Starting to Dig Into Elite: Dangerous

I haven’t really done much with Massively Multiplayer games in quite a while. Three years or so, really. The closure of Vanguard was a loss that subtracted from my enjoyment of the whole genre, and the lack of vision shown by then-current developers was further discouraging. While I stayed mostly in the news loop and occasionally checked in on Guild Wars 2 or EverQuest II, I never stayed for more than a matter of hours. I made a crack at getting back into WoW that lasted for maybe two weeks and maybe a dozen hours played.

The MMO genre moved back, not forward, as big money remained involved and risks ceased to be taken. Those heavily invested in extant titles presumably stayed happy, of course, but I was never that even with WoW, which I played regularly for something like a year. My lack of enthusiasm for MMOs in general is really the reason for the paucity of posts on this blog for the last couple of years. Trying to write here about other stuff never felt quite right and I never achieved a rhythm for it.


But it’s not like I’d sworn off the genre or anything. And thankfully there were interesting-looking things in the pipeline: Shroud of the Avatar and Pantheon: Rise of the Fallen but more so Star Citizen and Elite: Dangerous. I said at the time that the last sounded like the game that fit me best. I still think I’m right. Moreover, I am not only playing Elite: Dangerous, I am excited enough about it to write stuff.

I’m not going to say that Elite: Dangerous is the game for you. It’s certainly got problems and deficiencies and things it desperately needs and goofiness here and there and weird tangents taken by the development team that don’t interest anybody. Its multiplayer is still kind of rudimentary, but that’s… maybe not as much a problem as one might suppose.


I was for a long while a big booster of EVE Online, respecting its achievements even while only playing it intermittently. The biggest issue was that there was a whole end of the game that was only open to people in big nullsec alliances, and I get to be a tiny cog in a very big machine every day. There’s no romance in doing that in a game. Plus, a dependence on interaction with the community when that community is filled with pustulent fuckholes is really not a selling point.

What drew me to EVE in the first place was not empire-building, which I think there are better platforms for (see any 4X game,) but the dream of Traveller, of taking a spaceship out into the black and writing my own destiny with it, of seeing sights never seen before and sometimes getting into trouble. It took comparing the two games to get me to realize that Elite: Dangerous the MMO Spaceflight Sim was what I wanted, where EVE the MMORPG wasn’t.


The difference is significant; Elite: Dangerous isn’t an RPG in the video game sense, because it lacks clear, mechanical character progression. I love RPGs both on the tabletop and (when well-done) on the PC, but I find the absence of progression absolutely liberating. No longer was I years behind other players and with the best and most interesting gameplay locked behind a pseudo-social wall manned by misanthropes. In Elite: Dangerous even the uttermost end of the galaxy is within reach; if not today, then someday soon. Which is not a meaningful knock on EVE, by the way. It’s just the reason, I now think, why it never took ahold of me like I felt it should.

Like I said, Elite: Dangerous has its issues, and its stupid title is only one of them. It’s not as deep as it could be in a lot of places. But it’s the biggest canvas of all, and if I am only a tiny, tiny speck on that canvas then I’m not all that much smaller than anybody else. And this speck is out there doing what it wants to do — voyaging far from Sol, seeing things no one has ever seen before.


Elite: Dangerous Rigging and Starting Out

I mentioned in the last post how important immersion is for me as a player of video games. It’s why I spent as much time as I did in EVE Online and why I loved Vanguard so much despite its many problems. So when I start talking about Elite: Dangerous it’s worth starting to break down why it works so well in this capacity. Also I want to yammer a bit about approaching the game.

To start, though, I should probably talk about my setup, because that can make a huge difference to a game like this. I am not playing in VR, nor with head-tracking, a fancy projector setup or a cool custom cockpit. All that stuff would be awesome, to be sure. But I am playing using Voice Attack along with one of the HCS Voice Packs, and I have a HOTAS. This last is the relatively affordable Thrustmaster T-Flight X model rather than any of the Saitek rigs or the crazy-expensive Warthog. While I would like more buttons and maybe some switches, the T-Flight X is quite decent and has served me well so far. I also just have the one monitor, which is a 31.5″ 1080p television. And my rig itself is nothing special, an $800 off-the-shelf Asus running Windows 10 (as I recall, you need at least Windows 8 to run Voice Attack.) Elite: Dangerous runs on it with no performance issues.


