On the Fence
Moderators: MOD_Strategic_Command_3, Fury Software
-
- Posts: 139
- Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 1:09 pm
On the Fence
I have been following this game since its release. Have checked this forum almost on a daily basis.
Looks like most find this title to be pretty good and with the patches... no major CTD's and operating issues.
Seems like most find the AI to be competent and competitive for single player gaming.
Looks to offer a combination of historical play but also a fair amount "what if" experience depending on how a game play progresses.
I've stayed away from grand strategy WW2 products after the disaster I went through with Time of Fury years ago.
The mega titles like West Front, East Front, War in the Pacific are not my cup of tea from a micro-management perspective.
I'm on the fence between this game and Decisive Campaign Barbarossa.
Looking for comments especially those who have experience with both games.
Thanks for any insights.
Looks like most find this title to be pretty good and with the patches... no major CTD's and operating issues.
Seems like most find the AI to be competent and competitive for single player gaming.
Looks to offer a combination of historical play but also a fair amount "what if" experience depending on how a game play progresses.
I've stayed away from grand strategy WW2 products after the disaster I went through with Time of Fury years ago.
The mega titles like West Front, East Front, War in the Pacific are not my cup of tea from a micro-management perspective.
I'm on the fence between this game and Decisive Campaign Barbarossa.
Looking for comments especially those who have experience with both games.
Thanks for any insights.
RE: On the Fence
They are both excellent games and have about as much to do with each other as the price of fish in Helsinki. They scratch very different itches.
I'd have to say this is probably the best ETO grand strategy game I've played, period. And I've played lots, including Time of Fury (which could have been a great game if the developers had supported it, which they did not. Instead, it was a half baked fiasco. Those same developers have done the same exact thing with every game they've made since then. No follow through. Good ideas, piss poor execution. Don't buy anything from these dudes, ever. They have no QC whatever.)
I'd have to say this is probably the best ETO grand strategy game I've played, period. And I've played lots, including Time of Fury (which could have been a great game if the developers had supported it, which they did not. Instead, it was a half baked fiasco. Those same developers have done the same exact thing with every game they've made since then. No follow through. Good ideas, piss poor execution. Don't buy anything from these dudes, ever. They have no QC whatever.)
WitE Alpha Tester
RE: On the Fence
Watching the excellent You Tube beta SC series by Paradogs Gamer and Night Phoenix was really helpful for me to gain a good understanding of the game and gameplay and had convinced me to get it sometime before its release. Like you I had avoided mega games and for many years played the impressive Commander Europe At War Grand Strategy - very simiilar to SC but its fixed screen resolution became more outdated as time passed.
I know Decisive Battles Barbarossa has proved very popular and playing it I could see why. What turned me off it was the element of role playing - very cleverly integrated but just not for me. Others with more experience of it will be able to give you a better view.
SC is highly playable, with a very large map covering land and sea and has plenty of various units as the war expands. There is a well marked frontline so visually pockets containing surrounded enemy units are clearly presented. Its 'what ifs' include a series of neat decisions for player consideration, many of them involving the commitment of future MPP's (income production points) to gain additional units or strategic opportunities. It has dynamic movement which allows a unit to conduct its attack(s) at any point during its movement allotment, and a unit can be ordered several times during a turn in any order provided it hasn't exhausted its movement. This allows for exploitation, repeated attacks on an enemy unit (single stacking applies) and fighting retreats on both land and sea.
It has a fine AI that can really handle amphibious assaults as well as continental wide efforts. A clever feature is that the AI can be used to play one or more major powers in your side (Axis or Allied) if you wish to limit your command commitments. It also has production, diplomacy, technology research and reports to cover the full aspects of grand strategy. Highly recommended
I know Decisive Battles Barbarossa has proved very popular and playing it I could see why. What turned me off it was the element of role playing - very cleverly integrated but just not for me. Others with more experience of it will be able to give you a better view.
