Strategic Command WWII: World at War

[Dorb]

I was just about to reload MWiF and give it another go when the news came up that Strategic Command WWII World at War was being released next month so guess I will hold off and mess with it instead. Anyone else going to run with SCWWII for a change?

[juntoalmar]

I suggest that you look at the second video on the Steam page of the game to see how naval war works:

https://store.steampowered.com/app/9577 ... ld_at_War/

Basically, it looks like a Pokemon strategy game with WWII graphics. I don't think it's going to simulate the WWII as good as WiF/MWiF.

I wanted to like it (specially because of the AI and PBEM) but...

[Hairog]

Some of us Modders are taking a real close look at how we can tone down the naval game in SC3 Europe. The developers have built in and given players access to almost all aspects of the simulation. They can be modified to a surprising degree.
For my World War Three 1946 Mod I have made the Soviets the protagonist, added the Seehund mini-sub, the Wasserfall SAM, an anti-ship missile, mine fields, simulated atomic bomb attacks, changed the AI scripts etc. Its really quit versatile. Despite its none traditional Pokeyman type combat, the results are suprisingly historically accurate. If you make the same choices as Stalin, Churchill, Truman etc. you will get pretty much the same outcomes. It's a hoot to try the many "what ifs" that they all faced.
Right now I'm working on a scenario where Hitler gains control of the French fleet, delays attacking the Soviets and gives the Afrika Corps what it needs to take the Suez canal.

The AI is top rate by the way and a real challenge. I suggest you take a second look at the game system. I avoided it for years and preferred the old Time of Fury/Time of Wrath games (which never quite worked, which is a shame). But I jumped in and became a convert.

[pzgndr]

ORIGINAL: Hairog
Some of us Modders are taking a real close look at how we can tone down the naval game in SC3 Europe.

My Advanced Third Reich mod uses the original boardgame's limited generic fleets, which tones down the naval game quite well. Without stacking, it just doesn't make sense to have a plethora of various naval units. With limited fleets, players need to more carefully consider their options.

And yes, the AI is top rate. With variability of the generic "fuzzy-logic" AI, scripted events, and scripted AI strategies (all editable), it makes the solo game challenging and replayable. Perchance to dream of the day we can say that about MWiF...

[jjdenver]

It's a very good game and I've spent many hours playing it against AI and PBEM. However it's not even close to WIF. Having said that yes I'm going to buy and I look forward to what modders will do with it. Imo the air game was really too silly in the last version of the game - for example players would put almost the entire Luftwaffe in Africa and just bash their way through the Brits at Egypt then turn around and bash their way through Gibraltar and Morocco in the west. It was really really really extra goofy stuff. If they could tone down air a _LOT_ and navy a little it'd be a much better game imo.

There are players who are famous for being good at PBEM basically because they are very good at working the supply system to keep their massive air force in high supply to completely devastate their opponent at any point on the map they choose. I personally found the supply system combined with the poor supply interface and the silly way the game allocate supply very hard to interpret. I think the best players intensely micro-manage each turn which exact units are assigned to which specific HQ in an area with multiple HQ's. Not very fun really.

But still - more casual PBEM and against the AI - loads of fun.