Video Preview (UPDATED WITH PART V) (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII War in Europe >> Videos, Tutorials, Let's Plays



Message


Daniele -> Video Preview (UPDATED WITH PART V) (10/4/2016 9:21:13 AM)

UPDATED WITH PART I, II, III, IV, V
Hi all,

our friend youtuber Paradogs Gamer has posted the first of a series of videos about our upcoming wargame Strategic Command!

Strategic Command | 1939 Storm over Europe | Part 1 - War Preparation

Strategic Command | 1939 Storm over Europe | Part 2 - Assault on Poland!

Strategic Command | 1939 Storm over Europe | Part 3 - France is next!

Strategic Command | 1939 Storm over Europe | Part 4 - Strengthening the borders

Strategic Command | 1939 Storm over Europe | Part 5 - Icy shores of Denmark






The Guru -> RE: Video Preview (10/4/2016 11:09:56 PM)

Looks really nice!

I was quite astonished, though, by the values on the diplomatic screen

Romania 60% towards the Axis? in Sept 1939??
Iraq 20% pro-Western???

where does that all come from?




Birdw -> RE: Video Preview (10/5/2016 1:58:52 PM)

https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2016/09/30/the-flare-path-and-the-sea-lion-tamer/

Another review I found yesterday. If you read the article it hints at a possible release date. I hope it is on target. The reviewer is more into tactical games but it looked to me like it had all the flavor of the SC series that we've all come to love.




AlbertN -> RE: Video Preview (10/6/2016 11:10:43 AM)

Hmm 1 tier of some techs seems a bit limiting.
And Germany seems to have a low soft cap for an amount of units.




BillRunacre -> RE: Video Preview (10/6/2016 3:52:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: The Guru

Looks really nice!

I was quite astonished, though, by the values on the diplomatic screen

Romania 60% towards the Axis? in Sept 1939??
Iraq 20% pro-Western???

where does that all come from?


Hi

Romania's setting doesn't have any great effect. It does mean that the Axis could try diplomacy to bring her into their camp earlier, but it's probably not a worthwhile use of diplomacy. Germany has bigger fish to fry.

Iraq itself will change during the game in response to Axis successes, though it normally ends up conquered by the Allies, possibly being liberated if the Axis do very well.




AlbertN -> RE: Video Preview (10/7/2016 12:06:38 PM)

Poland looks way stronger than it should be - or better Germans seem very understrength (especially as by what seen in the video - each German corp individually attacking a Polish Army struggle).
Again experience gains seem meaningless by the looks of when units are selected. Units should gain more experience - and / or lose less when they get replacements.




IainMcNeil -> RE: Video Preview (10/7/2016 1:03:44 PM)

Most people take Poland in 3 turns, but it can be done in 2. It certainly is not overpowered! Experience is modeled, but so are organisation and supply and general tactics and the Germans are ahead on those type of factors which give them significant advantages in a head on fight. However the way to win is not to fight units one on one. You punch holes, go around the rest and head to Warsaw while cutting the others troops off. You have almost complete dominance in air power. I tend to ignore the strongest Polish units and let them attack me if they want to becomes involved.




The Guru -> RE: Video Preview (10/7/2016 8:34:50 PM)

I saw that in the vids that Germany gets a lot of points ( more than from Sweden) from... Norway...
Apart from Swedish iron ore passing through Norwegian waters in the winter, I really don't see what Norway contributed to Germany's economy (Norway was an unindustrialized poor contry - during the war, Norway and the Polish General Government area where the two only occupied zones that Germany had to ship supplies -food mostly- into, rather than the opposite)




AlbertN -> RE: Video Preview (10/7/2016 10:51:25 PM)

To answer to Guru here I think the "Norway" PPs are effectively Swedish which come through the Narvik route (anyhow used pratically only in Winter due to swedish ports getting iced).




Christolos -> RE: Video Preview (10/8/2016 3:27:14 AM)

This is a great gameplay preview!

I noticed that it appears that there isn't a railway movement feature. Is this right?

