Twitch stream for deck selection.The co-host here is so disinterested and even seems to feign excitement at the potential showing of a panzer deck. It's comical and makes the game seem like a joke. I suspect this guy probably wants to be somewhere playing starcraft or anime pink unicorns in space?
Unit descriptions and stats seem simplistic compared to red dragon which uses the same engine I would say.
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/132014495
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/4/3855/33687557006_49008657b9_h.jpg)
In engine trailerThis trailer definitely focuses on tanks. But does show infantry running in loose formation with foot synchronisation. Infantry probably get 10% of the air time while tanks get 90%. This game looks like a vehicle only party. Well that may be a little negative. But enjoy the "in engine" trailer.
What's a Char B1 doing on the battlefield against a Sherman?
Did I miss something? :uglystupid2:
The Germans had whole units of captured French tanks in normandy. However iirc most were withdrawn and their units re-equipped with german kit.
I think this game for the sake of variety and what if includes the original french tanks, but I am not sure if the original french equipped german units included charB1s. However the Germans did use them in many places.
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.worldwarphotos.info%2Fwp-content%2Fgallery%2Ffrance%2Ftanks%2Fb1_bis%2FGerman_Char_B1_bis_Panzerkampfwagen_B-2_740_f_number_232.jpg&hash=3f17704cadaf0b443ba65f48bf80d53ab1a7081a)
Thanks for the knowledge Destraex! O0
The German's were pretty desperate back then I guess. but come to think about, the Sherman was probably no better than a Char B1 :-\
Sherman gets an unfair rap. It was a sturdy, very reliable, easy to maintain tank. Under-gunned initially, but the upgraded 76mm versions, not to mention the Firefly, were formidable in the hands of a capable crew.
Also -- anyone who owns CM Beyond Normandy (with the vehicle pack) should check out this really well done scenario, featuring a panzergrenadier company using captured French equipment, including the Char and Renault tanks - the Chars are flammpanzer variants too.
http://www.thefewgoodmen.com/tsd3/combat-mission-battle-for-normandy/cm-battles-for-normandy/char-char-alike/
Great map -- good challenge and of course, not your everyday OOB --
Also, more to the point after watching the new trailer -- I can't freaking wait for this to come out. Wow.
Quote from: acctingman on March 29, 2017, 10:10:32 PM
Thanks for the knowledge Destraex! O0
The German's were pretty desperate back then I guess. but come to think about, the Sherman was probably no better than a Char B1 :-\
The 21st Panzer Division used a large number of captured French tanks at Normandy, mostly re-purposed and upgraded by engineer Major Alfred Becker.
Most of the chassis were S35's converted to assault guns.
The Germans did make use of the Char B1 as a training tank, and it was occasionally pressed into service. They had quite a few that were rebuilt into a flame tank dedicated to infantry support.
The divisions with the French tanks.
http://www.eugensystems.com/steel-division-normandy-44-division-of-the-week-21-panzerdivision/
"In Steel Division: Normandy 44, you will have to create a battlegroup out of one of the 18 divisions we have modeled ingame and which took part in the battle of Normandy. Depending on the division's type (armored, infantry, mechanized, airborne), history and TO&E (Table of Organization & Equipment), the troops and equipment available, the experience, ... will vary."
I have to say I'm really excited by this approach. (*18* divisions modeled!) I think Eugen's Wargames do a better job than most in blending a 'grognard' level of realism / fidelity to details with plain ol' playability and fun.
Quote from: sandman2575 on March 30, 2017, 08:52:43 AM
I have to say I'm really excited by this approach. (*18* divisions modeled!) I think Eugen's Wargames do a better job than most in blending a 'grognard' level of realism / fidelity to details with plain ol' playability and fun.
+1 And an excellent observation.
This does seem interesting.
I'd echo Sandman's comments on the Sherman. Just finished reading Zaloga's Armored Thunderbolt a month or two back and it really addresses that issue in great detail.
It was a great tank in 1942-1943 when it was first introduced to the battlefield. US Armored Command had the misfortune to not understand the nature of the tank arms race already underway, and in their complacency they neglected further development. As a result, it had the misfortune to be a bit undergunned and underarmored when it came up against Tigers and Panthers during the period of its heaviest use of the war: France in 1944 and early 1945.
Even then, it wasn't a death trap. The reliability and maintainability of it meant that we often had 2 Shermans in the field for every Panther or Tiger. That made it a lot easier to engage German tanks with superior numbers and get in flank shots, where the Panthers were notoriously vulnerable to even the Sherman's guns. It was an inferior tank-to-tank weapon by June 1944, but in other respects it was still a very good tank.
The 75mm AP round was insufficient for winning tank duels with the German heavies by June of 1944, but it featured a GREAT HE weapon (2-3 times the HE firepower of any comparable tank-based guns at the time), which proved very useful for bunker-busting missions. Zaloga notes that US Shermans fired 3-4 times as many HE shells in the war as they did AP shells. It was also a great runner in open country, meaning it could cover lots of ground and really disrupt enemy lines of supply and communication following a breakout.
Quote from: Destraex on March 29, 2017, 07:05:10 PM
Unit descriptions and stats seem simplistic compared to red dragon which uses the same engine I would say.
Displayed infantry weapon stats weren't as extensive as the heavy weapons, in
Red Dragon and
AirLand Battle, from what I recall. The biggest stat blocks were for guided missiles and aircraft with a variety of AtG ordnance, so I imagine they're going to be smaller in this WW2 version, as a whole, due to lack of those.
That screenshot of the small arms stats looks like it contains about the same amount of info as previous ones, however.
I've not seen the new stat blocks for large vehicle weapons in this new one yet so I can't say. Not been following this since I've been on a WW2 burnout for awhile.
Quote
This trailer definitely focuses on tanks. But does show infantry running in loose formation with foot synchronisation. Infantry probably get 10% of the air time while tanks get 90%. This game looks like a vehicle only party. Well that may be a little negative. But enjoy the "in engine" trailer.
Infantry were still pretty useful in previous games, especially for the low cost-to-capability in dense terrain, and spotting (which is a great facet of this series). Oh, and sometimes air mobility although this won't be much of a thing in the new one either.
The unit icons look like Theater of War and World In Conflict.
Quote from: FarAway Sooner on March 30, 2017, 01:14:38 PM
Just finished reading Zaloga's Armored Thunderbolt a month or two back and it really addresses that issue in great detail.
Excellent book.
Quote from: Apocalypse 31 on March 30, 2017, 03:04:19 PM
The unit icons look like Theater of War and World In Conflict.
Good or bad - whatcha saying man?
Quote from: Nefaro on March 30, 2017, 01:47:06 PM
Quote from: Destraex on March 29, 2017, 07:05:10 PM
This trailer definitely focuses on tanks. But does show infantry running in loose formation with foot synchronisation. Infantry probably get 10% of the air time while tanks get 90%. This game looks like a vehicle only party. Well that may be a little negative. But enjoy the "in engine" trailer.
Infantry were still pretty useful in previous games, especially for the low cost-to-capability in dense terrain, and spotting (which is a great facet of this series). Oh, and sometimes air mobility although this won't be much of a thing in the new one either.
Infantry was invaluable in the Wargame series. Putting anti-tank infantry units into urban centers, near intersections and choke points and in woods near likely avenues of approach was a critical defensive tactic. I found I was able to save a lot of high value units by using well placed infantry to take and secure strategic points and wear away the enemy heavy and mechanized armor.
Yup, a village full of Milan armed troops and forest full of stinger holding guys was an invaluable tactic
And a black hawk full of rangers going around the back was always fun too
I am more referring to infantry in red dragon being of very limited utility:
They were primarily used in RD for:
1) Fortifying Towns
2) Hiding in Trees to ambush
The question I have, based on what you have seen so far of SD44, would you ever do what they did in ww2 with your infantry?
For instance would you advance and hold ground other than towns. I would say because their are so many vehicles around and infantry don't seem to take cover properly other than by reaching a building, that infantry will be very exposed in any other type of ground except in the middle of a dense forest.
Normandy would have been fairly dense with vehicles, I grant you that. But even then the ratio of infantry outside of towns in combat would have been higher than I think will be possible in game.
If they are as limited as red dragon infantry it is possible all they will be doing is fortifying buildings and hiding in trees. I doubt we will see the classic fox holes or infantry taking cover to fire from undulating ground. No infantry formations such as loose formation to make them harder to kill. I know capturing buildings was a huge part of ww2 Europe. But buildings are not the be all and end of all of infantry capability in world war 2.
What I want to see is squads/sections (10men) and platoons (30 or so men) taking cover correctly and deploying weapons in cover correctly to give them the best profile for the enemy they are facing. Patrolling and moving forward in formations that don't get them all killed in one enfilade shot. Of course this is not always possible and it's part of the reason why house to house combat was more deadly in ww2 for infantry than more open combat in forests and rural areas.... however in Eugen games infantry tend to be very vulnerable in anything but buildings. That is just my experience, considering I saw tanks assault through heavy wooded areas.
I also hope they have both dense impassible for vehicles forest and other densities of forest to give infantry more cover.
Also the fact that when Eugen has open terrain, generally it is exactly that. A flat football field freshly mowed and perfectly level. Infantry cannot play against vehicles or even other infantry in this terrain. I don't want eugen to magically make line infantry invisible all the time either.
I would like it if as infantry advanced in open ground they were in line abreast, if they are assaulting they should be bounding and shooting as they do it and if they get fired upon enough they could go to ground individually behind cover. That cover in open ground can be shell holes, hay stacks, boulders, slight crests etc. There is so much more cover than just buildings for infantry. Consider though that in the bocage farmland their would have been open fields well tilled and flat, but that hedges in that country would block LOS and that bocage was far more rare in the British area. The British typically had no such cover and were thus using more massed brute force advance tactics.
Infantry vs infantry fights in open terrain should NOT be rare, but I bet they will be. Because there will be so many vehicles that it will be like modern warfare.
I don't think the ratio of vehicles to infantry was very high in ww2. In normandy though it probably was higher than average. Meaning more infantry on infantry assaults? Maybe that was eastern front more because late war I guess the western front would have been more highly mechanised.
Defensively infantry would have been very spread out... depending on their total numbers of course. But if you put one squad in a town. I would not expect them to bunch together in one room.
Which brings me to smoke grenades and their deployment by infantry?
Some pics for educational purposes from my Osprey Elite World War II infantry tactics squad and platoon. By Dr Stephen Bull and Illustrated by Peter Dennis.
I don't think we will see an advance such as this:
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/4/3791/33579984871_e42482e485_h.jpg)
or this:
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2830/32866837224_be225d3226_h.jpg)
^I think the game you are looking for is on the platoon or company level. I wouldn't expect to see those kinds of infantry combat details in a game focusing in at the Division level, although it would certainly be awesome.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on March 30, 2017, 06:45:19 PM
^I think the game you are looking for is on the platoon or company level. I wouldn't expect to see those kinds of infantry combat details in a game focusing in at the Division level, although it would certainly be awesome.
CM Normandy covers these things pretty well. And of course -- my current favorite board games -- Grand Tactical Series...The Greatest Day especially (since it covers Normandy) covers this sort of thing reasonably well. You don't see smoke, but you do see bocage and barrages and so on.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on March 30, 2017, 06:45:19 PM
^I think the game you are looking for is on the platoon or company level. I wouldn't expect to see those kinds of infantry combat details in a game focusing in at the Division level, although it would certainly be awesome.
If there is a game out there like that, which one is it?? Still being new to the gaming genre (not the topic) I'm still looking for a game like that (not names CMx2 :uglystupid2:)
Quote from: acctingman on March 30, 2017, 07:38:44 PM
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on March 30, 2017, 06:45:19 PM
^I think the game you are looking for is on the platoon or company level. I wouldn't expect to see those kinds of infantry combat details in a game focusing in at the Division level, although it would certainly be awesome.
If there is a game out there like that, which one is it?? Still being new to the gaming genre (not the topic) I'm still looking for a game like that (not names CMx2 :uglystupid2:)
Graviteam Tactics ?
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on March 30, 2017, 06:45:19 PM
^I think the game you are looking for is on the platoon or company level. I wouldn't expect to see those kinds of infantry combat details in a game focusing in at the Division level, although it would certainly be awesome.
+1
I don't know if there's a mod for men of war to allow you to have this control over 600 individual men but the war game series has never been this
It must be coop and it must be real time. Not much fits that bill other than COH and MOW.
I would even go as far to say that apart from aircraft SD44 is almost the same scale as coh and mow.
Yesterday's Dev vs AI
For me this is looking very good, with what looks like improvements on RD at the tactical level.
Quote from: Destraex on March 31, 2017, 04:46:21 AM
It must be coop and it must be real time. Not much fits that bill other than COH and MOW.
I would even go as far to say that apart from aircraft SD44 is almost the same scale as coh and mow.
Really? I played Red Dragon a little and I don't think I could control individual soldiers or their weapons. I might be mistaken though. I played it only a short time.
You are correct. I don't want to control individual soldiers. Just have squads survivable and take cover properly as well as moving and acting naturally.
But aren't the ranges of weapons purposely borked in MoW for playability. That was why I never really liked them.
That level of detail isn't provided on a war game map though, buildings, forest, woods - yes
Line of sight - yes
But "are we all hiding behind these sandbags properly" - no
I'm not saying war game is fast, it isn't, but by the time you've zoomed in to see if all the little fellas are taking cover properly, and this squad, and that squad and that one over there you'll have been tanked, artyed and bombed out of that position anyway and you've lost the zone
Watching this video of steel division multiplayer and very happy to see that a lone tank moving forward, because it cannot see much, does not affect the front line much other than to isolate itself in a small pocket that is very vulnerable to the SD44 "cut units off and force them to surrender" mechanic. This is a great improvement on other games where you can send lone tanks up and their morale and isolation does not affect them in the least.
You can see a person that moved their flame tank up far into enemy territory, because it cannot see far only has a tiny slither of corridor "secured", where a low end Ostruppen unit to the left of it can see across a field and has completely secured a large wide tract of the front on it's own.
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/4/3848/33782590435_74bb1646ca_h.jpg)
Quote from: Destraex on April 01, 2017, 07:05:55 PM
Watching this video of steel division multiplayer and very happy to see that a lone tank moving forward, because it cannot see much, does not affect the front line much other than to isolate itself in a small pocket that is very vulnerable to the SD44 "cut units off and force them to surrender" mechanic. This is a great improvement on other games where you can send lone tanks up and their morale and isolation does not affect them in the least.
Agree. It has very interesting implications for that time-honored (but, in my view, gimmicky and exasperating) RTS tactic of "rushing." Namely, that rushing will no longer be a viable early-game stratagem. O0
Agreed. However in real life spamming was sometimes the order of the day. I mean that was the whole point of Blitzkrieg right?
Concentrate and then punch through with overwhelming force at one point in the line. For the enemy it is to contain that breach and counter attack hopefully cutting the enemy off. But I do understand your point though. Their were many games that relied on simply driving a force at the enemy lines and that was the extent of the game, because there was not need to defend a whole line. The front lines mechanic in SD44 makes people want to ensure their lines are secure across the entire front as well as allowing some really neat break through mechanics... i.e. you have to portect the flanks of a break through. Their is no send two tanks driving behind enemy lines to destroy ther enemy base... I LOVE THIS! :P
In anticipation of this, I started playing Wargame Red Dragon again. Such an amazing game... but boy am I terrible at it! I can spend hours putting together decks, which is a lot of fun in itself -- but when it comes to using those decks in skirmishes against the AI, even on Easy, even playing mostly at Slow and Very Slow speeds, I keep getting overwhelmed.
The last RTS I felt I had good mastery of was Company of Heroes, about 10 years ago! I guess I'm just far more comfortable now with the sloooww, easy to control pace of games like Combat Mission.
I'd love if Steel Division played a little 'slower' than Wargame, but watching the dev demonstrations, it looks like the pacing is pretty comparable (unfortunately for me!)
Quote from: sandman2575 on April 02, 2017, 09:46:19 AM
In anticipation of this, I started playing Wargame Red Dragon again. Such an amazing game... but boy am I terrible at it! I can spend hours putting together decks, which is a lot of fun in itself -- but when it comes to using those decks in skirmishes against the AI, even on Easy, even playing mostly at Slow and Very Slow speeds, I keep getting overwhelmed.
The last RTS I felt I had good mastery of was Company of Heroes, about 10 years ago! I guess I'm just far more comfortable now with the sloooww, easy to control pace of games like Combat Mission.
I'd love if Steel Division played a little 'slower' than Wargame, but watching the dev demonstrations, it looks like the pacing is pretty comparable (unfortunately for me!)
Ugh, then someone with my mental capacity is out :idiot2:
one of these days, I'm going to buy a CMx2 game and give it a go. The fact that it's pause-able and I can take my time to play the game out helps someone like myself who struggles with RTS games :crazy2:
Hey, don't sell yourself short, man! My struggles with Eugen's Wargame series shouldn't be taken as a benchmark of difficulty by, well, really anyone. ;)
Combat Mission has the advantage that you don't even need to play it RTS style -- indeed, I'd suggest it shouldn't be played this way. I much prefer (and think probably most CMx2 players play this way) playing by 1-minute turn increments. You give all your orders, press 'finished,' and watch the action unfold for 60 seconds, during which you can't do anything but watch the action unfold.
My trouble with Wargame isn't about the RTS-like game speed. It's more about employing combined arms properly. A lot actually lies on the deck building too which can lead to victory or defeat even before the shooting starts. I'm lazy to give a lot of thought on deck building.
Mine was the speed. I wanted to like Air-Land Battle but it moved way too quickly for my tastes (and reflexes). You couldn't even take the time to zoom in and see the action (and enjoy the pretty graphics) or you'd end up losing a key unit/location.
I know Red Dragon introduced a slow down element but from the videos I've watched, even that moves more quickly that I care for.
Quote from: jomni on April 02, 2017, 08:46:33 PM
My trouble with Wargame isn't about the RTS-like game speed. It's more about employing combined arms properly. A lot actually lies on the deck building too which can lead to victory or defeat even before the shooting starts. I'm lazy to give a lot of thought on deck building.
I felt the same way about deck building for a really long time. Finally though, I dove in and it became a lot of fun to experiment. Since I play solo, I try to create balanced decks. It's usually pretty obvious quickly if something is missing or weak and it's quite fun to go back into the builder after a battle to try and tweak things to solve the problem.
I can see how the system would be even more useful for team battles where each player picks a particular specialty.
Just an all around fantastic series.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on April 03, 2017, 02:25:21 AM
I can see how the system would be even more useful for team battles where each player picks a particular specialty.
It's very good in theory. But random MP battles end up being a sad affair when there's no teamwork. Not to mention the rage quitters.
Quote from: Silent Disapproval Robot on April 02, 2017, 09:32:43 PM
Mine was the speed. I wanted to like Air-Land Battle but it moved way too quickly for my tastes (and reflexes). You couldn't even take the time to zoom in and see the action (and enjoy the pretty graphics) or you'd end up losing a key unit/location.
I know Red Dragon introduced a slow down element but from the videos I've watched, even that moves more quickly that I care for.
It's like 1 frame per second on its slowest speed SDR!
Quote from: jomni on April 02, 2017, 08:46:33 PM
My trouble with Wargame isn't about the RTS-like game speed. It's more about employing combined arms properly. A lot actually lies on the deck building too which can lead to victory or defeat even before the shooting starts. I'm lazy to give a lot of thought on deck building.
Deck building is half the game - build one, play it, find out what was short, not enough anti tank, too much air power and refine your deck
Quote from: jomni on April 03, 2017, 03:11:34 AM
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on April 03, 2017, 02:25:21 AM
I can see how the system would be even more useful for team battles where each player picks a particular specialty.
It's very good in theory. But random MP battles end up being a sad affair when there's no teamwork. Not to mention the rage quitters.
Yes. But this holds true for all mp games. When you play random matches, you're always going to come across jerks. It's the reason why I rarely play mp unless I have a good group of known friends to play with.
Quote from: undercovergeek on April 03, 2017, 03:41:30 AM
Quote from: Silent Disapproval Robot on April 02, 2017, 09:32:43 PM
Mine was the speed. I wanted to like Air-Land Battle but it moved way too quickly for my tastes (and reflexes). You couldn't even take the time to zoom in and see the action (and enjoy the pretty graphics) or you'd end up losing a key unit/location.
I know Red Dragon introduced a slow down element but from the videos I've watched, even that moves more quickly that I care for.
It's like 1 frame per second on its slowest speed SDR!
I was going to say this. Really, it is for all intents and purposes a pause. I bet the reason they didn't just include an outright pause is because it would have required a ton of work to permit the ability to issue orders while completely paused.
Pre-order and play NOW!!!!!!!
See ya', off to buy.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on April 05, 2017, 02:50:38 PM
Pre-order and play NOW!!!!!!!
See ya', off to buy.
Wait what seriously?
Dammit!!
Quote from: undercovergeek on April 03, 2017, 03:41:30 AM
Quote from: Silent Disapproval Robot on April 02, 2017, 09:32:43 PM
Mine was the speed. I wanted to like Air-Land Battle but it moved way too quickly for my tastes (and reflexes). You couldn't even take the time to zoom in and see the action (and enjoy the pretty graphics) or you'd end up losing a key unit/location.
I know Red Dragon introduced a slow down element but from the videos I've watched, even that moves more quickly that I care for.
It's like 1 frame per second on its slowest speed SDR!
Cool! Haven't seen any videos with it running that slowly.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on April 05, 2017, 02:50:38 PM
Pre-order and play NOW!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Wow. That was unexpected.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Welp, now I know what I'm doing once the kiddos are asleep.
ALSO - May 23 is the release date? Had no idea this was so close. I figured late summer / early fall at best.
last thing I needed was another game......downloading.... darn you all!
Very curious to see what you all think about this game. I think it might be too fast for me but still, curious!
So far, extremely encouraged! Multiple game speeds, the slowest being bullet time. Love the available maps and I'm excited to see an in-game mod center! Have not experimented with deck building yet and only played one quick skirmish. Very strategic in terms of terrain, cover, concealment, spotting, use of smoke and artillery, etc.
Its early and the beta is restricted, but I'm giving it an early 2 thumbs up.
That's great to hear. I made the mistake of glancing at some of the Steam reviews, and (surprise!) there's a lot of negativity. Glad to get an encouraging report from an informed source.
When I first fired it up, it went through the autodetect settings sequence but then it hung and I couldn't shut it down without a hard reboot.
It's up and running now. Looks good! I did key rebindings as I usually do as I'm a lefty and like to use the numpad instead of WASD. It took the inputs for the keys but they don't seem to work all the time. The camera will only scroll if I first select something like Fire on Position, otherwise the keys to move the map don't seem to work if I remap them to the numberpad. Hopefully they'll fix that soonish.
Tutorial's not available yet so I'm currently going through a bit of a trial and error process to learn how to play on the skirmish map. I remember bits and blobs from Air-Land Battle but I never did play that one enough to become familiar with it (too fast for me). I like the ability to slow things down to bullet time but I wish there were a bit more feedback so I could quickly hop over to possible trouble spots when I'm zoomed in on another section of the map.
I'm not sure how scoring works. The skirmish map seemed to be divided into three zones. Their deployment, my deployment, and a neutral bit in the middle. I moved my stuff up to the middle and set up there. My score didn't seem to move from zero but the German's did. Kept telling me stuff like "11 minutes until Axis victory!" even though I seemed to be doing a good job of shooting up and killing their stuff without losing much of my stuff.
For the price, it seems pretty good.
Ugh! Like I need another game to distract me from my current games.... :buck2: Just bought fer $52 CDN. >:(
Downloading now..... :D
WOW! 12.3 GB.... 58 minutes to download.... :o
I had the same issue with auto detect and locked up...cancelled out of that and it worked ok. Haven't figured things out yet:)
Is every unit unlocked from the beginning or do you have to do the scenarios first before using everything in quick battles?
Quote from: -budd- on April 05, 2017, 08:00:24 PM
Is every unit unlocked from the beginning or do you have to do the scenarios first before using everything in quick battles?
Everything is unlocked theoretically, but everything won't be available in a random pre-made deck. If you make your own battle group, you can select the units you want and everything that is available in beta is available to be used in your decks.
Quote from: Silent Disapproval Robot on April 05, 2017, 06:30:01 PM
I'm not sure how scoring works. The skirmish map seemed to be divided into three zones. Their deployment, my deployment, and a neutral bit in the middle. I moved my stuff up to the middle and set up there. My score didn't seem to move from zero but the German's did. Kept telling me stuff like "11 minutes until Axis victory!" even though I seemed to be doing a good job of shooting up and killing their stuff without losing much of my stuff.
There are two skirmish modes...conquest and destruction. In conquest, which is default, you score points by seizing ground. In destruction, you score by blowing $hit up. Change your mode to destruction and you'll see points being earned for kills.
Remember, there are three phases to every battle and units are specific to each phase. So if a unit card has a 'B' or a 'C' on it, that unit will not be available for reinforcement until the second or third phase of the battle begins, respectively. There is a timer so you can see when the phase will advance. This adds yet another layer of strategy to deck building. I had built what I thought was a fairly well-balanced deck, only to discover when trying it out that most of my strong units were phase B and C. I could not bring them onto the map early in the battle and as a result, I suffered. Lesson learned.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on April 05, 2017, 08:41:23 PM
There are two skirmish modes...conquest and destruction. In conquest, which is default, you score points by seizing ground. In destruction, you score by blowing $hit up. Change your mode to destruction and you'll see points being earned for kills.
If, like me, you generally suck at Wargame, you might want to switch from Conquest to Destruction, which in my experience is considerably easier vs. the AI. In Destruction, you can turtle and wait for the enemy to come to you (provided you've seized sufficient territory in the early game phase). I'm much better at that kind of thing.
EDIT -- intended as general advice -- not aimed specifically at JH!
Well I suck at this but it sure is fun!
I wish there was a speed setting between Bullet time and Very slow... Very Slow seems awfully fast! :o
Yeah, put some heavy stuff in Phase A if you can... tanks, arty etc. Just having recon like the Auto Build gives you, :P, is difficult to fight with, even against an Easy enemy.
Quote from: Barthheart on April 05, 2017, 09:27:08 PM
Well I suck at this but it sure is fun!
Pretty much my motto for all Eugen Systems' games. ;)
Spent about an hour with it tonight. Like Jarhead, my initial impressions are very positive. This is definitely Wargame: WW2, and that's a good thing.
Made a deck for 12th SS Panzer. Then played a skirmish which ended as 75% of all my Wargame experiences end: me surrendering.
Good feedback guys.
Posted partly on steam but wanted to share here as well some initial thoughts...
Been on mp last three hours, incredible game. Nothing like it out there. Best of ruse and wargame. The ww2 setting changes the pacing radically, for the better actually. Really incredible sense of battlefront shifts, offensives etc...the phase dynamic makes the game extremely deep...and the air game is now just right, perfect for this setting. It's much slower btw than wargame, great pace imo.
Can't wait for campaign, redemption for Eugene after AOA. This is the game every ruse, wargame, hell anyone who was wanted to command in a new way in this setting has been waiting for....
Quote from: Silent Disapproval Robot on April 05, 2017, 06:30:01 PM
Tutorial's not available yet so I'm currently going through a bit of a trial and error process to learn how to play on the skirmish map.
A tutorial is available here : https://www.paradoxplaza.com/steel-division-player-guide/
15% off here (Steam keys) :
https://uk.gamesplanet.com/game/steel-division-normandy-44-steam-key--3204-1?ref=itad ( £29.74 )
https://fr.gamesplanet.com/game/steel-division-normandy-44-steam-key--3204-1?ref=itad ( 33,99€ / 36,29$ )
http://www.dlgamer.eu/download-steel_division_normandy_44-pc_games-p-41363.html ( 33,99 € )
Anyone has negative feedback, so I dont buy it "now"?
How's multiplayer, is 10v10 already supported?
Quote from: Raied on April 06, 2017, 05:16:30 AM
Anyone has negative feedback, so I dont buy it "now"?
It sucks. Feel better?
Ok....how fast is the slowest setting on this game?
I'm not the most patient guy, but that's my issue, not the fault of any game, but I tend to SUCK at games that are zipping along.
Quote from: acctingman on April 06, 2017, 09:31:56 AM
Ok....how fast is the slowest setting on this game?
I'm not the most patient guy, but that's my issue, not the fault of any game, but I tend to SUCK at games that are zipping along.
Its for all intents and purposes a pause. If bullet time speed in this game is still too fast for someone to process information and make decisions, they probably couldn't get through the daily rigors of life...like breathing. I think you'll be ok! :crazy2:
Quote from: Barthheart on April 05, 2017, 09:27:08 PM
Well I suck at this but it sure is fun!
I wish there was a speed setting between Bullet time and Very slow... Very Slow seems awfully fast! :o
Yeah, put some heavy stuff in Phase A if you can... tanks, arty etc. Just having recon like the Auto Build gives you, :P, is difficult to fight with, even against an Easy enemy.
If you want to try to slow it down.......
See here: http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=12733.msg332074#msg332074 (http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=12733.msg332074#msg332074)
I had luck using this - http://www.cheatengine.org/downloads.php (http://www.cheatengine.org/downloads.php) and it helped quite a bit. Haven't used it in a while and not on windows 10. I'll have to get the latest version and try it out again soon. I don't have Steel Division yet but it is on my 'to buy' list.
Yeah bullet time is so slow it's hard to tell that units are still moving. It gives you lots of time to react. I was plying last night at very slow speed and bullet time speed. Played for about an hour and a half, including setup, and didn't make it to phase B of my first skirmish, which happens after 10 minutes of game time. :D
Maybe with practice I could move up to slow speed but very slow is fast enough for me for now. :crazy2:
Quote from: MC on April 06, 2017, 09:39:43 AM
Quote from: Barthheart on April 05, 2017, 09:27:08 PM
Well I suck at this but it sure is fun!
I wish there was a speed setting between Bullet time and Very slow... Very Slow seems awfully fast! :o
Yeah, put some heavy stuff in Phase A if you can... tanks, arty etc. Just having recon like the Auto Build gives you, :P, is difficult to fight with, even against an Easy enemy.
If you want to try to slow it down.......
See here: http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=12733.msg332074#msg332074 (http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=12733.msg332074#msg332074)
I had luck using this - http://www.cheatengine.org/downloads.php (http://www.cheatengine.org/downloads.php) and it helped quite a bit. Haven't used it in a while and not on windows 10. I'll have to get the latest version and try it out again soon. I don't have Steel Division yet but it is on my 'to buy' list.
Thanks for the link again! O0 I did use that with Air Land Battle and CoH. But since I've moved to a new Win 10 box I've not tried it again.
Seems to be working all great and fine based on most feedback, so I think it is safe to enjoy it from now (Beta).
Anyone else finding that (irrespective of what speed setting you're using) Steel Division plays 'slower' than Wargame? I'm finding that things develop more slowly, that units are more robust (esp. infantry) and in general just seem to last longer. For me this is *excellent* news. I find the pace of Wargame pretty difficult to handle. But I feel more in control so far in SD -- able to respond to situations without constantly hitting bullet-time/pause. I don't feel like I'm constantly on my heels, constantly trying to hold back the AI on multiple fronts.
Full disclosure though, I've been playing on "Easy" so far. Will bump that up to "Normal" later.
The Point-du-Hoc map is fantastic. Love all the tactical possibilities it opens up. And love that controlling major roads is essential.
Quote from: sandman2575 on April 06, 2017, 12:05:34 PM
Anyone else finding that (irrespective of what speed setting you're using) Steel Division plays 'slower' than Wargame?
WW2 tanks are slower than modern tanks.
Yes it plays slower than wargame in some respects. Faster in others due to the short map distances. I am finding that most things have less strategy and more immediate reactive counters. For instance I can have a fighter in as a counter for a bomber instantly and be attacking it.
i saw some YT let's-play footage and it looks great, love the setting :D, and i also like the bullet times as a semi-pause option for giving orders. :)
...i have the other Eugen games (steam sales :-[) but coudn't stand the hectic pace
also i saw a battle recorder replay in use! :)
where you can analyze (and surly marble, while zoomed-in) at your fight
and watch all the little details impossible to marble at when the overall battle has to be orchestrated zoomed-out
My question to those who already have it:
I know its meant and balanced for RTS fun and not a study sim, but does the different units stays close enuf to their well known real life counterpart and real life tactics, so it can be enjoyed by a Grog?
for example: does a MG and a group or two of riflemen plink away at a tank (if this is a good idea without AT capabilities on hand anyway) and just slowly wear down the 'health bar' of the tank ... which finally explodes from a hails storm of rifle bullets.
or do they just make the tank buttoned-up (spotting malus), the crew gets uneasy, and the tank might stop at max range engaging the now spotted juicy targets and even pull back a little because it fears possible closer range AT assets in the group.
Is there a bit of unit-AI of selfpreservation visible, so a (recon)unit don't open up on a overwhelming force and just spot and don't give away its position to be instantly annihilated
Does Infantry 'get attracted' by near cover when getting under fire and fall back when pressed to hard, or do they die in the to the pixel pinpointed spot they where send to like dumb robots (4example in the middle of the street close to a house)
If you watch a Steel Division 1944 battle between a handfull WW2 units when closer focused on a hot spot of the battlefield does it feel right what you see?
or does it get it too much of Halo Wars 2 in WW2 skins when zoomed in on a unit and observing the action.
Quote from: MikeGER on April 07, 2017, 03:37:35 AM
i saw some YT let's-play footage and it looks great, love the setting :D, and i also like the bullet times as a semi-pause option for giving orders. :)
...i have the other Eugen games (steam sales :-[) but coudn't stand the hectic pace
also i saw a battle recorder replay in use! :)
where you can analyze (and surly marble, while zoomed-in) at your fight
and watch all the little details impossible to marble at when the overall battle has to be orchestrated zoomed-out
My question to those who already have it:
I know its meant and balanced for RTS fun and not a study sim, but does the different units stays close enuf to their well known real life counterpart and real life tactics, so it can be enjoyed by a Grog?
for example: does a MG and a group or two of riflemen plink away at a tank (if this is a good idea without AT capabilities on hand anyway) and just slowly wear down the 'health bar' of the tank ... which finally explodes from a hails storm of rifle bullets.
or do they just make the tank buttoned-up (spotting malus), the crew gets uneasy, and the tank might stop at max range engaging the now spotted juicy targets and even pull back a little because it fears possible closer range AT assets in the group.
Is there a bit of unit-AI of selfpreservation visible, so a (recon)unit don't open up on a overwhelming force and just spot and don't give away its position to be instantly annihilated
Does Infantry 'get attracted' by near cover when getting under fire and fall back when pressed to hard, or do they die in the to the pixel pinpointed spot they where send to like dumb robots (4example in the middle of the street close to a house)
If you watch a Steel Division 1944 battle between a handfull WW2 units when closer focused on a hot spot of the battlefield does it feel right what you see?
or does it get it too much of Halo Wars 2 in WW2 skins when zoomed in on a unit and observing the action.
