AnyOne Playing this?

World War II: General Commander is an introductory war strategy game which brings a unique mix of scale, combat dynamics, and force management. An intuitive combination of rules and controls will give beginning wargamers and real time strategy fans the opportunity to simulate Germany’s famous last Blitzkrieg from either side.
Alan Sharif
Posts: 1108
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2001 8:00 am
Location: UK.
Contact:

RE: AnyOne Playing this?

Post by Alan Sharif »

I have purchased this game and just got around to playing it. Thus far I have only played the 7th Pz Army and Pieper scenarios.  I was not always sure what I was doing ( might be my fault always keener to play a game than learn how) but I have found this an enjoyable experience. I won both scenarios,on the standard setting, neither easy or hard, so might question the AI's ability. Remember, I really was not sure what I was doing, at least initially. However, when all is said and done this is a game worth looking at. I am generally NOT a fan of real time but this is no click fest and I would recommend it to WW2 fans at least. Would like to see more, France 1940, North Africa and the Eastern Front spring to mind.     
A Sharif
Alan Sharif
Posts: 1108
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2001 8:00 am
Location: UK.
Contact:

RE: AnyOne Playing this?

Post by Alan Sharif »

Ooops...........ignore my mentioning I was using the standard AI in my previous post, getting confused with Operation Barbarossa which I am also playing.

Have played this title some more and find much to enjoy about the game. However, I am getting used to either defeating the AI without much of a challenge, or, in a couple of smaller scenrios, being defeated without actually doing much at all. In one of my early games an Allied airstike destroyed enough of my units for me to lose the game without actually encountering any Allied Ground forces what so ever.

I have also played a couple of games as the Allied played on defense whereby I dug in everywhere prior to being attacked by the Axis and after a few turns I was informed I had won said scenario.

I suspect the smaller scenarios are useful only for learning the game on. I will try the campaign game before the weeks out, I hope, as this title is currently competing for more of my time with both Operation Barbarossa and Takeda.
A Sharif
Rosseau
Posts: 2882
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 2:20 am

RE: AnyOne Playing this?

Post by Rosseau »

To answer the question, I think they're all playing Time of Wrath...A much better game that is easy to mod as well.

I dropped $100 for the original CEAW and the Napoleon spinoff. The latter set the record for shortest time on my hard drive. I really tried to like it, really tried to mod it, and it was a no-go. Graphics and upgrade mechanics were nice, but gameplay is oh so boring.

I see Conquest Realms isn't selling like hotcakes either. My experience with Slitherine games is not good, and I've paid for it the hard way.

Having a pretty good time with Op Barb, which proves a simple wargame doesn't have to be so brain dead as these other two.


Alan Sharif
Posts: 1108
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2001 8:00 am
Location: UK.
Contact:

RE: AnyOne Playing this?

Post by Alan Sharif »

Hi Rosseau, I think we are talking about different titles here. Time Of Wrath is very much on my 'to buy' list after I played the demo.

With regards to General Commander I must add the AI needs some serious work. At present I win easily. Have not played the Allied Bulge Counter Attack scenario yet but otherwise my comment re AI hold fast.

Are there any patches in development which might address this?
A Sharif
GIveloper
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 1:10 pm
Contact:

RE: AnyOne Playing this?

Post by GIveloper »

Hi Alan,
 
We are working on it, we have very few resources but we try to deliver something as soon as we can.
 
WWII: GC Designer
Txema
Posts: 180
Joined: Fri May 09, 2003 2:00 pm
Location: Basque Country

RE: AnyOne Playing this?

Post by Txema »

I am very interested also in the patch to fix the AI problems. You have done a very interesting work on this game, but the AI patch is necessary. Please, develope a good patch to fix the AI flaws... this nice game deserves it !!
 
 
Txema
Alan Sharif
Posts: 1108
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2001 8:00 am
Location: UK.
Contact:

RE: AnyOne Playing this?

Post by Alan Sharif »

I agree totally. This is a very interesting game and you should be proud of the work you have done thus far. A better AI will make this a much better title. I would like to see further games using this system. One day I hope.
A Sharif
msickle
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 2:01 pm

RE: AnyOne Playing this?