I also noticed that it seems that the initial main use of mpps (because there is never enough for everything...) seems to be logically geared towards research, reinforcement, and upgrading of existing units rather than the building of new units. This is because new unit builds have already been pre-queued with supposed mpp costs that are scripted rather than player determined. I just wonder whether it would be more interesting to have more mpps available without any pre-scripted builds, to allow more flexibility...

C




apec -> RE: Video Preview (10/8/2016 10:35:31 AM)

I think there is rail movement feature in SC3 (as it is in SC2) but it cost mmps, I guess the author of the video preferred to save mmps for Research & Upgrades vs a faster re-deployment




Christolos -> RE: Video Preview (10/8/2016 5:34:19 PM)

Thanks, I had neglected to remember this since I only just started playing SC2 in anticipation of SC3. I could never get into playing SC2 because of the square grid instead of hexes.
I am really excited about SC3 though and can't wait for it to be released!

C




BillRunacre -> RE: Video Preview (10/8/2016 7:51:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: CC1

This is a great gameplay preview!

I noticed that it appears that there isn't a railway movement feature. Is this right?

I also noticed that it seems that the initial main use of mpps (because there is never enough for everything...) seems to be logically geared towards research, reinforcement, and upgrading of existing units rather than the building of new units. This is because new unit builds have already been pre-queued with supposed mpp costs that are scripted rather than player determined. I just wonder whether it would be more interesting to have more mpps available without any pre-scripted builds, to allow more flexibility...

C


Hi

The scripted units will soon run out in a long war, so the emphasis will change as the game progresses... and over-investing in research or diplomacy can lead to an early defeat.

In terms of movement from Poland to the west, the German player can either operate units by rail for a cost, use Forced March, suffering a unit morale penalty in doing so, or march them at normal speed.

Bill




Scook_99 -> RE: Video Preview (10/10/2016 7:40:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Runacre


quote:

ORIGINAL: CC1

This is a great gameplay preview!

I noticed that it appears that there isn't a railway movement feature. Is this right?

I also noticed that it seems that the initial main use of mpps (because there is never enough for everything...) seems to be logically geared towards research, reinforcement, and upgrading of existing units rather than the building of new units. This is because new unit builds have already been pre-queued with supposed mpp costs that are scripted rather than player determined. I just wonder whether it would be more interesting to have more mpps available without any pre-scripted builds, to allow more flexibility...

C


Hi

The scripted units will soon run out in a long war, so the emphasis will change as the game progresses... and over-investing in research or diplomacy can lead to an early defeat.

In terms of movement from Poland to the west, the German player can either operate units by rail for a cost, use Forced March, suffering a unit morale penalty in doing so, or march them at normal speed.

Bill


Question, where is the option for a forced march? Been looking for it, but I am not seeing it. Or, is that option removed from SC2 and you just mean physically marching your units across the map from one border to the other?





The Guru -> RE: Video Preview (10/10/2016 9:02:35 PM)

quote:

To answer to Guru here I think the "Norway" PPs are effectively Swedish which come through the Narvik route (anyhow used pratically only in Winter due to swedish ports getting iced).


That's my point. germany seems to be getting those every turn




BillRunacre -> RE: Video Preview (10/10/2016 9:30:48 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Scook_99

Question, where is the option for a forced march? Been looking for it, but I am not seeing it. Or, is that option removed from SC2 and you just mean physically marching your units across the map from one border to the other?



Hi

Double click on a unit. Not all units can forced march, there are rules a bit similar to in SC2.

But one big change is naval units have their own equivalent now, they lose 1 supply point when doing so but they move double their normal distance.

Also, check out the Manuals folder within the game's main installation for the Essential Guide (among other things) if you haven't already. [:)]

Bill




BillRunacre -> RE: Video Preview (10/10/2016 10:07:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: The Guru

quote:

To answer to Guru here I think the "Norway" PPs are effectively Swedish which come through the Narvik route (anyhow used pratically only in Winter due to swedish ports getting iced).


That's my point. germany seems to be getting those every turn



Hi

Germany will receive MPPs from Norway's convoy every turn, but the value of the Norwegian convoy will go up in winter while the Swedish one will cease altogether.

It's also my understanding that ore was transported via Narvik all year round, even though the proportion declined significantly when Lulea was free of ice. However, I have not seen detailed month by month figures which might be able to shed further light on the exact amounts dispatched via both ports (and other routes).

