the number available
in PG/AG... sorry about the hype).
The bottom line is that the various equipment files (regardless of author)
do add variety. And if they add to player enjoyment by improving the game
play, historic accuracy or just make/keep the games fun... then they are
accomplishing exactly what was hoped for and we all benefit.
Ray
--
Raymond C. Schroder
rcsch...@worldnet.att.net
The Zerstorer
http://www.geocities.com/~calhern/
Support the anti-Spam Amendment
Join at http://www.cauce.org/
Mike Cunningham wrote in message <35d2f...@nnrp1.news.uk.psi.net>...
Jonathan K.
>The bottom line is that the various equipment files (regardless of author)
>do add variety. And if they add to player enjoyment by improving the game
>play, historic accuracy or just make/keep the games fun... then they are
>accomplishing exactly what was hoped for and we all benefit.
Exactly. (speaking generally, here, not directly to Ray) You don't
like what they did, or don't think it's accurate; fine, change it;
make it available; if people like it, they'll use it. If not, they
won't. Some will like the originals. Others will enjoy the added
units and modified stats of revised versions. Play what you prefer,
but no need to trash on anyone else's efforts. Either way, gamers
only benefit--provided the debate remains respectful of the hard work
that was done.
--
Jonathan K.
Tony Miranda
Pac Gen. He also made a pretty darn good PG2 one. It's at his web page
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/sgt_stryker/pg2.htm
just my $.02
-Tony
"The point is, you see, that there is no point
in driving yourself mad trying to stop yourself going mad.
You might just as well give in and save your sanity for later."
(Douglas Adams)
Raymond Schroder wrote in message <6r1p9k$l...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>...
>The bottom line is that the various equipment files (regardless of author)
>do add variety. And if they add to player enjoyment by improving the game
>play, historic accuracy or just make/keep the games fun... then they are
>accomplishing exactly what was hoped for and we all benefit.
>
Raymond Schroder
couple of months co-authoring Steve's original file before deciding to
create a more detailed equipment file. A comparison of the Zerstorer's and
Armory files (to SSI's file, weapons books and each other) will I believe,
make readily apparent which file is the most comprehensive, most
historically accurate and which one used SSI's formulas for greater data
integrity. The Zerstorer's Ultimate Equipment files have been meticulously
constructed and are an excellent and easy way to improve the game. Am I
biased? Sure, but since I worked on both PG2 files, I know which is better.
Up to now there hasn't been much of a choice for Pacific General.
Unfortunately, SSI's file had some serious problems and the Armory's file
help salvage the game. However, the Zerstorer's PacGen file will be released
shortly and it is the largest file equipment file ever made for any of the
General Series games (1500 units) and should really enhance game play and
improve the games' realism.
Still, the main point is to enjoy the game. Use any equipment file you
prefer... the Zerstorer's or any other, including SSI's original. You can
always make your own file... or if you like just modify the Zerstorer's
equipment file... that would be a compliment also.
Ray
--
Raymond C. Schroder
rcsch...@worldnet.att.net
The Zerstorer
http://www.geocities.com/~calhern/
Support the anti-Spam Amendment
Join at http://www.cauce.org/
Tony Miranda wrote in message
<#QuEl6ly...@nih2naaa.prod2.compuserve.com>...
Mike Cunningham
Raymond Schroder wrote in message <6rb77d$m...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>...
>Thanks for the compliment... I'm sure Steve appreciates it too. I worked a
>couple of months co-authoring Steve's original file before deciding to
>create a more detailed equipment file
Ray,
Sorry for any unintended offence caused. I obviously didn't read the
rebuttal carefully enough.
Mike
Raymond Schroder
that are easily confused when editing the equipment files. I thought it was
interesting/informative reading too.
Ray
--
Raymond C. Schroder
rcsch...@worldnet.att.net
The Zerstorer
http://www.geocities.com/~calhern/
Support the anti-Spam Amendment
Join at http://www.cauce.org/
Mike Cunningham wrote in message <35d92...@nnrp1.news.uk.psi.net>...
>
>Raymond Schroder wrote in message <6rb77d$m...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>...
>>Thanks for the compliment... I'm sure Steve appreciates it too. I worked
a
>>couple of months co-authoring Steve's original file before deciding to