Looks like the Patch is out - first impressions?

[SMK-at-work]

Started a game yesterday as Axis, max allied advantage, with oil.  Am at April 42.
 
1 U-boat was dead on T3 - hit a convoy then 2 destroyers mugged it.
 
conquered Poland by T3, Denmark T6, holland and Belgium as per normal.  France held out until end of August 40.  Went straight to Sealion - RN created havoc among the transports, but was swamped by sheer numbers so I got ashore, secured an ungarrisoned Bristol quickly and conquered all of mainland UK by august 41, then the Sov Union attacked - have killed lots, but am unable to make headway & am slowly getting pushed back.  the 2nd sub was sunk protecting the invasion convoys.
 
Landed a corps in northern Ireland to take out the RAF there, but it got mauled by the RN on the way over and is only killing 1 point/turn.
 
Plenty of oil, but Germany is down to 2nd grad manpower for about 4-5 months now.
 
Sov union had lvl 4 armour when it joined the war & that's been making life difficult - mine is stil better at 6, but had a bad turn where he swamped it and killed 2 of the original 3 groups & the Sov's seem to have an awful lot of theirs!  their a/f is mostly ineffective, taking big hits every time it tries to strike or intercept, but again there's a lot of it.
 
the UK has started landing single corps on the north coast of France (from Feb 42) which has dragged off some troops from the East.  I need to build a few subs to intercept them in the Atlantic I think....
 
In the mean time the Italians have conquered Nth Africa without too much bother, and taken Iraq.  Iran is next, but Beirut is holding out against land attack.
 
Overall it's a tough game - mainly due to the numbers of allied units.  Research is fairly slow due to combat being hard and many points being spent to replace casualties.  If I could get a couple of moves without many losses German manpower would probably increase back up to 1st class level, but that doesnt' seem likely.  Oil isn't too bad yet - down to about 170 & Iran will help a bit more......

[Vypuero]

Targul has NO idea what he is talking about.  In fact so far it must be the perfect game for him, because he gets to whine like a bitch and just beat up on easy settings on the AI - when he played a human he got his ass handed to him.  Why don't you go to SC2 and whore for them some more, and leave us alone?

[Happycat]

Why don't you go to SC2 and whore for them some more, and leave us alone?

Ouch. [X(] Strong opinions on all sides...

[targul]

Simple. I paid for this game and want it to be correct and good. I need not leave because you like garbage.

You can be sure I will leave soon though because once SC2 brings out WAW I will be gone. During that interm I will continue to test this game.

You may not like what I say but until they ban me I will continue to say it. This game needs a playback. As to the AI it has some problems but overall it seems adequate. I have only mentioned the AI problems so they can fix them which is why I specifically say what the problem is.

Med has no active AI. Africa has no active AI. Otherwise AI works fine.

[LitFuel]

ORIGINAL: targul

Simple. I paid for this game and want it to be correct and good. I need not leave because you like garbage.

You can be sure I will leave soon though because once SC2 brings out WAW I will be gone. During that interm I will continue to test this game.

You may not like what I say but until they ban me I will continue to say it. This game needs a playback. As to the AI it has some problems but overall it seems adequate. I have only mentioned the AI problems so they can fix them which is why I specifically say what the problem is.

Med has no active AI. Africa has no active AI. Otherwise AI works fine.

Whatever...you came into this game with an agenda and you can leave with it as well. I firmly believe at this point you will never be happy no matter what they do. From what I'm reading you really haven't fully tried all the settings or had any thought of giving this game a chance. Far more are having great fun with it without all the bitching. SC fan boy is all you are to me at this point and the developers deserve more then constant knee jerk reactions. Why can't a group of people just appreciate the different games instead of blasting what they do not understand.

[targul]

Not sure where you get your opinions. I play almost all games. This was the latest release so this is the one I am playing. Well that is not true I did buy the Civil War game they brought out afterward. I spent 3 days trying to figure out how to play it and never did.

It is extremely complicated and I am not a big fan of the Civil War. But I do buy all the releases from Matrix and only SC2 fromt the other company so if you are going to say I side with one company over another I would say it would be Matrix.

I have play HOI2 for years. Complained on that board also until it was developed the way I like it and now with Stoney Road I like it.

I hope the developers do read what I have written since the criticism is meant for them. It is there responsibilty to make the game better. I am willing to buy what is produced in order to support the hobby and expect the developers to make the best they can.

I have written them personnally on some things I consider very good and on some things I consider bad. I have mentioned the things I like and the things I dont like. If we all hide our heads and dont give feedback good or bad they will never know.

I am finding since the patch the balance is much better. I am finding the AI is better overall. I do remain unhappy with the lack of AI in the Med or Africa. And as I have said if they fix those areas they could potentially have the best AI in the game. I have also said the AI even as it is is second in the industry IMO.