There are plenty of contradictory figures on the web, but an interesting comment on this is in Kersaudy's Norway 1940 which does say that the ore was transported via Narvik in winter, but that doesn't explain why on page 17 he says 'fragmentary information available by late September [1939] seemed to indicate a marked decrease in the iron ore traffic from Narvik to Germany' i.e. a decrease in late summer, which doesn't make sense if the ore was only transported from Narvik during winter.

Bill




Bronze -> Don't forget parts 6-8 (10/12/2016 1:13:36 AM)

Don't forget parts 6-8
And there are 2 other reviews on You Tube too




TSPC37730 -> RE: Don't forget parts 6-8 (10/12/2016 5:30:44 AM)

Just finished watching part 2. The sound effects brought back memories & almost a flashback. Looking forward to this one.




Daniele -> RE: Don't forget parts 6-8 (10/12/2016 4:11:54 PM)

We have created a playlist with some of the Let's Play videos of Strategic Command on Youtube!

You can find it at this link:
https://youtu.be/k4gKAykukAU?list=PLk5K-IfEIqTuj44VYPe5mENtH1H-lf9vJ




YohanTM -> RE: Don't forget parts 6-8 (10/12/2016 4:23:57 PM)

Been enjoying the video reviews and it is definitely priming the pump for release...and part 9 is up




kirk23 -> RE: Don't forget parts 6-8 (10/15/2016 3:12:07 PM)

I have been following all these videos, and they are excellent thank you.

But the Naval game still needs a bit of tweaking, because the damaged caused per attack, is excessive, I'm really glad these games come with a superb editor, because it sure is needed to toughen up the Battleships in game.


I think all the ships especially the Battleships, are either made of Glass or wood, because their 13" thick armour is certainly not working right. As Admiral Beatty famously said during the battle of Jutland, their seems to something wrong with our **** ships today. Its still only 1940 in game time and yet Britain has already lost more Battleships,than she lost during the entire second world war.




kirk23 -> RE: Don't forget parts 6-8 (10/18/2016 4:23:51 PM)

It is now up to video No 15 in Paradogs Gamer excellent AAR. For the past 4 game turns,German bombers have been attacking 2 British Aircraft Carriers,in the ports of Southampton and Bristol. Can anyone tell me why, the naval AI did not think about moving these vital units,before both were destroyed needlessly? Both these Carriers could easily have been saved,the AI needs to learn how to protect its forces better![&:]

Video link: 1 min 30 sec into the video you can see the Bombers attacking these Carriers.Then the AI has a turn,and it still did not think to move the Carriers,so on the players turn 19 minutes in to the video,both Carriers get wiped out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Da5cMBMn6II&index=15&list=PLt96thROd3u9rcKn4dRlhHcpaFTGQ_o4e




apec -> RE: Don't forget parts 6-8 (10/18/2016 4:46:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kirk23

It is now up to video No 15 in Paradogs Gamer excellent AAR. For the past 3 game turns,German bombers have been attacking 2 British Aircraft Carriers,in the ports of Southampton and Bristol. Can anyone tell me why, the naval AI did not think about moving these vital units,before both were destroyed needlessly? Both these Carriers could easily have been saved,the AI needs to learn how to protect its forces better![&:]



That's a good question. I noticed however that these bombing runs costed a fortune (approx. 10 bomber steps per turn) so not sure if taking down the two carrier was worth the cost.




Christolos -> RE: Don't forget parts 6-8 (10/18/2016 4:57:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kirk23

It is now up to video No 15 in Paradogs Gamer excellent AAR. For the past 4 game turns,German bombers have been attacking 2 British Aircraft Carriers,in the ports of Southampton and Bristol. Can anyone tell me why, the naval AI did not think about moving these vital units,before both were destroyed needlessly? Both these Carriers could easily have been saved,the AI needs to learn how to protect its forces better![&:]

Video link: 1 min 30 sec into the video you can see the Bombers attacking these Carriers.Then the AI has a turn,and it still did not think to move the Carriers,so on the players turn 19 minutes in to the video,both Carriers get wiped out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Da5cMBMn6II&index=15&list=PLt96thROd3u9rcKn4dRlhHcpaFTGQ_o4e


I agree. The fact that the AI is not taking steps to preserve such vital units as it's carriers, does indeed raise questions regarding the competency of the AI. It's one thing to lose 1 or 2 carriers in a naval action were they were committed to fight, but just sitting around like ducks waiting to be pounced on, does seem a little odd indeed. Maybe the port protection values need a little tweaking and/or the carriers should consider moving to get out of harms way.

