Experienced wargamers will find much to love in it!... or not.

[Petiloup]

Well, not really, this game is so basic that calling it a WW2 simulation is ludicrous at best.

It's very well done, beautiful to see, the system works flawlessly [didn't get any bugs really]...

It's just that the whole system isn't that great.

- Wanna sinks UBoats [or any ship] just use 6 of yours to surround it and attack it one by one.
If you don't sink it the first time then wait next turn as it can't move because of the system. I'm guessing
that the developers aren't aware the UBoats can dive under water.

- Thinking to sink the Allied or Axis navy, just go bait them with one of your subs, wait for him to attack it then send
your Battleships and other cruiser the sink it and retreat. Just need to be like 5-8 hexes away from your bait and
you can attack, destroy, retreat, keep repeating as the AI is plain dumb. At the end I destroyed the whole Royal
Navy and much of the US Navy with the Germans... ludicrous as said. Just need to read about WW2 at sea to understand that
this is just impossible.

- Who cares about defending Poland or France just defend the Capital by putting all your troops in it after the initial
attack and delay. The AI will take more time to defeat that country than if you do otherwise. Once I managed to keep Paris
till November 1940 while the rest of the country was occupied to still get Vichy.

- You can invade from anywhere, anyplace with no navy or air support and it's... ok. Sure, why not. So why land in Southern
Italy when you can invade the middle of Italy and cut Rome from any potential help from the German. By the way the AI
still give you an Event for Invading Southern Italy. All you need to have a successful invasion is to capture a port of value
5 or higher. (Or wait for it to be repaired to 5).

- When Italy surrenders you are getting Greece being liberated [if an Italian unit did make it surrender by taking the Capital first
so you can move troops there by ship directly and invade the whole Balkans area... of course... makes sense.

- You can take Tripoli like I did during the Battle of France then blockade Benghazi and Tobruk by destroying the ports to value -0-
with your Navy and the Afrika Korps still appear there... guessing they have some teleportation devices from outer space.

- Carriers are easily destroyed by 2-3 Battleships but 2-3 Carriers have a hard time sinking one Battleship... hmmmm strangely they
did get it wrong in real life. Some reading is necessary by the developers.

- The whole strategy to win in Russia against the AI as Axis or Russia is to destroy troops and not to occupy space. So just concentrate
all your tanks/mechanized and bombers in one area then keep destroying everything that you can without thinking. Once you have destroyed
enough then the AI will not know what to do. It doesn't really understand when to retreat. Of course superior tech helps.

- Superior tech helps more than numbers. I had my Russian infantry at level 3 before most of the Axis troops were at 2 and that stopped him.
Then I went to produce troops in numbers, again the whole idea is that if you lose too many troops a turn then you can't replace those and build
new one at the same time. You need to save troops, build more and destroy the enemy. Then time is your ally. Somehow the Russian were stupid
to use numbers in WW2 to defeat Germany... just doesn't work.

- You can invade even if the enemy has bombers that can reach the area of the invasion... again who cares it's just planes. Read the Raid on Dieppe
as this is how the Allied understood they needed total air supremacy for an invasion like D-Day.

- Heavy bombers are useless for strategic bombing, don't even bother. When bombing they destroy a handful of points at a time, but it cost more
than what they destroy to repair each hit they take. Now they are great as decoy because the can strike twice. So I used them to bomb enemy troops
first to attract interceptors, supported by my own Escort whenever possible, then used by other bombers to destroy troops. That works great and is
of course very logical when reading WW2. Again the point in this game is to destroy troops not the infrastructure, once you destroy more than the AI
can replace then it is toasted.

- Did build fortifications with engineers but not really quite seeing an impact. Think I will try next to break the Maginot line.

- Diplomacy, I was at 2 hexes of Berlin and Spain was still getting swayed to the Axis... OLE!!!

- At then I won a Decisive Victory in 1943 as my first game with the Allied. Not a great tell to a great AI.

As said, very well done game, mechanics as intended are working flawlessly, it looks great but a challenge for an experienced...

NOT EVEN CLOSE.

[n0kn0k]

Some valid points there. Just out of curiosity. What difficulty level were you playing at? And about the Carriers. Did you use the proper attack mode when facing the battleships?
About subwarefare. Just be aware that it's all an abstraction that also needs to give good gameplay. Imho many are having fun playing cat and mouse with the subs.

[The Land]

what is the proper attack mode?

[mavraamides]

ORIGINAL: Polonthi

- Superior tech helps more than numbers. I had my Russian infantry at level 3 before most of the Axis troops were at 2 and that stopped him.
Then I went to produce troops in numbers, again the whole idea is that if you lose too many troops a turn then you can't replace those and build
new one at the same time. You need to save troops, build more and destroy the enemy. Then time is your ally. Somehow the Russian were stupid
to use numbers in WW2 to defeat Germany... just doesn't work.

I'm surprised you got to tech level 3 so fast. When I played as Allies I always had Infantry Tech researched from the first turn I could do that and I didn't reach level 3 till early 1943. Long after Germans were at 2.

Maybe you had a research breakthrough or two? Did you invest heavily in Intelligence?

Also, FYI, the historic strategy of troops before tech works quite well. I maxed out garrisons once I had spent on Inf Tech and used them to clog up the approach routes to delay the Germans while I caught up on other tech. They never really threatened Leningrad, Moscow or Stalingrad.

And this was with default AI settings. I could be wrong but I don't think your results were typical.

[n0kn0k]

ORIGINAL: The Land

what is the proper attack mode?

Naval mode.

[Solaristics]

ORIGINAL: n0kn0k

ORIGINAL: The Land

what is the proper attack mode?

Naval mode.