So have I been only negative nope. But I have been negative about this lack of playback for PBEM. I prefer to play using PBEM but since I am usually playing a dozen or so games from a variety of companies at the same time without a good playback it is impossible for me to know what is happening.

[kevinkins]

Hey Vypuero ... which is better SG2 or this new game? Let's see what YOU are talking about.
 
Targul is trying to make things better for all of us gamers. His posts are filled with facts. As I read these posts
the game seems to have many problems. We are only trying help.
 
Kevin

[zman1974]

To be fair, comparing SC2 to C:EAW is hard to do without the realization that SC2 is on version 1.06, and is about to enter it's third generation of game overhaul.  C:EAW is just a baby by comparison.  Give it time.  I think the developers are listening to our issues, and to expect too much from the first patch is unrealistic, IMO.  Now, six months from now if we are seeing the same issues, then by all means, feed them to the wolves:)
 
For me, my biggest issue is the AI for the Med; universally expressed by detractors and supporters of this game the AI is abysmal.  Fix that, and my enjoyment level of Commander will increase exponentially.
 
Jim

[SMK-at-work]

I think CEAW is better now than SC2 was when it first came out, but then the CEAW folks have had a few years to see how SC2 did and what mistakes it made, so I think it is perfectly fair to compare them.

[Vypuero]

Well - I have little trouble seeing what is happening in the game with the new PBEM - you see enemy units that have attacked, as FOW is off, and you can see what the strengths are and even the movement paths.  Attacks are indicated in Red.  It is not as pretty as replay, but it also doesn't crash like replay often does for me in PG II.  It also has TCP/IP which works very well and is very enjoayable for me to play.  I prefer that whenever possible, it is just more fun.  Oil is definitely in issue in the game for the Axis.

[JudgeDredd]

Targul

It's not really so much as what you say, more the tone you set it in. Your criticism comes across as very angry criticism and not overly productive.

I agree with what you say, but how you are putting it across is not really conducive to being helpful.

[mavraamides]

ORIGINAL: Bigfish

Hi,

did anyone who has installed the patch know if battleships going on to attack subs? I can't find anything in the changelog if this is fixed. I never heard about a major warship (battleships, heavy cruisers) from wwii which had have anti submarine weapons.

greets
Bigfish

I always assumed that a battleship unit represented a battleship TF. With presumably 2 BB's 3-4 CA / CL's and a gaggle of DD's.

And if so, certainly the DD's in the TF would have anti-sub capability. Similarly, a CV TF is the same sort of setup with CV's instead of BB's as the capital ships.

And I assume the DD units are dedicated anti-sub TF's. Sort of DD wolfpacks if that makes sense.

And the sub units don't represent individual subs but rather entire wolfpacks.

If not, its rather crazy that one can't stack naval units! I mean look at something like CAW or WITP and you'll rarely see a lone BB or CV wandering the ocean.

Although, to be fair, the Germans did use their pocket BB's that way but I believe that was the rare exception, not the rule.

[JudgeDredd]

As far as I am aware, GordianKnot, you are correct. They mimic task forces rather than units, the same as an armoured counter on land represents an armoured div with all sundry equipment included....ergo, it doesn't make sense to shout that the armoured unit shouldn't be so effective against air units when, in fact, they would normally contain AA units....same as BB TFs, they still contain DDs...it's not that the BBs are sinking the subs.

[targul]

Oil is definitely an issue?

Do you mean you run our or have too much?

When I play Axis I have never run our of oil. I received a running low warning once. If you move those tanks and air using trains whenever you can instead of always making them walk you will find it saves a ton of oil.

When I was in Germany we always moved the armor by trains to where the operations where staged so I guess I just always thought that is how you do it.

Running those tracks on the German roads would just rip the road apart. It was also dangerous for the poor German's many times a German car would bit the dust as the tank driver grazed it.

[targul]

You are correct Judge. I am pissed off at that piece of junk they gave us to see what is happening in my PBEM games. As others have said I consider it insulting.

With that system I need to remember where each and every unit was on my last turn so I can go to all the places on the map to find out if anything happened. If you miss one and then start you turn you are screwed. I have since its release had wars started that I didnt know about. I have had units disapprear and cant remember what they were.

When I was much younger my memory was great I would probably not have cared since in those days I could remember all the details of a map. Hell, I can still remember those maps and every move they made and the results of the die rolls.
Now my memory is fading and I need the playback reminders to remember what I am doing in the game without it I am totally lost. Not much fun to start a new game everytime you recieve a turn.

[mavraamides]

ORIGINAL: targul

Oil is definitely an issue?

Do you mean you run our or have too much?

When I play Axis I have never run our of oil. I received a running low warning once. If you move those tanks and air using trains whenever you can instead of always making them walk you will find it saves a ton of oil.

When I was in Germany we always moved the armor by trains to where the operations where staged so I guess I just always thought that is how you do it.