SC is highly playable, with a very large map covering land and sea and has plenty of various units as the war expands. There is a well marked frontline so visually pockets containing surrounded enemy units are clearly presented. Its 'what ifs' include a series of neat decisions for player consideration, many of them involving the commitment of future MPP's (income production points) to gain additional units or strategic opportunities. It has dynamic movement which allows a unit to conduct its attack(s) at any point during its movement allotment, and a unit can be ordered several times during a turn in any order provided it hasn't exhausted its movement. This allows for exploitation, repeated attacks on an enemy unit (single stacking applies) and fighting retreats on both land and sea.
It has a fine AI that can really handle amphibious assaults as well as continental wide efforts. A clever feature is that the AI can be used to play one or more major powers in your side (Axis or Allied) if you wish to limit your command commitments. It also has production, diplomacy, technology research and reports to cover the full aspects of grand strategy. Highly recommended
RE: On the Fence
Hi David, appreciate your concern especially at the possible cost of the game which you did not mention, I think it is $55.95 plus $20 shipping cost, pretty dear IMO, I was fortunate enough to buy the game at Amazon.com for $5.95, there are posts that cover this, but after playing the game night and day, I am retired and able to do that, I would pay that amount $55.95 and feel it is worth every penny.
The AI is very efficient in all aspects, The options are multitude and well laid out, the map IMO is decent, the UI is well laid out. I agree with some posters that another level of zoom would help out players who say they can't make out some of the railines and other things.
As for playing the game if you just move units around like in many games without good thought you are going to get your rear end handed to you as I have many times.
I have the Pacific Strategic Command, nice game but IMO ruined by a poor AI, but that was then and I would love to see a new Pacific game with this new AI. Hubert said he would look into it, so hopefully he will do that.
Bo
The AI is very efficient in all aspects, The options are multitude and well laid out, the map IMO is decent, the UI is well laid out. I agree with some posters that another level of zoom would help out players who say they can't make out some of the railines and other things.
As for playing the game if you just move units around like in many games without good thought you are going to get your rear end handed to you as I have many times.
I have the Pacific Strategic Command, nice game but IMO ruined by a poor AI, but that was then and I would love to see a new Pacific game with this new AI. Hubert said he would look into it, so hopefully he will do that.
Bo
RE: On the Fence
I just tried to type a big, detailed post and it said I'm not allowed to post links and it erased all my hard work. Get DC:B for 30 bucks at Humble Bundle right now.
Get SCWWII for 6 bucks on Amazon. Then you get two fantastic games for 36 bucks. That's what I am going to do. I already got DC:B and I love it.
I want Strategic Command to scratch my "bigger maps, entire war" itch. DC:B scratches my "awesome WWII TBS with a unique RPG-layer" itch.
Get SCWWII for 6 bucks on Amazon. Then you get two fantastic games for 36 bucks. That's what I am going to do. I already got DC:B and I love it.
I want Strategic Command to scratch my "bigger maps, entire war" itch. DC:B scratches my "awesome WWII TBS with a unique RPG-layer" itch.
RE: On the Fence
They are both great games and the RP aspect of DC:B is really great, I hope they add that to more "wargames" it just adds so much more to the immersion. I've played a lot of the SC games since the first one and they have always been good times when in the mood for the genre.
I7-6700K@4.5GHz/Asus MAXIMUS VIII FORMULA/EVGA GTX 1080SC/Corsair LPX 16GB/Corsair 600Q/Corsair RM750i/Acer XB270H 27"/BenQ G2400W 24"/SOUND BLASTER ZX/Samsung 850 Pro x2/Samsung 950 Pro x1/Win10 Pro 64bit/Saitek X52/TrackIR3: Pro-TrackClip Pro/Oculus CV
RE: On the Fence
well, I have well over 100 games and this ai is by far the best I have used.. but the game itself lend to multiplayer so we wait for the next step... fantastic playable game
"Tanks forward"
RE: On the Fence
I have played both games.
