...Or should I say "going over the top'" based on my reading this forum's Naval war aspect comments. I've been reading this forum with interest and consider purchasing the game.
Do the abstract supply/HQ activation rules give a good "feel" for WWI combat? Does the abstract (at least not shown on map) rail transport simulation cause problems?
Has the new manual improved things for newbie understanding of the production, combat and other aspects of this game?
Have players found ways to keep track of what they are doing with their navies, given the interface?
It's been a long time since I wrote that term paper on Tannenberg and played SPI's WWI paper game, which was fun. If I get over learning curve and any other issues, might this game prove as playable and fun as that old paper classic?
Thinking of taking the plunge...
Moderator: SeanD
RE: Thinking of taking the plunge...
I honestly think that this game is one of the best strategic simulations I have played. It captures the flavour of WWI very well to my mind.
It's quite easy to learn I think (though difficult to master all the nuances). - I've never more than glanced at the manual, I just played a few turns against the AI and looked up a couple of thingsThe naval system is really the only counterintuitive bit of the rules and it's not insurmountably difficult to keep track of what's what, just more irritating than it might be. The rest of the game systems are straightforward and easy to grasp (but often subtle in effects).
And Frank's unstinting efforts to iron out bugs and improve the game yet further are quite astonishing. Most developer's would have said 'finished' long before now. That's another reason to buy this brilliantly conceived game.
It's quite easy to learn I think (though difficult to master all the nuances). - I've never more than glanced at the manual, I just played a few turns against the AI and looked up a couple of thingsThe naval system is really the only counterintuitive bit of the rules and it's not insurmountably difficult to keep track of what's what, just more irritating than it might be. The rest of the game systems are straightforward and easy to grasp (but often subtle in effects).
And Frank's unstinting efforts to iron out bugs and improve the game yet further are quite astonishing. Most developer's would have said 'finished' long before now. That's another reason to buy this brilliantly conceived game.
RE: Thinking of taking the plunge...
I am a demanding player with regard to what games I will invest time in. I bought this gem in July last year and it is still one of my most favored games for a number of reasons.
Yes the graphic are typical for this genre and disregard sound effects. Interface could be better and manual certainly too. AI is better than most and will get you into the game but that is also it.
The designer is very faithful in supporting this game and players are usually active and helpful on the forum.
The activation system is unique and brilliant. Replenishing these points are awful expensive so large scale offensives will loose steem sooner or later so you have to consider the investment very careful before you make it. Similarly offensives to gather say 5 to 10 hexes will have to be careful planned half a year in advance giving you this WW1 feel.
In the east and end game (with high tech) the situation will become fluid again.
You will need to gear your strategy to cope with both the trench warfare situation as the mobile warfare situation which appears when a country enters the war. So the first 6 to 12 months in France is a game of mobile warfare with high risk high yield playing style.
The game is utterly unforgiving in making major mistakes although minor mistakes are not that important but they count in the long term off course. This means you can play brilliantly as say the CP and loose the war with a single disastrous strategic decision.
I for one love this Damocles sword so if you are a "softee" this may not be one for you [;)]
Where this game really unfolds itself is in PBEM games. Units in rear areas are undetected and units in front contact need to be identified with air support in order to know the exact composition or real number of units. So that supposedly one corps may actually be a full strength army group of 4 corps!
Movement is simultaneously as turns orders are executed simultaneously. This makes for a huge move and guessing game with immense fog of war. After stalemate has occurred on a front it is more setpiece battle style.
Say you make a Schlieffen maneuver and knows France has 18 corps as OOB. You have identified 8 corps for certain and see a whole in the center of the French line. Is this the decisive moment to commit your reserve in an all out offensive in the center because French strength is supposedly committed to your norther envelopment through Belgium or are fresh French troops waiting in reserve to make a disastrous counterattack cutting off your spearheads?
This is a most fun game is you really want to challenged as you sometimes have to make rather critical decisions based on little information.
Sorry - got carried away [:D]
Yes the graphic are typical for this genre and disregard sound effects. Interface could be better and manual certainly too. AI is better than most and will get you into the game but that is also it.
The designer is very faithful in supporting this game and players are usually active and helpful on the forum.