With regard to your question about rifle fire at tanks. I do know that weapons that cannot harm the tank do not penetrate or kill it but do cause the tank "stress". If the tanks gets stressed enough it retreats.
As for self preservation, I think everything opens up unless expressly told not to open up on anything. You can switch the different weapons in the squad on and off iirc. So maybe turn the rifles off and leave the piat on for instance.
I cannot answer the last question properly without playing more. Suffice to say you are still rushing around while you learn it..... but after I learn it properly I don't know... guess that means slow it down with bullet time. With only a few games under my belt I am able to zoom and enjoy it although I don't like the camera angles particularly. I find myself adjusting it again every time I zoom in.
Picked it up yesterday and played two games. One game versus AI and a 10v10 online, both were great fun.
The game does feel a bit slower paced than Wargame, and I like that, though still a bit too fast for my tastes. Regardless, they are off to a nice start!
With the multiple speed settings I just do not understand how anyone could complain that this game is still "too fast". Just say you prefer turn-based over real time, because it seems that is what you must really mean. Both bullet time and very slow barely friggin move! Slow and normal I find are perfect under most circumstances, but sometimes are also too slow. As far as real time mechanics go, the multiple speed settings create the perfect balance during periods of intense action, light contact and positioning or maneuver.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on April 07, 2017, 05:34:43 AM
With the multiple speed settings I just do not understand how anyone could complain that this game is still "too fast". Just say you prefer turn-based over real time, because it seems that is what you must really mean. Both bullet time and very slow barely friggin move! Slow and normal I find are perfect under most circumstances, but sometimes are also too slow. As far as real time mechanics go, the multiple speed settings create the perfect balance during periods of intense action, light contact and positioning or maneuver.
While this holds true for singleplayer ("slower" is a nice speed for me), in multiplayer, normal will be the standard, and this is a multiplayer focussed game. Still having a blast though, the 10V10 was really interesting and the frontline mechanic felt natural.
Quote from: Surtur on April 07, 2017, 07:40:01 AM
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on April 07, 2017, 05:34:43 AM
With the multiple speed settings I just do not understand how anyone could complain that this game is still "too fast". Just say you prefer turn-based over real time, because it seems that is what you must really mean. Both bullet time and very slow barely friggin move! Slow and normal I find are perfect under most circumstances, but sometimes are also too slow. As far as real time mechanics go, the multiple speed settings create the perfect balance during periods of intense action, light contact and positioning or maneuver.
While this holds true for singleplayer ("slower" is a nice speed for me), in multiplayer, normal will be the standard, and this is a multiplayer focussed game. Still having a blast though, the 10V10 was really interesting and the frontline mechanic felt natural.
Very good point about MP. I didn't think about that. How do speed settings work in MP matches? Is a single speed setting selected by the host?
Quote from: MikeGER on April 07, 2017, 03:37:35 AM
for example: does a MG and a group or two of riflemen plink away at a tank (if this is a good idea without AT capabilities on hand anyway) and just slowly wear down the 'health bar' of the tank
It's not a health bar. It's a stress bar.
I bought it. I'm not sure if I will refund it.
It's not my thing.
I've fallen from Wargame.
I dont enjoy micromanaging squads & teams
I have an entire Battalion / Battlegroup to worry about. I want to focus on tactics of my entire element - flanking and maneuvering - not whether Johnny and his Bren team need to move 5 meters into cover or not. The game just feels like Company of Heroes on steroids.
This is not a good solo game - the AI is just able to react much faster than a human.
There were times when I was trying to balance my focus on my entire force. I had a Rifle platoon, a section of M18's, and a 17lber. The infantry was getting hammered by tanks, my M18's were getting hammered by AT guns, and the enemy was firing 2x rocket halftracks worth of munitions at my 17lber.
The AI can attack you, while simultaneously coordinating ground - air - artillery. No human can react to all of that. I was spending very little time on any specific unit because I was bouncing back and forth too much. The end result was - everything was destroyed.
Things I DO like:
-Beautiful, beautiful, beautiful game. Eugen never fails to amaze me with their IrisZoom game engine. This is my favorite, asethetically looking game engine on the market.
-Command Units are cool
-No more victory locations - Conquest mode now takes the entire map into account. So the winner is the guy who controls the majority of the map - through a frontline
But can't you slow it down to help you manage all that. Its the same reason I hate CM real time...but you have no real-time features with CM.
Can someone list some specific differences to Red Dragon from a game play standpoint? I loved building decks but hated playing, mainly because it seemed so gamey to me and was a complete departure from reality. Once passed building your force, it was just boom, boom, boom.
Quote from: RyanE on April 07, 2017, 02:16:25 PM
But can't you slow it down to help you manage all that. Its the same reason I hate CM real time...but you have no real-time features with CM.
You can, but its still a crap-ton of units, and the AI is still making decisions at full speed.
QuoteCan someone list some specific differences to Red Dragon from a game play standpoint? I loved building decks but hated playing, mainly because it seemed so gamey to me and was a complete departure from reality. Once passed building your force, it was just boom, boom, boom.
-Front lines - especially relevant in Conquest mode
-Unit Leaders (increase the experience level of nearby units)
-Unit unlocks by phase (Phase A, B, C) - Units are phsed in over time, so you dont get steamrolled by a division of Panther G's at start of a match.
Quote from: Apocalypse 31 on April 07, 2017, 01:59:48 PM
I bought it. I'm not sure if I will refund it.
It's not my thing.
I've fallen from Wargame.
I dont enjoy micromanaging squads & teams
I have an entire Battalion / Battlegroup to worry about. I want to focus on tactics of my entire element - flanking and maneuvering - not whether Johnny and his Bren team need to move 5 meters into cover or not. The game just feels like Company of Heroes on steroids.
This is not a good solo game - the AI is just able to react much faster than a human.
There were times when I was trying to balance my focus on my entire force. I had a Rifle platoon, a section of M18's, and a 17lber. The infantry was getting hammered by tanks, my M18's were getting hammered by AT guns, and the enemy was firing 2x rocket halftracks worth of munitions at my 17lber.
The AI can attack you, while simultaneously coordinating ground - air - artillery. No human can react to all of that. I was spending very little time on any specific unit because I was bouncing back and forth too much. The end result was - everything was destroyed.
Things I DO like:
-Beautiful, beautiful, beautiful game. Eugen never fails to amaze me with their IrisZoom game engine. This is my favorite, asethetically looking game engine on the market.
-Command Units are cool
-No more victory locations - Conquest mode now takes the entire map into account. So the winner is the guy who controls the majority of the map - through a frontline
Thank you for this. This makes me think I'll buy it down the road when it's 50% off O0
I prefer the more modern time setting of Wargame; but never stuck with it.
Despite this not having a dynamic campaign, I really think they're improved and balanced play, pace and the AI that I can see me booting it up for a fun tactical fix quite often.
Big plus for me is the AI is using combined arms well; making pushes that are not suicide dashes; and giving me a challenge, if not the whole battle but for significant periods. (Medium AI)
Long term- taking to the decks for the first time and I like how we can select created battle groups. Could be interesting for creating infantry heavy battles.
Quote from: Apocalypse 31 on April 07, 2017, 01:59:48 PM
I bought it. I'm not sure if I will refund it.
It's not my thing.
I've fallen from Wargame.
I dont enjoy micromanaging squads & teams
I have an entire Battalion / Battlegroup to worry about. I want to focus on tactics of my entire element - flanking and maneuvering - not whether Johnny and his Bren team need to move 5 meters into cover or not. The game just feels like Company of Heroes on steroids.
This is not a good solo game - the AI is just able to react much faster than a human.
There were times when I was trying to balance my focus on my entire force. I had a Rifle platoon, a section of M18's, and a 17lber. The infantry was getting hammered by tanks, my M18's were getting hammered by AT guns, and the enemy was firing 2x rocket halftracks worth of munitions at my 17lber.
The AI can attack you, while simultaneously coordinating ground - air - artillery. No human can react to all of that. I was spending very little time on any specific unit because I was bouncing back and forth too much. The end result was - everything was destroyed.
Things I DO like:
-Beautiful, beautiful, beautiful game. Eugen never fails to amaze me with their IrisZoom game engine. This is my favorite, asethetically looking game engine on the market.
-Command Units are cool
-No more victory locations - Conquest mode now takes the entire map into account. So the winner is the guy who controls the majority of the map - through a frontline
Thanks for the details, this is a problem with most RTS games, I think a function of easy pause and giving order is a must in those type of games for people who love to focus on strategy and tactics more than just reacting.
I have some questions though, is there any delay of execution after giving order to units, or its just same as other wargame?
Does recon units occupy or take part for your front line (the map changes to your color when recon unit on it)?
Is there any kind of order of battle, platoon commands/ artillery spotter/ company commander unit that effect the other units under the hierarchy, or it is just like other wargame series?
Thanks, and I agree about how beautiful is the map and graphics of this engine.
I think it is an outstanding solo game. It is, in fact, the only way I play it. I find I am just as capable of managing combined arms operations as the AI, without feeling overwhelmed. It is challenging, but then isn't that the whole point? At no time have I felt that the AI had an unfair advantage over me in any battle.
For people asking about realism and authenticity, you have to keep in mind that overall, these games are wargame "lite". They incorporate some elements of authenticity, ie. LOS, morale, cover, recon, supply, etc., but may leave out some higher level factors, such as C&C, organization, strict adherence to a TO&E, etc. Accept the game for what it is and enjoy! When you want something more hardcore, go play WitW in WitE. There is room on my harddrive for all of them, and Steel Division has already earned its place!
I for one, appreciate everyone's impressions of this game. Most, like 99% of you, are WAY more experienced than I am when it comes to wargames and I know I'm pretty slow to react, so games like this are a bit daunting for someone like myself :crazy2:
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on April 07, 2017, 04:07:46 PM
It is challenging, but then isn't that the whole point?
Different strokes for different folks.
What you define as 'challenging' I consider tedious and overall unenjoyable. Micromanaging teams and Squads are not the types of challenges I ever experienced when commanding troops, nor do I find those types of things to be fun - probably why Wargame/SD isn't for me anymore.
As a commander, you should be focused on a bigger picture (enemy OODA loop, timelines, decisions, adjacent, higher, etc) not micro details that subordinate commanders can manage (Team/Squad/Section/Platoon,Company)
Quote from: Apocalypse 31 on April 07, 2017, 05:02:50 PM
As a commander, you should be focused on a bigger picture (enemy OODA loop, timelines, decisions, adjacent, higher, etc) not micro details that subordinate commanders can manage (Team/Squad/Section/Platoon,Company)
Tell that to a Combat Mission player.
Quote from: jomni on April 07, 2017, 05:09:56 PM
Quote from: Apocalypse 31 on April 07, 2017, 05:02:50 PM
As a commander, you should be focused on a bigger picture (enemy OODA loop, timelines, decisions, adjacent, higher, etc) not micro details that subordinate commanders can manage (Team/Squad/Section/Platoon,Company)
Tell that to a Combat Mission player.
My favorite [sarcasm] was Flashpoint Campaigns. Managing Sections and Platoons at the Brigade/Division level. Eeek!
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on April 07, 2017, 04:07:46 PM
I think it is an outstanding solo game. It is, in fact, the only way I play it. I find I am just as capable of managing combined arms operations as the AI, without feeling overwhelmed. It is challenging, but then isn't that the whole point? At no time have I felt that the AI had an unfair advantage over me in any battle.
For people asking about realism and authenticity, you have to keep in mind that overall, these games are wargame "lite". They incorporate some elements of authenticity, ie. LOS, morale, cover, recon, supply, etc., but may leave out some higher level factors, such as C&C, organization, strict adherence to a TO&E, etc. Accept the game for what it is and enjoy! When you want something more hardcore, go play WitW in WitE. There is room on my harddrive for all of them, and Steel Division has already earned its place!
Exactly. However I am at the moment feeling a little like I have nothing to do, it just feels like a spam numbers game the way you use infantry. I might need to play it on hard. My infantry feel way too vulnerable because their is so much armour around.
Tried a 10v10 today and won but most of the enemy team upon realising they were doomed quit the game leaving us with a further 20 minute slog to the end.
At this stage the game became so easy that I started experimenting.
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2916/33776292371_7b8f8da90f_h.jpg)
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2862/33776290731_fe17d7774b_h.jpg)
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2863/33776276641_419cd64ea2_h.jpg)
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/4/3938/33776270321_c1873e7f27_h.jpg)
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2908/33092760483_e659dbf008_h.jpg)
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2944/33092759813_8435c89aae_h.jpg)
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2879/33062435604_d319dc7b2d_h.jpg)
Compared to old wargame.....
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2852/33489031980_27774583f0_h.jpg)
I understand this is not meant to be a full wargame or mil sim, but I wanted to know if there is any more wargame element added to the game since the last game in the series.
I enjoy games like MoW2 and so but I do not take it seriously, just enjoy it, games like MoW advanced the old typical RTS with cover for infantry, damage module for vehicle etc and still didnt remove the fun of being arcade RTS, it will be really nice if some mechanisms from CM or GT games added to this game and streamlined them.
What I liked about the wargame series is the realistic map and distances, what I hoped for Steel Division that more realistic elements would be added without making the game more complicated.
For sure I will get the game, but I always like to see any game series to evolve.
this is how i will probably play it :)
...found a video with constant slow and slower speed selection and nice zoomed-in episodes
(watch from @3:45 on to at least @10:00 to see some really cool stuff ...including almost
over the shoulder war-movie mode scenes)
(in the meantime i also saw a different vid where a mauled infantry with flashing red stress-bar 'jumps' from the street into the next house ...some time later in that vid it has recovered and later got a new order by the player)
SOLD !
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on April 07, 2017, 04:07:46 PM
I think it is an outstanding solo game. It is, in fact, the only way I play it. I find I am just as capable of managing combined arms operations as the AI, without feeling overwhelmed. It is challenging, but then isn't that the whole point? At no time have I felt that the AI had an unfair advantage over me in any battle.
For people asking about realism and authenticity, you have to keep in mind that overall, these games are wargame "lite". They incorporate some elements of authenticity, ie. LOS, morale, cover, recon, supply, etc., but may leave out some higher level factors, such as C&C, organization, strict adherence to a TO&E, etc. Accept the game for what it is and enjoy! When you want something more hardcore, go play WitW in WitE. There is room on my harddrive for all of them, and Steel Division has already earned its place!
Pretty much this really. This game scratches an itch.
That said, because I play mostly on Bullet Time and slow battles are taking long. I/m sure that I will get quicker and if I get comfortable on Normal for periods will try MP.
As for the SP game. I'm on my 4th with same map and same divisions. Each game the AI has done it's fair share in making it different. Sure the terrain key points have mostly been the same, but the AI has come at me differently enough each time.
Amazing detail, the game is beautiful zoomed in too; and there's Bullet time for that.
after watching that video I might not wait for a sale :dreamer:
The combat pace doesn't look that fast at all....watching it, I could follow it no problem
Quote from: acctingman on April 08, 2017, 12:45:21 PM
after watching that video I might not wait for a sale :dreamer:
The combat pace doesn't look that fast at all....watching it, I could follow it no problem
I find MikeGER's video very enticing as well. I wouldn't normally look twice at this sort of fast paced game, but the slower settings look very manageable. Appears (correct me if I'm wrong) units will fire automatically at enemies, but you can, if you want, micro-manage and have a unit fire at an enemy you select for it?
Quote from: Rayfer on April 08, 2017, 01:55:32 PM
Quote from: acctingman on April 08, 2017, 12:45:21 PM
after watching that video I might not wait for a sale :dreamer:
The combat pace doesn't look that fast at all....watching it, I could follow it no problem
I find MikeGER's video very enticing as well. I wouldn't normally look twice at this sort of fast paced game, but the slower settings look very manageable. Appears (correct me if I'm wrong) units will fire automatically at enemies, but you can, if you want, micro-manage and have a unit fire at an enemy you select for it?
Correct. You can also tell units to only fire if fired at. This is a very useful setting for leg unit scouts. You can have them sneak past the front line a look for stuff coming your way. They don't trigger the front line graphic/mechanic. I had a scout team quite far behind the front and they spotted a PAK 50 being towed toward the front. Had them open up, shoot up the towing kublewagon, then kill the gun crew. Back to don't shoot mode and move on.
Also had a M5 Stuart sneak around a hedgerow and come up behind a Panther, shoot it in the ass twice and cause a bail out. \m/ Then get blasted from half way across the map by it's partner. :hide:
Haven't tried MP yet... does someone know if you can choose who you play against? Might be interesting to get a Grogheads Only MP going some night. :D
one last question from me
I know these are 2 different games, but if Combat Mission is a 10 in terms of complexity, what would this game rate (to those that are playing this game currently and have played CMx2)
I'll take your answers off the air :bd:
Quote from: acctingman on April 08, 2017, 03:10:25 PM
one last question from me
I know these are 2 different games, but if Combat Mission is a 10 in terms of complexity, what would this game rate (to those that are playing this game currently and have played CMx2)
I'll take your answers off the air :bd:
What is it you find difficult about CM? The ui, the ai?
Is it difficult because you're getting beat or because you don't know what to do?
I'm only asking because any game you're not prepared to learn is going to kick your ass, but if you don't understand there's people here who will help
Quote from: Barthheart on April 08, 2017, 02:08:18 PM
Quote from: Rayfer on April 08, 2017, 01:55:32 PM
Quote from: acctingman on April 08, 2017, 12:45:21 PM
after watching that video I might not wait for a sale :dreamer:
The combat pace doesn't look that fast at all....watching it, I could follow it no problem
I find MikeGER's video very enticing as well. I wouldn't normally look twice at this sort of fast paced game, but the slower settings look very manageable. Appears (correct me if I'm wrong) units will fire automatically at enemies, but you can, if you want, micro-manage and have a unit fire at an enemy you select for it?
Correct. You can also tell units to only fire if fired at. This is a very useful setting for leg unit scouts. You can have them sneak past the front line a look for stuff coming your way. They don't trigger the front line graphic/mechanic. I had a scout team quite far behind the front and they spotted a PAK 50 being towed toward the front. Had them open up, shoot up the towing kublewagon, then kill the gun crew. Back to don't shoot mode and move on.
Also had a M5 Stuart sneak around a hedgerow and come up behind a Panther, shoot it in the ass twice and cause a bail out. \m/ Then get blasted from half way across the map by it's partner. :hide:
And it's stuff like this that keeps us all coming back for more! ::)
Quote from: undercovergeek on April 08, 2017, 03:36:19 PM
Quote from: acctingman on April 08, 2017, 03:10:25 PM
one last question from me
I know these are 2 different games, but if Combat Mission is a 10 in terms of complexity, what would this game rate (to those that are playing this game currently and have played CMx2)
I'll take your answers off the air :bd:
What is it you find difficult about CM? The ui, the ai?
Is it difficult because you're getting beat or because you don't know what to do?
I'm only asking because any game you're not prepared to learn is going to kick your ass, but if you don't understand there's people here who will help
I've played the demo a couple times several years ago and quite out of frustration. Tried it again a couple nights ago and it was just as frustrating. I know it has a steep learning curve. Just wondering how the learning curve on this game compares to CMx2 games.
It's me, not the game :crazy2:
I'm not a patient gamer, but I'm really trying to become one. I'm an ex-MMO'er with very very little experience in ww2 games (even though I love the era/topic)
Battle Academy was pretty easy for me but still enjoyable, but I found myself wanting something with a little more teeth to it. CM Normandy is a great white full of teeth for me however :tickedoff:
Frustration with what though?
ui and ai and the steep learning curve
This looks fantastic! Releases in May, Dawn of War III out at the end of this month, things are good! ;D
This game is probably about a 5 to learn imho. For me it's really really simple. But for some of my friends wargame red dragon was a real effort, some just gave up especially because it was less visual than a lot of games they were used to.
P.S. I wanted DOW3 just for the memories and a little kick of 40k, but at $70 US they can forget it. It's a simple RTS game and they are selling it at starcraft prices.
Quote from: Destraex on April 08, 2017, 08:14:08 PM
This game is probably about a 5 to learn imho. For me it's really really simple. But for some of my friends wargame red dragon was a real effort, some just gave up especially because it was less visual than a lot of games they were used to.
P.S. I wanted DOW3 just for the memories and a little kick of 40k, but at $70 US they can forget it. It's a simple RTS game and they are selling it at starcraft prices.
A 5.....I might give this a shot. A 5 for you is probably a 9 for me :uglystupid2:
Quote from: acctingman on April 08, 2017, 08:20:50 PM
Quote from: Destraex on April 08, 2017, 08:14:08 PM
This game is probably about a 5 to learn imho. For me it's really really simple. But for some of my friends wargame red dragon was a real effort, some just gave up especially because it was less visual than a lot of games they were used to.
P.S. I wanted DOW3 just for the memories and a little kick of 40k, but at $70 US they can forget it. It's a simple RTS game and they are selling it at starcraft prices.
A 5.....I might give this a shot. A 5 for you is probably a 9 for me :uglystupid2:
Why don't you just try it and refund it if you don't like it? There is no point in agonizing over the decision.
If you would take the time you have spent in the multiple threads here and apply it to a game, you'd be an expert by now. You tried the CM demo, you didn't like it, move on. Try Wargame. Make a decision for yourself. No one here is going to make it for you.
Quote from: acctingman on April 08, 2017, 08:20:50 PM
Quote from: Destraex on April 08, 2017, 08:14:08 PM
This game is probably about a 5 to learn imho. For me it's really really simple. But for some of my friends wargame red dragon was a real effort, some just gave up especially because it was less visual than a lot of games they were used to.
P.S. I wanted DOW3 just for the memories and a little kick of 40k, but at $70 US they can forget it. It's a simple RTS game and they are selling it at starcraft prices.
A 5.....I might give this a shot. A 5 for you is probably a 9 for me :uglystupid2:
Detailed let's try (by Quill) :
Part one focuses entirely on building up a Battlegroup. Part two is the actual battle (mostly on slow speed).
Pete, looks like you pasted the same YT link for both part 1 and part 2.
I thnik you may have wanted this one for 2:
Quote from: Staggerwing on April 09, 2017, 06:03:03 AM
I thnik you may have wanted this one for 2:
Correct. Thanks for fixing it.
A few things here to the video creator. I know you do not like the history side of things and want a "game" with statistics you can face off against each other. But I actually think it's a refreshing change to take wargame to ww2 and use the divisions with a remotely similar TO&E. Considering their will be 15 or so divisions I am happy to personalise what they had. You are right though about variation. Their will not be much. Which is fine and like the plethora of other ww2 games out their.
As for towns. AT Guns and infantry in towns with support from other vehicles and tanks if needed control the enemies speed. Without roads advancing is quite a slog especially for tanks. AT Guns are the new ATGMs. The flatness issue I agree with and have complained about, but normandy was mostly flat... without that terrain variation and especially being able to be used for covering infantry from long range fire. Infantry have a hard time, although with hedges they become more viable. One of my problems with red dragon was how infantry was only ever used for fortifying a town. Also tanks not going through hedgerows without support is historic and as it should be. Although light woods should be passable.
Quote from: Destraex on April 09, 2017, 07:26:34 PM
A few things here to the video creator.
The video you refer to isn't showing for me.
I think this is the issue :
http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=17513.msg495555#new
note the embed instructions from the users guide sub-forum
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi747.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fxx120%2FStaggerwing%2Fyoutubehowto_zps7e2c7f01.jpg&hash=10e0dbc07cde47d72e74a7422950dddad71e061c)
See where it's telling you to pull the link from?
Notice that it's not the URL from the address bar?
compare these two URLs:
followed YT embed instructions
https://youtu.be/ScuwBnXgCv8 <----- embed works fine, no SWF download
didn't follow YT embed instructions, grabbed link from address bar
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ScuwBnXgCv8 <----- embed doesn't work, triggers SWF download b/c YouTube parser won't display it
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on April 08, 2017, 08:45:46 PM
Why don't you just try it and refund it if you don't like it? There is no point in agonizing over the decision.
acctingman,
i have read over at Steam in the forum that because its pre-order and beta the time we spend with the beta is not counting for the refund timer.
so it looks like we all can playtest the beta until release and still are able to get a refund.
- legal advise: this was only a statement by a player at Steam,
so i recommend to check the smallprint of Steam refund policy on this particular gamer first before the buy-transaction
Quote from: Pete Dero on April 10, 2017, 03:22:13 AM
Quote from: Destraex on April 09, 2017, 07:26:34 PM
A few things here to the video creator.
The video you refer to isn't showing for me.
I think this is the issue :
http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=17513.msg495555#new
note the embed instructions from the users guide sub-forum
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi747.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fxx120%2FStaggerwing%2Fyoutubehowto_zps7e2c7f01.jpg&hash=10e0dbc07cde47d72e74a7422950dddad71e061c)
See where it's telling you to pull the link from?
Notice that it's not the URL from the address bar?
compare these two URLs:
followed YT embed instructions
https://youtu.be/ScuwBnXgCv8 <----- embed works fine, no SWF download
didn't follow YT embed instructions, grabbed link from address bar
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ScuwBnXgCv8 <----- embed doesn't work, triggers SWF download b/c YouTube parser won't display it
thx but I did do this. It was showing earlier. I have done it again.
Quote from: Destraex on April 10, 2017, 05:40:12 AM
thx but I did do this. It was showing earlier. I have done it again.
Now it is showing. Before I just saw a blank space.
About the video : it is probably a sign of the times that lack of knowledge isn't stopping anyone from having an opinion.
Quote : "don't pay attention to rate of fire, it is all dumbed down, although some of this might be based on history" (because most tanks have similar rof)
Having watched the first video (and not read all the thread - sorry) - is there artistic licence being implemented here? I noticed, for example, M4A3(105) which didn't have AP firepower and I also noticed that HE was being used rather oddly in places.
I can't recall the proper phrase for doing such things, but is it being done like this for gameplay?
They do take license for balance issues with arbitrary things like ranges. But not usually shell types and things that are more or less hard provable data.
So this may be a bug if you are noticing incorrect load outs. It is BETA after all.
http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_medium_tank_M4A3_105.html
https://wiki.warthunder.com/index.php?title=Medium_Tank_M4A3_(105)_HVSS_Sherman
Well, seems the M4A3 (105) was a howitzer which probably explains it's lack of HE
Quote from: JudgeDredd on April 11, 2017, 12:11:15 AM
http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_medium_tank_M4A3_105.html
https://wiki.warthunder.com/index.php?title=Medium_Tank_M4A3_(105)_HVSS_Sherman
Well, seems the M4A3 (105) was a howitzer which probably explains it's lack of HE
AP you mean.
Yes
Was gonna say?
Bought it yesterday; spent most of yesterday afternoon and night downloading and then it got caught in a loading loop of some kind while finalizing its test for my gfx card. (Note to self: need new gfx card.)
Man, the early-paradox-icality is strong with this one. :hide:
Still, made a Luftlander battlegroup, started a 1v1 game against the AI, and then saved and quit for the night. (Too many allergies, had to go back to bed early.)
I may try my best again to beat RUSE while I'm waiting for the devs to iron out the beta. Ironically, I have never been able to get past holding the Normandy beachhead there, so I'm not sure I deserve to play this game! L:-)
Quote from: JasonPratt on April 11, 2017, 07:36:55 AM
Man, the early-paradox-icality is strong with this one. :hide:
Sorry, dude. This one may be all on you. Experience has been mostly bug free for me and most everyone I have talked to about the game.
Quote from: JasonPratt on April 11, 2017, 07:36:55 AM
Bought it yesterday; spent most of yesterday afternoon and night downloading and then it got caught in a loading loop of some kind while finalizing its test for my gfx card. (Note to self: need new gfx card.)
Both me and a friend had this happen. After force exiting and getting back in (and not running the configuration) its run smooth for me even with almost everything turned up to max.
I had similar issues with Red Dragon. The auto configuration would start and never shutdown.
Quote from: Kushan on April 11, 2017, 08:35:42 AM
Quote from: JasonPratt on April 11, 2017, 07:36:55 AM
Bought it yesterday; spent most of yesterday afternoon and night downloading and then it got caught in a loading loop of some kind while finalizing its test for my gfx card. (Note to self: need new gfx card.)
Both me and a friend had this happen. After force exiting and getting back in (and not running the configuration) its run smooth for me even with almost everything turned up to max.
same here - had to quit via taskmanager
Managed to get onto a 10 v 10 match earlier. Was great until I was kicked for being "too slow" (which is kinda BS as I'm in the office and they have great net here + my computer is good here), but I had fun while I was in it.
Such a long, thin map!
Bug free for me. Great first match, won easily, at all the easiest settings.
One quick question. Can I build a deck, and have the AI play it, or all their decks randoms, from the four forces?
The AI can indeed play your decks; although I'm not sure if you can specifically assign a deck, they're included as part of the random custom pool (not to be confused with the pool of pre-made decks that come with the game).
You can specifically assign a deck.
Played my first skirmish tonight against the medium AI which was running what looked like an mechanized infantry build. They utterly pwnd me. It wasn't even close. It wasn't even distant! I think I maybe scored 44 points out of 5000.
I took a quality build for my Luftlande division, but that mainly meant I couldn't put as many troops downfield as fast as they could. I didn't do as badly on casualties -- still would have lost a destruction fight (or whatever it's called) but not as badly; the conquest fight they simply surrounded me from all sides despite my early attempts at pushing to take positions and control lines of approach. I was playing the rail yard map (there are only two maps in beta of course), and thought my airborne rangers would have done well in taking the buildings in the middle -- which they did for a while, but I couldn't keep them from being surrounded and picked off eventually.
I need to rethink my "company" composition: I need lots more long range punch, whether against soft or hard targets, which isn't something a Luftlande division comes much equipped with. I can at least get rid or shuffle around some units that didn't seem very useful.
Of course, playing 1v1 I'm expected to try to be good in any role against any role, whereas on a team fight I could have focused more on being elite infantry close range kickers (for example) or being more air support (for example).
1 V 1 is the most brutal mode to play I've found. The AI is just so much better than you.
I've heard some online people say the best mode to play is actually 3 v 3 all AI. You've got two AI partners who can take more of the slack while you experiment and learn the rope.
I'm leaning bits and bobs of Company "builds" as a I go along. For example, In Wargame the infantry AT units were so much more lethal, where-as in this I'm finding them very lack-lustre except in ambush scenarios where they get the drop on something up close.
Got a question. Why is the AI brutal? Is it cheating?
"cheating" is a complicated term when it comes to AI in strategy games I find. The Total War games historically used to just buff the AI to make it 'harder' for players. So they'd take less damage, do more damage, etc... AI would get free resources or w/e. Is that "cheating"?
I think the main thing with with regards to Steel Divisions and the Wargame games is that you're required to split your attention over a wide area and issue orders to alot of units at the same time. As a human, you can obviously only do one, or a single select group, at any one time but the AI is theoretically capable of issues precise orders to all units at once.
Not 100% sure on the details myself but playing it just feels the computer has an advantage just for being a computer. The "input lag" doesn't exist for the AI.
Just my thoughts, anyway.
So you notice no buffs in HP and resources?
I do have a feeling of having more limited resources in Wargame. But that's just me.
Quote from: jomni on April 12, 2017, 06:19:28 AM
So you notice no buffs in HP and resources?
I do have a feeling of having more limited resources in Wargame. But that's just me.
I don't have any visibility on the AI's points. I've never felt the AI has had more units on the board than they should have though.
Definitely no HP buffs so far that I've noticed - things seem to die when they're supposed to.
Watch a battle replay of a skirmish with fog of war off - you'll see the ai place troops, all the starting pieces he uses and then his moves
I have it by the way so I can form my own opinion eventually.
Quote from: undercovergeek on April 12, 2017, 06:50:30 AM
Watch a battle replay of a skirmish with fog of war off - you'll see the ai place troops, all the starting pieces he uses and then his moves
How do you view a replay of a battle? I've missed that completely. ???
^Same!
Not that I think the AI was cheating at all. They came with better control (as noted, the AI can make nanosecond choices and adjustments across the board all the time), and with a deck that worked very well against what I was bringing.
Quote from: WargamerJoe on April 12, 2017, 03:46:22 AM
1 V 1 is the most brutal mode to play I've found. The AI is just so much better than you.
This is exactly why I'm practicing on 1v1 out of the gate. O0
I say this as an owner of alb and rd - haven't got this yet
Go back out to main menu and there's a saved battles tab - every skirmish you've ever played is saved in there
Quote from: Barthheart on April 12, 2017, 07:44:55 AM
Quote from: undercovergeek on April 12, 2017, 06:50:30 AM
Watch a battle replay of a skirmish with fog of war off - you'll see the ai place troops, all the starting pieces he uses and then his moves
How do you view a replay of a battle? I've missed that completely. ???
Profile>replay
I haven't seen a definitive answer for this but are you able to create the AI deck and fight against it?
Quote from: -budd- on April 12, 2017, 07:21:22 PM
Quote from: Barthheart on April 12, 2017, 07:44:55 AM
Quote from: undercovergeek on April 12, 2017, 06:50:30 AM
Watch a battle replay of a skirmish with fog of war off - you'll see the ai place troops, all the starting pieces he uses and then his moves
How do you view a replay of a battle? I've missed that completely. ???
Profile>replay
Thanks! That works.
Just can't rewind when watching the replay.... can speed up and slow down but no rewind.....
Quote from: acctingman on April 12, 2017, 08:09:15 PM
I haven't seen a definitive answer for this but are you able to create the AI deck and fight against it?
yes
Quote from: Barthheart on April 12, 2017, 08:19:40 PM
Quote from: -budd- on April 12, 2017, 07:21:22 PM
Quote from: Barthheart on April 12, 2017, 07:44:55 AM
Quote from: undercovergeek on April 12, 2017, 06:50:30 AM
Watch a battle replay of a skirmish with fog of war off - you'll see the ai place troops, all the starting pieces he uses and then his moves
How do you view a replay of a battle? I've missed that completely. ???
Profile>replay
Thanks! That works.
Just can't rewind when watching the replay.... can speed up and slow down but no rewind.....
Kinda of a bummer when you want to get nice screenie.
Quote from: Destraex on April 09, 2017, 07:26:34 PM
, but normandy was mostly flat...
I looked at the game videos. Normandy might have had some flat areas, but it also had rolling hills, crucial ridges and some highlands (eg. Mount Pinchon and the massif around it) as well as steep valleys and Germans who did not have Firefly tanks. What's up with that? It even has a 17-point penetration factor (as in the actual Firefly had a 17 pdr gun). I kind of like the maps, but Normandy wasn't flat.
Germans seem to love the Firefly.
https://m.warhistoryonline.com/war-articles/27-images-captured-sherman-tanks-german-hands.html
Quote from: jomni on April 12, 2017, 10:23:45 PM
Germans seem to love the Firefly.
https://m.warhistoryonline.com/war-articles/27-images-captured-sherman-tanks-german-hands.html
Interesting! I wonder if the game will have a variety of options for capturing equipment and using it. For example, you could recapture ex-French tanks from the Germans etc., bicycles from bicycle Grenadiers and so on.