Bugs and stuff.
There have been one or two issues noted – but nothing that has really spoiled the enjoyment (certainly not while playing the AI) and nothing I would imagine that can’t get fixed pretty quickly. The game appears to be stable. This was the case with DC:B. It was clear from the outset that the game makers had brought to the market a stable, relatively bug free game - which sadly cannot be said for all games.....
AI
It’s always difficult to comment on as there is always a large variation in wargaming ability amongst the community. However for my part I would say that both games have provided me with a reasonable AI from which to learn the game mechanics, explore strategies and have fun. That said, I am a bit of a plank when it comes to wargaming prowess.
Playability
I did early AAR for both games. I did not want to have to sit and read a ton of instructions or sit through hours of tutorial – but wanted to get playing asap. Both games allowed this as both are pretty intuitive. (although there was a greater need for instruction from DC:B). The great thing about DC:B was the way the tutorials were presented; a few bite size tutorials that were to the point in delivering what was needed to actually get started. With SC this wasn’t really required. The game is pretty much playable straight out of the box and so learning as you go along is quite easy.
Value for money.
I bought both at full price (I don’t know if DC:B has been on sale yet) and I would have to say that in terms of £ per hours played, they have both been worth the money.
Summary
As mentioned previously, the games scratch different itches. It’s difficult to recommend one over the other for that reason and the fact that it ultimately depends on where a gamer’s interest lies.
But both are fun games and I would unhesitatingly recommend both at full price.
Bugs and stuff.
There have been one or two issues noted – but nothing that has really spoiled the enjoyment (certainly not while playing the AI) and nothing I would imagine that can’t get fixed pretty quickly. The game appears to be stable. This was the case with DC:B. It was clear from the outset that the game makers had brought to the market a stable, relatively bug free game - which sadly cannot be said for all games.....
AI
It’s always difficult to comment on as there is always a large variation in wargaming ability amongst the community. However for my part I would say that both games have provided me with a reasonable AI from which to learn the game mechanics, explore strategies and have fun. That said, I am a bit of a plank when it comes to wargaming prowess.
Playability
I did early AAR for both games. I did not want to have to sit and read a ton of instructions or sit through hours of tutorial – but wanted to get playing asap. Both games allowed this as both are pretty intuitive. (although there was a greater need for instruction from DC:B). The great thing about DC:B was the way the tutorials were presented; a few bite size tutorials that were to the point in delivering what was needed to actually get started. With SC this wasn’t really required. The game is pretty much playable straight out of the box and so learning as you go along is quite easy.
Value for money.
I bought both at full price (I don’t know if DC:B has been on sale yet) and I would have to say that in terms of £ per hours played, they have both been worth the money.
Summary
As mentioned previously, the games scratch different itches. It’s difficult to recommend one over the other for that reason and the fact that it ultimately depends on where a gamer’s interest lies.
But both are fun games and I would unhesitatingly recommend both at full price.
Now Maitland, now's your time!
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
RE: On the Fence
first time SC player. SC3 is very good. smooth play. looks easy but a lot going on. replayable.
didn't care at all for DC:B. haven't played it in a year.
didn't care at all for DC:B. haven't played it in a year.
RE: On the Fence
I have experienced the Ai over running Egypt, spain going axis and losing Gibralter an early. too early, US attack north of Rome being repulse by the Italians? WAT? all in all a great game with each time being a new and different experience..
"Tanks forward"
RE: On the Fence
Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa is immersive, with the role-playing aspect of relationships with higher-ups, battle-field commanders, supply and infrastructure command, and a really good OOB. It can be played straight-up counter-pushing, without that command overlay, however, so it offers a wide range of gaming experiences and replayability.
SC3 is the second-best operational level game of the war in Europe, behind Time of Fury (even with its flaws it is THE best in my opinion). SC3 is definitely going to get continued support and probably endless mods.
