HPS' "Modern Campaigns: Middle East '67"
compared to
Talonsoft's "Divided Ground"
As both games, Middle East '67 and Divided Ground, deal with the same historical era, a comparison between both is certainly an interesting topic.
Because Talonsoft's "Divided Ground" is the youngest offspring of the "Campaign Series", which was orginally developed by John Tiller, this game has a similiar style as HPS' "Middle East '67", which was, of course, also developed by John Tiller. This style, which I like to call the John Tiller Look-And-Feel, dates back to John's older Battleground series, which were published by Talonsoft in the mid-90s and can also be found in newer games by John, such as Campaign 1776, the Panzer Campaign Series and Squad Battles: Vietnam, only to name a few. A player, used to other games of John, will find her- or himself instantly at home.
But apart from the same historical era and a similiar style, other similarities end here. The artwork of "Middle East '67" resembles more the Panzer Campaign series (also published by HPS) to which modern vehicles and weapons have been added. And though the interfaces are similiar, both games play entirely different.
Both games deal with more than one of the Arab-Israeli wars. Where "Divided Ground" has 27 scenarios (incl. 3 Bootcamp scenarios) in the wars of 1948, '56, '67 and '73, "Middle East" depicts the wars of 1956, '67 and '73, but has 38 scenarios (incl. 1 Getting Started scenario).
As part of the Campaign Series, hexes in "Divided Ground" are 250 meters wide (an area of 62,500 m²) and a turn has the length of 6 minutes. In contrast a hex in "Middle East '67" has a width of 1 mile (~1600 meters) which calculates to a area 2 1/2 times that of a Panzer Campaigns hex. Turns are 3 hours per daylight and 6 hours long for night.
To illustrate this scale difference, the screenshots below show the same region. In the first image you can see a part of the "Middle East '67" 1956 scenario entitled "Gambit on the Mitla Pass". Below this you can see a part of the "Divided Ground" scenario "Mistake at Mitla", which depicts roughly the same historical action. (NOTE: The "DG" map was turned by 90° for comparision purposes as in the Talonsoft game north is on the left side of the screen. In HPS Games on the other hand, North is always up!). You can click on either picture to get a larger view on the map.
Here is an overview map of the whole "Middle East '67" Mitla scenario. The rectangle shows the area that is covered by the whole "Divided Ground" Mitla scenario.
As you can see, the main difference between both games is the scale. Like the other Campaign series games, "Divided Ground" is a tactical wargame, that uses platoons as basic counter size. That means, one counter consists of 1-6 vehicles, guns or infantry troops. "Middle East '67" on the other hand is an operational game, that uses companies and/or battalions as its basic counter size. A counter consists typically of 100-500 men or 10-30 vehicles/guns. Furthermore, the Middle East Mitla scenario begins at 1500 Hrs on 29 Oct and goes for 12 turns, ending at noon on 31 Oct.
Although the scale of "Middle East '67" is that of an operational wargame, combat losses are counted in individual men or vehicles.
Other features that distinguish "Middle East '67" from "Divided Ground" are
-
Combined Organization Penalty, that affects assaults by units of different divisions to simulate real problems associated with Command and control of such operations.
-
Battle Fatigue, that affects unit performance and morale of units under fire.
-
Morale, that changes during the scenario. And Troop Quality affects how far a unit can move as well as modies the Combat effect.
-
Combined Arms Penalty, that affects assaults by armored units in non-clear hexes (built up areas for example) when not adequately supported by sufficient Infantry,
-
Ferrying rules and Bridging (important in the Suez Canal crossing scenarios), as well as destroying and crossing AT Trenches on the Golan.
... and there are other rules as well, that make "Middle East '67" together with the "Panzer Campaigns" games unique.
In "Middle East '67" you can play entire campaigns with whole armies, in "Divided Ground" the largest formation is a division.
I can recommend "Middle East '67" to all players that are interested in playing the large campaigns of the Middle East wars.
An interesting article - by Glenn Saunders - is a comparison between HPS' "Panzer Campaigns" series and Talonsoft's orginal "Campaign series", both by John Tiller.
"The Middle East conflict has been a tragedy for all involved in it. Neighbours, instead of devoting themselves to the task of advancing the lot of the common man in a backward area, are pitted against each other in armed confrontation. For over thirty years this senseless waste of lives and wealth has been the fate of the area." - Chaim Herzog, The Arab-Israeli Wars
Thomas Wulfes
I'm a rookie playtester on the HPS team and beta-tested "Middle East '67" since early June when I meet Glenn Saunders. Middle East '67 was well underway by the time I saw it. Although I originally didn't plan to buy "Divided Ground" I got it by mistake. I 'm 33 years old, married to a wonderful wife and live near Frankfurt, Germany where I work as a professional software developer. I started playing wargames in the 80s, mainly with SL/ASL and Empire in Arms, but switched to computer wargames in the early 90s, first to SSI titles like "Rebel Charge at Chickamauga" and "Steel Panthers" and later to the "Battleground Series" by John Tiller, whose games have fascinated me ever since.
[Home || Games || Middle East '67 || Middle East History || Middle East '67 compared to Divided Ground ]