The activation system is unique and brilliant. Replenishing these points are awful expensive so large scale offensives will loose steem sooner or later so you have to consider the investment very careful before you make it. Similarly offensives to gather say 5 to 10 hexes will have to be careful planned half a year in advance giving you this WW1 feel.
In the east and end game (with high tech) the situation will become fluid again.
You will need to gear your strategy to cope with both the trench warfare situation as the mobile warfare situation which appears when a country enters the war. So the first 6 to 12 months in France is a game of mobile warfare with high risk high yield playing style.
The game is utterly unforgiving in making major mistakes although minor mistakes are not that important but they count in the long term off course. This means you can play brilliantly as say the CP and loose the war with a single disastrous strategic decision.
I for one love this Damocles sword so if you are a "softee" this may not be one for you [;)]
Where this game really unfolds itself is in PBEM games. Units in rear areas are undetected and units in front contact need to be identified with air support in order to know the exact composition or real number of units. So that supposedly one corps may actually be a full strength army group of 4 corps!
Movement is simultaneously as turns orders are executed simultaneously. This makes for a huge move and guessing game with immense fog of war. After stalemate has occurred on a front it is more setpiece battle style.
Say you make a Schlieffen maneuver and knows France has 18 corps as OOB. You have identified 8 corps for certain and see a whole in the center of the French line. Is this the decisive moment to commit your reserve in an all out offensive in the center because French strength is supposedly committed to your norther envelopment through Belgium or are fresh French troops waiting in reserve to make a disastrous counterattack cutting off your spearheads?
This is a most fun game is you really want to challenged as you sometimes have to make rather critical decisions based on little information.
Sorry - got carried away [:D]
Hit them where they aren't
RE: Thinking of taking the plunge...
Like they said. Quite a good game. It has a lot of strategic depth, by which I mean there are many different roads to defeat or victory. The mechanics of the game are fairly simple - no need for micromanagement - easy to learn, even if the manual is a little wanting. Fast-playing with high replayability.
As to whether it gives the "feel" of WWI, I couldn't say. It does pass the historical simulation test in that the actual war can be mirrored in the virtual war.
As to whether it gives the "feel" of WWI, I couldn't say. It does pass the historical simulation test in that the actual war can be mirrored in the virtual war.
RE: Thinking of taking the plunge...
Well, I'm something of a WWI buff. I've thought about games around it for years (the old AH 1914 was actually my first game, and it still stands up as one of the best ever), and realized one of the reasons there are so few is that it is so very difficult to model. Basically, you are stuck with too much foreknowledge, the saps at the time had no idea what they were doing. So it is very hard to make modern informed players make the kinds of decisions the historical leadership did.
The game has some flaws, but it is an extremely creditable effort on an almost impossible subject. The economics produce about the right effects even if not accurate in detail. The war in the East is very well modeled, the West less so, but that is mostly a matter of scale, and trying to factor in the idiocy of the high commands. The upside of the scale is there is none of that stupid getting the right hex-angle or soak off attacks stuff. The activation rules and simultaneous movement are very good indeed. And hjako is right, you make one significant mistake and you are cooked.
It does get a bit "gamey", in that most players end up achieving a fair number of encirclements, which is not accurate as there was really only one encirclement in the war, Tannenburg, and that was mostly due to unparalleled incompetence by the Russians. Encirclements were certainly tried for and seriously threatened throughout the war, outside of the Western Front, but armies were always able to retreat out of them. But that is about the only gamey aspect, otherwise things are about right.
The only place I have any reservations is the naval system, which frequently produces extremely ahistorical results. Fun ones, mind you, but it can get pretty bizarre.
The game has some flaws, but it is an extremely creditable effort on an almost impossible subject. The economics produce about the right effects even if not accurate in detail. The war in the East is very well modeled, the West less so, but that is mostly a matter of scale, and trying to factor in the idiocy of the high commands. The upside of the scale is there is none of that stupid getting the right hex-angle or soak off attacks stuff. The activation rules and simultaneous movement are very good indeed. And hjako is right, you make one significant mistake and you are cooked.
It does get a bit "gamey", in that most players end up achieving a fair number of encirclements, which is not accurate as there was really only one encirclement in the war, Tannenburg, and that was mostly due to unparalleled incompetence by the Russians. Encirclements were certainly tried for and seriously threatened throughout the war, outside of the Western Front, but armies were always able to retreat out of them. But that is about the only gamey aspect, otherwise things are about right.