In one skirmish battle, I received a notification that a Panther had been captured when the crew surrendered. I wonder if in a campaign game, it would have been added to the players OOB.
What's the general consensus on this. I'm kind of tempted.
Quote from: JudgeDredd on April 13, 2017, 05:49:06 AM
I'm kind of tempted.
It's good to have you back, JD O0
Quote from: JudgeDredd on April 13, 2017, 05:49:06 AM
What's the general consensus on this. I'm kind of tempted.
I think it's excellent. More manageable than Wargame for me -- I'm finding I mostly play SD44 on "Normal" speed, something I definitely don't do in Wargame. Obviously not a ton of content currently available in the Beta, but what's there is certainly worth playing, and all of it points to a game that, when fully released next month, could be really extraordinary.
Quote from: sandman2575 on April 13, 2017, 07:15:19 AM
Quote from: JudgeDredd on April 13, 2017, 05:49:06 AM
What's the general consensus on this. I'm kind of tempted.
I think it's excellent. More manageable than Wargame for me -- I'm finding I mostly play SD44 on "Normal" speed, something I definitely don't do in Wargame. Obviously not a ton of content currently available in the Beta, but what's there is certainly worth playing, and all of it points to a game that, when fully released next month, could be really extraordinary.
I agree with this. I never got into the previous ones but this one is good fun. Can't wait for the rest of the content.... and maybe a rewind function on the replay....
I look at this one like I do Red Dragon; a competitive/balanced platform with historical flavoring vs a striving to be historical/realistic platform like CM, Graviteam, or Steel Beasts. It is built to have balanced teams fight each other with somewhat realistic units.
If you question like why a unit is using this or that ammo, if the armor on a Panther V A-late model is undermodeled, or was XXX regiment even in Normandy, then you probably won't enjoy the game.
If you just like fighting with units with somewhat realistic capabilities on equal footing and balanced, this is the game for you.
Quote from: MengJiao on April 12, 2017, 09:52:27 PM
Quote from: Destraex on April 09, 2017, 07:26:34 PM
, but normandy was mostly flat...
I looked at the game videos. Normandy might have had some flat areas, but it also had rolling hills, crucial ridges and some highlands (eg. Mount Pinchon and the massif around it) as well as steep valleys and Germans who did not have Firefly tanks. What's up with that? It even has a 17-point penetration factor (as in the actual Firefly had a 17 pdr gun). I kind of like the maps, but Normandy wasn't flat.
The maps, well at least the Point-Du-Hoc map is not completely flat. Last night playing around with the replay I was able to do a "ride along" with one of my scout cars at ground level and there are definitely rises and rolling terrain that block LoS. I think before I setup my next battle I'll get down to ground level and prowl around f the map for a bit looking for
interesting terrain....
It looks gorgeous, but being an RTS it shall not reside on my computer. I will have to enjoy it vicariously through other Grogs. O0
Quote from: sandman2575 on April 13, 2017, 07:15:19 AM
Quote from: JudgeDredd on April 13, 2017, 05:49:06 AM
What's the general consensus on this. I'm kind of tempted.
I think it's excellent. More manageable than Wargame for me -- I'm finding I mostly play SD44 on "Normal" speed, something I definitely don't do in Wargame. Obviously not a ton of content currently available in the Beta, but what's there is certainly worth playing, and all of it points to a game that, when fully released next month, could be really extraordinary.
Well that sounds promising. I liked the idea of ALB, but the speed was a killer for me.
Quote from: Capn Darwin on April 13, 2017, 08:16:50 AM
It looks gorgeous, but being an RTS it shall not reside on my computer. I will have to enjoy it vicariously through other Grogs. O0
Same here, but since this game can be returned while it's still a beta version gives people a chance to play it that might be on the fence about it.
While I am no fan of traditional RTS games, I think its very unfair to broad brush games as RTS in a negative connotation just because they don't have artificial turns. If a game is real-time and has pausable order giving, plus the tools to manage the game in real-time, especially slowing the clock, then I don't see the issue. If someone will only play wargames games that have set turns, I am not sure they are being very open minded at all.
fight! fight! fight!
Quote from: -budd- on April 12, 2017, 07:21:22 PM
Quote from: Barthheart on April 12, 2017, 07:44:55 AM
Quote from: undercovergeek on April 12, 2017, 06:50:30 AM
Watch a battle replay of a skirmish with fog of war off - you'll see the ai place troops, all the starting pieces he uses and then his moves
How do you view a replay of a battle? I've missed that completely. ???
Profile>replay
Here you can find replays players uploaded (or upload your own).
http://sd-replays.net/replay-list
Do you empty your ammo as quickly and as frequently as Wargame?
Did not see that in the video in previous posts. In Wargame, I keep worrying about logistics giving commands to supply units.
Only units I've run out of ammo for so far is mortar/arty units.
I feel like my Shermans run out of HE pretty often -- and they carry a pretty good load to begin with. Still, arty is definitely your biggest supply eater, as in Wargame.
I've run out with mortars, 25 lbers, and PIAT teams. (and Spitfires but they just RTB so it's not an issue.) I just want to know how those crappy little French tanks keep managing to knock out my Churchills.
GMG has it 17% off
Thanks Barth
Ammo resupply
Definatley Arty
Some recon light vehicles have low amount of main gun ammo.
Phase A 12th Panzer Div command tanks
I've had panzerfausts run low.
Some infantry squads MG34 ammo so they can still reach out to 600
Quote from: Barthheart on April 13, 2017, 01:12:24 PM
Quote from: acctingman on April 13, 2017, 12:47:49 PM
GOG has it 17% off
I think you meant GMG... ???
I did, thank you.
At my age my brain doesn't work as fast as my hands :uglystupid2:
or, is it the other way around? :-\
Disregard....I just need to give up posting sometimes......
Quote from: acctingman on April 13, 2017, 12:47:49 PM
GMG has it 17% off
Thanks Barth
I was noticing that as well. Problem is, I don't know if they're providing keys right now or waiting until the release date.
Quote from: Arctic Blast on April 13, 2017, 02:07:12 PM
Quote from: acctingman on April 13, 2017, 12:47:49 PM
GMG has it 17% off
Thanks Barth
I was noticing that as well. Problem is, I don't know if they're providing keys right now or waiting until the release date.
I just checked GMG, it is 17% off, $33.29. It also said this:
Pre-orders for Steel Division: Normandy 44 includes:
Access to the game's Exclusive beta, allowing you to play the game in the weeks leading up to launch.I would take this to mean you could play it now?
Quote from: Rayfer on April 13, 2017, 02:44:09 PM
Quote from: Arctic Blast on April 13, 2017, 02:07:12 PM
Quote from: acctingman on April 13, 2017, 12:47:49 PM
GMG has it 17% off
Thanks Barth
I was noticing that as well. Problem is, I don't know if they're providing keys right now or waiting until the release date.
I just checked GMG, it is 17% off, $33.29. It also said this: Pre-orders for Steel Division: Normandy 44 includes:
Access to the game's Exclusive beta, allowing you to play the game in the weeks leading up to launch.
I would take this to mean you could play it now?
I completely missed that on the page. ;D
Yep, got my key immediately. Game installing while I'm off to work. :)
Quote from: sandman2575 on April 13, 2017, 07:15:19 AM
Quote from: JudgeDredd on April 13, 2017, 05:49:06 AM
What's the general consensus on this. I'm kind of tempted.
I think it's excellent. More manageable than Wargame for me -- I'm finding I mostly play SD44 on "Normal" speed, something I definitely don't do in Wargame. Obviously not a ton of content currently available in the Beta, but what's there is certainly worth playing, and all of it points to a game that, when fully released next month, could be really extraordinary.
This mirrors my own, initial impressions. Bullet time was invented for me. It is essentially stopped, with 30 seconds of real time for one second of game time to pass.
Good unit mix, and ones that I am more comfortable with. I KNOW what a Panzer IV is...not so sure on modern Swedish armor. This made the Wargame series a little more difficult for me.
wow - another game I suck at ;D
Interesting though. Padded out, there's going to be an awful lot of game here I imagine
Quote from: Pete Dero on April 13, 2017, 09:46:20 AM
Quote from: -budd- on April 12, 2017, 07:21:22 PM
Quote from: Barthheart on April 12, 2017, 07:44:55 AM
Quote from: undercovergeek on April 12, 2017, 06:50:30 AM
Watch a battle replay of a skirmish with fog of war off - you'll see the ai place troops, all the starting pieces he uses and then his moves
How do you view a replay of a battle? I've missed that completely. ???
Profile>replay
Here you can find replays players uploaded (or upload your own).
http://sd-replays.net/replay-list
Where do you copy these replays to?
Quote from: DennisS on April 13, 2017, 03:01:04 PM
Good unit mix, and ones that I am more comfortable with. I KNOW what a Panzer IV is...not so sure on modern Swedish armor. This made the Wargame series a little more difficult for me.
LOL I can relate. Still, building decks in Wargame is a good (and surprisingly addictive) way to get well acquainted with what might otherwise be some pretty esoteric equipment.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on April 13, 2017, 05:38:19 AM
In one skirmish battle, I received a notification that a Panther had been captured when the crew surrendered. I wonder if in a campaign game, it would have been added to the players OOB.
That would be cool. Normandy must have been littered with bicycles at least in the east at first. Capturing those would give the infantry or escaped tank crews something to do.
Quote from: Silent Disapproval Robot on April 13, 2017, 10:02:13 AM
I've run out with mortars, 25 lbers, and PIAT teams. (and Spitfires but they just RTB so it's not an issue.) I just want to know how those crappy little French tanks keep managing to knock out my Churchills.
The Germans did mount some big guns on Hotchkiss chassis, so some French-looking tanks rigged as sp guns could have 75mm guns or 105mm gun/howitzers on them.
It would be interesting if such things turned up in this game.
Quote from: RyanE on April 13, 2017, 07:34:13 AM
I look at this one like I do Red Dragon; a competitive/balanced platform with historical flavoring vs a striving to be historical/realistic platform like CM, Graviteam, or Steel Beasts. It is built to have balanced teams fight each other with somewhat realistic units.
If you question like why a unit is using this or that ammo, if the armor on a Panther V A-late model is undermodeled, or was XXX regiment even in Normandy, then you probably won't enjoy the game.
If you just like fighting with units with somewhat realistic capabilities on equal footing and balanced, this is the game for you.
Ammo -- except for the occasional discarding sabot I probably don't really care
Panther armor -- please do undermodel it on the G model if possible
Was XXX regiment even in Normandy? -- I can't even remember which regiment of the 4th Inf JD Salinger was in
8th? 12th? The other one?
It seems I might buy this game! And I hear there are hills of some kind -- any kind -- I don't seem to care much about that either.
Quote from: MengJiao on April 13, 2017, 04:40:43 PM
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on April 13, 2017, 05:38:19 AM
In one skirmish battle, I received a notification that a Panther had been captured when the crew surrendered. I wonder if in a campaign game, it would have been added to the players OOB.
That would be cool. Normandy must have been littered with bicycles at least in the east at first. Capturing those would give the infantry or escaped tank crews something to do.
I understand that SD44 is not supposed to be hyper-accurate historically, but feels to me like (if in fact it is operative) the captured equipment idea shouldn't hold for both sides. Obviously the Germans made lots of use of captured US/British/Soviet/Czech/French etc. equipment. But I don't think the Allies ever used captured German equipment in battle, did they? Captured tanks and aircraft were sent for testing and analysis. But the Allies never had need to actually employ German equipment in battle, as far as I know.
There is no capturable equipment in SD44 that I have seen. You sure the crew were not captured after they bailed out and the game stated your panther was captured. i.e. the crew gets taken off the map.
Check out the lengths people are going to in order to starcraft the game: This thread has people complaining that German tanks are too effective! lol
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/shermans-vs-panthers.1013307/page-2
"I actually did the math on this last night on tank fights, it was pretty fun! All numbers pertaining to hits to kill are averages, and should not be taken to be deterministic.
So let's step back and get the big picture. First thing to keep in mind is that every 100m you close, you add +1 AP to the shot. The other thing to know is that since the penetration table proceeds as a quartic function in terms of AP-AV, it's a fairly simple function so using 10AP against 5AV is the same as 15AP vs 10AV.
So, going abstract for a bit, divide the main cannon's range by 10, add that to the FAV and the given AP value, and you have a total "Tank Value (TV)." You can do the math yourself, but two tanks of equal TV, regardless of what their other stats look like, will be evenly matched. In this case, the Jumbo and Panther D wind up having equal TVs. At 1000m, both have 0% chance to penetrate. However, if you close to 500m (which is closer to historical tank engagement ranges, BTW), both have AP-AV=4, which corresponds to a 42% penetration chance, or 2.38 hits to kill. They have the same accuracy and ROF, so they're very evenly matched.
That's just comparing even tanks. If you're comparing uneven tanks at the maximum effective range, the weaker tank will take 50 hits to kill (2% penetration), while the stronger tank will take at most 12.5 (8% penetration). If you close the distance, however, the hits to kill converges. As an example: the M4A3(76)W and Jumbo cost the same, but have a difference in TV of 6. At the maximum effective range for the 76 to damage the Jumbo (600m), the 76 will, again, take 50 hits to kill the Jumbo, while the Jumbo will be at 2.38, or 21 times faster, aka the 76 will need 21x numerical superiority (ignoring the effects of morale damage, which will be substantial in such a scenario). If, however, the 76 closes to 300m, the number of hits to kill drops to 3.7, while the Jumbo's drops to 1.2, reducing the ratio to 3:1. There are two practical lessons from this demonstration: even small increases in TV can lead to massively different outcomes, and if you are using a weaker tank close the distance before engaging.
Now, on to cost. If you divide the number of points by TV, you get inverse efficiency (which is slightly more intuitive than efficiency). The average of all open beta tanks at this time is to spend 4.43 points per TV point. The Jumbo and M5A1 are significant outliers, clocking in at 3.64 and 3.75 respectively (the Jumbo is the most effective 'proper' tank - the SDKFZ 250/9 has both an AP and AV value so I put it in, and it spends 2.5 points per TV). The Panthers are also significant outliers: The Panther D at 5.71, the Panther G at 6.51, and the Bef. Panther at 6.36. In other words, the Jumbo is more efficient than the Panther family. Put more practically, you can take 3 Jumbos for 540 points, and 2 Panther Ds for 480. All else being equal, the Jumbos will defeat the Panther Ds dramatically.
However, let's consider Panther Gs vs Jumbos (TV1-TV0=1). If engagement ranges are left at max (800m) and the budget set to 560 points, 3 Jumbos will take 100 average hits (33 hit-volley-equivalents) to take out 2 Panther Gs, while the Panther Gs need 37.5 (18.75). So, advantage Panther Gs. If the Jumbos push to 300m, then they need 3.44 average hits (or 1 hit-volley-equivalent), while the Panther Gs need 4.17 (2). This ignores that Panther Gs have 7 accuracy, while the Jumbos have 5 (I don't know the accuracy tables).
MASSIVE CAVEATS
All else is never equal. For one thing, divisions have different cost incomes (which actually further distorts the Jumbo's advantage). For another, the number of tanks possible to deploy varies wildly - the 3AD can field 6 Jumbos, while the HJ can field 4 Panther Ds, 2 Bef. Panthers, and 18 Panther Gs. For yet another, none of the Jumbos are veteran.
This analysis ignores side shots, morale damage, accuracy, veteran status, leadership, etc. All of which is important.
An important thing to stress from this, however, is that higher TVs are a lot more forgiving. While the 3 Jumbos can close to 300m and defeat the 2 Panther Gs, the onus is on the 3AD player to use smoke and hedgerow hell to close that distance."
Quote from: sandman2575 on April 13, 2017, 07:32:46 PM
Quote from: MengJiao on April 13, 2017, 04:40:43 PM
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on April 13, 2017, 05:38:19 AM
In one skirmish battle, I received a notification that a Panther had been captured when the crew surrendered. I wonder if in a campaign game, it would have been added to the players OOB.
That would be cool. Normandy must have been littered with bicycles at least in the east at first. Capturing those would give the infantry or escaped tank crews something to do.
I understand that SD44 is not supposed to be hyper-accurate historically, but feels to me like (if in fact it is operative) the captured equipment idea shouldn't hold for both sides. Obviously the Germans made lots of use of captured US/British/Soviet/Czech/French etc. equipment. But I don't think the Allies ever used captured German equipment in battle, did they? Captured tanks and aircraft were sent for testing and analysis. But the Allies never had need to actually employ German equipment in battle, as far as I know.
The RN had a captured German submarine they used off Norway. Everyone was fond of German pistols and binoculars. The Australians used captured Italian tanks and Artillery at Tobruk. In fact they killed the first commander of 21 Pz with an Italian gun they had bore-sighted on a stretch of highway.
But no, not systematically, but since the game is not hyper-accurate there's no reason the allies couldn't say capture some German Hotchkiss tanks with 75mm guns on them for example. Or some bicycles.
MengJiao I disagree.
In fact Eugen are going to some lengths to ensure that what they have in their divisions is pretty close to what is actually in the real divisions OOB.
They make a few exceptions, like having one German divisions with captured French kit when in fact they were hastily outfitted with German kit to replace the French kit as Normandy happened... but in wargame, they are kept as they were a short time before the landings. That is for flavour but it is close enough and as FAR as Eugen stray from reality in terms of units that turn up as options in divisional decks.
BUT if they did find that some units used captured equipment then they would give it to them. I was fairly common in Russia for Germans to prefer the Russian sub machine gun and not the MP40 for instance. Since the games time frame extends to the capture of Paris ??? perhaps we will see things like captured panthers.
Quote from: Destraex on April 13, 2017, 08:26:44 PM
MengJiao I disagree.
In fact Eugen are going to some lengths to ensure that what they have in their divisions is pretty close to what is actually in the real divisions OOB.
They make a few exceptions, like having one German divisions with captured French kit when in fact they were hastily outfitted with German kit to replace the French kit as Normandy happened... but in wargame, they are kept as they were a short time before the landings. That is for flavour but it is close enough and as FAR as Eugen stray from reality in terms of units that turn up as options in divisional decks.
BUT if they did find that some units used captured equipment then they would give it to them. I was fairly common in Russia for Germans to prefer the Russian sub machine gun and not the MP40 for instance. Since the games time frame extends to the capture of Paris ??? perhaps we will see things like captured panthers.
Sticking to some kind of Divisional-level OOB seems like a good design decision and the graphics are wonderful. The sorts of intricate possibilities I often consider in games and scenarios would probably be more irritating and confusing than the relative cleanness the design tends to generate.
Quote from: JudgeDredd on April 13, 2017, 03:02:08 PM
wow - another game I suck at ;D
na, its only your first playtest
in my first 1:1 vs easy AI playing as the Germans i lost badly cause i didn't know how to get anything then recon guys in phase A (i didn't realised that the other tabs where active too and thought all had to be under recon tab :hide: ) and through some more UI nesciences :-[
in the meantime i am up to my fourth 1:1 vs AI (easy) and match is on par with the outcome
i play on slow, very slow, and occasional bullettime-stops and up to normal speedups ....and i like it! :)
I didn't had have even fiddled with the deck building yet and used the given once
I like the preplaning phase, analysing the map and planing my assault, placeng the units and orders at startup and see how it unfolds when Launch-button get pressed
Moltke is right: "No plan survives the contact with the enemy" ...as usual! O0
The AI doesn't seems to cheat and surprised me in the 3 battles on the same map with slightly different approaches and seems to react to my (known to the AI) assets on the map (and it didn't react to my invisible assets ! so i am sure AI has fog of war too)
the replays are -as mentioned somewhere above- stored under profile and so i can marble at the battle zoomed-in later from all angles and can casten the temptation to follow often unfolding
Hollywood warmovie scenes close by when live, when attention is better shifted to other parts of the battlefield and the general picture.... nothing is lost, its all on the HDD :D
worth to mention about recording (in the beta build version i was using then)
if you save a game the recording stops for good. when you pick up the saved game later the recording will not get continued at that point nor a second recording of that part will get stored
so if you want to record the full battle better don't let get
RL-interdictions into your way ;)
^ yeah - of course. First outing on Normal AI difficulty.
I just didn't know what I was doing. I think the AI was 3/4s of the way across the map before I realised how I deploy my units! That's after watching Quill's play through :DD
Adjusted AI, dropped speed (very slow is only just comfortable for me) and started another game. Much better and getting used to creating decks...not something I've ever really done or been into.
Great wee game.
Bullet time is slooooow. But I do still wish for a pause (couldn't find it if it's there). Just to take stock.
Took me a few attempts at learning the system as well but I think I've got it dialed in now. I just played a 1v1 game with me as the 15th Scottish vs the 12th SS on hard. I was able to get the 2000 point victory condition before phase C even kicked in. Recon is vital. The AI seems to really like rushing AT guns forward and if you're aggressive in phase A, you can easily catch them out and shoot them up as they try to deploy. That should give you some breathing room to get your own AT guns and medium armour into position to knock out whatever they try to bring up.
Not as in depth at GT Mius but still a lot of fun. I was going to give this a miss based on my experience with AirLand Battle but thankfully posters here let me know about bullet time (I spend 90%+ of my time in very slow or bullet time) and now I'm really enjoying this game.
...its called bullet time for a reason ^-^
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi66.tinypic.com%2Fzxm9ls.png&hash=a6407bbbb03f950c788db6ddc058b7e273cdbecc)
to late
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi67.tinypic.com%2F9vb91h.png&hash=31254368e0fa6b52e2bc9f67461c1510d5512f93)
checking on things with the recorder....
btw the explosion special effect has a concussion wave front spreading whose light refraction distorts the picture seen through the compressed air, nice effect
those Beute Fireflies are deadly >:D
I accidentally played a medium AI in my next game. Everything was going horribly wrong until the 3rd section.
Ended up winning convincingly - but I was pretty stressed.
Easy will be my go to for a tough time...very easy if I just want some shooting fun
I was sceptical about 2v2 AI partner.
Just playing my first now. Have to say wow, another significantly new experience.
Pont de Hoc Map larger and turned 90 degrees from 1v1 version. Some very dense terrain areas deadly for vehicles.
AI partner was doing ok, but now I worry about my flank :hide:
I gave the both AI enemy Scots Infantry. They seem to use the extra point better than 1v1 by getting more combined arms out early. This is first time I have seen them use Arty in phase B.
Overall, there's elements of my old love of CM, with intense memorable firefights. Like several memories of having to retreat from platoon+ attack, to retake by counter attack, to then hold off another attack. The double enclosed orchards middle left of Point de Hoc (facing the sea) if anybody else has spilled blood there...
^nice post
Am I correct there is no manual or tutorial yet? Kind of just have to play around and figure out what's what and how things work?
I really wish you guys would stop making me read these posts. I had convinced myself that because I didn't play Red Dragon enough, I wouldn't get suckered in.
Quote from: RyanE on April 14, 2017, 05:39:20 PM
I really wish you guys would stop making me read these posts. I had convinced myself that because I didn't play Red Dragon enough, I wouldn't get suckered in.
False assumption.
I believe its a totally different game now compared to Red Dragon. Only similar thing is deck building. Game is slower and the units are more survivable (especially infantry). Ammo runs out less. And there's that ABC phase. Capturing a % of the map is simpler and more fluid than capturing sectors.
Quote from: fabius on April 14, 2017, 02:35:37 PM
I was sceptical about 2v2 AI partner.
Just playing my first now. Have to say wow, another significantly new experience.
Pont de Hoc Map larger and turned 90 degrees from 1v1 version. Some very dense terrain areas deadly for vehicles.
AI partner was doing ok, but now I worry about my flank :hide:
I gave the both AI enemy Scots Infantry. They seem to use the extra point better than 1v1 by getting more combined arms out early. This is first time I have seen them use Arty in phase B.
Overall, there's elements of my old love of CM, with intense memorable firefights. Like several memories of having to retreat from platoon+ attack, to retake by counter attack, to then hold off another attack. The double enclosed orchards middle left of Point de Hoc (facing the sea) if anybody else has spilled blood there...
My first 2 vs. 2 game, with an AI partner? My AI buddy sent over some ammo for my guys! Ummm...thanks? Heh heh...I had completely neglected that part of the game, and my buddy hooooked me up.
So far, so good. I play on easy, and slow/very slow. I never could get the hang of the other two wargames by Eugen Systems...they were just too hard for me. This is very accessible, with bullet time, and my greater knowledge of the individual units.
It would be nice to be able to airdrop paratroopers though...
Quote from: jomni on April 14, 2017, 06:18:18 PM
Quote from: RyanE on April 14, 2017, 05:39:20 PM
I really wish you guys would stop making me read these posts. I had convinced myself that because I didn't play Red Dragon enough, I wouldn't get suckered in.
False assumption.
I believe its a totally different game now compared to Red Dragon. Only similar thing is deck building. Game is slower and the units are more survivable (especially infantry). Ammo runs out less. And there's that ABC phase. Capturing a % of the map is simpler and more fluid than capturing sectors.
Don't forget no fuel requirements for vehicles. BIG change there.
Quote from: jomni on April 14, 2017, 06:18:18 PM
Quote from: RyanE on April 14, 2017, 05:39:20 PM
I really wish you guys would stop making me read these posts. I had convinced myself that because I didn't play Red Dragon enough, I wouldn't get suckered in.
False assumption.
I believe its a totally different game now compared to Red Dragon. Only similar thing is deck building. Game is slower and the units are more survivable (especially infantry). Ammo runs out less. And there's that ABC phase. Capturing a % of the map is simpler and more fluid than capturing sectors.
Agreed. I do not like the other game type. Sitting back in the defense and pick off the AI as it comes in isn't very challenging.
Dennis I take it you did not play against humans in the "other game type".
For the conquest mode, is picking the cheapest units the most effective? It looks like the AI can churn out a lot of troops and swarm me. Cheap troops cover a lot of area too and can probe for holes.
I think that's the way to go.
Just got this today and only a couple of hours into it, but I must say it is a remarkable achievement, quite engrossing and well thought out. And it's still in early access! With more maps and divisions this could fast become a classic. The creation of your battlegroups and how they connect with the A-B-C phases of the unfolding battle makes for a enjoyable gaming experience.
Quote from: Rayfer on April 14, 2017, 09:19:40 PM
Just got this today and only a couple of hours into it, but I must say it is a remarkable achievement, quite engrossing and well thought out. And it's still in early access! With more maps and divisions this could fast become a classic. The creation of your battlegroups and how they connect with the A-B-C phases of the unfolding battle makes for a enjoyable gaming experience.
I read 17 maps, and 15 different divisions..including the 101st Airborne.
Quote from: DennisS on April 14, 2017, 06:34:09 PM
Quote from: fabius on April 14, 2017, 02:35:37 PM
I was sceptical about 2v2 AI partner.
Just playing my first now. Have to say wow, another significantly new experience.
Pont de Hoc Map larger and turned 90 degrees from 1v1 version. Some very dense terrain areas deadly for vehicles.
AI partner was doing ok, but now I worry about my flank :hide:
I gave the both AI enemy Scots Infantry. They seem to use the extra point better than 1v1 by getting more combined arms out early. This is first time I have seen them use Arty in phase B.
Overall, there's elements of my old love of CM, with intense memorable firefights. Like several memories of having to retreat from platoon+ attack, to retake by counter attack, to then hold off another attack. The double enclosed orchards middle left of Point de Hoc (facing the sea) if anybody else has spilled blood there...
My first 2 vs. 2 game, with an AI partner? My AI buddy sent over some ammo for my guys! Ummm...thanks? Heh heh...I had completely neglected that part of the game, and my buddy hooooked me up. ..
Yes 2 AI with Scots vs Me and an AI.
I think the friendly AI in these multi AI games tends to pick boundaries and 'corridor' its area of responsibility, a bit like MP. Not sure about enemy AI though, they could be sharing more.
Quote from: jomni on April 14, 2017, 08:38:57 PM
For the conquest mode, is picking the cheapest units the most effective? It looks like the AI can churn out a lot of troops and swarm me. Cheap troops cover a lot of area too and can probe for holes.
I think that's the way to go.
I don't think there is one single win strategy. All units seem to have their place, if anything a string dictum would be Combined Arms, Combined Arms, Combined Arms ! Early I mix support, AT, recon, command, the odd halftrack quality infantry with lots of cheaper motorised squads.
I'm no expert but.
If you pick cheap units, it's even more important to supplement them with command units.
When I can't cover the whole front, prioritise areas, go on defence in others, be prepared to give ground for more favourable terrain and ambush or stand off fire possibilities. Pure infantry fight, German squads with MG34 win in longer ranges, 400m to 600m. Back off out the forest if outnumbered and you can't get fire support there in time. Then hit them crossing and open space.
Also, I've held off significant AI mass infantry attacks with German Support halftrack, and a scout, while rushing some infantry there.
Quote from: fabius on April 15, 2017, 10:06:47 AM
Quote from: jomni on April 14, 2017, 08:38:57 PM
For the conquest mode, is picking the cheapest units the most effective? It looks like the AI can churn out a lot of troops and swarm me. Cheap troops cover a lot of area too and can probe for holes.
I think that's the way to go.
I don't think there is one single win strategy. All units seem to have their place, if anything a string dictum would be Combined Arms, Combined Arms, Combined Arms ! Early I mix support, AT, recon, command, the odd halftrack quality infantry with lots of cheaper motorised squads.
I'm no expert but.
If you pick cheap units, it's even more important to supplement them with command units.
When I can't cover the whole front, prioritise areas, go on defence in others, be prepared to give ground for more favourable terrain and ambush or stand off fire possibilities. Pure infantry fight, German squads with MG34 win in longer ranges, 400m to 600m. Back off out the forest if outnumbered and you can't get fire support there in time. Then hit them crossing and open space.
Also, I've held off significant AI mass infantry attacks with German Support halftrack, and a scout, while rushing some infantry there.
And I would add, Conquest mode plays out differently than Destruction mode. Played my first Destruction mode 1X1 against the AI, it's no longer about controlling more territory, it's about destroying enemy units. Quite a lot of fun. Had a minor victory with 3 minutes to go only to have two Panthers come in on my flank (poor recon on my part) and tear my Sherman's to shreds. :-\
Won my first skirmish a minute ago, 1v1 on the Normandy coast map (coast on my left), Luftlander division against... I'm not sure what exactly. Wasn't paying attention. Allies. 5000 point conquest, no time limit, 250 starting budget.
Went in with two teams of elite paratroops first, which necessarily ceded the center of the map for a while, but I pulled in a third team quickly. Didn't bother with flametruppen or panzerschrecks per se. Stiffened the three blocs with some heavy guns asap, although I suspect my light tanks early didn't amount to much -- hard to tell. Spread to four, then five teams, set up a firebase for my arty and an 88 flak (my other one didn't survive the inbound trip). Enemy tanks were pretty dire -- I never had better than a couple of PzIII, but a decent number of StuGs (and a few StuHs for infantry work) all day long. Eventually got air superiority, although the AI was pulling Mustangs down to the end. The AI earned around a half win before I turned the beat around.
I could have spent my limited spring-cold energy working on invading Poland this weeken, but I regret nothing. :smitten:
Quote from: JasonPratt on April 15, 2017, 05:44:08 PM
Won my first skirmish a minute ago, 1v1 on the Normandy coast map (coast on my left), Luftlander division against... I'm not sure what exactly. Wasn't paying attention. Allies. 5000 point conquest, no time limit, 250 starting budget.
Went in with two teams of elite paratroops first, which necessarily ceded the center of the map for a while, but I pulled in a third team quickly. Didn't bother with flametruppen or panzerschrecks per se. Stiffened the three blocs with some heavy guns asap, although I suspect my light tanks early didn't amount to much -- hard to tell. Spread to four, then five teams, set up a firebase for my arty and an 88 flak (my other one didn't survive the inbound trip). Enemy tanks were pretty dire -- I never had better than a couple of PzIII, but a decent number of StuGs (and a few StuHs for infantry work) all day long. Eventually got air superiority, although the AI was pulling Mustangs down to the end. The AI earned around a half win before I turned the beat around.
I could have spent my limited spring-cold energy working on invading Poland this weeken, but I regret nothing. :smitten:
Nice job! I just completed a 2 vs. 2, with three easy AI, one for me, two for the other team. I am TERRIBLE at these types of games...but I won a 2000 point territory victory in 19 minutes. I may step up to medium AI, if I continue to do this well.
I now have five decks built...all variants to the 15th Scottish Infantry. This suits my style of play, infantry, artillery, and supporting halftrack-based machine guns..
Quote from: fabius on April 15, 2017, 10:06:47 AM
Quote from: jomni on April 14, 2017, 08:38:57 PM
For the conquest mode, is picking the cheapest units the most effective? It looks like the AI can churn out a lot of troops and swarm me. Cheap troops cover a lot of area too and can probe for holes.
I think that's the way to go.
I don't think there is one single win strategy. All units seem to have their place, if anything a string dictum would be Combined Arms, Combined Arms, Combined Arms ! Early I mix support, AT, recon, command, the odd halftrack quality infantry with lots of cheaper motorised squads.
I'm no expert but.
If you pick cheap units, it's even more important to supplement them with command units.
When I can't cover the whole front, prioritise areas, go on defence in others, be prepared to give ground for more favourable terrain and ambush or stand off fire possibilities. Pure infantry fight, German squads with MG34 win in longer ranges, 400m to 600m. Back off out the forest if outnumbered and you can't get fire support there in time. Then hit them crossing and open space.
Also, I've held off significant AI mass infantry attacks with German Support halftrack, and a scout, while rushing some infantry there.
This sounds more like a destruction mode strategy which I don't have any problems with.
I'm more concerned about conquest mode as the AI seems to always have more troops than me.
A few shots of me playing coop with a mate. Very hard to get even a squad of 4 panthers together.
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2816/33937831911_673bb2be3d_h.jpg)
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/4/3932/33224898984_346fac1736_h.jpg)
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/4/3941/33224896734_2f3ead2075_h.jpg)
Yeah, as with Wargame, Conquest mode vs AI feels considerably harder than Destruction. I find it very difficult to win against Medium AI in Conquest playing with the German decks -- def. have an easier time playing as Allies.
Re. Destraex's nice screenshots - one small thing that does bother me about SD44 is the constantly exposed tank commanders manning MGs. A little too Company of Heroes arcade-y for me. (Probably also conditioned by so many hours playing Combat Mission, where those TCs would be killed in seconds being exposed in combat like that.)
sandman I thought it was german doctrine for tank commanders to have their heads out and looking around. But not sitting up like in the screenshots? So they should be out but crouching a little.
Quote from: Destraex on April 14, 2017, 08:33:07 PM
Dennis I take it you did not play against humans in the "other game type".
No humans...yet. But, the beating I just gave the AI gives me some level of confidence that human opponents won't crush the life out of me.
Quote from: Destraex on April 16, 2017, 09:04:30 AM
sandman I thought it was german doctrine for tank commanders to have their heads out and looking around. But not sitting up like in the screenshots? So they should be out but crouching a little.
