Great game!

[marklv]

Great game. I've played two hours and I'm hooked. Much more fun than SC2 in my opinion, and I love seeing those casualty figures - great idea that one. The game is also very playable - no ridiculous 'phases' of meaningless activities before you get to the real action: fighting.

In comparison with GoA, this one is way better. [:)] The AI could be improved a bit, but otherwise it's pretty much spot on.

I don't believe adding a diplomatic option would necessarily make the game better. In historical reality, no allied nation would have made peace with Hitler - at leat not a peace that would have been remotely acceptable to Germany. And there is no way that neutral countries like Spain or Turkey would have joined the Axis. To play with diplomacy is interesting but creates a made up history.

[firepowerjohan]

Thanks marklv, but what is GoA ?

[kram]

Guns of August by Frank Hunter

[Syagrius]

I will maybe buy GoA later because now I have too much fun with CEaW[&o]

[Hanal]

No need to sell GoA short in a CEaW thread...they are both very good games...........

[JudgeDredd]

Marklv...I saw your comment on the GoA forum. Of course it's your opinion, but I think you ought to play it some more. You are missing out on a blinding game.

As for CEAW, you aren't all wrong being as you noticed this is a gem.

[Dion]

I love this game. It's turning out to be one of my favorite games and I have some good ones.

[marklv]

Some suggestions.  Having played a full campaign game on the normal setting against the AI, lasting many hours, I find that the game could be improved by the following:

1) Diplomacy.  Although I am basically opposed to altering history, this would make the game more interesting from a number of aspects.  Spain and Turkey joining the Axis, for example, could lead to some interesting possibilities.
2) Extending the timespan.  At present it ends in June 1945 - I would extend it by a further two years.
3) Casualties.  At present, the figures for Germany include minor Axis nations like Romania, Hungary, etc.  The figures for Britain include minor allies like Poland and Belgium.  This needs to be changed so that every nation that participates in the conflict is given their own separate figures.
4) Nuclear research.  Well, the global conflict was ended by the A-bomb, so to be realistic this should be included in research.
5) AI. The AI was quite good in some respects, and gave me some tough battles on the Eastern front, but from the point of view of the allies it was obsessed by continuously attacking German forces in northern France. There was zero activity in the Mediterrenean, which does not reflect historical reality. Upon attacking Egypt, the Italians should face a strong British response, but this does not happen. Strategic bombing is another thing that the AI does not want to do.

My experience as Germany was interesting.  Poland was defeated, though not without some difficulty.  I then decided to attack Belgium and France (not Holland), and the invasion was also successful.  Just as I was building up my forces to attack Britain, the Soviets stabbed me in the back by declaring war in October 1941.  The war in the East then ebbed and flowed, with massive casualties all round.  The USA didn't attack me until January 1943 when it launched an attempted invasion of France.  The AI persisted in making attacks against my strong positions in northern France all through 1943, 44 and 45.  I repelled all the attacks!  By the time the game ended in June 1945 I was still throwing the allies into the sea and holding the Soviets.

Casualties were horrific.  7 million German (and minor Axis), 1.3 million Italian, 911,000 French, 1.7 million British (and minor allies), 1.4 million American (!) and 13 million (!!) Soviet.  The German and Soviet casualties certainly reflect the reality of what it was like to fight on the eastern front.  Tank losses were around 10,000 German, 3,000 Italian, 25,000 Soviet (!), 2,500 British, 3,000 American and 680 French.  Airplane losses were 10,000 German, 2,300 Italian, 7,500 British, 700 French, 1,500 American and 5,500 Soviet.

Although I was declared the winner by the game, I am sure that in the space of another year the allies would have squeezed me like a lemon - or nuked me if that possibility was available.  Unlike in SC2 I feel the production points were quite accurately allocated and reflected historical accuracy, but I do believe that Germany's conquest of Europe did not result in a high enough allocation.

Overall a very good game that could become a great game if the developers are willing to make the necessary changes.

[mavraamides]

I love this game.
 
The best ways to make it better? 
 
1) Add the rest of the world to the map!  I don't mean some kind of crazy HOI clone with the historically acurate Prime minister of fudge cookies for 350 countries and provinces, I just mean the rest of the war.  South America and most of Africa could be permanently neutral for all I care.
 
I'd love to play this game system with the Pacific included!
 
2) Since the scale would be larger, allow AI control of individual major powers like UK, USA, Russia, Germany, Italy, Japan for example so you could play just the UK and the AI would handle the USA and Russia for you.
 
3) Add the ability to have leaders for air and naval as well.  That would be HUGE in the Pacific!  It could even affect spotting and deception so a great admiral's TF would be harder to spot than normal making it a very dangerous unit.  Or a great Air Marshall would have greater ability to do strategic damage, etc.
 
OK, I can dream can't I!  Anyway, this is my favorite WWII ET game from a pure enjoyment perspective.

[targul]

That would make for an awesome expansion. 

[marklv]

GordianKnot,

I agree totally. A world map would make the game awesome and kick SC2 in the ass real hard.

I hope the developers realise the huge potential of this game.

[dave74]

I also would love a full world war two version, but i think there would have to be mre to the naval side of things as that was so much more important in the pacific. Also you would need to extend the build times as you dont really want everyone making a carrier every other turn!!

Would be great if they did this, Although i suspect they have already decided what they are doing next and not telling us!!![;)]

[Stryder]

i imagine it would be even harder to have a computer opponent do justice with a world map and the massively increased number of offensive and defensive strategies it must consider..

[targul]

Yes it would be harder since all the games that have tried it have failed horribly.  I would like to see them try once they have this side done though.  What I would suggest is get the basic of this game finished.  Not far to go for me.  Active AI in the South and Playback for PBEM and it would be done for me.
 
Then design a seperate game for the pacific that can be linked to this one.  Not sure a corps level game would be appropriate in the small island hoping system.

[marklv]

The other thing that bugs me is that there isn't an option to keep the USA or USSR as neutrals throughout.  They join in the war every time.  If Hitler had not attacked the Soviets there is no guarantee they would have come in to help the British - they had no reason to.  And the USA aimed to oppose Hitler through a 'cold war' rather than a hot one.  Japan dragged the unwilling giant into the conflict.

[Bossy573]

There also doesn't appear to be any production or fuel penalty to the USSR when you relieve them of their oil. Seems like the Russians should have some penalty there.

[marklv]

There clearly need to be some patches applied to the game.  The basic game is very good - better than SC2 in my opinion.  But there is much work to be done before this game could be released on the retail market with any credibility.