Not counting the PC all this cost maybe $125, including the game itself and the Horizons expansion pass. If you wait for a sale through Steam you can get both for something like $30, although to be honest I would recommend that a newbie grab the base game first and feel it out for a bit before dropping the extra dough on the expansion. Horizons does add a great deal to the game, even three-fifths finished as it is, but some of that (in the form of improved missions, more ships and the passenger stuff) is available to everybody anyway.

Probably the single biggest addition to immersion is the HOTAS. The game is playable with the mouse and keyboard, is improved by the addition of a flight stick but is better still after adding a throttle. There is a significant learning curve to the HOTAS controls, mind, and you may also be fussing with your bindings for a while. But the conceit of Elite: Dangerous, that you are a pilot flying a spaceship, is immeasurably enhanced by the addition of actual flight controls. Skilled FPS folks might say that they get better performance using the keyboard and mouse, and they may be right. But the experience is vastly superior with the HOTAS.


I also preferentially play in a dark room. And when I’m making trade runs I have the game’s music off and my own tunes in the background. I installed the lightweight mp3 player AIMP3 for this. It handles playlists so I have put together a few containing suitable music; Blue Öyster Cult, Hawkwind, Tangerine Dream, Ozric Tentacles and Amon Düül II have featured prominently. Last night was Yes.

My in-game activities have been mostly non-combat ones. I did do some early bounty hunting, but of late have been trading and running missions. My eventual goal is exploration; the rig that I’m shooting for will cost another 4 million credits or so, but I’m earning pretty well right now. A single mission can net me over 100k, and I found a single-hop trade run carting medical supplied to an Outbreak system that was pulling in about 70k per round trip. But that did dry up after a few days.


As a starting player some will have you believe that bounty hunting is the way to go. And indeed you can make a good amount of money at it even in the starter ship. But you need to find good places to hunt in (look for resource extraction sites in systems with ringed planets,) you run the risk of getting in over your head and relying on the authorities for help, and there’s a fair bit of waiting around for hostiles in the low-intensity areas that are suitable for newbie bounty hunters. Right out of the gate, though, you can add to this income with some low-volume cargo runs and running your Discovery Scanner in every system you visit. And I strongly recommend doing some travel, just to see the sights.

I should caution that Elite: Dangerous can be grindy. It’s not the grindiest thing I’ve played by a long shot; you can do a lot with 200K, and unlike in EVE Online you’re never all that far behind anybody else except in credits. But comparing ED to EVE is a something that really warrants a whole series of posts, and here I am just trying to get back into the routine of having something for the blog once a week. If nothing else Elite: Dangerous has rekindled my interest in online games again.

Elite: Dangerous Noob Thoughts

Immersion and strategic challenge are probably the two things that get me into a video game. Some games provide one or the other; not many provide both. Right now Elite: Dangerous is pushing both pedals clear to the floor.

Steam says I’ve played for 72 hours but that’s not actually true; Steam’s logging the time based on how long the launcher has been open. But I’m probably pushing 30 or 40 and am enjoying it enough that I’ll almost certainly pick up the “season pass” expansion.


Elite: Dangerous is in some sense the ultimate sandbox. It has all the hallmarks of sandbox gaming, in that it is almost entirely undirected. You set your own goals and do what you want within the confines of its universe. But the key is that its universe is so unconfining — the entirety of the Milky Way galaxy, a hundred billion stars or more, all out there waiting to be explored. No other game has anything close to this kind of scope. And it’s visually pretty stunning.

To be sure, there are holes in it. Balance is an ongoing problem as it is in any game of this kind. The multiplayer tools are rudimentary; planetary landing and other features are locked behind the Horizons paywall. Right now you don’t even have an avatar (that’s coming soon, though.) There’s a cash shop, but importantly it resides outside the game and offers only ship cosmetics, paint jobs, cockpit decorations and the like. The development cycle is slow but steady.


Elite: Dangerous offers several modes of play, including the full-on MMO Open, solo and a closed group mode. The notion that this is an ideal arrangement is growing on me; if you’re getting griefed you can just laugh it off and hop over to solo for a while. If you want to run with people of like persuasion you can hop into one of the dedicated private groups. Regardless, everything is happening in the same universe.

In terms of the mechanics that the player interacts with immediately, it’s not as deep as EVE Online… but it adds the huge additional dimension of actually flying your ship instead of picking selections from a menu. In EVE you are the captain, giving orders; in ED you are a pilot. Too, a massive background simulation is running behind ED that the players can interact with and affect; in EVE one never really has the sense that there’s anybody but players impacting the universe.