Right - I didn't mean the TCs should never unbutton (though that's a good rule of thumb when playing Combat Mission!) -- just that it bugs me that every panzer in SD44 seems to have a 3rd, cupola-mounted MG (hardly a standard feature in reality!) and that TCs will happily blaze away on their MGs seemingly in all circumstances. I suppose it's a way to give them some more firepower for 'balancing' purposes -- but it just feels very video-games to me.
Small thing... but then, I suppose those of us who frequent these forums are predisposed to notice the small things ... 8)
That is the stuff I was talking about a few pages ago. Based on my experience with Red Dragon. If those small things stand out, probably not the game for you.
Just bought the game and played my first game. Didn't have a clue what I was doing, got my ass handed to me on a platter and loved every minute of it :bd:
As long as you are loving it, that's the main thing.
Bullet mode is VERY slow. I was worried that it might be even too fast for me. My reaction time is sloooooow. :uglystupid2:
The slower speeds are very manageable.
downloading now. sounds like you fellas are having a good time with this one. dont want to miss the party <:-)
Quote from: acctingman on April 17, 2017, 08:46:11 AM
Bullet mode is VERY slow. I was worried that it might be even too fast for me. My reaction time is sloooooow. :uglystupid2:
The slower speeds are very manageable.
30:1 ratio for time...in bullet mode, ONE second of game time takes 30 seconds of real time. It really is bullet time!!
Yea, even I'm finding bullet mode too slow, but once things get nasty, bullet time is kind of nice for slower folks like myself O0
Presuming mutual agreement, can the RT be slowed down in MP?
After my lone win earlier I was unable to replicate the win in my sporadic further attempts this weekend (between taxes, allergies, and Easter. Went to bed 7pm Sunday night. :buck2: )
I did come close, having marched up the railyard map in 1v1 (for those who don't know, the maps can change and expand rather significantly as you bump up to 2v2/3v3 and 4v4 sizes. I thought I heard that eventually things could be 10v10 but I don't see how that's possible yet.)
But having come to dominate the map, I neglected to push ahead and close off all the lines of ingress, so I sat there shooting at occasional things the AI would pull out of its butt. And when I realized that somehow the AI was whittling me away despite its losses and that soon it would probably push through and collapse my line of defense, I ragequit. This game is very much NOT Company of Heroes for setting up a defensive line.
My choice of playing a slow buildup skirmish, with only 250 points available for deployment at the beginning, made some subtle but crucial tactical problems, too. Even though the Luftlanders get a hefty 80/min budget of income, their elite A-phase troops cost a lot, too, so unless you plan a cheap penal battalion infantry build you can't effectively control the map by yourself at the start: Allies have a lot more armed vehicles available at the beginning for running around taking territory, as my two little pockets of elite infantry try to eke out a couple of forward positions.
Last night I decided, though I haven't tested it yet, that I either need to go for cheap early tanks (the Luftlanders can get quite a few) to contest early Allied APC/Jeep rushes, or I should plan to just cede the map early and build up a much smaller defensive perimeter around one ingress point from which to expand with concentrated force, the idea being that if I can kill off enough of the other player's troops in detail with concentrated pushes and their attempts to breach my defenses, then eventually they'll be unable to collect up enough points or troops for effective task forces. And then I have to remember to keep pushing to close off their ingresses!
Which led me to a further realization about how the gameplay is structured. On one hand, income per minute is fixed (but arrives in batches) and can never be messed with which means attacking the enemy's ability to put out troops is impossible (other than shutting down ingresses -- which may itself be impossible...?) On the other hand, the only way to effectively create task forces all at once is to either start the mission with a large point budget (enough to put all or most of your A-phase troops out at once) or to spend long minutes adding no new troops (which seems fatal) so that you can buy a set at once.
I would put out some initial groups of, let's say, airborne infantry, a leader, and a tank; or maybe two infants and a leader; or some short company mix, and then spend the rest of the A-phase trying to put a third group out plus sporadically trucking in the rest of a mixed force company for the two or three groups. And then B- and C-phases are actually WORSE! -- you can't get a tank platoon together to save your life, you need to send your forces in bits and pieces asap to spackle whatever's happening on the map. (It doesn't help that the Luftlander's best tank is actually a stug. ::) :P )
Essentially to have time to build up a task force, you need to have already built up good defensive task forces for map control, and then feed them enough regular reinforcements to keep the from wearing out and collapsing. This pretty much requires that you either start with a huge enough point budget to build good task forces from the outset (so that you can secure areas long enough successfully enough to build up more task forces), or that you camp on an ingress lane (presumably left or right in order to keep one flank map-protected and concentrate your defenses better) so that your few starting troops reinforce each other's defenses most effectively while protecting their build-up corridor most effectively and receiving replacements as needed more quickly for prevention of overruns. Then as you gather up a strong task force, expand out to increase your perimeter.
I shall experiment along this line against the AI 1v1, and report back.
Quote from: Cyrano on April 17, 2017, 02:50:15 PM
Presuming mutual agreement, can the RT be slowed down in MP?
I would hope so. I'd also like to know if we can pick players for a MP game? I only like playing MP games with those I already know... would be fun to get a Grogs MP game going some night... :bd:
Quote from: JasonPratt on April 17, 2017, 03:02:00 PM
After my lone win earlier I was unable to replicate the win in my sporadic further attempts this weekend (between taxes, allergies, and Easter. Went to bed 7pm Sunday night. :buck2: )
I did come close, having marched up the railyard map in 1v1 (for those who don't know, the maps can change and expand rather significantly as you bump up to 2v2/3v3 and 4v4 sizes. I thought I heard that eventually things could be 10v10 but I don't see how that's possible yet.)
But having come to dominate the map, I neglected to push ahead and close off all the lines of ingress, so I sat there shooting at occasional things the AI would pull out of its butt. And when I realized that somehow the AI was whittling me away despite its losses and that soon it would probably push through and collapse my line of defense, I ragequit. This game is very much NOT Company of Heroes for setting up a defensive line.
My choice of playing a slow buildup skirmish, with only 250 points available for deployment at the beginning, made some subtle but crucial tactical problems, too. Even though the Luftlanders get a hefty 80/min budget of income, their elite A-phase troops cost a lot, too, so unless you plan a cheap penal battalion infantry build you can't effectively control the map by yourself at the start: Allies have a lot more armed vehicles available at the beginning for running around taking territory, as my two little pockets of elite infantry try to eke out a couple of forward positions.
Last night I decided, though I haven't tested it yet, that I either need to go for cheap early tanks (the Luftlanders can get quite a few) to contest early Allied APC/Jeep rushes, or I should plan to just cede the map early and build up a much smaller defensive perimeter around one ingress point from which to expand with concentrated force, the idea being that if I can kill off enough of the other player's troops in detail with concentrated pushes and their attempts to breach my defenses, then eventually they'll be unable to collect up enough points or troops for effective task forces. And then I have to remember to keep pushing to close off their ingresses!
Which led me to a further realization about how the gameplay is structured. On one hand, income per minute is fixed (but arrives in batches) and can never be messed with which means attacking the enemy's ability to put out troops is impossible (other than shutting down ingresses -- which may itself be impossible...?) On the other hand, the only way to effectively create task forces all at once is to either start the mission with a large point budget (enough to put all or most of your A-phase troops out at once) or to spend long minutes adding no new troops (which seems fatal) so that you can buy a set at once.
I would put out some initial groups of, let's say, airborne infantry, a leader, and a tank; or maybe two infants and a leader; or some short company mix, and then spend the rest of the A-phase trying to put a third group out plus sporadically trucking in the rest of a mixed force company for the two or three groups. And then B- and C-phases are actually WORSE! -- you can't get a tank platoon together to save your life, you need to send your forces in bits and pieces asap to spackle whatever's happening on the map. (It doesn't help that the Luftlander's best tank is actually a stug. ::) :P )
Essentially to have time to build up a task force, you need to have already built up good defensive task forces for map control, and then feed them enough regular reinforcements to keep the from wearing out and collapsing. This pretty much requires that you either start with a huge enough point budget to build good task forces from the outset (so that you can secure areas long enough successfully enough to build up more task forces), or that you camp on an ingress lane (presumably left or right in order to keep one flank map-protected and concentrate your defenses better) so that your few starting troops reinforce each other's defenses most effectively while protecting their build-up corridor most effectively and receiving replacements as needed more quickly for prevention of overruns. Then as you gather up a strong task force, expand out to increase your perimeter.
I shall experiment along this line against the AI 1v1, and report back.
OK. I tried the same general technique you did..low number of starting points.
For three main axis of attacks, I had three cheap recon units, and a ton of cheap infantry. One of the infantry units on each axis was a PIAT...essentially, anti-tank.
I got ten units for 250 points, and RACED (used "F") to as far forward as I could go. Rule number one...don't dismount until you're getting shot at, and then dismount in heavy trees. If you're fortunate, you can get that magic 51%, and start getting victory points, until you can re-inforce. I usually go for an arty for the area which has the hottest enemy action. I use it for counter-battery fire, or smoke to hide YOUR forward units, or to blind the AI's.
The rest is all re-inforcing, and marshalling forces for an attack. Get there firstest with the mostest.
Quote from: Barthheart on April 17, 2017, 03:12:30 PM
Quote from: Cyrano on April 17, 2017, 02:50:15 PM
Presuming mutual agreement, can the RT be slowed down in MP?
I would hope so. I'd also like to know if we can pick players for a MP game? I only like playing MP games with those I already know... would be fun to get a Grogs MP game going some night... :bd:
At the moment in the BETA you can pick your own friends and opponents by creating a game and selecting private (public is the other option), then inviting your friends. However their is a matchmaker coming and this has not been implimented yet. So I have no idea if this will change. I think they would be insane to get rid of the lobby system entirely though, especially since it is already there.
Your comments confirm my suspicion that cheap is best for conquest gameplay.
Quote from: Destraex on April 17, 2017, 07:55:19 PM
Quote from: Barthheart on April 17, 2017, 03:12:30 PM
Quote from: Cyrano on April 17, 2017, 02:50:15 PM
Presuming mutual agreement, can the RT be slowed down in MP?
I would hope so. I'd also like to know if we can pick players for a MP game? I only like playing MP games with those I already know... would be fun to get a Grogs MP game going some night... :bd:
At the moment in the BETA you can pick your own friends and opponents by creating a game and selecting private (public is the other option), then inviting your friends. However their is a matchmaker coming and this has not been implimented yet. So I have no idea if this will change. I think they would be insane to get rid of the lobby system entirely though, especially since it is already there.
Thanks! O0
I found myself wishing the maps would flip only 90 degrees from game to game rather than 180, as they do. Am I making sense?
Not really? You mean camera view?
I believe he's referring to the map rotating between plays. I noticed the Normandy map flipped 180 degrees between games. So one game I was at one end of the map, next game, I was at the other end. He's suggesting he'd like to see the maps flip 90 rather than 180 degrees
Quote from: JudgeDredd on April 18, 2017, 11:37:34 AM
I believe he's referring to the map rotating between plays. I noticed the Normandy map flipped 180 degrees between games. So one game I was at one end of the map, next game, I was at the other end. He's suggesting he'd like to see the maps flip 90 rather than 180 degrees
Thanks JD, that's exactly what I meant. It would allow the battle to flow east-west then flip to west-east rather than the current north-south then flip to south-north orientation. Or instead of flipping the map they could draw the set up zones on the right and left side of the map rather than the current top and bottom. It would have the same effect.
The larger maps reorient the axis, don't they? But only to make the new axis what gets flipped between?
Re lots of cheap units on a low-point start: yeah, I'm clearly not playing my Luftlander division with the cheap low-morale penal units. I could put three times the numbers of those out at first.
Re not dismounting until I'm being shot at: in my experience if my trucks are being shot at, it's usually too late to dismount without having the truck blow up beneath me, and I say that as someone who typically has been planning carefully to race at F-speed from a conveniently-closest opening position, for a defensive area at the edge of the enemy's area. I'll get there first, but not before I'm under fire by any AI units trying to get there, too. I've had lots of trucks die that way, short of the goal. I've learned to plan to disembark into cover short of the goal in case I detect APCs and/or Jeeps coming my way. (I can't escort with Luft's opening tanks, because they can't drive fast enough to keep up with the trucks. I could however F-speed the tanks forward first and have the trucks following at normal speed.)
I think if your troop truck is hit, the troops disembark anyway - I don't think they die in a blown up vehicle ;)
They can die in the truck explosion; but not always. Looks like it depends on how much violent HE is chucked and/or some randomness.
is there any way to rotate the camera? i can move it left, right, up, down and zoom in and out. would like to view them from any angle especially in the build a battlegroup. im sure im missing it. gotta be camera rotation right??
I can rotate the camera with pushing and hold my middle mouse button(which is my scroll wheel) and drag the mouse.
Ok, replays while a cool idea are right now almost useless. Sure hope this gets changed for release....
You can't rewind. WTF?!? :o If yer watching one side of the map close in to enjoy the graphics, you can't back up and then go watch another location... you have to start from the beginning!?! Which brings me to...
They record EVERYTHING! I usually take 15-20minutes to setup my first troops for he battle, checking sight lines, choosing troops, assigning first orders. The recordings have all of that time on record and only have a 10x fastforward (which isn't 10x anything as 2.5 minutes game time still takes 1 minute real time to "whiz" by)... snore!
Just tried the MS Game thingy to record some of my replay. Worked great. Now I have a recording that I can't share because when I try to Uplaod I get a message "Can't share this recording . We don't know this game"....WTF?!?
Quote from: Barthheart on April 18, 2017, 07:39:54 PM
I can rotate the camera with pushing and hold my middle mouse button(which is my scroll wheel) and drag the mouse.
great thanks. i knew i had to be missing it.
Another cool thing I stumbled on is the Line of Sight tool works anywhere on the map not just when you've clicked on a unit. Click anywhere on the map and hold down the C key and the LoS function comes up. And if you continue to hold the C down and move the mouse and the LoS tool updates as you move. Very handy when planning ambush sites.
Yep that is one of the best features of the game. Combat Mission needs it.
Couldn't agree more. Love this LOS feature.
Quote from: Barthheart on April 18, 2017, 08:30:32 PM
Another cool thing I stumbled on is the Line of Sight tool works anywhere on the map not just when you've clicked on a unit. Click anywhere on the map and hold down the C key and the LoS function comes up. And if you continue to hold the C down and move the mouse and the LoS tool updates as you move. Very handy when planning ambush sites.
Thanks BH.....I got 3 hours of play into this and didn't realize it had a LoS tool. :notworthy:
Quote from: Barthheart on April 18, 2017, 07:54:24 PM
They record EVERYTHING! I usually take 15-20minutes to setup my first troops for he battle, checking sight lines, choosing troops, assigning first orders. The recordings have all of that time on record and only have a 10x fastforward (which isn't 10x anything as 2.5 minutes game time still takes 1 minute real time to "whiz" by)...
that had changed to this behavoir with one of the first patches after beta release
Guess what happend to me after those patches :-[
I took my time, just like you, to study the map and set up my units... and because i knew from old recording tests it will not start before i will hit Launch , ...so i went to dinner! came back to actually fight the battle undisturbed by RL and hit Launch...
so i generated me a whooping 2:41h ! replay and had to sit through 2h on 10x fastforward to see what happend in the battle ....Arrrrr :o
I think a true rewind will not come because its recoding system eminent
but i hope there will be some higher fast forward steps (then just without updating the graphics) and then a 1 sec or 2 delay after you stop to refresh the graphics to that point and a fade in from a black screen or something
so we can have a 'fake rewind'
actually its start from the beginning and fastforward in the background as fast as the PC can processes it without updating the graphic and then fade in
So I was finally able to get a recording of the game's recording that I could post to YT using the NVidia recorder. Works pretty well but makes huge files...need to poke at that a bit.
Anyway, here it is. No talking by me, it's just to show that there is elevation changes on the map... at least along one edge of the Point Du Hoc map.
Pretty cool that in the game's recorder you can click on a unit and the camera will auto follow that unit when yer zoomed in. Also noticed when zoomed in this much that the grass plows down when you drive over it... wonder if that could be used in game to see enemy movements?
Lots of little details pop up when yer zoomed in this much but it's impossible to play at this level, at least for me.
Well done BH. You're right, impossible to play at this level but it sure is fun to watch it as a replay.
Yes, great video, really wets my appetite for some WWII action. What were the Germans shooting at your troops with? It looked like cruise missiles.
Quote from: Sir Slash on April 19, 2017, 09:42:34 AM
Yes, great video, really wets my appetite for some WWII action. What were the Germans shooting at your troops with? It looked like cruise missiles.
It was a Pzkw III. All the shots in the game have tracer effects. Everything in the video is happening at Normal speed.... way too fast for me still. I play at slow and very slow.
Barth....been meaning to ask you. Who is that in your avatar?
It looks like a cross between Deadpool and Vindicator from Alpha Flight :bd:
Looks like there was just a Steam update adding a new map and two new divisions. Fun to be had this afternoon! :smitten:
Quote from: acctingman on April 19, 2017, 10:50:52 AM
Barth....been meaning to ask you. Who is that in your avatar?
It looks like a cross between Deadpool and Vindicator from Alpha Flight :bd:
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bigbcomics.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2015%2F05%2Fcaptain_canuck_1_cover.jpg&hash=a784d39460bcd22db248300786b8f739291e3c3e)
Captain Canuck!
I see the game meets great approval. Should I pull the trigger on it?
Very much yes. Unless you prefer to wait for the full release. Beta content is limited but well worth playing now.
Quote from: sandman2575 on April 19, 2017, 02:01:04 PM
Very much yes. Unless you prefer to wait for the full release. Beta content is limited but well worth playing now.
Thanks Sandman -actually that's really helpful since we usually share similar opinions on games.
Yeah I know we've definitely been on a similar wavelength on a bunch of games, primarily ww2.
As someone who struggles with the pace of Wargame, I find SD44 a lot more manageable. It's challenging even against medium AI. But not so hectic that you can't think before acting. I actually play most of the game on "Normal" speed -- something I never do in Wargame.
So, hope you enjoy it!
Thanks! I have Wargame and that put me off with the fast speed of play. Looks like this will be my next purchase.
I actually started playing a lot of Wargame: Red Dragon in anticipation of SD44 coming out, and am still playing it. It really is a brilliant game. I've found that, with practice, you do start to manage the quick pace vs. the AI (multiplayer is completely beyond me).
Still, overall, I prefer the more 'leisurely' pace of WW2 warmachines in SD44.
Quote from: sandman2575 on April 19, 2017, 02:01:04 PM
Very much yes. Unless you prefer to wait for the full release. Beta content is limited but well worth playing now.
This.
The new map is Omaha (not the beach, or not yet -- despite the promo videos I have some doubts about actual beach assaults being in the game, maybe the campaign...). The two new divisions are the 2nd US Infantry and the 17th SS Panzergrenadier.
Quote from: Barthheart on April 19, 2017, 08:11:14 AM
So I was finally able to get a recording of the game's recording that I could post to YT using the NVidia recorder. Works pretty well but makes huge files...need to poke at that a bit.
Anyway, here it is. No talking by me, it's just to show that there is elevation changes on the map... at least along one edge of the Point Du Hoc map.
Nice! -- did that Jeep have Flintstone power driving?? :o I swear, when it turned left onto the field row, it looked like there was some kind of irregular pillar underneath. At first I thought the rider or driver model was clipping down through it (like their feet were pushing the Jeep along), but then I thought it was between them so couldn't
be them... and by then the Jeep had pulled around its nose toward the camera (and soon after dismounted) and never saw the effect again.
SCREW THAT APC WHICH TOWED OUR GUN HERE THO!! BLAM!! :DD
How cool would it be if close combat 3D was on this scale?
Way Cool.
Quote from: JasonPratt on April 19, 2017, 07:54:56 PM
....did that Jeep have Flintstone power driving?? :o I swear, when it turned left onto the field row, it looked like there was some kind of irregular pillar underneath. At first I thought the rider or driver model was clipping down through it (like their feet were pushing the Jeep along), but then I thought it was between them so couldn't be them...
LOL! I had the exact same thoughts as I watched my recorded replay. I have no idea what that thing was but it did look like they were using foot power.
I made the switch and finally started to play as the bad guys. Is it just me, or do the Germans seem to suck? I had no problem beating the game as the Brits or the Yanks on all three maps at medium difficulty while playing conquest but I'm getting my ass handed to me handily as the Germans. Maybe I just used the wrong division (I'm using the guys who just have a bunch of Stugs) but they seem really weak.
I'm playing the Luftlanders, too. I don't know that they're weak, but what they're strong in (aircraft and elite infantry / scouts, with some decent arty) doesn't seem to be good for winning conquest. But I've opined above (at some length) that this might be due to me trying to play an escalation game with only 250 to buy units to start. If I started with a lot of budget, I could flood the map with elite paras and some support crews (and stiffen them with a bunch of penal infs). That would have to make some difference in power projection, even though the opponent would get to flood with things, too. I haven't experimented with this yet, since I'm working on getting my multiplayer AAR produced and played.
My most recent theory was that if I'm going to play the Luftlanders on a minimum-surge match (250 points), I should just cede the map at first, building up a killing reinforced defense around one of the entry points, and then expand with task forces as I build them up. This could only possibly work with a 5000 point win-goal however. I don't think it's possible (against a medium AI or equivalent human) for the Luftlanders to win a minimum surge conquest map with a low victory goal.
Which is fine. The divisions should be distinct and not even necessarily balanced. On a team game, the Luftlanders should function like, well, the Luftlanders: air superiority, air support, and various defense-support to hold ground taken by your fellow Huns, plus building up some decent arty firebases.
I picked this up last week. I have to say, for someone who isn't a pure war gamer and struggles with overly complex games, this game (because of bullet speed) hits a sweet spot for me. I have lots to learn, but it's at a nice pace for me.
Love this game.
Wait, this game has the acctingman seal of approval?
I might need to pick this up, now! :P
Quote from: Toonces on April 26, 2017, 11:50:48 AM
Wait, this game has the acctingman seal of approval?
I might need to pick this up, now! :P
O0
Sorry, I suspect this has been addressed already, but I just made kind of a 1/4-to-1/2-assed effort to thumb through the 19 pages and missed it, so please be merciful: :hide:
How is singleplayer? Is that what you guys are playing? Is the campaign any good? Are there random skirmishes? Skirmishes with definable parameters?
Quote from: glen55 on April 26, 2017, 04:55:18 PM
Sorry, I suspect this has been addressed already, but I just made kind of a 1/4-to-1/2-assed effort to thumb through the 19 pages and missed it, so please be merciful: :hide:
How is singleplayer? Is that what you guys are playing? Is the campaign any good? Are there random skirmishes? Skirmishes with definable parameters?
Campaign is not in the beta. It will be in the final release. AI skirmishes are in the beta and they are very enjoyable.
Agreed, single-player skirms are very enjoyable. Even with only 2 maps and 4 divisions (now slowly being extended as the beta continues).
Enjoyable until a god damned Rangers lob a satchel charge into the building you just moved into and wipes out your entire squad of pioneers. :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff:
That just happened to me a few skirmishes ago. I targeted the Rangers with a gun of some sort (can't remember if it was a tank or cannon or something else). I zoomed in on them just as the first explosion hit and saw what looked like a crate go flying out of view towards my units at a very high speed. I wasn't sure if that was just some slightly wonky physics from the explosion or a satchel. Then the building my fresh squad was in blew up and killed all 10 of them and I got my answer.
Quote from: Silent Disapproval Robot on April 26, 2017, 06:07:33 PM
Enjoyable until a god damned Rangers lob a satchel charge into the building you just moved into and wipes out your entire squad of pioneers. :tickedoff: :tickedoff: :tickedoff:
That just happened to me a few skirmishes ago. I targeted the Rangers with a gun of some sort (can't remember if it was a tank or cannon or something else). I zoomed in on them just as the first explosion hit and saw what looked like a crate go flying out of view towards my units at a very high speed. I wasn't sure if that was just some slightly wonky physics from the explosion or a satchel. Then the building my fresh squad was in blew up and killed all 10 of them and I got my answer.
I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that will leave a mark! #:-)
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on April 26, 2017, 04:56:44 PM
Quote from: glen55 on April 26, 2017, 04:55:18 PM
Sorry, I suspect this has been addressed already, but I just made kind of a 1/4-to-1/2-assed effort to thumb through the 19 pages and missed it, so please be merciful: :hide:
How is singleplayer? Is that what you guys are playing? Is the campaign any good? Are there random skirmishes? Skirmishes with definable parameters?
Campaign is not in the beta. It will be in the final release. AI skirmishes are in the beta and they are very enjoyable.
Can you set parameters for the skirmishes? Terrain/unit type/battle type? Purchase units?
Sorry again for jumping into this 20 pages in but I never really played Wargame so the thread didn't grab me right off. But suddenly it is dawning on me that this game at least LOOKS pretty righteous.
Quote from: glen55 on April 26, 2017, 08:19:38 PM
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on April 26, 2017, 04:56:44 PM
Quote from: glen55 on April 26, 2017, 04:55:18 PM
Sorry, I suspect this has been addressed already, but I just made kind of a 1/4-to-1/2-assed effort to thumb through the 19 pages and missed it, so please be merciful: :hide:
How is singleplayer? Is that what you guys are playing? Is the campaign any good? Are there random skirmishes? Skirmishes with definable parameters?
Campaign is not in the beta. It will be in the final release. AI skirmishes are in the beta and they are very enjoyable.
Can you set parameters for the skirmishes? Terrain/unit type/battle type? Purchase units?
Sorry again for jumping into this 20 pages in but I never really played Wargame so the thread didn't grab me right off. But suddenly it is dawning on me that this game at least LOOKS pretty righteous.
You really need to read the thread. There is a lot of information that you'll find useful. Or, just check out the steam page. All the info. is there.
Basically, there are a series of maps with varied terrain. You can pick which maps you want to fight on and they vary in size based upon whether you want 1v1, 2v2, 3v3, etc. There are presently only two types of battles. One where you earn points by destroying the enemy and one where you win by taking territory.
There are pre-set armies based loosely on real historic divisions. However, half of the fun is building armies from the very robust OOB and list of units. You basically build battle "decks" and you make them balanced, or you can build specialized decks that focus on infantry, tank, support, air, etc.
One thing that makes SD44 unique from the wargame series is the phased approach to battle. Combat is fought in three phases...alpha, bravo and charlie. As the battle advances, reinforcements are unlocked. This is really important when building decks because only Alpha units will be available in the beginning. Bravo and Charlie units will not be employable until those phases are advanced.
A blog on the single player campaign and what it will be like when it arrives
http://www.eugensystems.com/steel-division-normandy-44-creating-the-single-player-campaign/
Quote from: Destraex on April 26, 2017, 09:00:14 PM
A blog on the single player campaign and what it will be like when it arrives
http://www.eugensystems.com/steel-division-normandy-44-creating-the-single-player-campaign/
It seems there's no mention of co-op, that's a bit shame and a step back compared to ALB & RD.
I had no idea red dragon was coop... also no idea air land was.
I bet a lot of people did not.
I really enjoyed the original European escalation single player campaign. Unlocking the units for multi.
The other campaigns in ALB and RD stuffed my multiplayer up because the unit values stayed static while multiplayer was constantly balanced.
This meant using an Abrams for instance in the campaign and having it be so tough then going to multi and having it less or more tough. I remember playing the british campaign and being completely annoyed that challenger tanks seemed so weak. When I got used to it I was not taking advantage of their toughness in multiplayer as I should have been.
In fact I'm not sure if RD was co-op or not.. but ALB most definitely was. :)
RD has no co-op, as was said, ALB does.
My son loves it.
Been playing this a fair bit this week as it's a slow week at work.
I always found the Wargame franchise evoked very complicated emotions when it comes to valuing yourself as you play the game, and Steel Division still has the same... problem? If it is a problem?
To illustrate the point: Played a 10 v 10 the other day. It was a blast, utter carnage, but I was definitely the weak link on my team. My opposite had a Beute Firefly that just killed anything I threw at it, and a really good arty game as he/she would just shell the crap out of anything and everything on my side of the field. They must have had great recon as I couldn't hide anything. It was extremely frustrating and I just couldn't do anything to them, apart from one counter towards the end where I counter-pushed with some armour and halted their advance.
I felt horrible, like I was letting the side down... but we won. My teammates were winning elsewhere and despite my failing I'd like to think I held onto enough ground to secure our lead and I was being aided by someone who also struggled against this person. Did what I could, and I didn't feel good about my performance but we still won and it was very confusing, emotionally :D.
Steel Division (and Wargame) aren't very good at teaching you how to get better mind.
Quote from: WargamerJoe on April 28, 2017, 11:52:11 AM
Been playing this a fair bit this week as it's a slow week at work.
I always found the Wargame franchise evoked very complicated emotions when it comes to valuing yourself as you play the game, and Steel Division still has the same... problem? If it is a problem?
To illustrate the point: Played a 10 v 10 the other day. It was a blast, utter carnage, but I was definitely the weak link on my team. My opposite had a Beute Firefly that just killed anything I threw at it, and a really good arty game as he/she would just shell the crap out of anything and everything on my side of the field. They must have had great recon as I couldn't hide anything. It was extremely frustrating and I just couldn't do anything to them, apart from one counter towards the end where I counter-pushed with some armour and halted their advance.
I felt horrible, like I was letting the side down... but we won. My teammates were winning elsewhere and despite my failing I'd like to think I held onto enough ground to secure our lead and I was being aided by someone who also struggled against this person. Did what I could, and I didn't feel good about my performance but we still won and it was very confusing, emotionally :D.
Steel Division (and Wargame) aren't very good at teaching you how to get better mind.
Sounds like all the hallmarks have a fantastic game to me.
Yep. It's an emotional roller coaster when some fancy pants knows the game so well. That is part of the reason I am an advocate for Eugen allowing map modding or procedural maps. More maps would equal more opportunity for newer players who don't know the maps so well.
New update today.
2 new maps-Colleville/Mont Ormel
2 new divisions-2e Division Blindée and 21. Panzerdivision
I tried out the Frenchies on the Colleville map. It hurts me to say but I did better with them than any other division I've tried so far. I had 80% of the map by the time phase B started. That ain't right!
Quote from: Silent Disapproval Robot on May 04, 2017, 01:30:41 AM
I tried out the Frenchies on the Colleville map. It hurts me to say but I did better with them than any other division I've tried so far. I had 80% of the map by the time phase B started. That ain't right!
Eugen is a French company.
So much for historical accuracy... :2funny:
Just threw together some builds with the new divisions. Will hopefully test them out over lunch.
Has anyone else noticed the the Division builders seems to have all the divisions in it now? Only some are greyed out?
(Or is that just me?)
There are two more divisions being released on May 17th.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on May 04, 2017, 07:20:02 AM
There are two more divisions being released on May 17th.
And more maps? I hope so!
Quote from: Rayfer on May 04, 2017, 07:47:47 AM
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on May 04, 2017, 07:20:02 AM
There are two more divisions being released on May 17th.
And more maps? I hope so!
Seems a bit odd considering the game is out in full on May 23rd. Seems a bit of a small window to get feedback.
Quote from: Rayfer on May 04, 2017, 07:47:47 AM
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on May 04, 2017, 07:20:02 AM
There are two more divisions being released on May 17th.
And more maps? I hope so!
Two more maps on 5/17, as well.
Quote from: WargamerJoe on May 04, 2017, 08:12:43 AM
Quote from: Rayfer on May 04, 2017, 07:47:47 AM
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on May 04, 2017, 07:20:02 AM
There are two more divisions being released on May 17th.
And more maps? I hope so!
Seems a bit odd considering the game is out in full on May 23rd. Seems a bit of a small window to get feedback.
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.akamai.steamstatic.com%2Fsteamcommunity%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fclans%2F27986232%2F4c57950798a6855b3a0bcc983ba92629856351d9.jpg&hash=f2249562fa2272b6b0c47dec7ba52d5f36b63a49)
I must agree the detail in the French Division is great. Wish they did the same for the panzergrenadiers in the brown jumpsuits.
I think it's very cool that Eugen decided to include the Free French, Polish, and Canadian forces (...yes I know it's a French company). But it would've been easy to make a standard-fare D-Day game where the emphasis was exclusively on the US vs. Germans, with the British playing a 'supporting' role. Being sticklers for accuracy, I guess it's not too surprising Eugen went in this direction -- so maybe I'm just saying I'm glad Eugen is the co. making this game. O0
I am also hoping that they will go Africa and Italy for expansions rather than the predictable Russia.
Quote from: Destraex on May 04, 2017, 09:34:54 AM
I am also hoping that they will go Africa and Italy for expansions rather than the predictable Russia.
Pacific!
I never said you were lying Jar ;) I just think it's an odd thing. I don't check the main site that often so I didn't see the page you posted.
Just took the new divisions out for a spin. Went ok, neither stood out at me but my ability isn't high so I'm probably not making full use of what I have. Wanted to give that smoke plane a go but didn't get a chance.
I bought that damned smoke plane assuming it was a regular bomber. Imagine my disappointment when I had a line on 3 IG88 guns all in a row and nailed them with smoke canisters.
I think the big advantage the French division has is that it gets a huge amount of points in the recon phase so in the territory grabbing mode (conquest?), they can clean up. Having some tanks and half-tracks with decent firepower and survivability doesn't hurt either.
I don't know about you guys, but I love reading the blog posts they're doing on Divisions in the game. I really like the historical snapshot, and then how that translates in the actual game...
... what I don't like though, is that none of that personality or specialism really comes through in the actual game itself via the Division builder. Take their one on the 352. ID - I can gather from that blog post that they're a decent Infantry-focused Division that'll be good on defence and Phase-A territory control, but I don't think any of that would have come through in the builder itself.
Maybe I've been playing too many games recently where optimisation/build choice matters (I also really like card games and deck-builders, so I'm getting some kind of weird cross-wires here), but in the builder itself I'm having a hard time really evaluating what my choices are. This pick vs. that pick. The blog article mentions the 352 have better recon units than other Divisions, but would I have been able to tell that in the builder?
I can really get behind the idea of each Division being good at a specific thing, but I'm having trouble picking up that information in-game and while I love the blog posts, in principle I shouldn't have to consult external information to find this out.
Sorry, don't mean for this to be a rant. Still really enjoying this game but I find choices stressful and you have so many here :D
Agreed, the in-game needs more information. Then again, we don't even have a proper manual yet, do we...? ???
Which suggests that Division information will be in the manual.
What is this 'manual' you speak of? You mean some games actually come with a physical book-form of how it is played? Shirley, you jest. ???
Don't call me Shirley.
For those who don't know yet, here's the full division list to be available on release out of beta. #/#/# refers to income per minute in Phases A/B/C. Slot numbers are not shown (i.e. how many slots available for infantry, how many for scouts, etc.) Descriptions are paraphrased from the teeeeennnnyyyy popups on their Battlegroup entries.