C




Hubert Cater -> RE: Don't forget parts 6-8 (10/18/2016 5:31:55 PM)

Thanks gentlemen, this is already fixed on our end [:)]




kirk23 -> RE: Don't forget parts 6-8 (10/18/2016 5:45:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater

Thanks gentlemen, this is already fixed on our end [:)]


Excellent news![:)]


Waiting for games release is going to be torture,can't wait to get playing,will just have to be patient for another Month I suppose.[;)]




Christolos -> RE: Don't forget parts 6-8 (10/19/2016 1:16:06 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater

Thanks gentlemen, this is already fixed on our end [:)]


Great! Can you let us know how this was fixed and will this also impact the fact that the UK CV (under AI control) in the Med also hung around at Malta turn after turn until it was finally sunk after being relentlessly attacked by bombers and the Regia Marina - see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Da5cMBMn6II&list=PLt96thROd3u9rcKn4dRlhHcpaFTGQ_o4e&index=15 from 11:07 to 11:58 for its final moments.

The CV was attacked over multiple turns which included the UK navy taking a pounding as well. It would seem that at this point (and knowing the threat and impending doom that lay ahead), the UK AI would pack it in and retreat the damaged CV to safer waters. It could also be rationalized, as Rasputitsa has interestingly pointed out in http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4163954&mpage=1� that the CV could have suffered a critical hit such that it could not be moved, but this would have to be by design (so the player is also affected) to make it more palpable...

C




Daniele -> RE: Don't forget parts 6-8 (10/19/2016 9:09:41 AM)

An interesting Preview + Gameplay article by our friend Joselillo (in Spanish)
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4166266




kirk23 -> RE: Don't forget parts 6-8 (10/19/2016 9:12:22 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater

Thanks gentlemen, this is already fixed on our end [:)]


Hi Hubert, as I have said earlier,I have been watching all Paradogs Gamer AAR video's, and as far as I can see, during the players turn, the game is now seriously unbalanced! With the combination of the new movement,combined attacks,and the extremely high percentage of successful attacks on units,it appears to easy to completely destroy units. Units that will have to be replaced,I really fear that the MPPs available,will not be enough to build these needed new units,to replace the losses,which can only result in a fatal hemorrhage.

To counter this advantage,more attacks have to fail,this can easily be remedied by using the EVADE option,this in combination with maybe reduced damage per attack,will make the game much more challenging.[&:]


UPDATE


I have to say I'm amazed,that everyone appears to think that the gamey attack combinations are ok? So the target unit is just going to do nothing, but take damage,from a procession of attacking units,who are moving from 4 or more hexes away,I don't know what the game scale per hex is,but I'm assuming 20 - 25 miles.Attacking units move in attack,and move away again,only to let another unit move in and attack,and move away again,does no one think that this is gamey and nuts?[&:]


On land this type of combat is maybe perfectly ok,because land units are protecting Cities etc,naval units don't have that to concern them,they are free to move about when and where they want.

This is where the naval game is completely different from the land combat.On land its feasible to assume, that a unit will defend one hex,be that a Town,City whatever. At sea,naval units don't have that,when naval units get attacked,they are both aggressive and defensive, they are moving targets,at 20 Knots or more in most cases,firing at a target thousands of yards away,while at the same time always changing course to evade being hit by the enemy.If they are undamaged and winning nothing changes,but when they start to take serious damage,then they revert to all out defence,by using a smoke screen to hide their position,while at the same time repeatedly altering course,in an all out effort to escape.



Don't get me wrong I think the game is great I do,but their are things that need highlighting,and this is one of them..

I also know that the game is abstracted,but this is taking it out of the realms of probability,and as soon as I get my copy of the game, I will as usual go straight to the editor and fix the combat aspect.




Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.046875