Matrix Games Forums

Interface is clean and crisp, map is nice if bland. Counters are very … SPI, for the grognards among us. I'm sure some mods will drastically improve these things. Unit detail is handy and deep. There's a pretty fair amount going on under the hood in combat, movement, supply. Conquered Poland three times and played one turn of the 1944 scenario. AI isn't idiotic on the defense, so far, and seems proactive. Soviets launch a host of poor attacks; whether that's par for the course and/or by design remains to be seen.

Production is fun and involved. Tech is a bit murky, but it's early. Diplomacy is straightforward and this isn't a sandbox - more of a minor deviation game. Can break down INF corps into divisions, but not ARM corps, which is a bummer at 30 miles/hex. Probably helps the AI. More later!

You can switch the NATO counters in options, there are 2 sets.

This is the war game I would make if I could make a war game. The designer kept everything that is good and fun about war gaming and scaled back all the tedious micromanagement that bogs down many games and makes them ultimately not fun, for me.

It's fast and fun but has all the depth to make it a complicated game where you need to think about your moves and make strategic decisions.

ORIGINAL: 821Bobo

You can switch the NATO counters in options, there are 2 sets.

great news thanks for all of us none grogheads who still play the non nato styles / counters

Thanks for first impressions. After the review on Wargamer(forum won`t let me post the link) I`m still on the fence whether it is worth getting instead of Strategic Command WWTwo: War in Europe.

Next to strategic AI they are lacking challenges/things like decisions etc. Any thoughts from you guys who already played some hours?

Is this another re-hash of Strategic Command? Is anti sub warfare like playing whack-a-mole?

I playtested and played both SC3 and Warplan. Both great games. And quite different, although on rather similar scales. Anti-sub warfare in Warplan is completely different than in SC3, as is all of the naval aspect of the game.

ORIGINAL: gwgardner

I playtested and played both SC3 and Warplan. Both great games. And quite different, although on rather similar scales. Anti-sub warfare in Warplan is completely different than in SC3, as is all of the naval aspect of the game.

Better, or just different?

More naval impressions please. I really dislike the naval mechanics in the SC games. In SC being able to move in, attack, and then move away without any response/interception is unrealistic IMHO. It sounds from the WarPlan naval dev diary that there is no interception, but you can either attack and move or move and attack, but not move, attack, and move. Is that correct?

The review over at Wargamer is lukewarm. The reviewer's biggest concern is that he thinks the German's fuel reserves is too generous and that playing the historical scenario they had more than enough past 1945. I'll wait for additional reviews and feedback. Nice to hear that work on the Pacific front has already started.

Wargamer's strategic concerns are a matter of scripting not internal A.I. It takes time to cover all the sneaky things a human can do. I already am modifying the scripts. He also had a bugged version I didn't catch.

It can only improve over time

Is there a way to see the scenario briefing after the game has started? I know I need to keep units in Poland I think 6 units within 10 hexes of Warsaw but I don't remember if that is correct.

The naval game in Warplan is completely different than in SC3. Among the differences:

- ships are in fleets;

- as all fleets/units in Warplan are 'visible,' searches are necessary to actually attack an enemy fleet, so for example I may know that an as yet unidentified German task force has entered the Danish Straits, and I can send out fleets to destroy it, but those fleets still have to successfully recon the task force before actually identi-fying and attacking. This mechanism makes for some fun naval maneuvers.

- fleets can attempt to meet up with oilers to extend their stay at sea

- fleets at sea CAN intercept enemy fleets that end their movement within the intercept range of the fleet.

- fleets can provide beach supply

and so on. As I said above, I love SC3, but I too much prefer Warplan's naval game over SC3s.

To Toby42, I just have too much respect for the SC3 franchise to say Warplan is overall better. They're different, very different, and both VERY enjoyable.

I will have to form my first impressions tonight when I get home.

ORIGINAL: Dr. Foo

Is there a way to see the scenario briefing after the game has started? I know I need to keep units in Poland I think 6 units within 10 hexes of Warsaw but I don't remember if that is correct.

The Scenario Notes.pdf in the WarPlan\Manuals folder has all that information.

It will also popup a message if you are short.

One of the biggest advantages of a computer wargame is fog of war. From what I'm reading you see all units but may not know what they are or their strengths. I think there should be a FOW level where you don't know there is a unit there. However it shouldn't be like what happens in SCWIE when you bump in to a hidden unit and take a significant hit.
If you look at the battles in the Pacific such as Midway, the Japanese were not aware that there were American carriers waiting for them because they had broken the Japanese communications code. In the Coral Sea neither side knew where the other side's carriers were and throughout the Pacific naval battles it was all about locating the enemy fleets/carriers.
When it comes to significant land battles in the European front, I can mention three. Stalingrad where the Germans were not aware that the Russians had massed large forces on either side of Stalingrad. The Battle of the Bulge where the Americans were caught by surprise. France 1940 where German forces advancing through the Ardennes out flanked the Allied forces expecting an advance similar to what the Germans did in WWI.
If you can see all enemy units even though you don't know the details of the units you can't re-create the above historical events. I hope an additional FOW level is added before the Pacific front is released.

Seems very promising but this review points out some things that really need improving before I can purchase it.

The remarks concerning Stalingrad, Ardennes 1940 and Ardennes 1944 are not totally correct.

Ther German recon had noticed the build up at the flanks of the 6th army but could not do much. There were no reserves and a lack of gasoline to move. Furthermore, Hitler forbide any retreat before at after the Russian attack which was the only solution to avoid encirclement.

The French and British had seen the German concentration via air recon at least on May 9th bud did not believe in an assault at this place.

The Americans had infos about German troop concentration in the Eifel but simply thought that they were resting there.

So, this limited fog of war on land is from my view fine.

I just have begun playing, so These are really first impressions.

- Seems to be a very good design. I am enjoying it.
- I would prefer an extended FoW, where units in the far Hinterland of enemy territory can not be seen in very case.
- a weather forcast for the next turn would be fine.
- In "Reports and Stats" all information about enemies should be estimates, not real.
- In the "Turn report", maybe headlines would be fine (Naval / Army / Air / Events / etc.) for a better visibility.
- Maybe graphs about the development in different areas (I found them a good supplement to statistics in SC3).

Only remarks! I think, it is a good release. Becoming even better, when I understand everything. [:D]

[:D]

ORIGINAL: Meteor2

I just have begun playing, so These are really first impressions.

- Seems to be a very good design. I am enjoying it.
- I would prefer an extended FoW, where units in the far Hinterland of enemy territory can not be seen in very case.

Agreed!

ORIGINAL: Meteor2
- a weather forcast for the next turn would be fine.

Yes, though I don't think it should be 100% accurate, instead should perhaps just displayed the percentage likelihood of different weather conditions in the different regions

ORIGINAL: Meteor2
- In "Reports and Stats" all information about enemies should be estimates, not real.

I guess ideally the accuracy of these should depend on an "Intelligence" investment