I believe you'd be happy with either game. Better, both.
SC3 is the second-best operational level game of the war in Europe, behind Time of Fury (even with its flaws it is THE best in my opinion). SC3 is definitely going to get continued support and probably endless mods.
I believe you'd be happy with either game. Better, both.
RE: On the Fence
ORIGINAL: gwgardner
Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa is immersive, with the role-playing aspect of relationships with higher-ups, battle-field commanders, supply and infrastructure command, and a really good OOB. It can be played straight-up counter-pushing, without that command overlay, however, so it offers a wide range of gaming experiences and replayability.
SC3 is the second-best operational level game of the war in Europe, behind Time of Fury (even with its flaws it is THE best in my opinion). SC3 is definitely going to get continued support and probably endless mods.
I believe you'd be happy with either game. Better, both.
Seriously?
Time of Fury was half baked, imbalanced, full of bugs, weak AI, etc. etc.
So many unresolved problems.
It could've been polished into something great, with time. It never got the love it deserved or needed because the company making it has a bad habit of rushing from one release to another without giving any of their releases the TLC they need. This habit has continued since.
Do Not Buy anything from them.
This game is light years better and works right out of the box. The AI actually can give you a competitive game, even. I haven't run into a single game breaking bug. Balance seems much better to me than Time of Fury, which had a pronounced Axis bias. This product plainly benefited from its prior iterations in a way that was never true for Time of Fury.
SO far as I am concerned, SC3 is THE gold standard for ETO grand strategy and Time of Fury is a cautionary tale in How Not To Do It. These two games shouldn't be remotely compared.
WitE Alpha Tester
RE: On the Fence
ORIGINAL: warspite1
I have played both games.
Bugs and stuff.
There have been one or two issues noted – but nothing that has really spoiled the enjoyment (certainly not while playing the AI) and nothing I would imagine that can’t get fixed pretty quickly. The game appears to be stable. This was the case with DC:B. It was clear from the outset that the game makers had brought to the market a stable, relatively bug free game - which sadly cannot be said for all games.....
AI
It’s always difficult to comment on as there is always a large variation in wargaming ability amongst the community. However for my part I would say that both games have provided me with a reasonable AI from which to learn the game mechanics, explore strategies and have fun. That said, I am a bit of a plank when it comes to wargaming prowess.
Playability
I did early AAR for both games. I did not want to have to sit and read a ton of instructions or sit through hours of tutorial – but wanted to get playing asap. Both games allowed this as both are pretty intuitive. (although there was a greater need for instruction from DC:B). The great thing about DC:B was the way the tutorials were presented; a few bite size tutorials that were to the point in delivering what was needed to actually get started. With SC this wasn’t really required. The game is pretty much playable straight out of the box and so learning as you go along is quite easy.
Value for money.
I bought both at full price (I don’t know if DC:B has been on sale yet) and I would have to say that in terms of £ per hours played, they have both been worth the money.
Summary
As mentioned previously, the games scratch different itches. It’s difficult to recommend one over the other for that reason and the fact that it ultimately depends on where a gamer’s interest lies.
But both are fun games and I would unhesitatingly recommend both at full price.
DCB is on sale right now. Last day, I believe, on Humble Bundle. Will give you a steam key for 30 bucks. I'm loving it so far! SCIII is next. Hopefully they don't have any truck guys to piss off in that game. Truck guy hates me in DC:B!
RE: On the Fence
warspite1ORIGINAL: nickaepi
ORIGINAL: warspite1
I have played both games.
Bugs and stuff.
There have been one or two issues noted – but nothing that has really spoiled the enjoyment (certainly not while playing the AI) and nothing I would imagine that can’t get fixed pretty quickly. The game appears to be stable. This was the case with DC:B. It was clear from the outset that the game makers had brought to the market a stable, relatively bug free game - which sadly cannot be said for all games.....