Post by msickle »

I actually like this game and I think it brings some new approaches to wargaming.  I will be watching future releases from you GI.

Having said that, I found some very rough edges that make it difficult to enjoy the game in it's current state.

Problems:
1. Crashes... every.. time...  I have never been able to make it thru a scenario once without it crashing somewhere along the line.  Well one time I did, I just sat back and sped it up and let the AI roll over me just to see what it would do.  It seems to not crash if I don’t give orders or move the map.

2. Resolution, UI.  I know this has been covered elsewhere, but limiting it to such a small resolution makes it look terrible.  Running it in actual rez is tiny and also unreadable.  (I have a 1920x1600)  The game map is a bit dark, although it seems that that is related to control?  Either way there is a lot of dark, black, shadowy terrain and it looks gloomy.  There are lots of buttons on display at all times. Unit facing is hard to see, esp. on infantry.

3.   Units lack the ability to do anything on their own.  This means that you actually do need to micro manage every single move.  The auto formations are ok for putting a regiment in the right area.  But if they are defending against a massive onslaught, then it won't work.  Unit's don't auto fortify, and they don't do tactical retreats.  They sit there and get hammered until they shatter.  Now, for handling a division or two in one area that is not a problem, because the game system is well done.  But take the 7th Panzer attacks scenario...  You have 3 different battles going on, and if you need to manage one area carefully, you need to drop the time multiple to almost nothing or else risk getting steamrollered on one of the other two.  So the game crawls... all that would be ok, but just really slow, except the crashing thing.

So the game does not feel like a RTS clickfest, no, but due to the need to micromanage so many units across such a huge area sort of has the same basic result.  And mind you – I have only played the size one and two scenarios – I have not even touched the 3s and 4s.

4. Armored units have no ability to fall back as they fight.  They stand and die like static infantry units until you order them to go somewhere else or run.  On the offense, you can set them up to attack in a complex path but on defense it’s all manual.

5. Armored infantry is way too powerful.  They can run right into towns and defenses and all of their halftracks are just fine.  They are like tank units with 400 tanks instead of 40.  They steamroller everything.  They suffer no ill effects from being fired on from above even though all of these vehicles in this timeframe were open topped.  Tank and AT units damage them but not like a bunch of halftracks.  I've had them run through gauntlets of fire and keep on rolling.  Just a few of them in a group can smash anything in the path.  I'd say the only reason I kill them much at all is artillery and the AI running them right into defending units and parking them there. I can imagine that making mounted infantry have to mount and dismount, and then managing the transport separately would add a lot of complexity to an otherwise simple system.  But – motorized infantry, in trucks?  That would be even more suspect in this current system.

Side note here - AT guns, what the heck?  They get shredded on defense, but can roll up on offense and hammer away.  Here, they roll around like 45mm cannons on lawnmowers, moving over hills with the greatest of ease.

6. No real zone of control.  Sometimes units will stop and battle it out, but if there is any extra room they will slip around everything, and fast.  A straggling pack of infantry battalions will be 3kn down the road behind your defensive line in a flash, even if they are surrounded on all sides by dug in units.  Artillery with manual targeting can slow things down a lot - but this is a full time job if you have 3-4 arty units to manually target.  That works only if you don't need to interact with your other forces, such as when everyone is hunkered down in defense.

In one run of the 7th panzer scenario I pulled everything on the left back with only a small screening force and fortified 2 solid lines of defense with tanks, infantry and AT guns.  (1 armored and 1 infantry division.) They were fully fortified by the time the Germans hit them.  Waves of mostly halftracks came in and basically started swirling around, just running up and down the defensive lines, eventually shattering them.

7.  Zooming in and out is very inconsistent.  I tried many different mouse wheel settings, and it does not seem to make any difference.  Sometimes it zooms in a LOT and usually it is slow.  Zooming in and out to place units takes many, many rotations of the mouse wheel at the "normal" speed.

