Right. So I recently discovered Battle for Germany in my ongoing quest to 
unearth good long forgotten wargame titles, and being the industrious lad that 
I am I headed right on over to www.vassalengine.org to see if a module existed. 
That was when I ran up against the big 2004 notice on SPI game titles being 
taken down because of an exclusive DG/Hexwar.com relationship.
   
  That all makes sense. I don't like it in the least, but it makes sense. The 
next bit is where I'm confused. The notice goes on to say:
   
  "In the interim, Wargame Academy will act as a clearinghouse of java 
applications for pbem/server play of SPI titles. Please contact WGA ([EMAIL 
PROTECTED]) should you wish to be part of the development and playtest group. 
WGA assumes all liability and thus enables VASSAL to remain in full compliance 
of Hexwars required compliance."
   
  Does this mean the modules are still available and that WGA is hosting them 
in defiance of DG/HW? Does this mean if I ask politely I can get the Battle for 
Germany module that used to be hosted on the VASSAL site? I find that paragraph 
extremely confusing.
   
  So... I headed on over to wargameacademy.org to check around a bit and there 
you go - Battle for Germany listed on the left! 
   
  *click*
   
  On the B4G game info page, number 18 confirms the existence of a VASSAL 
module but provides no download links or further information short of saying 
it's up for debug/enhancement prior to a PBEM tournament.
   
  So, I suppose my general question is - what's the deal now? Does WGA actually 
have all these SPI modules? If yes, what does it do with them? Who gets to use 
them? When?
   
  Let me conclude by saying that the VASSAL engine group might at first appear 
to be the wrong place to ask this question - but I think a group of module 
developers would be the best audience to answer a question on the state of an 
entire publisher's module library.
   
  Thanks guys!
   
  Andrew

 Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com 

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply via email to