AI
It’s always difficult to comment on as there is always a large variation in wargaming ability amongst the community. However for my part I would say that both games have provided me with a reasonable AI from which to learn the game mechanics, explore strategies and have fun. That said, I am a bit of a plank when it comes to wargaming prowess.
Playability
I did early AAR for both games. I did not want to have to sit and read a ton of instructions or sit through hours of tutorial – but wanted to get playing asap. Both games allowed this as both are pretty intuitive. (although there was a greater need for instruction from DC:B). The great thing about DC:B was the way the tutorials were presented; a few bite size tutorials that were to the point in delivering what was needed to actually get started. With SC this wasn’t really required. The game is pretty much playable straight out of the box and so learning as you go along is quite easy.
Value for money.
I bought both at full price (I don’t know if DC:B has been on sale yet) and I would have to say that in terms of £ per hours played, they have both been worth the money.
Summary
As mentioned previously, the games scratch different itches. It’s difficult to recommend one over the other for that reason and the fact that it ultimately depends on where a gamer’s interest lies.
But both are fun games and I would unhesitatingly recommend both at full price.
DCB is on sale right now. Last day, I believe, on Humble Bundle. Will give you a steam key for 30 bucks. I'm loving it so far! SCIII is next. Hopefully they don't have any truck guys to piss off in that game. Truck guy hates me in DC:B!
Everyone hates me in DC:B - especially that miserable ***** von Leeb [:D]
Now Maitland, now's your time!
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
RE: On the Fence
Unless I am misunderstanding, how can you buy the newly released SC3 WW2 for $6 - and how could Matrix allow that on a brand-new release? Of course, I wouldn't be complaining if I got it for $6 [:D]
RE: On the Fence
I think that he had an Amazon coupon?ORIGINAL: rosseau
Unless I am misunderstanding, how can you buy the newly released SC3 WW2 for $6 - and how could Matrix allow that on a brand-new release? Of course, I wouldn't be complaining if I got it for $6 [:D]
Tony
RE: On the Fence
ORIGINAL: rosseau
Unless I am misunderstanding, how can you buy the newly released SC3 WW2 for $6 - and how could Matrix allow that on a brand-new release? Of course, I wouldn't be complaining if I got it for $6 [:D]
They use an Amazon coupon for $50, for Prime I believe.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it!
RE: On the Fence
ORIGINAL: rosseau
Unless I am misunderstanding, how can you buy the newly released SC3 WW2 for $6 - and how could Matrix allow that on a brand-new release? Of course, I wouldn't be complaining if I got it for $6 [:D]
Hi rosseau, did a post on this but to help posters I will redo it.
Amazon.com Strategic Campaign cost $55.95. Accept their credit card you get a $50 gift card that can be used on the game, plus no shipping charges.
Final cost $5.95 and you can put that on your new credit card [;)] It may be out of stock and it is up to Matrix if they wan't to relace that stock.
Just checked Amazon.com and they say it is currently out of stock.
Do not have prime and I still received the $50 gift certificate.
Bo
RE: On the Fence
ORIGINAL: rosseau
Unless I am misunderstanding, how can you buy the newly released SC3 WW2 for $6 - and how could Matrix allow that on a brand-new release? Of course, I wouldn't be complaining if I got it for $6 [:D]
Exactly what Bo said, down below. When you go to purchase (you do not need Prime), it will prompt you to apply for a credit card, that gives you an instant 50 dollar Amazon gift card toward purchase.
I've been trying to accomplish this but Amazon still doesn't have SC3 in stock.
Daniele, from Matrix, said they put a fulfillment order in about a week ago, with Amazon but still not showing available yet on the site.
RE: On the Fence
[/quote]
" "Do we have any AP left?" "Nope...Wasted all of that a few turns ago."
" "Do we have any AP left?" "Nope...Wasted all of that a few turns ago."