Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa

[Rainsong94]

If playing as the Soviets, does the German AI have to make decisions and contend with all the consequences, such as negative relations among their commanders? Or are they playing with "Decisions off"? Are the RPG decisions solely for the immersion for the human player? What about the "what-if?" decisions. Do they utilize those?

[atheory]

I really want to try this game, but I fear it will be a paid DLC dump site and i'm not sure about the price point. I will wait and see for a bit, maybe wait a year and see what's what. I'm really intrigued at the aspect of a strong AI.

So, not writing it off. I got my eye on you!

[stonestriker]

@GrauWolf80

Look at his two previous titles. The last patch for DC1 came out AFTER the release of DC2, which indicates that support continues a long time for these game, neither of which have had DLC. And in around 2 weeks the editor will be released, which would probably not be released if he sought to make tons of DLC for the game.

[gunnergoz]

Just started playing this with all detail/history options on and even as Russian I can see this game is not like any other wargame I've ever played - and I've been playing them since the late 1980's on PC's and Macs. I too was surprised that it only goes into early '42 but now that I'm into the game I can see the possible variations available and the way that the game makes you think in terms that are actually similar to real operational commanders, so the limitations make sense because '42 was different from '41 on the East front. It is a masterpiece of thinking and executing an idea that is out of the box. It may not appeal to players who enjoy simplified/abstracted straight up combat games like PG or its clones, nor does it have the economic and logistic complexity of a Gary Grigsby game either. Instead it focuses on a specific strategic situation and on the leaders and decisions that made history in a narrow time frame.
Now I can only add that if this engine and concept is applied to other theaters and timeframes of WW2, I'll be first in line to buy them. Kudos to the designers.

[baloo7777]

ORIGINAL: gwgardner

There are so many options and varieties of play in this game that to me there is an unlimited horizon of replayability for the one scenario.

Just one example: 'posture' is a key concept in the game, whether your individual armies are in blitzkrieg, sustained offensive, or defensive posture. Each posture has impact on combat capabilities, supply and fuel usage, APs (action points), fatigue. I have played the campaign through without ever changing off blitzkrieg posture - my Panzer armies were sucking air, my infantry were flopping on the ground, by mid October. Then I have tried the campaign with an arbitrary timetable for when I'd switch over to sustained offensive, and then I have tried a campaign with using the reports carefully, on combat losses, fuel usage, fatigue, to determine when to change posture. Just altering this one single aspect of play, and I have played much different campaigns.

There are so many factors like 'posture' in this game that give it so much replayability.

Hello gwgardner! I played Time of Fury against you several years ago and was impressed with your abilities, and your willingness to help a newbie (namely me).
All that being said...I value your input on this game...and I think it has helped convince me to make the purchase...