I hadn't noticed this in the manual: I've been in fighter mode the whole time! That explains why my carriers were feeling a bit useless. RTFM, always RTFM.

[sPzAbt653]

I agree with some points made in the original post, but others are incorrect and may be based on initial impressions and lack of full understanding of game mechanics.

Whenever Air Units fly they are subject to Interception, but Naval units have free reign to come and go anywhere they please with immunity to attack [with the exception of the silly Surprise Attack mechanic]. This includes embarked Land Units that are making Amphibious Landings, they suffer no Interceptions and freely move thru the seas and debark. The Naval System needs Interception.

Surrounding enemy Naval Units with 6 friendly units is clunky, but not a game breaker. However, surrounded Subs do need to dive away [unless they suffered a critical hit which prevents them from diving [;)] ].

Defending Capitols doesn't always work, as there is a chance that thru casualties and loss of territory a country will surrender.

Surrendered Major Countries do lose their conquered territory to the opposition, and it seems more reasonable to have them remain as they were, to be re-occupied by a surviving friendly Major, or to be 'conquered' or 'liberated' by the opposition. However, this may not be possible as Axis and Allies are not able to control territory, only other countries may. Maybe such territories can revert to Neutral Status ?

Operations such as the automatic transfer of the DAK to Afrika can be disabled prior to starting the game.

Destroying units is the main goal of the game, and reducing the enemy's ability to rebuild and repair units is part of the strategy. The practice of setting up 'kill zones' to defeat numbers of computer controlled units is a viable strategy in some cases, but does not always work [especially in Russia, don't know why the OP claims this is THE strategy for defeating Russia].

Heavy Bombers are excellent weapons for the right cause at the right time. For example, if a location can not be taken in one turn and the defender can reinforce adequately, HB's can reduce the defender's ability to reinforce, making the location's capture easier. Another example, when the Axis are on the decline, the fleets of UK and US HB's can wreak havoc on Axis local supply grids and/or on Resources which reduce MPP's.

Building Fortifications may not be an ultimate defense, but in Russia they can certainly help in slowing that early German juggernaut.

Diplomacy and some events might still use a little fine tuning. Five months beta testing is hardly long enough to vet out all timing issues. Not that anything was rushed, these types of issues can be expected long after release and patches, depending on what combination of events occur in particular games.

The game IS very well done, and a vast improvement over any options that I have found. I've been playing wargames since 1972 and am really enjoying SC3. [&o]

[dave123]

You make many valid points that I agree with, in fact I have a thread about the ease of invading all over the place with game breaking results. I also made Italy surrender this way.

I also agree research is too fast, my Americans (in 3 games) have been super advanced before entering the war, I'm talking jets and more.

But is it really necessary to take such a hostile tone?

I've had all the SC games (it's quite a long line, going back to the early days). The creator, Mr. Cater has been more than helpful fixing and fine tuning each game, and I'm sure he will this time as well.

[itkotw2000]

-Surrounding enemy ships to trap them is very useful, especially the high value ships or ships you just cant get killed in that turn. Often times I will attack, sink a few ships, then surround the remaining ships to be attacked the next turn.

-Baiting is another great tactic. I wrote a long post about it in another thread. Bait with subs, kill destroyers to bait main fleet, attack main fleet and run (run if you are early axis against the full allied fleets).

-The comment about capital cities makes me actually want to try playing the allies for once. The game revolves around only capturing cities and towns, this aspect does seem a bit gamey. Think of how many troops you would have to kill to get Britain to surrender. By early 1942, in one of my games, I had destroyed a few British ARMIES and quite a few corps in Africa, but Britain will happily pump out new units. Historically, there would be a limit to how many troops Britain could lose.

-Air losses seem high in general, but the OP is right about heavy bombers costing more to operate than they could even cause in damage. It is "funny" to watch the AI bomb northern France right after the fall of France. The AI will bomb the Low Countries, but incur huge losses to themselves. Seeing a message like "bombers have destroyed 2 mpp" is kind of a joke if they take 50 or 100 mpp in damage.


As the original poster wrote, "mechanics as intended are working flawlessly", this is absolutely right. That being said, there are so many abstractions used to make the game playable for casual gamers, but experienced (hardcore-grognard) players like detail and, I dare say, realism and plausibility.

[Goodmongo]

So it's not your cup of tea. To each their own.

[n0kn0k]

ORIGINAL: itkotw

-Air losses seem high in general, but the OP is right about heavy bombers costing more to operate than they could even cause in damage.
It is "funny" to watch the AI bomb northern France right after the fall of France.
The AI will bomb the Low Countries, but incur huge losses to themselves.
Seeing a message like "bombers have destroyed 2 mpp" is kind of a joke if they take 50 or 100 mpp in damage.

I would recommend leveling them up first before you start your bombing campaign. Also use fighter escorts.
If you have long range bombers I believe you can even "raid" the convoy routes for 0.2 exp per turn.

[Titan]

Beating up on and exploiting little quirks against the AI is one thing...I guess the real test would be against another Human where alot of these tactics could easily be countered by a thoughtful opponent. I somehow doubt your anlyasis would be as critical

[dave123]

ORIGINAL: Titan

Beating up on and exploiting little quirks against the AI is one thing...I guess the real test would be against another Human where alot of these tactics could easily be countered by a thoughtful opponent. I somehow doubt your anlyasis would be as critical

True,but some things will remain.

MP with a smart opponent won't stop the city grabs in italy, yougoslavia, or france, and if they do, they will be severely hampered economically because of the expense. In fact, it's tough defending all the cities on the russian front as well, but I do think a unified front by a real human could fix that.

I don't use heavy bombers for the reasons stated above,and I find all air not worth the money it takes to fix it up. I only keep a few fighters to help defend, and far behind the lines.