8. The maps feel constricted and more like mazes than maps.  Now, I imagine that these fit the Bulge stuff well, but it still feels boxy.  On that topic, the Battle of the Bulge has been done so many thousands of times, I was not inspired by this setting at all.  I decided to try it despite this.   I would love to see this tried with some eastern front action, with more of a mix of open and closed maps.

9. Battalions cannot be broken into smaller battle groups. For instance, an armored division is a pretty massive force... but in this game you can only use it for 1 big or 2 small defensive lines and that's about it.  Combine that with the weak zones of control, the super halftracks, and your division feels pretty small.  You can almost always be flanked unless the AI decides it WANTS to come thru you or is bottled by a bridge or river.  The ability to parcel out tanks and AT guns in smaller groups would be nice.

10.  Sound is low and not very rich.  A big battle with 200 tanks, a few thousand infantry and some artillery sounds like someone shooting pistols in the back yard.


Now - that might all sound harsh, I want to be clear that I do like this game none-the-less.  Here are some things I liked:

1. Real time operational never played like this.  The Panther games stuff is along these lines but it feels kind of clinical.  I think the 3D map is the main ingredient that helps it, it really helps visualize the battle as it shapes up.

2. Supply and road handling, very nicely done overall and it gives a much more interesting battlespace that feels more alive.

3.  The icons that display that allow you to jump to different main battles is nice. 

4. The basic controls, of looking at, moving, facing units is nice.  When you get the hang of the camera controls and start moving units, you feel like you can lay out the movement of a division or two very quickly and with a plan.  You can decide to use roads or go cross country easily.  

----

Well, overall I think in needs some work, but there is something to the core combo of real time, 3D map, and this nice interface for giving movement orders.  Plus of course the awesome supply handling.

Matt
Alan Sharif
Posts: 1108
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2001 8:00 am
Location: UK.
Contact:

RE: AnyOne Playing this?

Post by Alan Sharif »

Nice Post Matt. I have to agree on most points ( game has never crashed on me), and I would love to see this game developed further. East Front and North Africa would be excellent, however, some of the more mobile battles of WW1 would interest me also. In fact, there are a lot of battles/campaigns/eras that this game system would really suit.
A Sharif
Rosseau
Posts: 2882
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 2:20 am

RE: AnyOne Playing this?

Post by Rosseau »

You're right Alan, I was talking about Commander - Europe at War and its Napoleonic half-brother!

I bought World War II: General Commander before Matrix had it up and liked it immediately.

My only gripe would be why no Light and Heavy tanks for the Americans (Stuarts, Pershings)? The game could use a bit more variety in unit types if possible.

Alan Sharif
Posts: 1108
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2001 8:00 am
Location: UK.
Contact:

RE: AnyOne Playing this?

Post by Alan Sharif »

Hi Rosseau. Must admit, I have been tempted by the WW2 title, but never the Napoleonic one. The system seems totally wrong for that period.
A Sharif
Rosseau
Posts: 2882
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 2:20 am

RE: AnyOne Playing this?

Post by Rosseau »

Not to hijack this thread or tempt you further, but it's available here for $20:

http://www.slitherine.com/games/mh_ceaw_gold_pc

Don't know why Matrix is selling it for $50!
User avatar
karonagames
Posts: 4701
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2006 8:05 am
Location: The Duchy of Cornwall, nr England

RE: AnyOne Playing this?

Post by karonagames »

This is not the same game. Too many games with commander in the title.
It's only a Game

User avatar
sabre1
Posts: 1922
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2001 8:00 am
Location: CA

RE: AnyOne Playing this?

Post by sabre1 »

Anybody home?

This game looked like it had a TON of potential, and just faded away...

Too bad.
Combat Command Matrix Edition Company, The Forgotten Few
User avatar
Redmarkus5
Posts: 4454
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2007 1:59 pm
Location: 0.00

RE: AnyOne Playing this?

Post by Redmarkus5 »

I think the devs must have folded.
WitE2 tester, WitW, WitP, CMMO, CM2, GTOS, GTMF, WP & WPP, TOAW4, BA2
Post Reply

Return to “World War II: General Commander”