The only place I have any reservations is the naval system, which frequently produces extremely ahistorical results. Fun ones, mind you, but it can get pretty bizarre.
RE: Thinking of taking the plunge...
ORIGINAL: OrvalB
It does get a bit "gamey", in that most players end up achieving a fair number of encirclements, which is not accurate as there was really only one encirclement in the war, Tannenburg, and that was mostly due to unparalleled incompetence by the Russians. Encirclements were certainly tried for and seriously threatened throughout the war, outside of the Western Front, but armies were always able to retreat out of them. But that is about the only gamey aspect, otherwise things are about right.
IMO most players don't recognize the dangers and stay around too long. That an aggressive player tries to outflank you really can't be called gamey conduct if you refuse to retreat?
I think its more accurate to claim that due to the more strategic biased scale of this game encirclements are more likely to occur with more units involved than else.
Hit them where they aren't
RE: Thinking of taking the plunge...
Part of the reason player don't react in time is that they are very reluctant to abandon hard won territory and the investment in building a solid line of entrenchments only to be forced to abandon the position by an enemy breakthrough 300km away. It is decisions like these that give the game its tension that keeps it interesting.ORIGINAL: hjaco
ORIGINAL: OrvalB
It does get a bit "gamey", in that most players end up achieving a fair number of encirclements, which is not accurate as there was really only one encirclement in the war, Tannenburg, and that was mostly due to unparalleled incompetence by the Russians. Encirclements were certainly tried for and seriously threatened throughout the war, outside of the Western Front, but armies were always able to retreat out of them. But that is about the only gamey aspect, otherwise things are about right.
IMO most players don't recognize the dangers and stay around too long. That an aggressive player tries to outflank you really can't be called gamey conduct if you refuse to retreat?
I think its more accurate to claim that due to the more strategic biased scale of this game encirclements are more likely to occur with more units involved than else.
RE: Thinking of taking the plunge...
I'm guilty of getting my troops encircled like 6/10 times. I just cant let go.
RE: Thinking of taking the plunge...
Oh I am certainly guilty as charged as well [:D]
In my last game against Lascar the Entente launched an all out offensive throguh the low countries with the British even taken Hamburg with my spearheads (thats what I prefer to call those 10+ British corps) cut off and destroyed piecemal.
Hopefully I will remember to count to "4" when remembering used German poison gas in the future [8D]
In my last game against Lascar the Entente launched an all out offensive throguh the low countries with the British even taken Hamburg with my spearheads (thats what I prefer to call those 10+ British corps) cut off and destroyed piecemal.
Hopefully I will remember to count to "4" when remembering used German poison gas in the future [8D]
Hit them where they aren't
RE: Thinking of taking the plunge...
Interesting replies; thanks, I'm getting close.
Just how long can the German navy prevent the BEF from getting to France in 1914? I find this ability somewhat ahistorical.
Just how long can the German navy prevent the BEF from getting to France in 1914? I find this ability somewhat ahistorical.
RE: Thinking of taking the plunge...
Britain can reinforce through the North Sea to Cherbourg or the North Atlantic to Brest. In the latter case the troops will be delayed to the front due to using strategic movement but its pretty safe as the Franco-British navies can combine in the North Atlantic.
In any case if CP want to use (and possibly sacrifice) their fleet in an offensive they are most likely to support their flanking maneuver through Belgium by a sortie into the North Sea to prevent British reinforcements arriving directly into Belgium.
Then again CP may face a fire eating Churchill expecting exactly that maneuver reacting appropriately ....
In any case if CP want to use (and possibly sacrifice) their fleet in an offensive they are most likely to support their flanking maneuver through Belgium by a sortie into the North Sea to prevent British reinforcements arriving directly into Belgium.
Then again CP may face a fire eating Churchill expecting exactly that maneuver reacting appropriately ....
Hit them where they aren't
RE: Thinking of taking the plunge...