ALLIES
--------
3rd Armored "Spearhead" -- 65/105/150 -- medium tanks available from Phase A, and no infantry without armored halftracks. Swarms of medium and heavy tanks in Phases B and C.
101st Airborne "Screaming Eagles" (to be released) -- 100/105/120 -- elite infantry many of whom (as "airborne") don't give a poot about being stuck behind a front. Very light on anything other than infantry support (which does include airmobile cannons), until a few TDs arrive from the beach. Tons of air support though, and offmap guns. Steady, high early incomes to offset the elite costs. (The paras in this game do not seem to arrive by airdrop?)
2nd Infantry "Indianhead" -- 75/120/135 -- grunts with a few rangers to start, veteran riflemen are the backbone, weak on tanks, but decent pak arty to push around. Also, Xylophone rocket launchers?
2e Blindee "2e DB" -- 105/110/115 -- elite French recon division, with American Wolverines, light tanks, armored cars.
Guards Household "The Household Division" (tbr) -- 80/125/130 -- British, good quality tanks and infantry, with Cromwells to start and Fireflies in Phase B. Takes a while to get going, though, with expensive units and slow income early.
6th Airborne "Red Devils" (tbr) -- 70/125/135 -- elite British infantry with paras able to operate in enemy lines, and a little more armor and arty than the 101st.
15th Infantry "Scottish" -- 85/120/125 -- early cheap veteran British infantry, but weak on support in Phase A. Strongest in Phase B with Churchill tanks and massive arty. Its best anti-tank is towed, and only arrives Phase C.
3rd Canadian Infantry (tbr) -- 70/120/130 -- heavy APC and light flamethrower vehicles in Phase A, stormtrooper infantry, serious anti-tank only arrives in Phase C.
1st Pancerna "Black Division" (tbr) -- 90/115/125 -- fast cav infantry and Phase A tank destroyers with air support. Weak on Phases B and C.
AXIS
-----
Panzer Lehr (tbr) -- 75/95/150 -- veteran troops, weak in early phases, dominating hard in Phase C when the Tigers and TigerIIs arrive.
12th SS Panzer "Hitlerjugend" -- 70/115/135 -- good leaders, young troops, weak in Phase A but 'closer to the front' than the Panzer Lehr so the armored support starts to arrive sooner: Panthers, self-propelled arty, Flaks. They do commandeer one Cromwell and one Firefly in Phase A.
21st Panzer "Rommel's Zirkus" -- 85/120/125 -- close to the beaches, it gets its armor strongly in Phase A, although mostly captured French equipment. A few King Tigers in Phase C.
116th Panzer "Windhund Division" (tbr) -- 90/100/120 -- costly Phase A infantry, but good arty selection, and a very wide tank selection starting in Phase A with older light tanks, moving to Panzer and Jagdpanzer IVs in Phase B and Panthers in Phase C.
17th PanzerGrenadier "Gotz Von Berlichingen" -- 75/125/130 -- mechanized infantry, strong on defense, lots of StuGs, some off-map arty.
3rd Fallschimjager "Grune Teufel" (tbr) -- 85/95/145 -- the "Green Devils" paratroops, tons of elite infantry who don't mind being caught behind lines. Not much infantry support, but lots of air support.
91st Luftlande "Haudegen Division" -- 80/120/130 -- the description talks about captured French tanks, but that seems to be a lie? Or maybe just historical color irrelevant to the game. This is the division I've been playing since beta opened, and I can tell you they use early German tanks up through the Panzer III (only a few as leaders), with StuGs (and a few StuHs) as their armored backbone in Phases B and C. [EDITED TO CORRECT: I thought the Pzr35 and 39 were basically upmodded Pz38 and maybe PzII, but evidently they are the repurposed French tanks. Hotchkiss 35 and 39.] They get a very interesting mix of everything except good tanks (and destroyers beyond the StuG), actually: trash infantry, elite and veteran infantry, paratroops, very decent air support, good arty (including off-map options up to rail guns), lots of good leaders, lots of infantry support, anti-air swarms. Their main weakness aside from cruddy tank options, is their lack of focus. Oh, and their transport vehicles suck.
352 Infantry "Pegasus Division" (tbr) -- 90/100/130 -- strong veteran infantry defenders (almost foiled Omaha Beach), lots of cheap vet infantry early, strong arty and anti-tank later.
716th Infantry "Eichenlaub Division" (tbr) -- 100/110/120 -- a steady economy that starts strong early to build up infantry defense, lots of machine guns, arty assets, early 88 dual-purpose, infantry support tanks arrive later.
Quote from: WargamerJoe on May 05, 2017, 11:01:41 AM
Don't call me Shirley.
Fun fact: at my local pub quiz the other night one of the questions was "In Airplane, what was the line to which Leslie Nielsen responded, 'Don't call me Shirley'?".
Surely you must be joking!
I think.
6th Airborne is to be released this wednesday.
Quote from: Toonces on May 11, 2017, 05:15:25 PM
Surely you must be joking!
I think.
I seem to have branded in my memory:
"Surely you can't be serious!"
"I am serious. And don't call me Shirley."
;D
Quote from: Destraex on May 11, 2017, 07:20:37 PM
6th Airborne is to be released this wednesday.
This will be the first
actively airborne division released in the game, and I'll be morbidly curious to see if they'll be riding jeeps or trucks to the front line. ::) (That makes sense enough for the Green Devils eventually, and my beloved Luftlande currently, because by the time of Overlord they had been grounded: that's the whole point for the Luftlanders, to take grounded elite airborne troops and scrape together enough security assets from the Luftwaffe to outfit them with a division. Presumably ditto for the Fallschimjagers eventually. But the Red Devils and the Screaming Eagles?!)
Thanks everyone. Your comments, tips, etc...have helped me out with deciding to keep this game. Once I got over my frustration of sucking, I realized how fun this game is.
Quote from: JasonPratt on May 12, 2017, 08:41:32 AM
Quote from: Destraex on May 11, 2017, 07:20:37 PM
6th Airborne is to be released this wednesday.
This will be the first actively airborne division released in the game, and I'll be morbidly curious to see if they'll be riding jeeps or trucks to the front line. ::) (That makes sense enough for the Green Devils eventually, and my beloved Luftlande currently, because by the time of Overlord they had been grounded: that's the whole point for the Luftlanders, to take grounded elite airborne troops and scrape together enough security assets from the Luftwaffe to outfit them with a division. Presumably ditto for the Fallschimjagers eventually. But the Red Devils and the Screaming Eagles?!)
Yeah...would be really nice to be able to have troops jump in during battle.
It really shouldn't be all that hard to do in the engine, either. Heck, if I'm recalling correctly, R.U.S.E. could do it! (?)
Sure, you make it expensive and it would be proportionately dangerous depending on the situation, duh. Plus the airbornes shouldn't generate a lot of territory control, which in turn should be partly offset by their "airborne" power of fighting behind enemy frontlines without penalty.
Imagine, Red Devil airmobile light tanks, pack arty, missing Jeeps, etc.!
>:D (Let's see who gets that joke...)
One suggestion that I got from Three Moves Ahead is always playing skirmishes against the AI in 3-vs-3.
You get bigger battles overall and the spectacle, but you wind up assigning yourself to a more manageable "lane".
I've enjoyed it.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on May 12, 2017, 10:41:37 AM
Quote from: JasonPratt on May 12, 2017, 08:41:32 AM
Quote from: Destraex on May 11, 2017, 07:20:37 PM
6th Airborne is to be released this wednesday.
This will be the first actively airborne division released in the game, and I'll be morbidly curious to see if they'll be riding jeeps or trucks to the front line. ::) (That makes sense enough for the Green Devils eventually, and my beloved Luftlande currently, because by the time of Overlord they had been grounded: that's the whole point for the Luftlanders, to take grounded elite airborne troops and scrape together enough security assets from the Luftwaffe to outfit them with a division. Presumably ditto for the Fallschimjagers eventually. But the Red Devils and the Screaming Eagles?!)
Yeah...would be really nice to be able to have troops jump in during battle.
Do paratroops really jump into a battle like that? I always thought that they typically jump away from troop concentrations then spend time moving up to engage. Some historical jumps had isolated areas where troopers fought rear area troops, but it seems like that is an exception and doesn't really fit the scale of this game. It always seemed that if they are jumping directly into battle or near an ongoing battle, someone has done something wrong.
Quote from: RyanE on May 12, 2017, 02:35:26 PM
Do paratroops really jump into a battle like that? I always thought that they typically jump away from troop concentrations then spend time moving up to engage. Some historical jumps had isolated areas where troopers fought rear area troops, but it seems like that is an exception and doesn't really fit the scale of this game. It always seemed that if they are jumping directly into battle or near an ongoing battle, someone has done something wrong.
There were some instances of paratroops jumping directly into a fight, Crete comes to mind, but yeah, it was the exception not the rule. The casualty rates for the initial drops in Crete demonstrate why.
Which suggests using the Red Devils and the Screaming Eagles in this game is dumb regardless: jumping into the teeth? Kind of what they did but not in the sense of this gameplay. Trucked to the front line? Bwahahahaha.
Quote from: Cyrano on May 12, 2017, 11:31:04 AM
One suggestion that I got from Three Moves Ahead is always playing skirmishes against the AI in 3-vs-3.
You get bigger battles overall and the spectacle, but you wind up assigning yourself to a more manageable "lane".
I've enjoyed it.
Like this suggestion. Will give it a try. Thanks!
Quote from: SirAndrewD on May 12, 2017, 02:48:06 PM
Quote from: RyanE on May 12, 2017, 02:35:26 PM
Do paratroops really jump into a battle like that? I always thought that they typically jump away from troop concentrations then spend time moving up to engage. Some historical jumps had isolated areas where troopers fought rear area troops, but it seems like that is an exception and doesn't really fit the scale of this game. It always seemed that if they are jumping directly into battle or near an ongoing battle, someone has done something wrong.
There were some instances of paratroops jumping directly into a fight, Crete comes to mind, but yeah, it was the exception not the rule. The casualty rates for the initial drops in Crete demonstrate why.
And what was learned from Crete was that troops should land far enough away from any type of enemy concentration that they can organize and attack as a unit. Casualties with the troopers who landed near enemy positions in the morning were like 80-90% killed (not killed and wounded, but killed). The units that landed farther away were able to set up positions and laid the ground work for the transports to arrive the next day.
Normandy landings were a cock up and similar results as on Crete when Germans had a troops concentrated. It took hours for Allied troopers to organize themselves and have a n impact beyond misinformation and confusion. I always shake my head a little when I see tactical games having paratroopers falling from the skies on enemy positions.
NO PARATROOPERS IN GAME WILL JUMP IN.
Remember when you play this game you are playing a hypothetical scenario... not a real set piece exact historical scenario. This is a more, paratroopers were in normandy, here is their divisional kit. Go forth and fight the other divisions in normandy.
In the single player campaign you may get something more historical, but it will still not be combat mission. This game is far ahead of other RTS genre games however. i.e. games you don't need to be a grog to play, can coop and can play in an hour or so.
Eh, I guess I'm okay with no paratrooper jumps. The Red Devs and the 101st Eagles both acted like elite light infantry divisions on the ground in the early days following the landing, once they got back together again. The 6th held a key town near where they landed (don't recall which one offhand) weathering a major artillery strike and then smashing an armored advance attempting to retake the town. The 101st teamed up with a couple of other divisions to envelop-assault a key city on the western side of the invasion meanwhile.
Anyway, today's the day when the British 6th Airborne unlocks, along with the German 352nd Infantry. The two new maps unlocked are Odon and Carpiquet.
ODON map - Odon river? No river seen
Quote from: Destraex on May 17, 2017, 06:36:51 PM
ODON map - Odon river? No river seen
Yes there is a river there.......
will get released today 7pm (Paris time) ...in about 1,5 hour
There are two mods in the Steam Workshop under Game Play that the Eugen Devs have already posted: One that eliminates the ABC Phases (you start with everything) and another that gives the US the Sherman M4A3 for 60 points in the first phase if you're playing the default phase mode.
I set up a battle between the Canucks and the SS at Capriquet airfield. Bloody vicious map. Lots of open terrain and clear LOS. Shermans don't hold up well against StuGs and 75mm AT guns.
Shermans didn't hold up too well against much of anything. Hence the nickname "Ronson" by Sherman tank crewman (named after the popular cigarette lighter) as they most often "flamed up" after being hit. At least the Brits had sense enough to up-gun their own Sherman variant the "Firefly."
Finished seven of the eight boot camp tutorials. IMHO they are very well done and do a good job covering the basics.
Quote from: Silent Disapproval Robot on May 24, 2017, 11:39:34 AM
I set up a battle between the Canucks and the SS at Capriquet airfield. Bloody vicious map. Lots of open terrain and clear LOS. Shermans don't hold up well against StuGs and 75mm AT guns.
I find my StuGs get murdered pretty fast by Allied armor. This is a point I think the game is weak on, probably because the game doesn't properly model how StuGs were meant to be used.
Quote from: Rayfer on May 24, 2017, 02:53:19 PM
Finished seven of the eight boot camp tutorials. IMHO they are very well done and do a good job covering the basics.
Thought the Boot Camp was pretty good -- though the voice acting is dreadful (platoon is not pronounced "PLAH-toon", nor do we usually refer to tanks as "armors" ... the narration was so stiff that I'm not entirely sure it wasn't some voice emulator instead of a real actor.... I know, nitpicking; it's a French company, le Anglais isn't their strong point...)
You should hear the voice-overs in some of the pre-briefing cut-scenes of the campaign. It sounds like they literally just go that auto-reader tool Windows has to read out the dialogue. It's hilariously bad and robotic.
I posted on their forum a while back about the voices. British sound American etc.
The Canadians sounded reasonable when I played them last night. But they had some strange phrases and some of the voice acting was obviously in French sentence syntax.
Must be French Canadians
I'm glad they put most of their effort, time and energy into making the game play great. Yes, the voice acting is pretty bad, but the game otherwise shines so brightly, I don't think the corny accents should be the focus of discussion.
I've decided to not let the pre-mission foibles get to me.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on May 25, 2017, 06:31:19 AM
I'm glad they put most of their effort, time and energy into making the game play great. Yes, the voice acting is pretty bad, but the game otherwise shines so brightly, I don't think the corny accents should be the focus of discussion.
I certainly agree -- the game is fantastic. I guess it was just jarring to me that in a game that otherwise has such stellar production values, the tutorial 'sergeant' sounded so amateurish. Admittedly a quibble that in no way detracts from what Eugen has achieved here.
My one wish going forward is that Eugen will introduce dynamic campaigns along the lines of Airland Battle and Red Dragon. Not sure if that's something they could offer in DLC or if we'll have to wait for a sequel. But the campaigns -- especially in Red Dragon -- are so terrific that it seems a shame SD'44 offers the far less interesting campaign mechanics of European Escalation.
I loved the dynamic campaigns of ALB/RD as well.
I can understand why they went the way they did for this though and I do still quite like the Solo missions.
Fantastic game all round though.
Yeah, the tutorial instructor does sound like a robot! -- doesn't affect the gameplay, just funny. I've seen that they're going to re-dub some of the in-game unit comments, though, so yay.
What's more important is how many of us are going to get together to play the game this weekend. :D
Quote from: JasonPratt on May 25, 2017, 11:11:45 AM
...
What's more important is how many of us are going to get together to play the game this weekend. :D
I'm in for trying that. :D
Quote from: Barthheart on May 25, 2017, 01:41:39 PM
Quote from: JasonPratt on May 25, 2017, 11:11:45 AM
...
What's more important is how many of us are going to get together to play the game this weekend. :D
I'm in for trying that. :D
I think a little 2v2 may be in order. So far we have JP, BH and JH. Who else wants in?
How's a vs match work as far as speed control? Can anyone dial it down or are you set at normal?
Quote from: Silent Disapproval Robot on May 25, 2017, 02:19:05 PM
How's a vs match work as far as speed control? Can anyone dial it down or are you set at normal?
Dunno. Never played mp!
Well... when Jason and I played us against the AI we could not set the speed. It was perma set to normal.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on May 25, 2017, 02:13:04 PM
Quote from: Barthheart on May 25, 2017, 01:41:39 PM
Quote from: JasonPratt on May 25, 2017, 11:11:45 AM
...
What's more important is how many of us are going to get together to play the game this weekend. :D
I'm in for trying that. :D
I think a little 2v2 may be in order. So far we have JP, BH and JH. Who else wants in?
Not at normal speed. I'm way to slow and panicky for that :-[
Yeah I play at slow speed too.... but if it's all humans then it should be more even.... I hope... :hide:
As far as online MP is concerned, the speed setting is locked to normal AFAIK.
Not sure if creating private matches or w/e lets you get around that, might be a setting somewhere, but all the MP I've played so far has been un-pausable and fixed speed.
Ditto the observations, seems to be fixed at normal.
If you set your "budgets" pretty low when creating the game, though, then you'll have fewer units on the field at any given time, so it's easier to manage them. Also, this game seems to work best if you're sending out units to a place to set up, even when you're on the attack: you group, hunt along this shift-click path, and I'll get back to you later.
I can play normal speed against the AI, if I have to (although I prefer slower), so if we all team against the AI I can help take the lead on that. New players should not play against experienced ones if possible! -- you should practice against medium AI for any hope of doing good at that.
Alternately, games can be set up to be 1v2 or disbalanced like that, so if two new players wanted to team up against a more experienced one (and I play a faction weak in armor, which is an invitation to be easily steamrolled in this game!) that could be arranged. O:-)
Anyone else finding Skirmishes against "Medium" AI really challenging? It kicks my ass every time. I can beat "Easy" AI without too much trouble, but I'm hopeless against "Medium"...
Oh yes, quite challenging. But I play the AI 1v1. I've heard that medium AI is easier to deal with in skirmish if you've brought AI friends along.
Yeah 1v1 vs. AI is actually pretty brutal. You want to be playing 2v2 or 3v3 with AI buddies to give yourself more breathing room.
Wow. Just did a co-op with friendly Medium AI vs. 2xMedium AI in St. Mere Eglise. Played as 352nd Wehr Infantry vs. 101st Airborne. Once again, got my ass handed to me. :knuppel2:
!!
I'm not quite sure why I'm so terrible at this game! Admittedly, I'm not much good at Airland Battle or Red Dragon either. But I find myself playing SD44 most of the time on Normal speed, something I seldom do in ALB / RD. Maybe I need to slow things down.
You should DEFINITELY slow things down when you have a chance (i.e. skirmish against the AI). It's very much like learning to fence: speed is important but the fastest miss in the world is still a miss, so start slow and get the accuracy first. Speed will naturally come later, you won't have to worry about developing it.
Just had a nice mp game with Jarhead, vs 2 easy AIs. My Luftlanders held our third of the map reasonably well until Phase C started, and I have to say the AI was coming back when we scored a points win -- mainly from crushing my airborne outpost! With... Stuarts? I think? I didn't see any heavy armor out. There was some Davy Crockett on a mortar I couldn't get rid of in time, and he suppressed a lot of my guys.
JH set up a lonnnnng direct-fire anti-tank killing ground on his 2/3 of the map, and just cored everything that tried to get near him. Mainly I kept the enemy from getting near his right flank while he won the game. O0 I think he was playing 21st Panzergrenadiers.
Jason that is excellent. I salute you both. I am also just playing against the AI currently - coop. It can give you a damned good thrashing.
A lot of interesting observations in our game against the AI.
The map contained large relatively open fields in the center permitting me to set up kill zones with beautiful lines of sight with my strong anti-tank and armored assets which filled the ranks of my 17.SS battlegroup. Jason, meanwhile, secured some very defensible terrain on the right flank with his crack infantry, while I held the center and anchored the left. We spent some quality time reviewing the map and it's terrain features before we deployed for battle and thought we had a very competent plan.
Now, making things a little more interesting, the best defensive terrain in Jason's AO was a little further north of the main line of resistance. As a result, he made contact pretty early on in the game with various recon elements, which over time became supported by heavier infantry and mechanized forces. Jason's falschirmjaegers were shredding everything the Canadian infantry and US airborne forces threw at him, but by the middle of phase B he was starting to get pressure from increasingly heavier forces, and his anti-tank capability was limited to relatively short range panzershrek units. As a result, and since contact on the left and center was extremely light, I started deploying units on the right flank to reinforce Jason's luftlanders...and, of course, that's when a relatively controlled skirmish on the right flank turned into a heated struggle for the entire battlefield.
It started as a rapid recon probe on the extreme left flank and quickly turned into an all out advance with infantry supported by light armor, anti-tank guns and P51s. My well positioned forces did a great job of annhilating those initial forces that tried to explore the center and left flank. With my stukas supported by Jason's Messerschmitts, we were able to provide some effective CAS while inflicting losses on the allies air assets. Unfortunately, by phase C, the allies had extensive AAA setup across the front that made further sortie dangerous and costly.
My recollection of the armor deployed by the allies differs somewhat from Jason's. I could swear I saw Shermans supported by wolverines. Much of the allied armor forces were committed on the right, where Jason's light infantry forces were already depleted from heavy combat since early in phase A. At the same time, capable and long range infantry support and anti-tank units steadily crept down avenues in the center and on the left. During this time I lost some high value units like panzer IVs and Marder IIIc's. We went into phase c with a wide 1000 point lead over the allies, but by the time the bell rang, we were only a couple hundred points apart and the situation was deteriorating. So, we were quite literally, saved by the bell.
My general observations...the AI makes effective use of recon elements. It starts with quick probes of the frontline and always dips its toes in before diving in with heavier combat forces. At least in this game, the AI made contact with lower point infantry and mechanized units and appeared to use these forces to wear our positions out, before committing a steady thrust with heavier combined arms forces, including high value armor units. It's hard to say whether the AI random deck was built this way by chance, or whether the AI purposely held back it's heavy units for a final quarter assault. Either way, it made for an exciting battle.
Also, the AI seemed to try different things and would not keep sending its forces into my kill zones while expecting a different result. Instead, after I hurt him, I noticed his probes would shift to other areas, perhaps checking for weakness?
Finally, the AI is aggressive. Jason said before we launched, the AI will always come to you, and he was spot on. The AI seems to only know how to go on the offense. At no time did the AI wait, trying to consolidate its positions, or goad us into advancing to its positions. It used a 100% offensive strategy. I wonder if higher difficulty settings may result in other more defensive strategies.
Anyway, awesome battle all around. Thanks to Jason for kicking ass on the right and holding it together long enough for us to pull out with a win. Great fun and can't wait to do it again!
Great AAR, JH & JP.
The AI really is surprisingly competent, like JH says, making good use of recon and probes, and massing for assaults. It's also very effective with counter-battery fires. And definitely true that AI on Medium or higher is pretty relentless, keeping pressure up almost all along the front. Easy AI seems content to hold territory in some places, which is why I find it far easier to handle than Medium -- Medium AI feels more like the Wargame titles in terms of difficulty and stress!
Speaking of stress -- I know this is a mechanic in Wargame, but I love that Eugen made the effects more front & center with the 'red bar' -- It really is an ingenious way of countering the simplistic 'rock paper scissors' play of other RTSs. No matter how powerful an individual unit may be, your opponent can usually counter it with good tactics and good combined arms. Recent game I was getting pushed back hard by the AI. Purchased a Jagdpanther and thought, "OK, suck on this." The AI didn't have any hard-anti-armor fielded -- but it did have plenty of AAA. My Jagdpanther barely even got in the fight. It was completely flustered by Bofors fire, stress bar went right up and it wound up falling back in short order. And love that Morale also plays into this -- a veteran or elite Jagdpather would've stood up better to the AAA. As a rookie, it lost its cool quickly.
I'm extremely impressed by SD44. The more I play it -- and I haven't really been playing anything else -- the more I feel like Eugen has achieved something really special with this release.
Ah, 17th! I'm sure I knew that originally, but I haven't played enough for them to stick out as distinct yet. (Also, since I always play the Luftlanders I don't have much experience with other German divisions yet.)
On the topic of heavy armor, what I meant was that while I saw some high-value anti-armor guns I didn't see any double-digit armor plating on my side of the map. My games so far have often featured no small amounts of very tanky tanks that can shrug off all kinds of hits, and can only really be beat by air (at least in my deck). Of course I was often distracted by plotting new routes to my outpost for incoming units -- on this map (which was Pegasus Bridge and which did not feature Pegasus Bridge as I joked shortly after loading!) one of our three ingress lanes was actually on the lower right side rather than on the bottom side, which was one reason I chose to stake out a position to defend on the far right. Our other two ingresses did cross bridges over the river, but were much better for JH's line.
I really was a bit surprised that my main outpost held out as long as it did; I kept expecting they would die and I'd be falling back or rather rebuilding at other defensive points closer back to parallel with JH's shooting gallery line. Since we were playing "destruction", not conquest, and since JH had great anti-tank guns he could pull up early, and since I knew from experience the game likes to attack (whether destruction or conquest), I recommended he set up a thin but long line in the middle with a shorter secondary line on the left to snipe the enemy. And he did super-great at that. O0 But in hindsight, I feel like I should have taken a similarly "south" position in one of the defensive towns, to anchor his right flank. Why? Because this greatly shortens the time and routes to deploy new troops. And while the new release out of beta adds a rule where someone gaining 90% of the map (or something like that, I forget the exact figure but it's high) will auto-win during destruction mode, I felt pretty sure we could deny that until we racked up our score.
As it was, I spent a lot of time building up pockets of new airborne resistance in a descending wedge left and right of my position (with some reinforcing help from JH on my left side), and throwing my air in to CAS and CAP/intercept problems. What I meant to do, but never really did, was build up an arty park.
Also, I continue to be somewhat amazed at just how surprisingly worthless my Marders and STuGs are. They're freaking anti-tank guns, and not small ones, with ARMOR -- they ought to kick a lot of ass! But I've theorized that the game doesn't really know how to model their low profiles (especially with the STuG) in creating overshoots, difficult aims, and deflection shots. It occurred to me after the fight last night, when watching (out of the corner of my eye, as it were) how great JH's guns were doing, and recalling how great my few 88s usually do, that I may be desperately mis-using the Marders and StuGs, too: they aren't tanks. And I try to push them forward like tanks, instead of treating them like tougher and more easily re-positioned ANTI-TANK GUNS. Because my tanks are totally worthless, except at shooting jeeps and halftracks in Phase A.
In regard to whether the AI held off (quasi-)intentionally on deploying the Shermans late, or whether that was a deck effect: I'm inclined to think it was a deck effect, but I've seen at least one case where the computer chose to hold back sending out its air force until very late in a conquest game. Even if it had no air-stacks until Phase C, it still prioritized other units due to some instructions or protocol calcs. There's a lot to be said for holding on with what you got until you build up enough req points to put in a huge task force which then super-stack-rolls forward; I wouldn't be surprised if the programmers gave the AI some instructions under conditions for that.
Still, we were on a downward lose-slope at the end. Against two Easy AIs, and with JH's line just murdering everything. My side was about to fold (even though I had gotten some resupply trucks up to the airborne outpost). Against two medium AIs... it might have been a rather different game. :hide:
Quote from: sandman2575 on May 27, 2017, 09:10:24 AM
And love that Morale also plays into this -- a veteran or elite Jagdpather would've stood up better to the AAA. As a rookie, it lost its cool quickly.
And having a leader in radius would have substantially bulked it, not only adding a star of experience in effect but also reducing suppression effects and, if I recall correctly, eliminating surrender effects.
Quote from: JasonPratt on May 27, 2017, 09:58:43 AM
Also, I continue to be somewhat amazed at just how surprisingly worthless my Marders and STuGs are. They're freaking anti-tank guns, and not small ones, with ARMOR -- they ought to kick a lot of ass! But I've theorized that the game doesn't really know how to model their low profiles (especially with the STuG) in creating overshoots, difficult aims, and deflection shots. It occurred to me after the fight last night, when watching (out of the corner of my eye, as it were) how great JH's guns were doing, and recalling how great my few 88s usually do, that I may be desperately mis-using the Marders and StuGs, too: they aren't tanks. And I try to push them forward like tanks, instead of treating them like tougher and more easily re-positioned ANTI-TANK GUNS. Because my tanks are totally worthless, except at shooting jeeps and halftracks in Phase A.
This is an outstanding point and observation. I KNOW I tend to treat my StuGs and Marders as tanks, trying to employ them as such, and I ALWAYS end up paying for it. You're absolutely correct...They are basically just anti-tank guns with treads and should not be used in a direct infantry support/armor role. Eventually, I'll suffer enough to learn this invaluable lesson.
Is there any kind pf reply feature to watch games that have been played, like a recorder?
edit...nevermind, I saw the answer on the Rock, Paper, Shotgun review that every skirmish and MP game is automatically recorded.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on May 27, 2017, 10:15:49 AM
Quote from: JasonPratt on May 27, 2017, 09:58:43 AM
Also, I continue to be somewhat amazed at just how surprisingly worthless my Marders and STuGs are. They're freaking anti-tank guns, and not small ones, with ARMOR -- they ought to kick a lot of ass! But I've theorized that the game doesn't really know how to model their low profiles (especially with the STuG) in creating overshoots, difficult aims, and deflection shots. It occurred to me after the fight last night, when watching (out of the corner of my eye, as it were) how great JH's guns were doing, and recalling how great my few 88s usually do, that I may be desperately mis-using the Marders and StuGs, too: they aren't tanks. And I try to push them forward like tanks, instead of treating them like tougher and more easily re-positioned ANTI-TANK GUNS. Because my tanks are totally worthless, except at shooting jeeps and halftracks in Phase A.
This is an outstanding point and observation. I KNOW I tend to treat my StuGs and Marders as tanks, trying to employ them as such, and I ALWAYS end up paying for it. You're absolutely correct...They are basically just anti-tank guns with treads and should not be used in a direct infantry support/armor role. Eventually, I'll suffer enough to learn this invaluable lesson.
Source : THE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF WEAPONS OF WORLD WAR II
Sturmgeschütz IIIFollowing from its experiences in World War I, the German army saw the need for an armoured mobile gun that could follow infantry attacks and provide fire support and the firepower
to knock out strongpoints and bunkers, During the late 1930s such a gun was developed using the chassis, suspension and running gear of the PzKpfw III
tank. This armoured gun was known as the Sturmgeschütz III though its formal designation was Gepanzerte Selbstfahrlafette für Sturmgeschütz 7.5-cm Kanone SdKfz 142, (assault gun model
3) and it had the usual upper hull and turret of the tank replaced by a thick carapace of armour with a short 75-mm (2.95-in) gun mounted in the front. This weapon was first issued for service in
1940 (StuG III Ausf A) and was soon followed by a whole series of vehicles that gradually incorporated overall and detail improvements, to the extent that when the war ended in 1945 many
were still in service on all fronts. The 1941 models were the StuG III Ausf B, C and D, while the slightly improved StuG III Ausf E appeared in 1942.
The main change to the Sturmgeschütz III (or StuG III) series was a gradual programme of upgunning, The original short 75-mm gun was an y 24 weapon (i.e. the length of the barrel
was 24 times the calibre) and had limitations against many targets except at short ranges. Thus it was replaced by longer guns with improved performance, first an y43 (StuG III Ausf F)
and then an L/48 gun (StuG III Ausf G).
The latter gun also provided the StuG HI series with an anti-tank capability, and this was in a way to the detriment of the original assault-support concept, for it was far easier to produce a StuG
than it was a tank, so many StuG Ills with L/48 guns were diverted to the Panzer divisions in place of battle tanks, Used as a tank-killer the StuG III had its moments, but it lacked traverse
and adequate protection for the task. It had to be retained as such, however, for German industry simply could not supply enough tanks for the Panzer divisions.
As an assault gun the StuG III series was far more successful.
Ryan, yes as you remembered, there's an automatic recorder, which is also pretty much the only feasible way to get down close enough to the map to appreciate the gfx! However, the playback is ultra-stupid in that you can't go backward. Just about every game will be at least 1/2 an hour, and so if you want to follow multiple units around and test angles for screenshots or whatever, then you have to start over again from the beginning, like an answering machine recording! :pullhair:
STuGs and STuHs (the howitzer version, which my deck has a couple of), should certainly be used as mobile direct-fire infantry support weapons against hard and soft points respectively. But in SD44, those roles don't really exist. And even the Marder, which was more intended for direct anti-armor action than the STuG originally, just doesn't have the reaction time and aiming and armor to attack into anything more than the lightest armor. Better than the cruddy French tanks I start with, simply in virtue of having more powerful guns, but they seem to die just as quickly if not moreso.
It might be possible to micro-manage leapfrogging teams of Marders and/or STuGs in short overwatch progressions, but good the hell luck doing that in multiplayer without the ability to slow time!
The Marder should be considered more of 'mobile' AT gun. It should be able to kill stuff, but I would think highly vulnerable when taking fire itself.
Stug on the other hand is armored and has a low silhouette I should think it would do very well against light allied armor. They both have formidable guns.
I ntactical games like CM and Graviteam, Stugs are good anti-armor if longer ranges where the limited traverse isn't as much of an issue. Back in the CMBB days, I used to charge Stug emplacements and then, if I made it, peel off to the side where the Stug couldn't get to me in time before I put a shot in its side.
Quote from: Tuna on May 27, 2017, 11:59:11 AM
The Marder should be considered more of 'mobile' AT gun. It should be able to kill stuff, but I would think highly vulnerable when taking fire itself.
Stug on the other hand is armored and has a low silhouette I should think it would do very well against light allied armor. They both have formidable guns.
Very much agree. Marders should be best employed for ambushes, as defensive assets. StuGs on the other hand should be able to play a key supporting role in offensive thrusts.
I guess I haven't had the same experience as JP -- I've found StuGs to be pretty hardy on the offensive.
Thinking about StuGs and StuHs though -- anyone else bothered by the fact that howitzer / infantry-gun units like the sIG 33 and leFHs, or StuHs and 105mm Shermans have to be used as direct fire units? I guess it's just for gameplay purposes, but it really cuts down their usefulness. I seldom take them in my decks, especially for bocage-heavy maps with bad lines of sight.
Isn't that what they were originally designed for, Infantry direct fire support. Like Soviet SU-152s.
NERDS!
I approve of this thread! O0
Quote from: RyanE on May 27, 2017, 01:25:37 PM
Isn't that what they were originally designed for, Infantry direct fire support. Like Soviet SU-152s.
For the self-propelled armored guns, yes I'm sure you're right - bad example on my part -- but the infantry guns like the LeiG? Well, come to think of it, I guess they had direct fire roles too. Guess I'm letting my experience with Graviteam Tactics (where I always try to use infantry guns in an indirect role, with fires called in by the spotter) color my view.
Carry on then!
Sandman. I would love to know how they were used predominantly in real life.
Me having a debate on the total war forums with somebody, I think their are a lot of GROGS who are on the fence about this game. Some who probably should not even try it, because they will not have the correct mind set. Tearing it apart for little obscurities.
"I agree that I would have appreciated a more detailed simulation of command chain. The only part of the game that simulates command is a morale buff given to the troops if a commander unit is in the vicinity.