Elite: Dangerous is one of the most immersive things I’ve played. There’s a joy in warming up your HOTAS and actually having to take off and land your ship, or in navigating to a new destination in deep space, or in hopping to a new system and finding something you didn’t expect.

The learning curve is pretty high, with the additional complication that some of the learning is in the actual flying of your ship. In that sense it is somewhat twitch-based, but not to a degree that it bothers me. And I’m pretty far from the best pilot in the galaxy.

Wargaming in 2017

I can’t say that I accomplished everything I wanted to in 2016, as a wargamer. But there was plenty of forward progress: I got in a little bit of wargaming at Origins, went to a week-long wargaming-centered event, and managed to get some play in at the local club. And my collection grew, mostly in titles I was looking for, but a little bit of chaff arrived as well. Perhaps most importantly, I made a number of wargaming contacts, both locally and online, and while I’ve already done some gaming with a couple of them, I think I’m in even better shape moving onward into the future.

Now it’s time to look into how I want to move forward in 2017.

Personal Gaming Space

One priority that’s perhaps the most pressing is to get my personal gaming space at home set up and organized. Right now that room is just a cluttered and disorganized mess. When complete it will be a small but adequate space for one or two-map games to get and stay set up. This is such a big deal because it will let me host games at home, but it’ll also enable bigger and better videos.

Ardwulf’s Lair on YouTube

And speaking of which, I have plans for the YouTube channel. Which I hope will blossom into reality over the course of 2017. I’m going to be cagey about it for now, but in brief I want to do more and better videos. Absolutely first on the list is finishing the damned Paths of Glory series so I can move on to something else.

Games to Learn

One motivation for doing videos is teaching — for the viewer, obviously, but also for me. Making a How to Wargame series is an instructional process on both sides; at the end hopefully both of us pretty much know how to play the game. In the case of Paths of Glory, I rather outpaced the videos, which I think is one issue that’s kept me from finishing. (There were also technical problems, however.)

As a learner of wargames I want to focus fairly narrowly in 2017; I want to continue to learn the rules of GOSS and the Great Campaigns of the American Civil War series, and get started digging into Great Battles of History. I’d also like to keep going with OCS and the GMT East Front Series. All told this ought to keep me more than busy even with just the material I have in my wargame library already.


Of course, I plan to grow that wargame library in 2017. I’m trying to be very, very selective… but even so there’s some whole new games that will be landing this year in addition to the existing series that I’m looking to fill out. At this point I am probably most excited about the standalone Holland ’44 and the GCotACW title Atlanta is Ours. I also have the reprint of Unconditional Surrender preordered.

To Be Played

All this is moot unless I get games to the table, of course. And thankfully I have some managable stuff that I should be able to play versus live opponents. But I also have some bigger things that I intend to tackle solitaire, including but not limited to three or four dedicated solitaire titles.


Winterfest 2017 is just weeks away… but due to time and money constraints, I may or may not actually go. Even so, I will definitely attend Origins, where I will again try to get in as much wargaming as I can. And I’m very excited about the War Room at Buckeye Game Fest, now that I have one of those under my belt and can plan something meaty.

A Closer Look at Atlantic Wall

I want a big Normandy game. Normandy ’44 is a tremendously good game but I would also like to explore the campaign at a lower resolution than the Simonitch title allows. There are many options but I’ve turned up surprisingly few below division level. A few games cover the whole campaign at lower than battalion level, but those are incomplete or only cover the first few days after the landings. Examples include The Greatest Day or the SCS Day of Days. The former, when/if completed, will likely be a bit too much even for me.

The biggest are Decision’s Atlantic Wall and GMT’s The Battle for Normandy. The latter is out of print and increasingly hard to get; the going rate for both games is in the $150-200 range, so it’s a big buy that I want to firmly nail down before pulling any triggers. Thankfully there’s time, since it will take a while to save up that much bread. (Target: January)

In favor of Battle for Normandy, it’s fairly streamlined for such a big game and has a good, well-scaled selection of scenarios that range from Omaha Beach and its immediate surroundings clear up to a big, big campaign game lasting through August 11. That’s 201 game turns if you’re keeping track. It’s nearly universally regarded as a very good game.


On the other hand you have Alantic Wall. Not especially similar to the 1978 SPI title of the same name, it is part of GOSS (the Grand Operational Simulation Series) and it lives up to that ominous acronym. It’s a bit larger than TBfN in every way, has nearly twice as many counters and has rules an order of magnitude more complex. AW’s 234-turn campaign game is a much more serious attempt to simulate the whole story of the fighting in Normandy. Both games are nominally battalion level, AW has a lot more companies available and is much more marker-heavy.

