"Newbie" initial impressions
Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2016 3:47 am
Late to the party but wanted to give my initial impressions.
I am an old school board/wargamer as well as video. I played the original Strategic Command when it first came out years ago - mainly solo/against the AI. So my comments come more from the newbie perspective instead of someone familiar with the latest version(s) of the game.
It's obvious the game graphically has come a long way. First, the map is beautiful even compared to the previous version. Also I was never comfortable with squares in games (just not what I am used to) so the shift to hexes is a plus for me. I still need to get used to no stacking. It seems kind of weird that an air/naval/hq unit takes up an entire hex and therefore cannot be protected from enemies that get adjacent to it - amongst other things. Also I wrestle with the one unit at a time attacking - this leads to phased attacks where the order of attacking units plays an important role in defeating the enemy. While this is another tactical consideration that makes the game more interesting I don't know how realistic this is to actual combat. The Air and Naval aspects of the game seem to be more complex and nuanced then I remember but I need to play some more to get a better feel. I really wonder what carrier battles will look like - but probably not something that is going to happen in the European version of the game alot.
Production/Research/Diplomacy seems to add an entire set of new layers that need to be mastered to play well. But I wonder if to ease the learning curve it would be helpful to automate/let the AI handle these aspects so players who want to just focus on the units/combat portion of the game can - either to learn the game in parts or play more simply. To be honest that is one of the hurdles I have with a game like Hearts of Iron - the level of complexity and number of game systems that need to be understood/mastered to play well. Maybe the player could choose the level of control for these areas - from just giving the AI general guidelines all the way to detailed control of the systems. Or is this already in the game and I just missed it?
I've skimmed the editor and it looks powerful - looking forward to the community generating lots of scenarios after release.
One question - at what point do you want testers to start posting AARs/Playthrus on the main forum?
I am an old school board/wargamer as well as video. I played the original Strategic Command when it first came out years ago - mainly solo/against the AI. So my comments come more from the newbie perspective instead of someone familiar with the latest version(s) of the game.
It's obvious the game graphically has come a long way. First, the map is beautiful even compared to the previous version. Also I was never comfortable with squares in games (just not what I am used to) so the shift to hexes is a plus for me. I still need to get used to no stacking. It seems kind of weird that an air/naval/hq unit takes up an entire hex and therefore cannot be protected from enemies that get adjacent to it - amongst other things. Also I wrestle with the one unit at a time attacking - this leads to phased attacks where the order of attacking units plays an important role in defeating the enemy. While this is another tactical consideration that makes the game more interesting I don't know how realistic this is to actual combat. The Air and Naval aspects of the game seem to be more complex and nuanced then I remember but I need to play some more to get a better feel. I really wonder what carrier battles will look like - but probably not something that is going to happen in the European version of the game alot.
Production/Research/Diplomacy seems to add an entire set of new layers that need to be mastered to play well. But I wonder if to ease the learning curve it would be helpful to automate/let the AI handle these aspects so players who want to just focus on the units/combat portion of the game can - either to learn the game in parts or play more simply. To be honest that is one of the hurdles I have with a game like Hearts of Iron - the level of complexity and number of game systems that need to be understood/mastered to play well. Maybe the player could choose the level of control for these areas - from just giving the AI general guidelines all the way to detailed control of the systems. Or is this already in the game and I just missed it?
I've skimmed the editor and it looks powerful - looking forward to the community generating lots of scenarios after release.
One question - at what point do you want testers to start posting AARs/Playthrus on the main forum?