The troops do not get suppressed, worried, break and retreat as often as they would. They also fire more accurately. Because a commander is considered to do what veteran status does for the troops. Give them better morale and make them less nervous shots.
You can slow the game down to the point it may as well be paused it is going to slowly.
The slower settings are below, like total war, their are arrow buttons to achieve this effect anytime you want for as long as you want as long as you are not playing with other humans:
Normal > Slow > Very Slow > Bullet time
As for the rate at which units take damage. Units become useless or are destroyed when they are penetrated, which might be after 10 shots if the range is great or not at all if the armour values defeat the incoming fire. Their is no health bar. So don't expect to have a lot of notice especially in close range engagements or from the sides. For your information, yes I do zoom in to watch particularly important firefights or to properly place some units and sight them like AT guns. However the LOS tool can also be used anytime for that. I must admit though that I stay zoomed out most of the time until I get that breather to zoom in. Having said that, this is a very SLOW RTS or light wargame. This is not a combat mission or graviteam game, where people think being historical means being able to make split second decisions in an artificially paused environment for ever. I understand the argument of AI not being good commanders and having to play every individual commander, however this is not realistic. Because you effectively circumvent your own Command and Control simulation when you BORG control your units, because you can see them all and you can link them all via radio and perfect communication with your own brain. This is why when you lose units because you cannot control them all in real time, when they AI has control of them, you can put that down to BAD COMMANDERS or IMPERFECT COMMUNICATIONS etc.
No computer game, unless it is one that has FOG of war and every single person playing as an individual soldier isolated from all but the people he would actually have been in contact with, does a good job of command and control. You can always move units without orders to a certain extent.
Unfortunately in steel division you do have BORG spotting, which means if one unit sees something all units know where that unit is. What slows things down in this game though is the time it takes units to aim. They don't just fire, they have to set up.
I play with friends a lot, friends that are not really competent enough for multiplayer. We play against the AI co-cooperatively and just enjoy each others company. It's beer and pretzels. If you play it against VERY EASY rather than just easy AI then you have a lot of time to do things and zoom around to enjoy things.
I as you do, would prefer to have combat mission mechanics with this engine though."
I think the inimitable Tim Stone over at RPS hit the nail on the head in saying, in effect, SD44 hits a sweet-spot between groggy-wargame detail and video-gamey RTS fun --
"There are two wars raging within Steel Division. While the Axis and Allies are going at it hammer and tongs in the très jolie fields and lanes of NW France, behind the scenes 'Plausibility' and 'Populism' – or 'Wargame' and 'RTS' if you prefer – are scrapping just as energetically for control of the soul of Eugen's latest offering. Most of the time the fight is close and the game is great as a result."
https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2017/05/24/steel-division-normandy-44-review/ (https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2017/05/24/steel-division-normandy-44-review/)
Good synopsis.
This game is hitting a sweet spot for me that hasn't been hit since Panzer General. It's enough beer and pretzels to get over my current over 40 lack of attention span, but real enough to feel like I did when I was younger moving around 500 chits and taking two hour turns in wargames.
I really like it.
Caved and bought it, will probably refund though. Despise deckbuilding.
^^ That sounds like we're going to hear a cursy video sooner or later. >:D
Re Borg spotting: even Command Ops (formerly Airborne Assault) doesn't do proper C&C in that regard. You always know what all your units see in real time (within the limits of FoW) and they all know it, too. It's like every unit on the map has one man with an immortality clause who shall always be the last to die, who constantly radios what he sees back into your brain with no time delay.
But that's the game being a game. The only computer game I know of with perfect C&C sim, is Campaigns on the Danube (I almost typed Dragoons in the Fog ;) ). Although come to think of it, if you're using Headquarters In The Saddle + Courier mode in a multiplayer Scourge of War / Take Command game, that works equivalently: you only can see what you personally can see, and you only heard about what's going on elsewhere if your allies send updates, and then only brief messages -- which could be intercepted, or get stuck in a pond, and take time to reach you anyway.
Maybe Dave & Crew at Panther Games can finagle a way to provide an option in COPs3 to only get occasional blips about what your guys and the other units are doing. But I'm doubtful they could get a competent AI running with that information.
Quote from: Hofstadter on May 28, 2017, 09:08:17 AM
Despise deckbuilding.
Not saying the same would necessarily happen to you -- but I ignored deck-building for the longest time with Wargame... it just seemed confusing and pointless. But one day it just clicked with me for some reason, and once it does, it becomes pretty addictive. Probably half of all my hours in Airland Battle / Red Dragon are just building new decks for new purposes.
Admittedly, deck-building in SD'44 is a little less satisfying than Wargame because it's less flexible; you're restricted by the Division type, whereas in Wargame it can be a lot more open-ended and experimental. But overall I've really liked putting new decks together for SD'44. And the A-B-C phasing of unit availability adds a new twist.
If you haven't already -- Give it a try!
I've made my peace with this one and have found myself enjoying it.
The lack and, likely, inability, to offer historical scenarios will always make it less for me, but it is certainly fun and I am looking forward to a big, silly MP or two.
The parallel I think my head is drawing is with John Bobek's The Games of War (https://www.amazon.com/Games-War-Treasury-Battles-Soldiers/dp/1434330281). John runs games at cons all over the place and I spent some time with him yesterday at Nexus here in Milwaukee. He runs games from all periods and almost never paints minis in the way we square-buttoners thing of it. He uses cardboard, plastic, and highly abstracted terrain to just play games. And, based on our conversation, he almost never uses historical scenarios for reasons he has thought through, although I will say I respectfully disagreed.
I will always, happily, play a game John runs. For reasons I doubt I could fully articulate, I would never choose to game that way on a day-to-day basis.
Thus I think it is for me with Steel Division.
It took me awhile to warm up to deck building too. But once I stopped looking at them as cards in a deck (I hate card based games) I really started to enjoy it and it really is half the game. Without building solid decks, your ability to do well in the game will be limited, as will your enjoyment.
It really is just a unique way of showing an OOB.
Quote from: Cyrano on May 28, 2017, 11:10:38 AM
I've made my peace with this one and have found myself enjoying it.
The lack and, likely, inability, to offer historical scenarios will always make it less for me, but it is certainly fun and I am looking forward to a big, silly MP or two.
The parallel I think my head is drawing is with John Bobek's The Games of War (https://www.amazon.com/Games-War-Treasury-Battles-Soldiers/dp/1434330281). John runs games at cons all over the place and I spent some time with him yesterday at Nexus here in Milwaukee. He runs games from all periods and almost never paints minis in the way we square-buttoners thing of it. He uses cardboard, plastic, and highly abstracted terrain to just play games. And, based on our conversation, he almost never uses historical scenarios for reasons he has thought through, although I will say I respectfully disagreed.
I will always, happily, play a game John runs. For reasons I doubt I could fully articulate, I would never choose to game that way on a day-to-day basis.
Thus I think it is for me with Steel Division.
But do you think with mods there just might be historical scenarios made?
Historical scenarios of a sort must be possible, because the campaigns are built around something-like-historical-scenarios.
Re the deck building; yeah it isn't really deck building because it isn't like you're shuffling cards and dealing them out randomly. It's more like spending political points to buy troops in a Panzer Generalish game, except that there are no points just relative values: you can fill a slot with 6 of these trash French tanks, or with one veteran Panzer III tank who functions as a leader; and there are only so many "stacks" of either one available from your division, and this division expects your Kampfgruppe to use no more than 5 "stacks" of tanks anyway.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on May 28, 2017, 11:47:28 AM
Without building solid decks, your ability to do well in the game will be limited, as will your enjoyment.
It really is just a unique way of showing an OOB.
Can we have solid deck examples?
Well, no deck can really do everything. And a deck that works well at destruction won't necessarily work well at conquest. Every division has enough options to try doing different things with them, though, even though every division has limitations as to what can be feasibly tried. There's no point in the Luftlanders ever trying for a solid panzer build, for example. But that wasn't what their division was about anyway.
So, keeping in mind it's totally ahistorical for a division to seriously attempt air control during Normandy, or even artillery superiority, here's my Quality Luftlander deck.
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimageshack.com%2Fa%2Fimg923%2F5812%2FkdX0pJ.png&hash=8653b51805b70ff07d25589dc9cd95783a23467f)
The Luftlanders, along with the 3rd Fallschimjagers (the remnants of the Green Devils), are the only two German divisions that have a real chance at achieving air dominance. So, at the bottom of that screen, you can see that I've filled all my air slots.
Note that each division has an absolute total of "stacks", and they aren't all the same. In the upper right, under my dropdown menu for selecting my divisional decks, where it reads "activations", I've got 38 (out of 38) slots. Other divisions will have 40 or maybe 28 or whatever. This total is fixed per division; so are the total number of stacks you can devote to the categories per division. I've got (and I'm using) 7 air stack slots, at the bottom; I'm not sure any division has more available for air power. Moreover, I've got a good selection of "stack" options for quality air power, and that's what I've chosen. These don't cost anything to "buy" when setting up a division, but naturally the higher cost items come out slower in the game as your income tallies every minute.
For Phase A air, I chose to go for close air support, so I've got three stacks of that; two stacks of M109s with rocket tubes (two planes each, thus the "x2"), and a flying tank gun! I could have loaded up all my air power with Phase A picks, including choices for dogfighters, but naturally the stronger picks tend to show up in later phases and I wanted to save some slots for those. I could have substituted the one tank-gun plane with a stack of multiple dogfighters, though. Or a fairly large stack of "Storchs", which I have occasionally wished I had since if a plane isn't a dedicated scout it can't see down very well.
For Phase B I wanted to protect my ground assets and knock out dogfighters, so I picked two stacks of two veteran 109 dogfighters, plus a stack of another two ME129 flying tank guns. The last slot I picked for a single elite dogfighter in Phase C, although I couldn't get him in a FW.
This is a flexible air power build, but if I went harder with anti-air on the ground I might have gotten rid of the dogfighters and picked up more ground pounders (or spotters).
Moving up one notch to artillery, the Luftlanders only have 5 slots here, but they've got numerous decent arty picks. I chose none in Phase A, since one part of my overall plan is to set up an arty park or two, screened by plenty of elite infantry for mutual reinforcement; thus the infantry go out to secure positions in Phase A. In Phase B I can lead out with less expensive but smaller (but veteran!) Feldkannone 39s, which not only have a good soft damage (not shown here) but quite decent damage against hard targets. (That's the little yellow 11 in the upper right corner.) Everything after that is Feldhowitzer 396s for FREAKING DAYS! :bd: They aren't the absolute best arty possible, even strictly for the Luftlanders (that would be a PanzerLorraine), but they're the best I can get that will damage armor. In a ballistic arc. If tanks roll up to spit at my infantry in the trees, they will live briefly to regret it. L:-)
Speaking of infantry, the Luftlanders are an infantry division, and more importantly they're built around grounded airborne troops but less along the line of "what could the airbornes take with them to be air-dropped" and more along the line of "what can we find at unused airbase defenses to send along with them". My infantry troops can be found in the first and second row (plus some panzerschreck teams in the anti-tank row). If they have wings, that means they don't suffer penalties from being surrounded, which makes them ideal for surging ahead to take territory early in Phase A. If they have a star in the upper left, that means they're leaders. (Most leaders in this game are infantry.) I filled all my slots for pure infantry along the line of, "I want them to be able to hit armor"; and then I added two more stacks of veteran leaders to fill out the ranks. Scouts I can parsel out throughout the game (as spotters for arty and airstrikes), but I chose the ones that can also panzerfaust armor nearby. (The little yellow symbol on the upper right, with a black plate being divided by a black slash, indicates short range armor piercing.) By the same token, as noted, I bring along a lot of PzSchrek teams in Phase A's anti-tank.
What the Luftlanders suck at, as noted upthread, is tanks. I'm still polishing just how much armor I should even try bringing, but my experiments suggest that it's better to flood the field early with sucky old French tanks (which I've got access to lots of), even though they're going to die, than to try to bring a lot fewer more veteran but still sucky armor. By the same token, I'm bringing lots of StuGs and some StuHs in Phase C, and as many Marder 2s as I can get my hands on.
Since I'm air controlling as a main strategy, I'm bring the most numerous decent anti-air stack I can find in Phase B -- but no more than one stack, because I don't have many anti-air slots, and those elite 88s are like freaking gold.
I've learned that I don't usually have ammo problems until Phase C, so I only bring the ammo trucks in then.
What this deck isn't too great at, is advancing for territory control after Phase A -- but I'm not sure it's possible to build a Luftlander deck that does that well. That fits the character of the division: go in hard early to stake out defensive spots, then defend and support while your allies take over in B and C. Since I don't have good armor plating (except for the StuGs near the end, and they aren't as good as many other things), I've decided to make sure almost everything in the field can kill armor plating at long or close distances. I also, after some testing, decided I needed to sacrifice some quality in power for stacks that will bring significant numbers of units because it's impossible to control the map with fewer units. That balance is hard to strike, and my fragile but numerous early French tanks are a source of bitter bother for me: I really do need them for more early map control, basically shooting transports coming in early.
That's a helluva lot of Luftwaffe you're sporting there, Jason. :coolsmiley:
Also pretty "C" phase heavy, when it comes to units beyond infantry & recon. I tend to prioritize "B" in my own stacks, since "C" can feel like a long way off when you're getting your a$$ handed to you in phase "A" (my own common experience, anyways...)
Aren't you worried about running out of munitions with no Supply available until "C"? EDIT -- I see that no, you're aren't. :)
My own $0.02, but I've pretty much completely eliminated crappy French/Somua armor from my Wehrmacht decks. Even in phase "A", it just doesn't feel like they're worth the precious slots. I've taken to emphasizing artillery and AA as my support units. And seriously de-emphasizing airpower. Here's my 352nd Infanterie, just as a point of contrast --
Actually, I've got plenty of B units: lots of veteran infantry, anti-air (which has anti-infantry dual-purpose), Marder IIs starting in, more crappy French tanks :buck2: , almost always some elite A Phase infantry remaining, lots of arty, almost all my remaining air. B Phase is so full I can't do everything, but that's when I'm deciding whether to go more air power or arty power, or maybe a bigger ground push with the grenadiers.
If the Luftlanders had machine-gun transports which stayed on the map, I might get rid of my early crappy tanks. But they're good at zapping the enemy's machine-gun transports, so unless the enemy brings medium tanks early I can prevent them from rolling opportunity thrusts deep into my side of the map.
Hmmmm.... must remember to bring early medium tanks to a fight with JP. ;)
Here are two examples of balanced battlegroups that I've had a lot of success with in single player.
This is a balanced BG of the 12.SS "Hitlerjugend". The only potential weakness is a lack of early "A" Phase artillery and aviation. Otherwise, I feel like this BG can hold its own throughout, and has especially heavy hitting mid and late battle firepower. Yes, there is no "A" phase supply, but if you need supply before "B" phase, you'll need prayer and divine intervention a lot more than ammo.
(https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/18738465_10203454855488238_7929829318982901884_o.jpg?oh=ba7b27523f66b8409a2ef82eea501442&oe=59BA55CA)
This is also a somewhat balanced BG, this time from 17.SS Panzergrendier. I think this BG plays a little better on the defense. It compensates for its lack of armored firepower with nice anti-tank, artillery and aviation assets. I like to use the strong infantry units, backed up by artillery and CAS, to seize and hold territory, then bring in the anti-tank pieces and let the enemy come to me.
(https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/18738802_10203454855448237_8877986937861484327_o.jpg?oh=5db6e766352bf9c3009a9626d67bc147&oe=59B3D71A)
I prefer making balanced decks because I primarily play single player. However, I am delving into MP, and while balanced decks still certainly have their place, I think the most successful MP teams, are the ones where each member of the team specializes in one or two roles. This should overwhelm a team composed of players using balanced decks...Here, being a jack of all trades and a master of none can lead to defeat against experienced, specialized players who coordinate their strategy.
Delving into MP with who?
Great samples. What about Allied OOBs?
Quote from: Gusington on May 28, 2017, 08:09:21 PM
Delving into MP with who?
So far just with JP. LoL. You want in?
I do. Gotta get the game first :)
Quote from: Gusington on May 28, 2017, 08:23:04 PM
I do. Gotta get the game first :)
Try to get it before the war ends.
"The Goddamn war will be over before we get out there, won't it Private Pyle!"
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs3.crackedcdn.com%2Fphpimages%2Farticle%2F0%2F8%2F0%2F437080_v1.jpg&hash=00d7bf24531f0a61760c19b72daf14f36d4f62aa)
The game is tooled, ultimately, around its deck building and its relationship to MP. That can and does make one think about the interplay between the different arms in a quasi-historical way.
It's not a substitute for a TO&E, however, much less the OOB for an actual battle. And I will leave to the side the strategic stuff that must be pushed to the side for the game to be fun; things like Jason's worthy note that the Wehrmacht seeking anything approaching air superiority in this period is funny.
Modders are magical people, though, and I very much look forward to what they come up with.
And none of this should be taken to say the game isn't very fine at doing what it intends. I just don't think it is what it isn't.
Quote from: Cyrano on May 28, 2017, 11:05:33 PM
And none of this should be taken to say the game isn't very fine at doing what it intends. I just don't think it is what it isn't.
.. but nobody is claiming it is something other than what it is. The only people who are complaining about what it isn't are the people who insist upon supreme historical accuracy and authenticity as to every detail. This isn't War in the West, nor was it ever meant to be. I'm amused by people who try to knock it simply because it's not the game they wanted. So what if stuGs arent harder to hit because of their really low profile??? This particular issue hasn't stopped me from enjoying the hell out of this game. People who take their games so seriously probably don't end up enjoying much...in games...and in life.
Did the tutorials. Played and won the st mere eglise scenario.
Ugh I love the damned thing. Blyat
Here is a balanced Allied BG I just made with the 3d Armored Spearhead. I have not tested it yet in combat, but will do so asap and report back. I see no reason why it will not perform as intended though. It has a good mix of offensive firepower throughout all phases, infantry, armor and artillery, supported by nice command elements, AAA, steady supply and even a reasonable aviation component.
(https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/18700674_10203456775016225_1882485266576713899_o.jpg?oh=c633fb118461cf48cbd37908bb27ae5d&oe=59BA72C0)
Played the 3rd during beta. Found it hard to capture land.
Quote from: jomni on May 29, 2017, 08:49:37 AM
Played the 3rd during beta. Found it hard to capture land.
Why? They have all the tools. Light on air, but everything else should be sufficient to seize and hold ground. Tremendous amount of armored, infantry and artillery firepower.
When you all play do you try to build up points to bring on "complete units" or just spend and bring on stuff when it's available?
For example, I always try to bring on infantry in units of 3 Rifle squads, a MMG or HMG, a mortar, a command section, and a specialty section (AT, flame etc). This costs about 200 points, +- depending on division. Then I can operate them as a self-contained combined force. MMG/HMG covers squads as they advance in leap frog fashion. Mortars for hitting enemy MGs. Command section keeps them altogether.
For tanks I try to bring on a command tank and 3 to 4 similar tanks to act as a unit.
This highly influences my force structures when setting up decks.
Quote from: Barthheart on May 28, 2017, 07:28:17 PM
Hmmmm.... must remember to bring early medium tanks to a fight with JP. ;)
And Polish cavalry.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on May 29, 2017, 06:15:51 AMSo what if stuGs arent harder to hit because of their really low profile???
Well, I care, but only because my STuGs get routinely murdered by enemy armor. ;)
I ran a few 4x4 skirmishes yesterday testing some other deck builds, although I was still playing the Luftlanders; lots one, won one (both conquests -- the one I lost, was played on that map with the low ridgey hill in the middle. That was hella fun to invest with my airborne troops! :D ) Took the time to create a pair of anti-tank task forces on the far left side, although I also had a lot of help from at least one of my AI teammates; I would move one set up maybe 100 yards (maybe 50) while the others sat on overwatch, then bring the others up to parallel. I never lost a single unit of mixed Marders and STuGs (with a few surviving French tanks for flavor and machine gun support.)
Quote from: Barthheart on May 29, 2017, 09:51:21 AM
When you all play do you try to build up points to bring on "complete units" or just spend and bring on stuff when it's available?
Ideally I try to do the former, because I have found from experience that the latter is a losing proposition. :buck2: Some things like air power and rolling 88s are just too expensive to bring out as part of a bunch tho. I also don't worry much if I'm bringing out arty one at a time or in a bloc: even one arty can serve its purpose of messing with the enemy. I usually bring out AA only when it's needed in an area, too, so usually one at a time. Having said that, I could see some value in saving up to spam cheap AA (40 points each for decent AA) all over the map at once. Instant air blanket. I suspect the AI does this, although with so many Allied APCs remaining around as light air cover on the map it's hard to tell.
Meanwhile: those Hitler Youth and 17th SS Panzer decks! :smitten: That 3rd Spearhead deck with ALLLL THEEE SHERRRRMANNNSSSS is no joke either.
Quote from: Cyrano on May 28, 2017, 11:05:33 PM
It's not a substitute for a TO&E, however, much less the OOB for an actual battle.
Well, yes, it isn't
Command Ops. Might help be a gateway to COps2 tho.
Here are the other three kampfgruppes I was indirectly testing yesterday. I haven't played any of them directly yet, so I haven't polished them any.
First, "the Old Timers" from Eichenlaub's 716th division:
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimageshack.com%2Fa%2Fimg924%2F6260%2FsPQhOG.png&hash=a956ecdfa431940a7542743c4f030e74271c1214)
Notice that they have an absolute total of 40 slots! That means that they can sacrifice ability in two areas: for the 716th that's scouting and airpower. The 716th makes up for this by being reasonably strong in EVERYTHING ELSE... at least as far as stack numbers go. Since I had limited scout slots, I chose to pack up with tall stacks (4 and 5 units each) on everything, with the best quality I could get within that constraint. That includes scouts with a machine-gun Kubel in Phase A, so it can stay around and do a bit of work.
If I'm reading the abbreviations correctly (the game could stand more tooltips or some other clarity in this regard), most of my infantry are actually Italian veterans -- or maybe veterans of the Italian defense? I just realized looking this over that I didn't bring enough leaders for this gruppe, so I replaced one stack of Pioneers with another stack of Pioneerfuhrers.
Since I have literally no good tanks in this division -- they're all repurposed French light tanks, even in phase C -- I just elected not to have any tanks at all, although in polishing I might decide to sacrifice those two slots of little infantry support howitzers and add some Panzer 355 leader tanks stacks for Phase B and C. I suspect however they'd be more fragile than normal leaders.
Everything in this deck is geared toward supporting my infantry swarm, and/or supporting my allies. The 716th can cover the map in 88s for example; I can even get one out in Phase A! I can roll out a fair number of Lorraines which I can shoot-and-scoot if they draw counter-battery fire. What they and the 120 mm (!!) mortars aren't good at, though, is anti-armor. Also, those 120mm mortars are my best Phase C overall -- I don't get any more self-propelled arty, much less anything with armor, and the technically stronger items are off-map field and rail guns which, while nice, are very limited and I have a hard time properly using them.
Next up, the 21st Panzer Division, Rommel's Circus:
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimageshack.com%2Fa%2Fimg922%2F2425%2Fkfkmz6.png&hash=40ee58e00b8dbd0e63ba674adeb44e593f9fc474)
You might think, "Wow, Rommel's!? It must rule everything!" But in fact it's rather a cobbled-together group that tends to favor light armor. Given its weaknesses, I decided to sacrifice all my infantry and mechanize up all my other slots to the full. My only heavy tanks are a pair of King Tigers in Phase C. Everything else is Panzer 4; even my anti-tanks in late phases are only Marder 1's! But nothing gets pushed around, it's all mobile armor if I can help it, and multiples per stack. That especially includes the scouts, since without infantry I need them to help detect and repel infantry ambushes. However, I'm very weak in Phase A scouting, although I still bring what rolling machineguns I can get.
This then is a "Panzer Scout" Kampfgruppe -- it can run fast and hit hard for a fast moving unit, but it isn't meant to strike fear in the heart of the enemy.
That's the job of the Panzer-Lehr. Or as I call this Gruppe, "the Panzer Fear". :D
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimageshack.com%2Fa%2Fimg924%2F7158%2FqkdnQx.png&hash=14ab7746886663fdfe5f3d5b34bc607d36cac4dd)
Like Rommel's Panzer Scouts, it only has 36 slots; unlike the scouts, quite notably, I only put one scout in (though it's a good one). It's only averagely good at everything in terms of slots, but by sacrificing almost all my scouts I loaded up on quality armor and a fair number of good Phase A infantry to hassle the map until my hideously overpowered armors start to arrive in Phase B. Granted, I'm weak on leaders -- really weak -- and I lack sheer numbers to push around the map. But when I have Tigers (6 elite ones in Phase B!) and Panthers (plus steady JagdIVs) out the wazoo, then I'm fine with borrowing leaders from other gruppes on the board if I have to. :D :smitten:
Notice that each gruppe, while it might do okay by itself, is really meant to supplement the other three. The Quality Luftlanders bring the heavy infantry and the air power, plus some decent strength in other regards. The Old Timers bring the infantry spam and the spam support. The Panzer Scouts bring the armor flood. The Panzer Fear doesn't do much in Phase A, but brings constant heavy armor and mechanized support vehicles to help spike other task forces on the map.
If anyone would like to try those builds, copy-paste these codes into your battlegroup builder using the "import" button.
Quality Luftlanders: HxiUwpQRlZKWMpTSlOGUAZLxk6OTIpKilHKSkpNilLGUopPBlWGV0pYBlRGWQZLRlEI=
Old timers: HhmQoo/ij0KQIY5xjmGOUZFykFKQ0pGCj7OPopERkWGQYpFBkTKO0Y6yjsGO4ZIxkaKRsg==
Rommel's Panzer Scouts: GxmBMYGyvFGDQYMzgMGDIYDSgqGDEoPhglKCQYVhhHGE4oGBhBKE0YEhhEGBEbfCg/KDsg==
The Panzer Fear: IBOXYZgjmEOac5fhlxOXMpdCltKaQZchmqGYUpoylsKZkpmzl5GYsQ==
:bd:
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on May 29, 2017, 08:51:57 AM
Quote from: jomni on May 29, 2017, 08:49:37 AM
Played the 3rd during beta. Found it hard to capture land.
Why? They have all the tools. Light on air, but everything else should be sufficient to seize and hold ground. Tremendous amount of armored, infantry and artillery firepower.
I don't know. I previously thought they're better at destruction matches. Just not playing right I guess.
Update: I just won conquest recently vs easy AI. Used more infantry. Not a lot of tanks.
I played three solo matches this afternoon, one with each new deck, 30 minutes each, destruction, no point cap, medium income rate, and 250 starting budget (so that things would escalate from a little), against random Allied decks.
The Panzer Scout deck, the one with no infantry at all, did not do well. I think I didn't have enough in Phase A to keep the enemy from getting enough ground to out-produce me in Phase B (because taking ground gives a bonus to income in the various phases, when playing destruction). But it might have been that the map was a little too not-open, or possibly I pushed too far forward at first -- because now that I recall, I did hold my forward line (barely) into Phase B when all my Panzer 4s started to release (not counting the anti-infantry Pz4s I got in Phase A). I shall have to play again and reconsider if I just got dealt a random deck that didn't suit my build.
The Old Timers won their destruction match pretty handily, and on a map with a lot of shooting distance when I really thought they might do better buttoning up in areas.
The Panzer Fear deck, I played twice. The first time was a total disaster; the second time (on the same map but it was shuffled and flipped around randomly) I put more infantry out at first and saved my few scout cars for later. Phase A was tough, but aside from the scout cars I ended up putting all my A into the field, which from a low-credit medium-income start seems efficient. When Phase B started I had saved up enough to put an Elite Tiger with some air protection and soon afterward one of my scout cars. I won that match, but the other team was coming back toward the end -- however, I still had loads of armor I could have put out, lots of Panthers remaining, that sort of thing.
I decided that the Panzer Fear deck, while it has envious artillery, should avoid trying to go that route. I took out one stack each of my Tigers and Panthers (taking out that elite Tiger B phase stack was a little physically painful, but I realized I should just have to "make do" with only 4 early elite Tigers :2funny: ) and most of my arty, save two Panzer IV tanks which serve as forward observers for off-map artillery -- which I might not even use, but I had used up all my other slots so I could still take them. Pz4 tanks are still Pz4 tanks after all. In return, I loaded up on the strongest scout cars that Lehr has available. I haven't tested the new build yet, but it should help me spot targets for my Tigers and Panthers better. (I also traded in my Storchs which died quickly anyway, for an elite dogfighter.) This deck is meant to be more of a support deck anyway.
Great comments. When I upgrade my PC, I might get into this.
JP: Eichenlaub Division just means "Oak Leaf division" after the insignia. The 252nd Infanterie Division was nicknamed the Eichenlaub Division as well, but there were multiple divisions using some form of oak leaf insignia.
The commander is Generalleutnant Wilhelm Richter. I see they've tried to get the correct leader pictures in place.
Ita. Freiwillige means Italienische Freiwillige, or Italian Volunteers like you already thought. What they're doing in Normandy, I don't know. The infantryman is holding a Beretta Model 38 or 38a.
It was quite the SMG https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLErRfvbeeY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLErRfvbeeY)
As to the game: are experienced stacks smaller than regular ones? It can be tricky to balance quality and quantity in a game where experienced units are smaller in size or more expensive to the extent that you'll always have less of them.
Ah, thanks! -- I think I knew "Oak leaf" was the translation, but still thought that was someone's name. Had I moused over the portrait, the tooltip would have shown Richter.
The "Freiwillige" did in my head connote volunteers, but I couldn't figure out why veteran volunteers from Italy would be in Normandy. The Germans did have a lot of European Allied troops in the area helping out, so some Italian troops aren't impossible; after the capitulation of Italian command, they could have signed over to the United Europe idea of the Reich. Why they'd be in Normandy instead of in the Alps, I don't know, but the Western Command was desperate for any troops to man and support the Atlantic wall.
Quote from: ComradeP on May 30, 2017, 01:11:37 AM
As to the game: are experienced stacks smaller than regular ones? It can be tricky to balance quality and quantity in a game where experienced units are smaller in size or more expensive to the extent that you'll always have less of them.
Yes, experienced stacks will be shorter (fewer units per stack) than less experienced units of the same type. Sometimes shorter stacks of the same experience can be available in early phases, too, like the 88 Flak in Phase A of the Eichenlaubs.
After writing my critique of my Panzer Fear deck last night, I have about decided that I should sacrifice other tanks for the 6 elite Tigers available from Phase B onward. I've got to finish producing the Turn 5 episode of my DC:Blitz mp game vs Barth this afternoon, though, before I get back to playtime. ;)
Mind-boggling to me that people play multiplayer on normal speed. I play single-player mostly on bullet time and never faster than very slow. I'm sure I'll speed up a little when I become proficient - I'm only in about my 3rd battle.
Normal speed just doesn't seem to me like it would be fun. There's so much going on that the game gets away from me on very slow.
I've been practicing on normal speed (including for those runs), just so I can play mp. I definitely would prefer slow and very slow (and the bullet-time pause) otherwise.
Quote from: glen55 on May 30, 2017, 01:50:40 PM
Mind-boggling to me that people play multiplayer on normal speed. I play single-player mostly on bullet time and never faster than very slow. I'm sure I'll speed up a little when I become proficient - I'm only in about my 3rd battle.
Normal speed just doesn't seem to me like it would be fun. There's so much going on that the game gets away from me on very slow.
How do you play mostly on bullet time? I mean, its practically a pause...I play mostly on normal and go down to slow or very slow when my attention must be divided on more than one section of the map...I find bullet time necessary only in the occasional unusual circumstance.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on May 30, 2017, 03:24:47 PM
Quote from: glen55 on May 30, 2017, 01:50:40 PM
Mind-boggling to me that people play multiplayer on normal speed. I play single-player mostly on bullet time and never faster than very slow. I'm sure I'll speed up a little when I become proficient - I'm only in about my 3rd battle.
Normal speed just doesn't seem to me like it would be fun. There's so much going on that the game gets away from me on very slow.
How do you play mostly on bullet time? I mean, its practically a pause...I play mostly on normal and go down to slow or very slow when my attention must be divided on more than one section of the map...I find bullet time necessary only in the occasional unusual circumstance.
Maybe some people prefer to play the game a little slower? That's great that some people can play this game on faster speeds, I know I wish I could, but bullet speed for me thank you very much! I enjoy the slowish game play at bullet speed. Anything else, at least for me, is just too fast and I don't get to the enjoy the full flavor of the game. O0
Quote from: acctingman on May 30, 2017, 03:27:37 PM
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on May 30, 2017, 03:24:47 PM
Quote from: glen55 on May 30, 2017, 01:50:40 PM
Mind-boggling to me that people play multiplayer on normal speed. I play single-player mostly on bullet time and never faster than very slow. I'm sure I'll speed up a little when I become proficient - I'm only in about my 3rd battle.
Normal speed just doesn't seem to me like it would be fun. There's so much going on that the game gets away from me on very slow.
How do you play mostly on bullet time? I mean, its practically a pause...I play mostly on normal and go down to slow or very slow when my attention must be divided on more than one section of the map...I find bullet time necessary only in the occasional unusual circumstance.
Maybe some people prefer to play the game a little slower? That's great that some people can play this game on faster speeds, I know I wish I could, but bullet speed for me thank you very much! I enjoy the slowish game play at bullet speed. Anything else, at least for me, is just too fast and I don't get to the enjoy the full flavor of the game. O0
A little slower? Its a pause for all intents and purposes. I'm not criticizing anyone for their play preference, I think people should play it how they are most comfortable, I'm just curious how someone could play "mostly" at bullet time. It is extremely...EXTREMELY slow.
Mostly, I study the position in bullet time for a minute or two, then advance time at very slow speed for about 10 seconds, maybe 20 seconds if I'm feeling antsy! But some times, I will just kind of study endlessly and the game does indeed advance in bullet time, e.g., if a jeep is moving up the road you can actually see it move! Maybe not quite as wicked quick as the minute hand of a clock, but you can see it~!
I really enjoy the studying the position part. :)
I'm impatient. The faster the game finishes, the more battles I get to play in a sitting. So normal or a notch slower for me.
I think I know why I'm failing at conquest before. I wasn't bringing in enough commanders for my separate groups. Making them lose ground more easily without the all important buffs. Commander buffs are more cost efficient than buying experienced troops. So in phase A, I deploy more cheap troops with support of commanders to gain a foothold on important sports.
Learned a lot by doing the tutorials.
Iirc, bullet time is one game second every thirty real seconds, or 1/30th speed. A thirty minute game at bullet-time would take 15 hours.
I don't think anyone thinks you mean you're taking at least 15 hours (maybe twice or three times that!) to play a match, acctingman -- that's why they're questioning what you said. Very slow would seem to be the slowest feasible speed for playing a whole match.