Running those tracks on the German roads would just rip the road apart. It was also dangerous for the poor German's many times a German car would bit the dust as the tank driver grazed it.

In my last game as Axis (vs. AI) I used a very heavy Air / Navy strategy and I ended up running very low on oil. And I do use rail every chance I can. Often even paying the 7 extra production points to use more than I have. But I have 7+ subs and 10-12 air at any given time and everytime they engage in combat they burn up oil. These have been a much bigger issue than the armor. I now have most of my fighter wings sitting idly and acting only as defensive cover unless I really need them because I don't want to burn up anymore black gold.

I think in my next attempt, I'll go much more infantry heavy because you can buy 3 corps for the price of 1 air and they use no oil. At least untill I hit lower level manpower.

[JudgeDredd]

Well, your point is taken...for PBEM it is not acceptable to have a a PBEM system that does not show opponent play.

However, the game is really far from junk and in your posts you do acknowledge this, saying it's a fun game and has potential and you would be absolutely correct. It is those.

You are also correct in that the absence of a PBEM playback system makes the game pretty unplayable AS PBEM and if you do only want to play PBEM, then I can see why it would affect those type of players moreso than, say I being as I do not want to play multiplayer.

But I do think it's a bit harsh to say it's junk.

Please try and remember this is a labour of love for someone. Someone has created this hoping to make people happy. Hoping that people find his creativeness a healthy and enjoyable passtime. I'm sure he didn't want to produce "junk" or dish out "crap"...more like the omission of a PBEM playback was perhaps construed as not being "a big issue" or wouldn't be a "missed feature". Ok...they got it wrong. I know you paid a fair whack of cash for it. I am not dismissing that. But what you are doing in your statements is making very derogatory statements about something someone tried to provide you with for you to enjoy.

I am a developer myself. When I create something, I like to think that the users find it useful and enjoyable and, if they do not, I take it very personally and to heart and I immediately try and rectify the situation. I would not like to hear that people found my application junk and useless. I would, however, listen to my users and find out how I can best I can solve their issues.

However, it is my ultimate goal to provide something that people enjoy.

[targul]

I build a balanced army but if I attempted what you have I would suspect to run out of oil.

I dont run but 4 armor most of the time and 4 air. Lots of Motorized infantry though.

[mavraamides]

ORIGINAL: targul

I build a balanced army but if I attempted what you have I would suspect to run out of oil.

I dont run but 4 armor most of the time and 4 air. Lots of Motorized infantry though.

I think it does show that the oil rules definitely work.

Now don't get me wrong, it doesn't mean its perfectly balanced or couldn't be tweaked, but by differentiating between units that consume large quantities of oil and those that don't, I feel the designers have done a good job of modeling the challenges Germany faced by having a high tech mechanized military with a very limited supply of oil.

And if memory serves, I don't think SC2 really models that at all so this is one area (along with the use of hexes instead of isometric sqares) where I think this game is actually superior to SC2.

[Bigfish]

I always assumed that a battleship unit represented a battleship TF. With presumably 2 BB's 3-4 CA / CL's and a gaggle of DD's

Then it schould be named correctly as Task Force or Task Group not as Battleship only! Also the icon schould show up some more ships instead of only one. Also i think the price of subs should some cheaper in comparision to the battleships. Making battleships more expensively then subs is another way.

The ressources of one battleship should be enough for a complete wolfpack. Buying a battelship represents a Task Force means buying a sub represents a hole fleet of subs. If so - warships fighting against some wolfpacks means sending the warships straight towards the bottom of the atlantic ocean.


@GordianKnot: Where do you from? I have to reread some books but i think you are talking about typical US Task Forces. British warships often sailing alone or with only a few destroyer escorts. Examples:
- hunting the Graf Spee: german side: BC Graf Spee; british side: CA Exeter, CL Ajax, CL Achilles no escorts
- sinking HMS Hood: german side: BB Bismarck, CA Prinz Eugen; british side: BB Hood, BB Prince of Wales no escorts
- right before that: The observation Force of Bismarck TG includes only two heavy cruisers the HMS Norfolk and HMS Suffolk no escorts
- sinking HMS Glorius: german side: BC Scharnhorst, BC Gneisenau; british side: CV Glorius, two destroyer escorts
- meeting 9th April 1940 near by the lofots: german side: BC Scharnhorst, BC Gneisenau; british side: BC Renown no escorts (i think)
- sinking HMS Ark Royal: german side: SS U-81; british side: CV Ark Royal, two destroyer escorts
- there are more exxamples

On the other side: Capital warships (also there task forces) won't hunting subs because of a suddenly meeting. With 1943 there where still special sub hunter groups including a cvl with some destroyer escorts activly hunting subs in the atlantic.

British Task Groups are smaller like the US ones. I think Slitherine schould give more details what is meant and adjust the pricing.

greets
Bigfish