I think the game has a very good WWI feeling. I often find things that actually model the history of the war. That includes the limited movement with the activation points, that includes the need to deal with resources and the whole moral-system. You could actually re-play the war. While you can try to be historically accurate, you still have all options to try totally different strategies. That makes the game very re-play able. Especially against a human opponent. Ive been playing it for one year now almost non stop. And different strategies is more than just "go west" or "go east", you can try to win through military conquest, attrition warfare, starvation, and most likely a mixture of all of those. Yet its easy to manage. To have a game that is that complex yet basically dealing with some few easy interfaces is great.
Of course some stuff is not always satisfying. Naval warfare is one of these things. Some other stuff. But overall the game is extremely good.
I'd say that even the "getting encircled" or "not getting out early enough" is pretty much accurate in WWI terms. Maybe the encirclement not so much, but all sides wer guilty of trying to push their troops forward thinking that this offensive is the last punch they need to do. Right until they ran out of steam and get pawned by new reinforcements.
Of course some stuff is not always satisfying. Naval warfare is one of these things. Some other stuff. But overall the game is extremely good.
I'd say that even the "getting encircled" or "not getting out early enough" is pretty much accurate in WWI terms. Maybe the encirclement not so much, but all sides wer guilty of trying to push their troops forward thinking that this offensive is the last punch they need to do. Right until they ran out of steam and get pawned by new reinforcements.
RE: Thinking of taking the plunge...
ORIGINAL: FM WarB
Interesting replies; thanks, I'm getting close.
Just how long can the German navy prevent the BEF from getting to France in 1914? I find this ability somewhat ahistorical.
It can't really. I've never seen a full strength UK fleet lose to the Germans. The numbers just do not add up.
What I like is that it does feel like WWI.
The armies are huge, but very slow and ponderous to move.
You can win a lot of battles and not really change your fate in the war.
You can win a lot of battles and then get clocked by a counterattack when your armies wear out if you push too far.
You get a feel for why the Germans adopted the strategy they did - a war in Russia is well neigh pointless and an attack through the Franco-German border is a massacre waiting to happen. That said, you feel the near-run features of the Schlieffen Plan.
The offensive point feature really changes the dynamics of the game so much.
Naval combat is abstracted, a lot, but really gets the right results for surface combat - short of an epic UK blunder the Germans are going to get bottled up. Submarine warfare is not as effective as it actually was though so functionally you never get the UK into any threatening position.
RE: Thinking of taking the plunge...
Yeah, those activation points. You play this game like you do most games, you know, the clever opportunistic attack thing when your opponent makes a mistake, well you are probably going to get your ass kicked. Your commander has two points, the enemy does an advance that leaves a gaping opportunity, but there are going to be three more impulses, and HQs on either side are out of gas. The smart move is to sit it out and take the punishment, and wait for the last impulse. Or do nothing and bank those points. Which is not a smart move in most wargames, but in this one, if you take the chance and hit back, whoops all of a sudden there you are all strung out and worn down and there ain't a damn thing you can do about it, you get to sit there helplessly as you get pummeled.
This is particularly acute on the Eastern Front, where neither side can really help leaving the other apparently golden opportunities. And sometimes they are in fact golden, and sometimes they are emphatically not. You always have to be thinking about the whole turn, thinking 2 or 3 or 4 impulses ahead; indeed you have to think about next turn too, and how many activation points you will have to hand out then, and how many the opponent might have. Getting this wrong is the Big Oops! It took me a couple of very unpleasant bloody noses on what had appeared at the time to be brilliant devastating advances, to learn to hold my horses and always be thinking about next turn and beyond.
Opportunism and impulsiveness are very very dangerous in this game. A slower, methodical, long-sighted, sometimes downright Fabian approach seems to work far better.
This is particularly acute on the Eastern Front, where neither side can really help leaving the other apparently golden opportunities. And sometimes they are in fact golden, and sometimes they are emphatically not. You always have to be thinking about the whole turn, thinking 2 or 3 or 4 impulses ahead; indeed you have to think about next turn too, and how many activation points you will have to hand out then, and how many the opponent might have. Getting this wrong is the Big Oops! It took me a couple of very unpleasant bloody noses on what had appeared at the time to be brilliant devastating advances, to learn to hold my horses and always be thinking about next turn and beyond.
Opportunism and impulsiveness are very very dangerous in this game. A slower, methodical, long-sighted, sometimes downright Fabian approach seems to work far better.