Nope, you are correct. I go bullet time when the shit hits the fan (which is often as I learn the game). O0
Meanwhile, after editing about half my Turn 5 with Barth last night, I spent the rest of the night polishing my Panzer Fear deck. (I'll need to do the same with my Panzer Scout deck, assuming I keep it at all.) At the composition I showed upthread, it's just too rich without a large starting budget and greater-than-medium income rate. But playing it several ways confirmed that at my usual settings (medium income rate, 250 starting budget) I end up only getting 5 to 8 of the heavies out in a 30 minute game -- and without a lot of support!
That being the case, I've redesigned the deck so that each of the heavies is now a Phase B commander (and the Panthers are actually better than the Tiger E in this game). This way they can provide bonuses to support groups rolling along with them. I have to accept that I'm only going to get out 5 of them per (short) game, and so I should look for relatively cheap support like rolling scouts and those 27-point soft-damage assault guns and some anti-air, and maybe a Panzer 4 and/or Jagdpanzer 4 with each Tiger or Panther commander.
I've also realized that for infantry, I'm better off sending out infantry platoons of 1 Panzerschreck squad, 1 MG42 squad, and 1 elite Panzerfuhrer squad, at the start -- because in the Panzer Lehr division, those things also get equally veteran or elite APCs which serve as mobile MG42 platforms and, for the anti-tank squads, also a small anti-armor gun. This allows me to save my rolling anti-armor scouts for later in Phase A or Phase B: those APCs are a nice force multiplier, and under the right conditions I've seen them survive until well into Phase C.
This new setup went through several versions last night, so I'll report tomorrow (or tonight) on how things go with it. I can still create a variant Panzer Fear deck more along my original lines, for "richer" games. (Longer games wouldn't really count, because the rate of income is just too small to support the waves of heavy armor I wanted to put out. As it is, I may still refine the task force composition back to 4 or maybe even 3 Heavy Commanders to build a task force around.)
If there were a speed halfway between bullet time and very slow, I would probably play at that speed most of the time. But playing at very slow, I don't have time to focus on a sector, I always have to be scanning the whole map. It's too fast for me to run it more than a few seconds at a time.
Quote from: glen55 on May 31, 2017, 12:29:37 PM
If there were a speed halfway between bullet time and very slow, I would probably play at that speed most of the time. But playing at very slow, I don't have time to focus on a sector, I always have to be scanning the whole map. It's too fast for me to run it more than a few seconds at a time.
I posted this before for Airland Battle (http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=12733.0-)
I installed cheat engine speedhack (single player only !!). It allows you to slow the game down and even lets you pause it while you can still give orders. http://www.cheatengine.org/aboutce.php
Cheat Engine is an open source tool designed to help you with modifying single player games running under window so you can make them harder or easier depending on your preference
It comes with a memory scanner to quickly scan for variables used within a game and allow you to change them, but it also comes with a debugger, disassembler, assembler, speedhack, trainer maker, direct 3D manipulation tools, system inspection tools and more.
Download : http://www.cheatengine.org/downloads.php
I suggest you only use the version without Open Candy (it could be considered to be Malware)
Short tutorial : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dZ2okB8WNQ
Run Cheatengine.exe
Now run the game you want to play (Wargame games should run in windowed full screen as you need to be able to use Alt-Tab).
Alt tab back to cheatengine.
Select the game process in cheat engine by clicking on the computer icon (the icon will be blinking)
Check enable Speedhack (You can add ingame shortcuts in cheatengine through Edit-settings-shortcuts).
Alt Tab back to the game and play.
Quote from: Pete Dero on May 31, 2017, 01:17:07 PM
Quote from: glen55 on May 31, 2017, 12:29:37 PM
If there were a speed halfway between bullet time and very slow, I would probably play at that speed most of the time. But playing at very slow, I don't have time to focus on a sector, I always have to be scanning the whole map. It's too fast for me to run it more than a few seconds at a time.
I posted this before for Airland Battle (http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=12733.0-)
I installed cheat engine speedhack (single player only !!). It allows you to slow the game down and even lets you pause it while you can still give orders. http://www.cheatengine.org/aboutce.php
Cheat Engine is an open source tool designed to help you with modifying single player games running under window so you can make them harder or easier depending on your preference
It comes with a memory scanner to quickly scan for variables used within a game and allow you to change them, but it also comes with a debugger, disassembler, assembler, speedhack, trainer maker, direct 3D manipulation tools, system inspection tools and more.
Download : http://www.cheatengine.org/downloads.php
I suggest you only use the version without Open Candy (it could be considered to be Malware)
Short tutorial : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dZ2okB8WNQ
Run Cheatengine.exe
Now run the game you want to play (Wargame games should run in windowed full screen as you need to be able to use Alt-Tab).
Alt tab back to cheatengine.
Select the game process in cheat engine by clicking on the computer icon (the icon will be blinking)
Check enable Speedhack (You can add ingame shortcuts in cheatengine through Edit-settings-shortcuts).
Alt Tab back to the game and play.
Thanks, I'll give it a shot.
I played at Normal speed last night and I felt the game was quite slow going.
SD44 definitely plays much slower, seems to me, than Wargame. I literally couldn't play Airland Battle without the Speed Hack -- and thank goodness Eugen added game speed controls for Red Dragon. But with SD44, I find I tend to start Skirmishes on Slow, and once I feel like I have a handle on how the battlefield is developing, I bump it up to Normal. I still do some panicky Bullet Time pausing when something goes FUBAR, but overall I play on Normal. Feels very manageable to me, in a way Wargame never has at that speed.
Quote from: sandman2575 on May 31, 2017, 06:10:13 PM
SD44 definitely plays much slower, seems to me, than Wargame. I literally couldn't play Airland Battle without the Speed Hack -- and thank goodness Eugen added game speed controls for Red Dragon. But with SD44, I find I tend to start Skirmishes on Slow, and once I feel like I have a handle on how the battlefield is developing, I bump it up to Normal. I still do some panicky Bullet Time pausing when something goes FUBAR, but overall I play on Normal. Feels very manageable to me, in a way Wargame never has at that speed.
Bullet time is great for sussing out a difficult tactical situation..but for the most part, I play on very slow. I also prefer larger battles, and normal time is unmanageable time for me.
Still need more tips. Still sick at this game. Can't beat medium AI in conquest mode. I get to kill a lot of them but end up not capturing territory due to play style.
Not sure if this has been mentioned already but Smoke is your friend. The most effective way to block LOS is to fire the smoke onto the unit you're trying to block. Then just rush with infantry.
Haven't had a chance to try that smoke plane the Free French division has yet.
Quote from: WargamerJoe on June 06, 2017, 04:42:03 AM
Not sure if this has been mentioned already but Smoke is your friend. The most effective way to block LOS is to fire the smoke onto the unit you're trying to block. Then just rush with infantry.
Haven't had a chance to try that smoke plane the Free French division has yet.
Will try that I do it on occasion but not all the time.
A little late to the party, but I got this game gifted to me. :bd:
Excited to start playing in the coming days.
Drop me a line on Steam (Sabreman, I'm on your Grog friend list), and I'll be glad to help out and mp (coop or vs).
Do we have a grog discord?
Don't know, but several of us have Discord accounts.
There is no official Gorgheads Discord channel, but I will look into setting one up if there is a real interest.
Ok, so I will explain why I use discord exclusively now and have for over a year.
1. It's Free. No server charges, unlimited people in your channel.
2. Takes 5 minutes to setup. There is a client which I recommend or there is a web version.
3. Voice is a lot clearer than teamspeak generally.
4. It's specifically made for gamers
5. Anybody in the group can invite anybody in to a channel within your group with the click of a plus button. This makes administration and adding temp people for quick games. E.g. Say somebodies brother wanted to join for a game but was not specifically part of the group. Any member can click add and boom, you are in business. Invites are usually direct to the channel they need to be in. So no confusion trying to navigate around... of course the admins can kick or purge or create rules that only allow certain people into particular channels as well as the usual promoting of officers.
6. You can turn individual peoples volume up and down at your end, so if somebody is loud you can turn them down. This saves me from the one guy in the channel who wants to deafen me. Not sure if TS had this, but in discord its as easy as right clicking on the gent in question and pulling a slider.
A Picture. From left to right you can follow in general largest to smallest.
i. On the far left at the top you can see the two GROUPS I am currently a member of.
ii. You can see I am in the group with the Anchor symbol
iii. Slightly to the right along that column are the voice and text channels. I am in the General Chat channel while being in the pls say hi when joining voice channel.
iv. Further to the right you can see the general text channel and scroll through all of its history for years!
v. Note that I can be speaking in general chat for the anchor symbol channel while texting in the battlestar channel above it. So I can be doing BETA test chat while speaking to my friends on another channel.
vi. A little further to the right is a list of friends. These people may be members of any channel or none at all. I have people from other clans here and always know when they are online. Often what game they are playing is shown here. A little like steam. Say I see 2RC4U is online and know he is playing mech because it says that next to his name. I can then scroll to the mech channel which he is likely to be in and click to join him and say g'day.
As you can see Discord has a tonne of flexibility, is built for gamers and is free. No server renting. You get as many as you want for free. Voice quality is great. You can even change the country your server is hosting in at will. Which I often do for people overseas who have poor internet. So they can speak more clearly without dropping. I know some people with VERY bad internet.
P.S. The program also supports private group calls like skype outside of the normal structure mentioned. i.e. their is a telephone button to call people on the friends list.
https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4375/36490806615_190c6eb772_o.jpg
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4375/36490806615_109f1834c0_b.jpg)
So how do they make money?
Probably by stealing your details. Like Skype does. :arr:
https://support.discordapp.com/hc/en-us/articles/210544537-How-is-Discord-making-money-How-can-I-contribute-
I've had no problem using Steam voice chat for Steam games.
I struggle with Steam's quality, being on the deaf side.
Wow, this game takes no prisoners.
We tried a simple 2vs2 battle against 2 easy AI's.
Even considering my mate is not really well versed in tactics and weapons capabilities, I too learned a lesson in humility!
We successfully took a town, but it evolved in a stalemate pretty soon where the AI was constantly assaulting us from 2 sides, effectively stopping us in gaining more map control while it sat comfortably on its 68% mapspace owned.
A flanking attempt by my quickly revealed that the AI had a garrison in the other town as well. Impressive!
Well considering my job has been shit the past 3 weeks I might reward myself and pick this up tonight
It's pretty great and, IMO, well worth full asking price -- IF this type of game appeals to you (RTS with simple controls, deep roster of units, lots of units deployed to scale on a large map, WW2.)
Quote from: JasonPratt on August 11, 2017, 01:39:16 PM
It's pretty great and, IMO, well worth full asking price -- IF this type of game appeals to you (RTS with simple controls, deep roster of units, lots of units deployed to scale on a large map, WW2.)
Let me ask this, is it more accessible than the wargame series predecessors?
Quote from: jamus34 on August 11, 2017, 01:59:08 PM
Quote from: JasonPratt on August 11, 2017, 01:39:16 PM
It's pretty great and, IMO, well worth full asking price -- IF this type of game appeals to you (RTS with simple controls, deep roster of units, lots of units deployed to scale on a large map, WW2.)
Let me ask this, is it more accessible than the wargame series predecessors?
I think so. I've had a much easier time getting into this one. It maybe because I know the equipment better but it's also a slower paced game. The Phase system is a great throttle on getting overwhelmed.
Yes, objectively so, for at least three reasons:
1.) A near-pause slow mode (one second every 30 real), in single player.
2.) Lacks lethality of modern weapons, so infantry are more useful. Which is good because useful armor is expensive.
3.) The standard new "phases" (which can be modded out or adjusted) means maps don't have to be absolutely flooded with troops from the beginning or near the start. You can set things up so that troops trickle in from the beginning if you want.
Well I grabbed it. Downloading now
OK, so I'm a little better at this than the Wargames...but not by much. I got through the training and played the boot camp skimish.
So, my MG's seem to die easily but my Inf get chewed up by the OPFOR.
My armor has the best of luck but they can get taken out pretty quick with antitank.
I was trying for a combined arms approach.
Is anyone here still on this and willing to show me the ropes?
I could need some guidance as well. 🤔
I know I've friended with Ysk (I'm Sabreman). Not sure about Jamus. You can go to the Grogheads Steam group and friend me from there.
Just drop me a line when we're both on Steam! Combined arms is definitely the way to go, if only because armor is so much more expensive that you'll never get enough out to do anything by themselves. ;)
Note: I found Jamus in the Grog group, sent a friend request (from/as Sabreman.)
LOL. I got friended by Sabreman like a year ago, but I never knew who it was! Hey, alright me and JP are Steam buddies! :hug:
Yup just accepted the invite!
Had a great learner match with JP last night on this. Sad to say he had to carry me through most of the match and we lost but great experience!
Hope I can hook up soon as well.
Quote from: Yskonyn on August 14, 2017, 07:48:41 AM
Hope I can hook up soon as well.
More the merrier. I find it is really easy to get tunnel vision on one sector and lose operational vision
Since Jamus hadn't really started working on decks yet, we both played random Allied decks against two AI Axis on standard difficulty.
That might sound harsh for a new player, but (1) I picked two decks of my own, Panzer Scouts Rich and Panzer Fear Rich, which as their titles suggest need a rich budget to work right; and (2) started with only 250 points max on the field, and medium income.
So they were handicapped a lot. But they had lots of good kit for us to fight against. O0 The AI never sent any air after us, but I don't think those decks had much air either.
We basically ran out of time: it was a short match, 30 minutes, and we turned the conquest tide with about 8 minutes remaining. It wasn't long enough for us to catch up on points.
Do you guys use voice coms?
Yeah I was using a 101st AB so I was a late game deck. We came back at the end but the early losses were too much to overcome. We were significantly hurt by my lack of early armor and low points.
Yes, we were using Discord for our voice coms.
Jamus drew the 101st, which is among the best infantry in the game, and can fort up in trees and buildings very well -- which Jamus was trying to do on the right side of the map, in forested area a little advanced into the enemy's side.
I drew the Polish, which I thought was pretty great since (1) I had thought about building a Polish deck for my first Allied (but hadn't gotten around to it yet) and (2) they had a very respectable mix of everything, including some strong early armor support.
One thing neither of us did well in that fight, was use our artillery, I think. I was super-late bringing any out. The enemy didn't bring a lot either -- I don't recall how much I gave those two decks -- but the AI used what it did bring very well.
I spent probably too much time setting up a super-stack of armor to march up field, clearing out our center (and aiming eventually for the far-left enemy ingress point); and I didn't have quite the attention to advance it in a steady overwatch pattern. But I did do okay creating strong points in the enemy area, and small task forces for securing various wing areas. Also, I think we both did okay supporting each other in different areas on the map. Overall, I thought it was a fine match: the computer won by doing something the AI has been taught to do very well, which is sacrifice single units to establish extended control zones in the early and midgame. Hunting and clearing them out isn't hard, but it takes time, and attention, and if the computer can keep us busy meanwhile then those ceded areas just rack up the points.
So, do you suggest holding a line for quite some time in phase Alpha until you have more units on map before starting maneuvering and probing out the enemy?
Not advised to rush towns, for example, and dig in there?
Kind of depends.
1.) Is the match destruction or conquest? Area control boosts buying capability (and thus more/better units on the field faster) for the former, but is utterly necessary to winning the game in the latter. If you don't get that established early, you may lose, especially in a short timed match (like ours, 30 minutes last night. We were pushing back into the enemy's final quarter of the field but lost on points when the bell rang.)
2.) What's your initial pool of funds? If you're playing a match with enough cash to plop most or all of Phase A on the ground at the start, then that's going to make a difference how far you can push forward with strength. If you're starting with 250 points (which I tend to favor), then you'll only be able to put a couple of relatively weak groups on the map, or else a wide but very thin probing screen that can't feasibly hold ground -- but which could end up scoring you serious early points in a conquest match, because your enemy may be too concentrated in a few places to deal with your sacrificial front-pushers.
3.) What does the terrain look like, both on your side and on your enemy's side? Jarhead and I (I think, or maybe Barth) played the exact same map (Pegasus Bridge) only I had the airborne troops (my Luftlanders) and I was the one who could fort up in a forest. If your side starts with control of the bridge, then the middle of the map is super-open on your side up to the enemy's side; the right side has some towns and forest groups edging well into the enemy's territory (where I deployed with my elite infantry at first); and the left side is pretty steadily fields with treelines breaking up long-distance fire but still with lots of medium ranged killing fields -- but without much way for infantry to advance forward under cover.
In our earlier match, we had chosen destruction I think, so... uh... JarBarth set up a long line of anti-tank cannons deep in our backfield to just murder everything trying to come down the wide central section, while I rushed infantry up the right side to fort up behind enemy lines in a forest area. I also sent air power to help him safeguard our left wing, but the enemy spent most of the game controlling a lot more of the map than us (including on either side of my forted troops, which eventually threatened my unusual ingress point on the lower right side). Sure we slaughtered massively, and won, but they were earning more cash to spend on units for us to shoot at. Had that been a conquest game, we would have lost for setting up a defensive turkey shoot and ceding most of the map.
4.) Another factor is, how fast are your reinforcements likely to make it to your advanced position? If you're holding a position with infantry, their trucks and APCs (and especially Jeeps) might get there pretty fast but your tanks won't -- and your infantry may not depending on how threatened the road network between your ingress and outpost areas has become.
On balance, though, I do prefer to run for defensible areas just across into the enemy's area, even when I'm starting with minimal points.
Note: even last night with Jamus, I created two small task forces (one of them a pair of anti-tank guns) and ran them up to small defensible areas with good fields of fire, left and right of the center area. I got flanked on all sides quite quickly, and (as I was expecting) I had to create more task forces to push those encroachments back. I got tempted into superstacking an armored fist rather than moving with a handful of units there, and that took too long -- but of course I also expected the enemy to be throwing fairly hard units at us even with its probes (since I knew what decks I had assigned them).
And really I lost the game by underestimating the Opfor speed to get to a certain point on the map. They beat there and chewed up my initial force which put us deep in the hole.
That said I'll probably be around tonight if anyone wants to give it a go.
Also FYI the add friend function was not working yesterday. Not sure if Eugen was having server issues.
Anybody who is actively playing have any comments on the new patch? Haven't dipped my toe for a while, but it's only a matter of time. I dig this game, and love the fact that they are still tweaking it.
@Jason
It sounds a bit like Company of Heroes, but with the Red Dragon engine instead. Is that a fair characterisation?
Quote from: Boggit on August 14, 2017, 05:43:06 PM
@Jason
It sounds a bit like Company of Heroes, but with the Red Dragon engine instead. Is that a fair characterisation?
No. It's not even similar to Red Dragon except for the engine.
It's a unique game. Squads don't die easily, they flee to regroup more than die, and the pace is significantly slower.
Quote from: JasonPratt on August 14, 2017, 09:29:18 AM
Yes, we were using Discord for our voice coms.
Jamus drew the 101st, which is among the best infantry in the game, and can fort up in trees and buildings very well -- which Jamus was trying to do on the right side of the map, in forested area a little advanced into the enemy's side.
I drew the Polish, which I thought was pretty great since (1) I had thought about building a Polish deck for my first Allied (but hadn't gotten around to it yet) and (2) they had a very respectable mix of everything, including some strong early armor support.
One thing neither of us did well in that fight, was use our artillery, I think. I was super-late bringing any out. The enemy didn't bring a lot either -- I don't recall how much I gave those two decks -- but the AI used what it did bring very well.
I spent probably too much time setting up a super-stack of armor to march up field, clearing out our center (and aiming eventually for the far-left enemy ingress point); and I didn't have quite the attention to advance it in a steady overwatch pattern. But I did do okay creating strong points in the enemy area, and small task forces for securing various wing areas. Also, I think we both did okay supporting each other in different areas on the map. Overall, I thought it was a fine match: the computer won by doing something the AI has been taught to do very well, which is sacrifice single units to establish extended control zones in the early and midgame. Hunting and clearing them out isn't hard, but it takes time, and attention, and if the computer can keep us busy meanwhile then those ceded areas just rack up the points.
There is a grog discord channel then? If so are you open to inviting Destraex (My discord name is the same as my forum name).
Quote from: Destraex on August 14, 2017, 07:03:34 PM
Quote from: JasonPratt on August 14, 2017, 09:29:18 AM
Yes, we were using Discord for our voice coms.
Jamus drew the 101st, which is among the best infantry in the game, and can fort up in trees and buildings very well -- which Jamus was trying to do on the right side of the map, in forested area a little advanced into the enemy's side.
I drew the Polish, which I thought was pretty great since (1) I had thought about building a Polish deck for my first Allied (but hadn't gotten around to it yet) and (2) they had a very respectable mix of everything, including some strong early armor support.
One thing neither of us did well in that fight, was use our artillery, I think. I was super-late bringing any out. The enemy didn't bring a lot either -- I don't recall how much I gave those two decks -- but the AI used what it did bring very well.
I spent probably too much time setting up a super-stack of armor to march up field, clearing out our center (and aiming eventually for the far-left enemy ingress point); and I didn't have quite the attention to advance it in a steady overwatch pattern. But I did do okay creating strong points in the enemy area, and small task forces for securing various wing areas. Also, I think we both did okay supporting each other in different areas on the map. Overall, I thought it was a fine match: the computer won by doing something the AI has been taught to do very well, which is sacrifice single units to establish extended control zones in the early and midgame. Hunting and clearing them out isn't hard, but it takes time, and attention, and if the computer can keep us busy meanwhile then those ceded areas just rack up the points.
There is a grog discord channel then? If so are you open to inviting Destraex (My discord name is the same as my forum name).
JP was just direct calling me...I have my own discord (for what it's worth) but it's not like it's an official Grog channel.
Quote from: Destraex on March 29, 2017, 07:36:57 PM
The Germans had whole units of captured French tanks in normandy. However iirc most were withdrawn and their units re-equipped with german kit.
I think this game for the sake of variety and what if includes the original french tanks, but I am not sure if the original french equipped german units included charB1s. However the Germans did use them in many places.
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.worldwarphotos.info%2Fwp-content%2Fgallery%2Ffrance%2Ftanks%2Fb1_bis%2FGerman_Char_B1_bis_Panzerkampfwagen_B-2_740_f_number_232.jpg&hash=3f17704cadaf0b443ba65f48bf80d53ab1a7081a)
21st Panzer Division - newly reformed as it was destroyed in Tunisia. Very much having to make do with what they could cobble together from old French kit, they were quite imaginative getting together a reasonable number of tanks .
http://spearhead1944.com/gerpg/ger1.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/21st_Panzer_Division_(Wehrmacht)#1943
In the mean time I could just invite you all to my clans discord which I administer? Until Jarhead decides if he wants to do an official one.
I'd need discord names.
That works for me. Also note SD's servers have been down the past 2 days. Of course right when I get the game
Indeed. Sent you a PM invite.
I think to add you on Discord, Destraex, I'd have to know your four-digt suffix number. It isn't usually part of your service name, but printed under it (down at the lower left of the Discord main usage screen if I recall correctly).
Quote from: jomni on August 14, 2017, 06:10:42 PM
Quote from: Boggit on August 14, 2017, 05:43:06 PM
@Jason
It sounds a bit like Company of Heroes, but with the Red Dragon engine instead. Is that a fair characterisation?
No. It's not even similar to Red Dragon except for the engine.
It's a unique game. Squads don't die easily, they flee to regroup more than die, and the pace is significantly slower.
Differences from CoH (1 and 2) are so different as to be totally distinct. The first and biggest difference being, no base building. The game is closer to Sudden Strike and Men of War, I'd say.
Other differences: no active special abilities, whether for the units or on the map generally (partial exception, for calling off-map arty, which is a limited-shot recharge special ability for some units);
no way to upgrade abilities and experience (although being around a leader adds one temporary 'star' of experience, up to a maximum of three);
the battlefield is much larger even on 1 vs 1 maps;
air power loiters and can be retasked (and also legitimately shot down), then returns when bingo fuel/ammo or evacuates under pressure to repair, refuel, and rearm, before being on call again;
buildings are less destructable;
area control is more fluid;
grouping is more basic (and wonky);
zoom out is, naturally (and necessarily), much better;
no specialization tweaking while in-game.
If you want a game that better mixes Red Dragonesque engine with Company of Heroes, go for R.U.S.E. (but be aware you'll have to deal with the UBISOFT server nonsense). It's the same engine as SD and "Wargame", but an earlier version with some base building and (if I recall correctly) special abilities -- certainly on the map. It also has a more cinematic campaign, again like the CoH games.
Server back up per Eugen but chat and friends list disabled which makes multiplayer more of a challenge.
Had a great chat with Dest yesterday evening (my time). Looking forward to seeing if we can get a full group together on this.
Yes. Would be good to get a group together for a bash against the AI.
Keep in mind that unless we can fill a public 10v10 fast then a private server is 4v4. Although one can host a 10v10 privately if one fills out a form and mucks around to create a server
Yeah if there's a group thing could I join? I need to clock more time on it.
First thing I suppose would be to sign up with the Groghead Steam group if you aren't already there. Easier to friend each other that way, and to check via Steam whether anyone's up for playing a game. (I just noticed you're in the GH steam group so I sent a friend invitation Hof. I sent invitations out to most of the Grogs I recognized and have talked with to some extent, but I haven't petitioned everyone I recognized yet I guess, just looking at the list again now! The request will be from "Sabreman" which I suppose I should change to include "JRP" or something for easier recognition.)
Unfortunately, SD doesn't have, like, clans or anything yet. You have to set friend groups manually, within its own engine, which is currently still borked. Jamus and I got a game started (the other night) but couldn't friend each other so we had to do a public match and rush to get in. (I'm friended in the game system with Barthheart and Jarhead, with whom I've had a couple of co-op matches though not recently.)
While looking for Hof on Steam, I tried finding Destraex, but couldn't. ???
Incidentally, with SD's own mp servers down the other night, Jamus and I punched a lot of orcs in Dawn of War: Soulstorm. I'm also teaching W8aminute, and at least one other new player who isn't a Groghead member (yet) but a friend of a friend.
Keep an eye out for me chaps!
I'd be up for a big Grogs match. O0
All that requires is for us to all be together online at once, and not doing anything else already!
:hide: :dreamer:
Yep. Well you guys know where I am :)
Some naval action guys also now have me on call for port battles...
But its gaming... so whenever the moons align.
@Jason... when we play through discord or steam its easier with Eugen games to add friends when setting up games... as other friends can invite friends into the game and then you can friend them.
Move along....nothing to see here :peace:
Quote from: Destraex on August 21, 2017, 06:39:34 PM
@Jason... when we play through discord or steam its easier with Eugen games to add friends when setting up games... as other friends can invite friends into the game and then you can friend them.
Sure! -- if Eugen has fixed their friend add/connection system. :buck2:
Quote from: JasonPratt on August 22, 2017, 01:35:18 PM
Quote from: Destraex on August 21, 2017, 06:39:34 PM
@Jason... when we play through discord or steam its easier with Eugen games to add friends when setting up games... as other friends can invite friends into the game and then you can friend them.
Sure! -- if Eugen has fixed their friend add/connection system. :buck2:
Still borked as of last night
Yeah I added a bunch of people from the grogheads list too.
I kept looking at the damn girl in steam and telling myself to play it...
We still can. I just create a game called destraex's game. You see it in the lobby and join. Did this last night with a mate.
Hopefully this will fix things. I have no idea why only two hard drives are involved. It's unusual for such a problem to happen. It's like the friends server was one computer in a back room somewhere, instead of a data centre using distributed computing and taken care of by a third party.
"Hello everyone,
Twelve days ago, a malfunction on our servers started to prevent new players to create their account to access our online services. It was followed by a complete crash of our servers, making online play impossible for 48 hours. This was due to the simultaneous and sudden death of both the hard drives containing the databases.
This was the first time, since the release of Wargame: European Escalation in 2012, we were experiencing such a serious breakdown.
We have switched our servers and our online services to a new, more stable architecture.
We also are changing the way friend list are managed on Steam, and Steel Division: Normandy 44 and Wargame: Red Dragon will now use the Steam Friend List system (an update will be available for Act of Aggression: Reboot Edition as well). To do so, we had to reinitiate the friend list, and a few of you might have to complete your friend list by adding them on Steam. The system will be improved in the coming days.
There will be a short server maintenance tomorrow at 10AM CEST to switch to this new friend list system.
We would like to thank you all for your support, and we sincerely apologize for the inconvenience.
Eugen Systems"
We'll see. Des, are you on Steam's Grogheads group? I tried to find you on the Grogheads group, but failed.
Looks like everything is back up and running. Sadly on a random basis the game is mostly dead (120 people logged in last night)
JP and I had a game yesterday. I wouldn't necessarily call it a good game but a game. Right now I'm a liability as my decks are all late game decks and on conquest that is a loss. Still working on improving that but on 2v2 map there is not a lot of forgiveness. 3v3 would probably be more supportive for a late deck build.
That said, I feel my infantry held out pretty well, although it seemed I was losing units that were in cover and not suppressed so that was a bit head-scratching.
Going to continue working on decks but would like to get a larger 3v3 or 4v4 game going if there's anyone else interested at some point.
I'd play it. But I am a real rookie vs people and don't have any decks setup for it.
At the moment, Steam has Steel Division: Normandy 44 - Second Wave Bundle (http://store.steampowered.com/bundle/4635/Steel_Division_Normandy_44__Second_Wave_Bundle/) on sale for $24.46 U.S. I am very tempted by this offer.
So, what's the verdict? Is Steel Division: Normandy 44 worth playing?
Quote from: Greybriar on November 16, 2017, 10:52:34 AM
At the moment, Steam has Steel Division: Normandy 44 - Second Wave Bundle (http://store.steampowered.com/bundle/4635/Steel_Division_Normandy_44__Second_Wave_Bundle/) on sale for $24.46 U.S. I am very tempted by this offer.
Evil. Pure Evil.
Recently tried the 'Storm in the West' Mod- seemed to give the game better firefights.
I think it's really well done and the engine really is better suited to WWII that current generation hardware of the wargame series where a hit is a kill.
That said the game is dead. You might find some guys here that are willing to play but Eugen really screwed the pooch on how they handled this game and the server issues.
Quote from: jamus34 on November 16, 2017, 11:57:47 AM
I think it's really well done and the engine really is better suited to WWII that current generation hardware of the wargame series where a hit is a kill.
That said the game is dead. You might find some guys here that are willing to play but Eugen really screwed the pooch on how they handled this game and the server issues.
But in my opinion it remains an outstanding single player experience.
I'm still having fun playing solo. The new Attack/Defend scenarios are good for when you just want to blow crap up with WWII toys.
Thanks guys. I appreciate your thoughts. O0
I will pull the trigger on this for the single-player mode alone.
Humble has the game on sale for half off. $19.99
https://www.humblebundle.com/store/steel-division-normandy-44?linkID=&mcID=102:5a20cec19eb8296c0481633a:ot:582651aaf7bb513ff1a9e78b:1&utm_source=Humble+Bundle+Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2017_12_04_curvepublishersale_2017&utm_content=Grid_Image
New update today! Emphasis mine! :D
QuoteNew Update: Santa Claws
Kicking off the Steel Division: Normandy 44's Christmas Event, here's the long-awaited Santa Claws Update patchlog! This update is a special one: it was tested and approved by the community (you) during an open-beta phase. It brings some cool gameplay changes, as well as some long-awaited features:
Gameplay changes:
Vehicles' critical damages can now be repaired by supply units
Reworked damage & critical hit systems
Adjusted vehicle off-road speed
Increased Short/Mid range precision
Features:
Moddable DLC Content: Second Wave DLC owners can now create mods with the DLC content
Active Pause: the game can now be paused with the "P" key in Single Player (campaign, skirmish...), while still allowing you to give orders.
Private "Breakthrough" game
Fixes:
Improved AI in Attack/Defense Breakthrough games
Fixed some rare crashes
Fixed Carrier Recce UI buttons (Fire at Position, Auto-cover, Return fire)
Fixed 2e DB Lance-Flammes unit, now able to get back into its vehicles
Fixed LeFH 18M smoke cursor
Fixed Pzh 39H (21.Panzer) AP shots stress values
Fixed PzH Lorraine 105 top view picture
Fixed Canadian Ace Leo Major's weapon on his 3D model and 2D picture
Fixed Troop formation bug on multiple selection
^That'll be a game changer for a lot of old grogs around here.
Who you calling old? :-"
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on December 21, 2017, 11:37:18 AM
^That'll be a game changer for a lot of old grogs around here.
Yep, I may buy it now (not that I'm admitting to being old, daddio).
Actually, for me, it's less about my supposed lack of reaction time and more about the fact that when I play these games I don't get a chance to enjoy the shiny graphics
Quote from: Barthheart on December 21, 2017, 11:23:40 AM
New update today! Emphasis mine! :D
QuoteNew Update: Santa Claws
Kicking off the Steel Division: Normandy 44's Christmas Event, here's the long-awaited Santa Claws Update patchlog! This update is a special one: it was tested and approved by the community (you) during an open-beta phase. It brings some cool gameplay changes, as well as some long-awaited features:
Gameplay changes:
Vehicles' critical damages can now be repaired by supply units
Reworked damage & critical hit systems
Adjusted vehicle off-road speed
Increased Short/Mid range precision
Features:
Moddable DLC Content: Second Wave DLC owners can now create mods with the DLC content
Active Pause: the game can now be paused with the "P" key in Single Player (campaign, skirmish...), while still allowing you to give orders.
Private "Breakthrough" game
Fixes:
Improved AI in Attack/Defense Breakthrough games
Fixed some rare crashes
Fixed Carrier Recce UI buttons (Fire at Position, Auto-cover, Return fire)
Fixed 2e DB Lance-Flammes unit, now able to get back into its vehicles
Fixed LeFH 18M smoke cursor
Fixed Pzh 39H (21.Panzer) AP shots stress values
Fixed PzH Lorraine 105 top view picture
Fixed Canadian Ace Leo Major's weapon on his 3D model and 2D picture
Fixed Troop formation bug on multiple selection
Much awesomeness!!! Thank you! O0
Quote from: Father Ted on December 21, 2017, 01:24:49 PM
...
Actually, for me, it's less about my supposed lack of reaction time and more about the fact that when I play these games I don't get a chance to enjoy the shiny graphics
This! Now we'll be able to zoom right in while the action is going and see the cool models up close.
Quote from: Barthheart on December 21, 2017, 11:23:40 AM
New update today! Emphasis mine! :D
Active Pause: the game can now be paused with the "P" key in Single Player (campaign, skirmish...), while still allowing you to give orders.
Excellent! Now I can pause the game while trying to find the keystroke combinations I need to use in certain situations. O0
Quote from: Greybriar on December 21, 2017, 05:25:33 PM
Quote from: Barthheart on December 21, 2017, 11:23:40 AM
New update today! Emphasis mine! :D
Quote
Active Pause: the game can now be paused with the "P" key in Single Player (campaign, skirmish...), while still allowing you to give orders.
Excellent! Now I can pause the game while trying to find the keystroke combinations I need to use in certain situations. O0
A true pause function? Not bullet time? Can you give units orders during this pause period?
I always wondered why they so resisted doing this. I would love to have had it in Red Dragon.