It also has a reputation for being unapproachable. On top of being quite complex, the original rulebook is a big mess even aside from having no index. The new version, released last month, still lacks an index but has a massive, detailed table of contents and is substantially reorganized. A totally reorganized playbook (“Scenario Rules” in GOSS-speak)is also now available which also offers a number of significant clarifications and corrections and a near-complete reorganization.

To my half-informed eye the new manuals seem considerably clearer than the original did. It’s still a complicated game but it looks less unapproachable now.


Atlantic Wall lacks, however, the range in scenarios that TBfN has. The nominal “learning scenario” is huge by that standard, takes quite a long time just to set up and omits relatively few of the full game’s features and mechanics. As a scenario it covers an interesting situation and looks good, but as a teaching exercise it looks very poorly thought out.

This highlights a significant issue in an otherwise excellent Vassal module. Namely that it only includes the campaign. If you want to set up a scenario, you currently have to do it manually, which is a titanic pain in the dumper. Hopefully the upcoming version 2.54 of the module will fix this.

The battle for Normandy’s Vassal module has a similar problem of being incomplete. In this case, though, it lacks the game’s player aid card, which includes the CRT, TEC and other necessary tables. Neither do the downloads available from GMT and Consimworld. This makes it impossible to explore the game beyond a certain point using Vassal in hopes of making a decision on it — and that point is pretty much right after the airborne assault on the morning before the D-Day landings.

Atlantic Wall’s Vassal module is complete except for the scenario setups, however, and with the new rules I feel capable of exploring the game. So between the two games the edge currently goes to Atlantic Wall in this respect.


Additionally, AW’s Airborne and Amphibious Assault modules are basically 90%+ complete games in themselves. I’d call them mingames, but there’s not much mini about the beach landings; each is played out on its own map with its own set of counters and rules. And this is all part of the campaign setup. While these won’t teach me that much about how the main game functions, they’ll let me explore the scale in detail and get a sense of the basic GOSS way of doing things.

I also give the edge to Atlantic Wall for the Airborne landings rules themselves. I think they produce more organic results, and more interesting ones to boot. There’s more to them and the whole landing sequence takes longer, but that’s not unexpected. They are also clearer in at least a couple of places than the Airborne rules from TBfN; I had a hell of a time trying to figure out how artillery units behave during the airdrop segment combat, while in AW I found it in about two minutes.

So right now, unless I am still unable to figure the game out using the new rules, Advantage: Atlantic Wall. That decision could change, but I’ll keep you posted on the whens and whys.

Comments Off on A Closer Look at Atlantic Wall Posted in Commentary

Blathering About Wargaming: A Correction

Since some of my YouTube viewers expressed interest in seeing stream-of-consciousness content despite my stated plan to lean the channel toward structured, scripted video, I did a video called Wargame Blather which is just me talking off the cuff about wargaming.

If response is good this may become a recurring but irregular feature.

The topic at hand this time around was wargaming the Normandy campaign of June 1944, with an emphasis on the operational level and looking at a number of games in that neighborhood, in particular Decision’s Atlantic Wall.

In the course of the video I misrepresented the soloability of Atlantic Wall’s Airborne Landing sequence. What I said is that there’s very little for the German player to do in this sequence. Which is true but not as clear-cut as I made it sound. While the German player more limited to deciding on retreat direction during the landings themselves, and while there are a number of limitations on how he can react during the movement and combat segments of the Airborne sequence, there are still plenty of decisions to make.

So I wanted to clarify that, which I didn’t feel I could do in an annotation. The next post will expand my thoughts on Atlantic Wall and how it seems to compare with GMT’s The Battle for Normandy.

Comments Off on Blathering About Wargaming: A Correction Posted in Commentary

New and Upcoming

As I continue to work on the directions I want to go for the rest of 2016 and into 2017, I have the long-awaited, much-demanded new episode of How to Wargame out today. The response so far has been very enthusiastic.

I’m still gearing up for an announcement video and hope to have part one of that posted next week. Meanwhile I’ll give you a teaser image below. The next playthrough series and the next game in the How to Wargame series have both been decided upon.


The next How to Wargame video will be a simpler system than Paths of Glory. After that I plan to tackle something more difficult, perhaps very difficult. But that’s not set yet, and for the moment I will say that it is not ASL.

Stay tuned.

Comments Off on New and Upcoming Posted in Commentary