Quote from: DennisS on December 21, 2017, 09:09:41 PM
Quote from: Greybriar on December 21, 2017, 05:25:33 PM
Quote from: Barthheart on December 21, 2017, 11:23:40 AM
New update today! Emphasis mine! :D
Quote
Active Pause: the game can now be paused with the "P" key in Single Player (campaign, skirmish...), while still allowing you to give orders.
Excellent! Now I can pause the game while trying to find the keystroke combinations I need to use in certain situations. O0
A true pause function? Not bullet time? Can you give units orders during this pause period?
I am assuming that because it says "while still allowing you to give orders", means you can give orders while paused.
Quote from: DennisS on December 21, 2017, 09:09:41 PM
Quote from: Greybriar on December 21, 2017, 05:25:33 PM
Quote from: Barthheart on December 21, 2017, 11:23:40 AM
New update today! Emphasis mine! :D
Quote
Active Pause: the game can now be paused with the "P" key in Single Player (campaign, skirmish...), while still allowing you to give orders.
Excellent! Now I can pause the game while trying to find the keystroke combinations I need to use in certain situations. O0
A true pause function? Not bullet time? Can you give units orders during this pause period?
Just played a quick match and the pause is a true pause and you can issue orders while paused. Finally was able to play a match at normal speed and still have control... and won at medium difficulty!
Yes! Finally! :notworthy:
Announcing "Back to Hell" DLC and Free Coop Pack
4 new divisions, playable in solo & multiplayer skirmish:
7th Armoured Division "Desert Rats"
Demi-Brigade SAS
2. Panzerdivision
Festungs Gross-Paris
58 new units, including the famous Westland Lysander aircraft, the le.FH 16 field howitzer, the Dewoitine D.520 fighter aircraft, the Panzer IB light tank, and the 75mm SP Autocar... Use the new remote-controlled demolition vehicle Borgward IV to blow up your enemy infantry & light vehicles.
http://steamcommunity.com/games/572410/announcements/detail/1654378539083414457
I haven't played this game much (RL things and other hobbies) but it sure does sound like the developers have been adding lots of goodies.
:bd:
Will get.
I think this game is a true gem. If it just had a dynamic campaign... I might never play anything else.
New DLC released...
http://store.steampowered.com/app/780340/Steel_Division_Normandy_44__Back_to_Hell/ (http://store.steampowered.com/app/780340/Steel_Division_Normandy_44__Back_to_Hell/)
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.akamai.steamstatic.com%2Fsteam%2Fapps%2F780340%2Fextras%2FSteam_Store_list_ENG.png%3Ft%3D1518530401&hash=d2f15d74f8a3992b88ec76fb11bfe02ccd0f901a)
\m/
Thanks for the updates!
Once I'm done with my current obsessions I'm going to fire this game up! O0
Looks like the base game is on sale for $15.99 too.
http://store.steampowered.com/app/572410/Steel_Division_Normandy_44/
$15.99. I recommend this game: playable squad/gun/vehicle-level tactical/operational WW2 combat.
Looks like Eugen staff went on strike.
Google Translate:
Hello,
As you read in the press and on social networks, 21 of the 44 employees of Eugen Systems
have been on strike since February 14 afternoon. It seemed necessary to provide some elements
to understand the situation.
The working week at Eugen Systems is 38.5 hours. As specified in each contract
the gross annual remuneration of each employee includes, on the one hand, the remuneration for
35 hours of work, as well as any overtime hours within the limit of 1.72 hours per
week. In addition, each employee has 1 day of RTT per month, which he can
take when he wants, even by half-day.
Payrolls, which are usually sent on time to employees, have been
exceptionally sent late for the January pay. On the one hand because of the
simplification of the pay statement related to the latest legislative reforms involving complications
for the preparation of pay slips. On the other hand an update on the presentation of newsletters
to mention the actual hours completed. As such, each employee received a letter
explanatory.
The wages were paid on time at the usual pay date.
We would like to point out that the company Eugen Systems perfectly respects the minimum wages
for all employees, and in any case made regularizations when it was
necessary.
We noticed an error update on the payslip of 2 employees, which will be well
obviously corrected on the payroll of February 2018.
There is no crunch culture at Eugen Systems. It happened once, in 2010 during the
publication of RUSE, that the management requests 3 employees to stay to work one day,
a Saturday: This day of work helped to ensure the stability of the servers and the smooth running of the
launch of the game. Since then we have released 5 games, and this never happened again.
Finally, the Directorate endeavors to communicate with the staff representatives during the
meetings, and internal discussions are currently underway regarding the classification of
some employees. They will continue until an agreement is reached.
As exchanged with staff delegates at the meeting of December 2017, Eugen
Systems organizes, starting next week, the annual and professional interviews of
collaborators, which will allow a time of exchange with each one.
Thank you for your attention,
Eugen Systems
Oye vey. (No translation necessary)
I translated it anyways. Just because I am always interested to know things. :P
https://www.factornews.com/interview/strike-division-page-1-43805.html
"Google translate:
Valentine's Day is loving couples who walk hand in hand, but sometimes it is also breaks. And sometimes, they are pretty brutal. Today, some twenty people in their fifties working at Eugen System, the Parisian studio responsible for R.U.S.E or more recently Steel Division, went on strike at midday. It has been some time since the discontent among the employees of the studio, dissatisfaction that crystallized today when employees discovered irregularities in the settlement of their January salary. The group of developers therefore decided to go on strike and meet to discuss their demands, which will be added to the already long list of grievances that exist between the management and the development teams, detailed in particular in a Mediapart article on working conditions in the French JV.
We were able to interview a person employed by the studio about this social movement, and this is what she told us.
Fern: The social movements in the companies of JV, it is rather rare anyway. What happened to get here?
Eugenie *: Since about one year, when our staff delegates came into office, we have reported irregularities in the running of the studio through their work: the minimum wages not always respected, the frictions with the creative direction of the projects developed in the business and the administrative management completely in the tear, among other things. We tried to establish a dialogue with the management of the studio to improve the situation, but she always refused to listen to us. Faced with this refusal to discuss, we called on a lawyer in the hope of reasoning the direction, especially on points of the Labor Code, and reframing the negotiations. After feeling that it had worked, with a slight improvement in the exchanges, we realized that the direction was just timed. Today, February 14, 2018, after receiving our pay slips 2 weeks late, the day after the release of the last DLC Steel Division, we found the result of the latest slam dated. This crystallized our fed up, and we spontaneously decided to go on strike at midday, which will be followed tomorrow.
F: Did the current events in the industry, such as the Quantic Dream affair or the creation of STJV, inspire you in this coup?
E: First and foremost, the election of staff delegates allowed us to speak with one voice to management. That's when we realized that the dialogue we tried to put in place was completely ignored as our fed up gradually turned into claims, then today into action. The release of the word in the industry and the surveys that have been published about Quantic Dream have only confirmed what we already suspected, namely that our situation was far from unique in the French studios.
F: To get ahead of the trolls, why talk about it now?
E: It's exactly like Duck PC said in his article, the industry is small and a sidelocation is quickly arrived. Individually, we are too exposed to make waves, but as a block, we fear less blows. Today, the trigger remains the burst of anger of the employees of the studio facing the latest maneuvers of management. But we do not want to stop the movement, and now we know that structures like the STJV are ready to support us in this kind of initiatives.
F: Thank you for answering our questions, I leave you the last word.
E: In the video game, we work by passion ...
* The first name has been changed."
https://www.wargamer.com/articles/steel-division-2-announced/
Eugen Systems have just announced a sequel to their real-time tactical WW2 war game, Steel Division: Normandy '44.
Steel Division II, as it is currently known, is set on the Eastern Front and primarily covers Operation Bagration, which was fought between 22nd of June and 19th of August 1944 when the Red Army launched an offensive into Belorussia (present day Belarus).
I really enjoyed Steel Division as a singleplayer game (although the forum is dominated by MP talk). The new SP mode with a dynamic campaign and an army to command sounds like just what the dr ordered.
WANT!
Can't wait for another game that glorifies the supremacy of the German army!
RTS Is not my thing but this looks good!
No Paradox this time as far as I can tell - Eugen will probably self-publish unless they can get someone to help them further down the line.
Shame really, I thought PDX and Eugen could have worked well together but a lot of things seem to have not gone quite right. Would be interested in knowing who decided they should part ways.
Quote from: Sir Slash on July 25, 2018, 11:17:50 AM
RTS Is not my thing but this looks good!
With ya Slash. Game is gorgeous but RTS and me just do not mix. Even in slow mo mode. Hell, maybe I just need to suck it up and try again :uglystupid2:
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on July 25, 2018, 10:54:20 AM
WANT!
Can't wait for another game that glorifies the supremacy of the German army!
How so ? The Germans were slaughtered at Bagration. Unless there's sarcasm there I didn't quite get.
All kidding aside, the Eugen games get flak for nerfing weapons or overpowering weapons for the sake of MP balance over historical accuracy.
The good news is that the SP campaign sounds like an instant purchase and what was lacking from the first one. If you are only playing SP, there are mods that will turn off the balancing and add more realism to the weapons / vehicles.
Quote from: Skoop on July 25, 2018, 11:29:31 AM
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on July 25, 2018, 10:54:20 AM
WANT!
Can't wait for another game that glorifies the supremacy of the German army!
How so ? The Germans were slaughtered at Bagration. Unless there's sarcasm there I didn't quite get.
All kidding aside, the Eugen games get flak for nerfing weapons or overpowering weapons for the sake of MP balance over historical accuracy.
The good news is that the SP campaign sounds like an instant purchase and what was lacking from the first one. If you are only playing SP, there are mods that will turn off the balancing and add more realism to the weapons / vehicles.
Yes. It was sarcasm. We were talking about WWII German army pr0n in another thread.
This is great and what I wanted
Quote from: glen55 on July 25, 2018, 10:47:07 AM
The new SP mode with a dynamic campaign and an army to command sounds like just what the dr ordered.
Very much this.
Still not exactly sure why SD'44 never really caught fire -- definitely never seemed to have the fan-base that the Wargame titles had. It's a superb game. But the lack of dynamic campaign was/is definitely a shortcoming. The sequel sounds like it could really be terrific.
Be careful what you wish for. I suspect steel division was not as popular because it had a more restrictive .deck system and therefore more historical but less variety in decks. A Sherman is a Sherman is a Sherman. Weapons systems are fairly samish. I love it though. Still enjoy it regularly as a go to that most of my friends who still do t mi d a bit of real time stress enjoy. Steel division obviously did well enough to justify a number 2. I do wonder after the steel division strikes if that is why paradox cut them loose.
Quote from: sandman2575 on July 25, 2018, 08:07:52 PM
Quote from: glen55 on July 25, 2018, 10:47:07 AM
The new SP mode with a dynamic campaign and an army to command sounds like just what the dr ordered.
Very much this.
Still not exactly sure why SD'44 never really caught fire -- definitely never seemed to have the fan-base that the Wargame titles had. It's a superb game. But the lack of dynamic campaign was/is definitely a shortcoming. The sequel sounds like it could really be terrific.
I can't recall precisely why, but after watching a few videos I somehow got it into my head that Steel Division Normandy '44 was not for me and wrote it off early on. (I've always been a Steel Panthers / Combat Mission / Tiller loyalist). But I'm starting to think I may have been shortsighted as I have seen many positive comments since SDII was announced. (The lack of a dynamic campaign is of zero concern to me as I prefer scenarios to campaigns).
Well, there aren't many "scenarios", other than create your own scenarios.
There are, however, single-player campaigns. (Of scripted scenarios but you can develop and take along your core forces, I think, Panzer General style.)
Quote from: stolypin on July 26, 2018, 09:21:57 AM
I can't recall precisely why, but after watching a few videos I somehow got it into my head that Steel Division Normandy '44 was not for me and wrote it off early on. (I've always been a Steel Panthers / Combat Mission / Tiller loyalist). But I'm starting to think I may have been shortsighted as I have seen many positive comments since SDII was announced. (The lack of a dynamic campaign is of zero concern to me as I prefer scenarios to campaigns).
It seems to go on sale pretty often -- I'd bet you could pick it up for $20 without too much trouble with a little searching and patience.
Anyway, it's a very good game, well worth checking out. I'm not much of a Tiller guy at all myself, but have poured countless hours into Combat Mission. Obviously it's a very different game from CM, but I'm evidence that you can enjoy SD'44 even if Combat Mission is your preferred cup of tea.
Green a gaming has it for $10 atm
I think its lack of appeal is the huge learning curve of it. The multiplayer aspect is a big thing and veterans of the series already know how to play the style. So learning it is either watching 50 youtube videos, or getting smashed 100 times.
Huge learning curve? Of Steel Division? I don't see it, not at all.
The deck building takes some learning, but gameplay is a no brainer. When I think "huge learning curve", I think War in the pacific, etc.
I think it's more of a learning spike than a 'curve', the more you play SD, easier it gets but those first few matches... especially if you don't give yourself the right conditions to learn in, can be incredibly brutal and you won't always understand why you're loosing. I never found the game great at explaining itself but once you start picking things up - like Jar said, it's a lot easier than it looks.
Just avoid 1v1's.
SD44 is a game I dearly love and yet rarely ever play. I don't understand this yet. ???
But I wanted to add a re-vote for "dearly love". :smitten:
Quote from: Hofstadter on July 27, 2018, 03:27:30 AM
I think its lack of appeal is the huge learning curve of it. The multiplayer aspect is a big thing and veterans of the series already know how to play the style. So learning it is either watching 50 youtube videos, or getting smashed 100 times.
Play skirmish vs not easy but very easy AI. The AI virtually lets you win while you learn.
Really been enjoying this guys videos on steel division tourney match commentary. It's like watching a game of your chosen sport.
This guy really knows his stuff and you learn a lot from him. I have seen so many tactics in this game that I just did not have the game knowledge to be able to use effectively.
EDIT: just realised their was not topic for the recently announced #2
I can never really win in this game
Me neither. I want to like it but I barely play it because I duck at it. I think it's mainly down to the piecemeal nature of unit arrivals.
Quote from: Silent Disapproval Robot on August 25, 2018, 05:43:43 PM
Me neither. I want to like it but I barely play it because I duck at it. I think it's mainly down to the piecemeal nature of unit arrivals.
Its only piecemeal if you build your decks that way. Also, the enemy is operating under the same reinforcement rules too...
If you enjoy it, that's cool. I want to but it doesn't click with me.
Quote from: Silent Disapproval Robot on August 25, 2018, 05:55:55 PM
If you enjoy it, that's cool. I want to but it doesn't click with me.
That's cool if you don't like it, or suck at it, but I don't think its because of how reinforcements work.
It is why I don't particularly like it. I find it limiting as I'd rather have a set pool of units available all at once in order to plan my attack or defence over having them come on a timer.
Quote from: Silent Disapproval Robot on August 25, 2018, 06:07:29 PM
It is why I don't particularly like it. I find it limiting as I'd rather have a set pool of units available all at once in order to plan my attack or defence over having them come on a timer.
OK. That's fair enough. I didn't like it at first either. I guess it grew on me once I got better at building decks, which is something I avoided delving into for quite some time.
Quote from: Silent Disapproval Robot on August 25, 2018, 06:07:29 PM
It is why I don't particularly like it. I find it limiting as I'd rather have a set pool of units available all at once in order to plan my attack or defence over having them come on a timer.
There are ways to do almost that.
Quote from: Destraex on August 12, 2018, 06:33:34 PM
Really been enjoying this guys videos on steel division tourney match commentary. It's like watching a game of your chosen sport.
This guy really knows his stuff and you learn a lot from him. I have seen so many tactics in this game that I just did not have the game knowledge to be able to use effectively.
Do you have a video of him you liked in particular? I watched a few, trying to give the game another chance, and I didn't really see any sort of "tactical behavior" I think I would enjoy.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on July 27, 2018, 05:34:47 AM
Huge learning curve? Of Steel Division? I don't see it, not at all.
The deck building takes some learning, but gameplay is a no brainer. When I think "huge learning curve", I think War in the pacific, etc.
That's what I think as well... But I am open to being convinced of the entertainment factor. Although a game that seems to value "any piece of land" the same for VP Point calculation and doesn't even come with unit'S abilities to dig-in, or any kind of engagement type apart from "we drive straight at each other", does fight uphill while convincing me.
Cheers,
I
I don't consider it to have a huge learning curve either. However to use the units well and understand how the stats interact is a skill that does have a little bit of a curve. But generally it's not much more complex than chess. It takes a lot of really nice things into account as well. Like penetration being tied to the range of weapons and such. Things you really don't get in an RTS normally. It's a very nice cross between RTS and wargame. Being game enough not to be laborious for most players and real enough to suspend my disbelief.
Generally I don't think steel division is worth playing unless you play with a friend on the same side. I do enjoy it on my own occasionally though. It is a very engaging game.
^you're biased though. You always prefer multiplayer. I'm biased toward single player and outside of a few matches with Jason Pratt, it's the only way way I play this game and it's totally worth it.
Anyone up for getting a Grogs game going on this again.
I also played with Pratt and while I was not very good (sucked at deckbuilding) I had a ton of fun.
If I could be around when you boys were on without the kids running riot (my son has a penetrating voice and I have industrial deafness making it hard to play with people online with voice during the day). I am always up for a bit of SD44 against the AI.
Drop me a ping if you see me on Steam! (And not already in something else, but often I can stop that. ;) )
Hmmm.... I've also played a game of this with Jason...... ??? :)
Maybe a MP Grog game would be fun..... I'd be up for that.
For private games you can do 4 people vs 4 ai. It is possible though to do 6 people vs 2 ai with a bit of creative clicking. The Eugen public servers do 10 vs 10 but you cannot add ai.
Im up for it, but I dont think im online at the same time as anybody else
Quote from: sandman2575 on July 26, 2018, 07:55:54 PM
Quote from: stolypin on July 26, 2018, 09:21:57 AM
I can't recall precisely why, but after watching a few videos I somehow got it into my head that Steel Division Normandy '44 was not for me and wrote it off early on. (I've always been a Steel Panthers / Combat Mission / Tiller loyalist). But I'm starting to think I may have been shortsighted as I have seen many positive comments since SDII was announced. (The lack of a dynamic campaign is of zero concern to me as I prefer scenarios to campaigns).
It seems to go on sale pretty often -- I'd bet you could pick it up for $20 without too much trouble with a little searching and patience.
Anyway, it's a very good game, well worth checking out. I'm not much of a Tiller guy at all myself, but have poured countless hours into Combat Mission. Obviously it's a very different game from CM, but I'm evidence that you can enjoy SD'44 even if Combat Mission is your preferred cup of tea.
Yep it was 13 bucks and with the DLC about 30 so I got it. The tutorials are fun so far.
Played during the weekend. But Easy AI is too easy. I remember having trouble at medium.
Yeah, the AI steps up is significantly at the medium setting.
Quote from: jomni on April 05, 2017, 10:33:40 PM
Good feedback guys.
The "realism" can be surprising. I was skirmishing with the 2ieme Blindee through the Bois de Limors when I heard some of the armored infantry speaking Spanish -- Which is as it should be since one of the battalions in that division was a Spanish battalion.
You also hear what sounds like Italian for the German Italian units.
I played a multiplayer game with random humans last night. Was a lot of fun. However I was responsible for holding a large swath of the map on the far side while one of the three players on our side was only allocated a narrow frontage so he could push effectively. I held for the first phase fairly well. But when those german big cats came on the field my division just had nothing that could respond effectively. The opposing player must have been building up to phase B\C by saving his points. We won in the end. But I needed significant help from the middle player when my front started falling mid B phase.
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1846/43694494815_f277368cb2_o.jpg)
Hey folks
I'm going to start playing this game (for basically the first time). I've watched Quill's Let's play videos, but I'm hear to ask for any tips/tricks/advice from the professionals here :bd:
Thanks
Tips for you when playing skirmish vs AI:
a) In skirmish always play conquest not annihilation. So that your aim is to take ground rather than kill the enemy. Set more conquest points if you want the battle to last longer. It can be fun to experiment at the end when you have beaten the enemy enough that they are a little more sparse on the ground. Additionally if you play germans you will get time to bring out those expensive big cats with a long game.
b) Start by putting enemy AI on very easy
c) In phase A for a new player a good starting configuration is to race to the front and put a team of recon, officer infantry and a 6pdr or 57mm AT gun in good firing positions covering most of the field. I usually use 3. Moving them up the main roads using the move fast command.
d) Remember that before you start the battle you can queue up movement commands. Always deploy your units on roads and queue the move fast command to where you want them to end up.
e) Make sure you hold down C to show the distance circle and look at the maximum range of your weapons by selecting the unit and pressing on the guys name in the bottom right. This will bring up his stats page and show you the ranges of various weapons. Remember these are maximum ranges and it is often better to let the enemy close before opening fire.
The distance circle ALSO shows whether a unit can see through cover from the where your cursor is.
f) To let the enemy close press Z on your units. They will hide as indicated by a lightning symbol to indicate they have no power on their unit symbol. When the enemy get too close they will still be seen. When they are seen they may not get the first shot in if they are hiding so be wary of that. This is especially good to do with bazooka teams.
g) Make sure you press U to unload troops if the enemy are firing on them. If the truck gets hit the whole squad dies in a lot of cases.
h) Press the R key or retreat button if your men are pinned (i.e. the red bar is full) and they will retreat for 30 seconds. This is often enough to get them back behind cover. You will have no control of them while they do this.
i) Remember that recon is very very important in this game. You must make sure you have recon in good forward hiding positions relaying enemy movements to your forces. Otherwise they will be firing at you and you will not be able to see them or if you can you will not be able to identify them. Once your scouts are forward and deployed. Press Z to hide them so they do not reveal their position.
Do not worry if they are in enemy territory. Unless they are found they will do fine.
j)Use aircraft bombs especially to suppress the big tank cats the germans have that you cannot kill at range. I have had games where we have had nothing to kill the German Konigstiger with but could suppress it with arty or aircraft all day. Keeping it from engaging and forcing it to retreat constantly.
k) On the unit icons the yellow circled number is the AP power of your main weapon, the lower silver shield number is your frontal armour value. THey are directly related. 8 yellow AP will beat 8 silver shield armour at the weapons maximum range. Additionally for every 100m of closure from max range you gain 1 yellow AP. So a weapon with 800m max range and a default AP of 8 that closed to 700m would have a AP of 9. Thus beating a silver shield of up to 9. Flank when you can as flanks and rear are obviously much less silver shield in value. This can be shown by bringing up the unit diagram.
l) Do not bother trying to destroy enemy aircraft with flak. Only fighters do this effectively. FLAK will only suppress the enemy which is good enough if you can have enough flak to do this before they drop. However enough flak batteries will take down the enemy. Flak combined with fighters is a good combo. Fighters will be able to strafe troops as well. Which is especially useful for pinning AT guns. Half the game is about taking out hidden enemy AT guns.
J) Keep officers near your important units in each sector. Units within the officers circle will be more accurate and have better moral. Which makes the difference often in long range engagements. Keep your officers hidden if you can.
k) Pay special attention to the number of rounds and range your artillery units have as well as the rate of fire. The reload speed for artillery can be a killer. Especially when the first shots are being calculated. By that time the enemy can be gone and your artillery will still fire. Adjusting fire I do not think takes as long but is still not effective at following anything units that are once again stationary.
l) Use your infantry to take and hold ground but keep them in the trees or in cover. Buildings are excellent for this and taking towns with them is great. They are very hard to dislodge from buildings. But retreat them from outer buildings of a town if their are enemy heavy units approaching. Let them fight house to house from the inner buildings rather than getting hit for no reply in the outer buildings. Use your scouts to find weak points in the enemy line and push into them with infantry if they are only lightly defended. This can be an easy way to take ground. Which is the aim of this game... not to sit back and take out enemy units. (unless you play annihilation which I think is pointless).
j) Open topped vehicles can be easy targets for aircraft if you are lucky. Marders are very effective AT weapons but very weak from the top.
k) With regard to aircraft. If you notice the enemy bring on fighters or think the flak is too heavy. Press the retreat button on them rather than lose them. I actually set the game to "do not auto retreat after dropping bombs", so I can have the aircraft hang around and I can use their machine guns to strafe after the bombing run.
Also just before retreating its a good idea to tell the arcraft to swing the way you want to retreat. Because otherwise they can turn towards rather than away from the enemy to turn around and retreat.
l) When using fighters they will attack nearby enemy if you leave them circling on the field.
m) If you see one of your tanks listed as abandoned. You can resupply the crew with a supply truck.
n) Always watch for out of ammo symbols on your units. This may just mean an MG is low on ammo rather than the main gun, it may mean a weapon is just out of HE and therefore will no longer fire on infantry. It may mean an infantry unit is out of AT rocket ammo and
can no longer stave off enemy armour. OR it could mean that a unit has been ammo racked, is strangely alive BUT has literally no ammo for any weapons. Of course it could also mean a unit has simply run out of ammo.
o) After units reach the front, I think it is better to then us the Q command to move. Which is basically a movement command that insists on units stopping and firing upon contact. If you do not want the unit to stop, for instance if it is moving between cover, just use a normal move command. Then of course move fast command just uses roads.
p) SPACE bar will take you to the location of the last message. But I do not use it as it is disorientating.
q) There is a command to stop your unit from AUTO HIDING. I sometimes use it to stop AT guns moving to silly positions so I can manually place them properly.
r) When you unload infantry. watch as they enter cover like trees, buildings or vinyards etc. They will gain different coloured shields which indicate what kind of cover they are in. Learn which cover is best or if something you think of as cover is doing anything at all.
s) Remember that infantry carried in vehicles with NO weapons will dissappear as soon as you unload the troops. This is a big change from previous games and confuses some people. Weaponised vehicles like half tracks stay and you can reload your men onto them. This is especially a big trap for placing AT guns. Because you unload your AT gun to find your position is no good and you have no vehicle to hook back up to to move again. Thus having to push the gun slowly to where you want to go.
t) Remember that weapon ranges in this game are maximum effective range. The men will only open fire to those max effecive ranges. However they may not match exactly to maximum real physically possible ranges in real life. For instance rifle ranges will often only be 300m for something like a garand. This is the effective range of the average soldier but some may say it should be longer. Some tanks can fire 1200m and the usual in this game is max effective of 1000m. Same for AT guns and infantry support guns. So be wary that you may find a wolverine shooting at your mkIV from a little further than you can hit him at. This comes down to playing the game from both sides and knowing what each unit can do.
Often the MG in the unit has the longest range. So be wary as I mentioned above that if you open up at max range it will likely just be your squad automatic weapon firing. Bren, BAR or some such. I think I will try with allied units to let them close because I realised writing this that the allies advantage relies on all soldiers firing. Where the german infantry units often carry one or more of the very effective mg34 or 42 guns.
u) Most maps are flat. It's normandy after all. But some have elevation. Elevation in borked in this game. Their is no way of telling how far your guns can depress or raise to fire up hills and the hills are the same wierd all or nothing sharp inclines wargame do. I do not think they have really developed hill mechanics properly. I don't think their is a fatigue factor. In fact infantry never get tired in this game. But then they are so slow anyways. There is also no fuel limit in this game like their was in previous wargame games. They simplified the resupply mechanic to ammunition and basic field repairs only. If you have a track blown a supply truck can fix it. Same with ammo.
v) Some AT guns especially in phase A DO NOT have HE capability. So will NOT fire at infantry. Just be aware that if they are not firing it may be because of this. Often AT guns that do have HE will only have a limited supply. Some German divisions especially though are flush with infantry guns. Which are excellent with HE. Although they do not seem to be able to fire except in direct fire roles.
w) Mortars in this game are very close range. Therefore they almost have to be on top of the enemy to fire. 1200 or 1600m for instance is normal for the max range of mortars in this game. It's only of the unrealistic things in the game I do not like. but it does give the feel that you have close indirect fire support. Remember that a BAR in this game is 400m range and a .30 cal is 600m where a .50 will fire 800m. A squad mg42 is only 400m as well. But a tripod one is 800m. So I guess mortars will outrange most small arms.
x) Remember paratroopers will not surrender just because they are surrounded where other troops that are will surrender under a little pressure if you get close enough to them. If you get surrounded you can fight your way out, but be careful of the enemy getting too close to you.
y) With each shot taken against the enemy the next will be more accurate. This is a game mechanic that simulates learning the fall of shot and adjusting. So be aware if the enemy has been firing at you for some time he is bound to land a shot soon, not only that but a critical one if he is already hitting you will be more likely over time. The more gold stars your crew has the more accurate and the better moral they will have. I think though if you move your tanks position or tell them to fire at something else you have to start this process again.
z) You must stop you tanks to fire. It's ww2 and a lot of units will either not fire well or not fire on the move at all. Well maybe not at all?
a1) NOTE that units under stress (the red bar) do not fire as well. The more stressed the more likely they are to miss. This is why it is good to move stressed units. It is good to stress incoming aircraft with AA for this reason. You may not force a retreat or kill the AC but you may make it miss.
a2) Some shock units have a high proportion of SMG weapons and almost no longer ranged weapons. There is no point putting them in long range defensive positions. I sometimes do this by mistake and wonder why they are not firing. But close in they just win right away really.
a3) The allies vehicles have a tonne of MGs they can use for AA purposes. The germans have comparatively few organically. Thus the germans always need at least a little AAA. The allies organic AA while not good at least will not let a german aircraft loiter at will.
I hope this helps.
WOW
Destraex.....seriously, thank you!
no problem. :)
I forgot to mention you need turtle wax for your tanks and cups of tea if you play the British.
As an alternate to one point of Des' list: play annihilation on skirmish instead of conquest. But, make sure your deck is prepared to set up and defend killing fields on the map.
The enemy will gain some extra income by pushing down beyond the halfway point, but you'll be killing him from prepared positions and forcing him to spend his cards and income recovering from this; whereas on the other hand if your units die, you'll be able to reinforce your positions more quickly than he can bring back force against you.
Relatedly, good defensive squads and vehicles are more cost-effective than assaulters, and yet assaulters often make fine defenders, too (especially if you have scouts helping spot for them). So you can pump out more defenders more quickly to start with, and then stiffen your line with any assault units in your deck.
As the computer runs out of options, you can start creating task forces to advance upward to cut off and bottle in his lines of reinforcement.
Against a human player on annihilation, things get more complex of course.
The thing I don't like about annihilation mode is that the AI can run out of units with you just sitting back with enough ammo trucks to kill them. Kinda defeats the point of SD1 in general with it's front line system.
Of course! -- but for a beginner, that's good practice. O0
I am interested though to see how you go accting man
Well, it will be a week or so before I start. I have a couple platoons of Sherman's that need painting before I can jump into anything else! :bd:
Just spray them green. Five minutes done. Then move on to pre painted steel division Sherman's. American 3rd division is a great division for starters. Well balanced and has the best allies tsnks in the game for armour protection. The Sherman jumbo. Which in this game at least can stand up against German heavy armour and at guns at long ranges.
I played a 3v3 skirmish with very easy AI the other day and "won". I say that because though I did the most damage I also suffered the most losses and my losses were greater than my kills / damage.
I picked a point in the middle early on to defend to hopefully allow my AI teammates the ability to pincer either side. I used a combination of scouts in stealth in the woods, lots of infantry and some AT guns set on long crossroads. I also did not slow the game down at all so I guess I did ok. I did manage to hold the spot I initially planned well (main road had a bridge so I wanted to keep control of that at all costs) but I couldn't really get any push further. I did try to help out the flanks a bit but I didn't want to spread my forces too thin and get overran.
Necro'ing this thread!
I tried asking on Steam (their forums are so toxic and wasteful and Paradox which seems to be dead for this game) and since I have no response, I'd thought I'd ask here.
I'm wondering if anyone has any tips on how to set up solo skirmish battles? I pick an ally (usually easy) and then I'll pick 2 to 3 random German AI opponents set to very easy or easy and I've noticed I can rush all the way toward the German side only to catch them barely set up and I usually just bull rush in and wipe them out.
Any ideas what I'm doing wrong? I'd like for it to be more of a challenge. Trying to improve my tactical awareness a bit more so I can adequately take on the campaign game and I thought using the solo game would be the best way.
Is it as simple as setting the German's to medium AI? Tried that once and I still cleaned house.
Thanks for any tips/suggestions.
^Maybe you're just the reincarnation of Gen. George S. Patton?
Definitely try increasing the enemy AI level. If you are on very easy or easy, I would expect it to not be particularly aggressive. You can also try assigning it a battle deck that you have designed. If you are giving the AI randomized decks, they could end up not being very balanced or offensive.
Finally, why would you ask something like this in the steam forums before you would ask here? That is the second time you've gone someplace else first over the last week...have the world's finest experts on wargaming done something to offend you?
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on June 17, 2019, 09:02:53 AM
^Maybe you're just the reincarnation of Gen. George S. Patton?
Definitely try increasing the enemy AI level. If you are on very easy or easy, I would expect it to not be particularly aggressive. You can also try assigning it a battle deck that you have designed. If you are giving the AI randomized decks, they could end up not being very balanced or offensive.
Finally, why would you ask something like this in the steam forums before you would ask here? That is the second time you've gone someplace else first over the last week...have the world's finest experts on wargaming done something to offend you?
Yea, you guys are so quick to respond. I know you're kidding, but no one has ever been offensive here and I find 99% of the folks here to be more than generous with their advice (and it's greatly appreciated by me who knows 1/10th of what you all know about war gaming), but it's just me doing my due diligence when I post on the game developers forums (that are dead for SD 44').
As far as posting on Steam, yea...that's on me. I should know better :-\
Thanks for the tips JH
^Come here first, always. We know the developers and their games better than they know themselves. :crazy2:
Quote from: acctingman on June 17, 2019, 09:24:59 AM
I know you're kidding, but no one has ever been offensive here
Dang. I'm not doing my job.
^WORK ON IT
The AI is generally not the brightest. They generally just get extra points and bum rush you out of the blocks. So if your playing the AI it can just be a matter of rushing up and quickly getting defences in place. Because you know they are coming. They rely on a points advantage.
I agree with Jarhead. Give the AI some good decks that you have made and have them on medium at the very least. Choose a map that is not very open. Much harder to beat the AI without good fields of fire.
If you can bushwack the AI so well, perhaps it's time to fight H you Muns.
What I tend to do is play coop with a friend that is much worse than myself. Thus putting a lot of pressure on me to do the work. Talk about stress. My mate even knows it. "Lets do these settings, he says, I know you will pull me out of the fire." Needless to say it does not always work this way. SD44 especially in phase A is unforgiving if you lose your best units early.
I can't even win against the AI above Easy Level.
And Easy is very Easy for me. That's why I stopped playing.
Quote from: jomni on June 18, 2019, 09:39:00 PM
I can't even win against the AI above Easy Level.
And Easy is very Easy for me. That's why I stopped playing.
Tried the campaign again and I'm getting slaughtered, not as badly as the first couple tries.
Does SD2 have a difficulty meter? :P
Just picked up this game.
Is there a way to lower the AI in the campaign mode?
Please note on Sale on Steam at the moment, discounted at -33%