First impressions anyone?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

First impressions anyone?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> WW2: Time of Wrath >> First impressions anyone?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

First impressions anyone? - 7/19/2009 1:19:42 AM

Ron

Posts: 506
Joined: 6/6/2002
Status: offline

Would love to hear any from newcomers to the game. How does it compare now to other strategic games like SC2, HOI2, Making History or GGWAW? Strengths and weaknesses etc. I read the Wargamer AAR and to be honest I was very suprised at what 'happened' in the first two months; it doesn't seem very historical at all. I am intrigued by the developers examples of the AI, how does it play in reality long term? Thanks in advance.

Post #: 1

RE: First impressions anyone? - 7/19/2009 4:58:05 AM

JFalk68

Posts: 223
Joined: 11/5/2007
Status: offline

I read the AAR's also. They where very well written and the pictures where great, the reviewer seemed to give the impression that the AI was giving him some good resistance in places but I left the article feeling as if maybe the AI was too easy. I assume this was one of the first times the reviewer played the game yet he seemed to be doing extremely well overall against the AI.

I would have liked to have seen how the AI really crushed him in some devious manuver or lulled him into one course of action only later on to take advantage on his situation. I too am hoping to see some more feedback before I buy.

(in reply to Ron)

Post #: 2

RE: First impressions anyone? - 7/19/2009 5:09:00 AM

gwgardner

Posts: 6722
Joined: 4/7/2006
Status: offline

The reviewer in the wargamer AAR probably has played the game more than anyone. Very experienced and likes to test the limits.

_____________________________

(in reply to JFalk68)

Post #: 3

RE: First impressions anyone? - 7/19/2009 6:38:14 AM

Hard Sarge

Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline

I got it, I like it so far, only played the attack on Poland so far, still learning the system, but seems to work well, can't make any statements on the AI from that battle, other then it didn't do anything stupid, but didn't really stand a chance

think it could be a good one

_____________________________

(in reply to gwgardner)

Post #: 4

RE: First impressions anyone? - 7/19/2009 10:06:32 AM

patchogue

Posts: 140
Joined: 6/15/2008
Status: offline

It's taking me a while to get used to the extra information on the counters but air and airborne both seem to be better than in Road to War.

_____________________________

"It takes three years to build a ship, it takes three centuries to build a tradition"
Admiral Andrew Cunningham
1941

(in reply to Hard Sarge)

Post #: 5

RE: First impressions anyone? - 7/19/2009 11:01:00 AM

doomtrader

Posts: 5321
Joined: 7/22/2008
From: Poland
Status: offline

The one who played the AAR at wargamer is cpdeyoung from this forum, so he is really experienced.
Polish campaign is walk in the park for Germans

_____________________________

(in reply to patchogue)

Post #: 6

RE: First impressions anyone? - 7/19/2009 12:11:37 PM

Hard Sarge

Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline

roger, that is why I added in that it was the Polish battle

odd though, got to wonder what history is being modelled here, seems like the defence (or is it Allied Bias ?) is pretty strong (UK 3-1 in losses, France 2-1, Belgum 4-1 ?)

overall, like the system, think it is going to be a good game

_____________________________

(in reply to doomtrader)

Post #: 7

RE: First impressions anyone? - 7/19/2009 1:49:21 PM

Hard Sarge

Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline

what I am seeing for losses taken vs given, does it work right ? (or am I reading the reports wrong ?)

but last turn, I look at the numbers, the GB are at 26. for losses taken, they lose 8 points of airpower and had 3 Divs destroyed, and check the report page and the GB are still at 26. ?

disreguard

the wording is a little backward is all

< Message edited by Hard Sarge -- 7/20/2009 4:15:52 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Hard Sarge)

Post #: 8

RE: First impressions anyone? - 7/19/2009 2:14:25 PM

RAM

Posts: 402
Joined: 5/1/2000
From: Bilbao,Vizcaya,Spain
Status: offline

I'm a newcomer to ToW, never played road to war.

So far I like it a lot, but I find it a bit complicated to set my troops organized. I would like some way to establish chain of commands (for instance OKH - Army Group South - 4th Panzer Army) instead of the direct "the closest unit with HQ acts as HQ"). I'd like to see units directly attached to HQs instead of the way they're organized (it would be easier for me to see in a HQ screen which units does this HQ control, and thus impart orders more cleverly, given that I would set zones of operation to different HQs and its units...)

I find it confusing to get my units organized as I want ,because of what I said avobe. Too much to control and not that much easy to control everything. But I guess I'll get used to it :).

So far any tries I've done to conduct sub operations have met major disasters, losing most of the german submarines to a very small return. The only raid sortie I tried with surface forces also met utter disaster. Will need some feedback on how to succesfully use naval forces.

Other than that I'm loving it. I like the depth, I like the AI is not utterly stupid, I like the way the land and air war are managed. I like the game, I'm loving it, but sometimes I get a bit lost because it's so easy to lose track of all the forces you control. It could be easier, tbh, but once I have got the hold of the game I guess I won't miss any of anything I mentioned before.

So far is a 8.5 out of 10 for me. Thumbs up!

_____________________________

RAM

"Look at me! look at me!!!

Not like that! NOT LIKE THAT!!!"

(in reply to Hard Sarge)

Post #: 9

RE: First impressions anyone? - 7/19/2009 3:55:01 PM

cpdeyoung

Posts: 5368
Joined: 7/17/2007
From: South Carolina, USA
Status: offline

Notes on the AAR at Wargamer : This AAR was actually done across multiple betas, and I had done two or three earlier where I tried the strategy of roaring out of Poland and up the Baltic coast. Each time this operation worked like a champ and the Soviets were left with a tough defensive task. I was surprised in this one to find myself at war with the USSR as I attacked Lithuania. The Red Army is still quite weak at this point in the war, so I was able to prevail, but it was still a shock. This was the first campaign in ToW that I carried so far, and I was learning the new Soviet behaviors, and strengths and weaknesses as I went. I was very pleased to see the new events, and to see the huge effect the new supply rules have. RtV players who are not careful will find themselves fighting the "last war" rather than the current one.

The AI in ToW is much improved from RtV but it is still not going to give a strong human player a strategic challenge. A weaker human player will also struggle against a stronger human. However I was playing with "normal" production for all sides, and I have an idea I would have been overrun if the USSR was on "easy". I see all the modders firing up their tools for map and counter mods, but I can't wait to add new events to make the AI tougher.

I love the relative speed of playing the AI, but PBEM, or hotseat, is a real challenge. Still the AI is respectable, and remember you can give it some help with the F12 key. Switch the opposing forces to "human", make some tweaks, and switch back to AI mode. I did a little of this myself in the AAR, primarily making the defense of Moscow a bit tougher.

I do want to mod the events, but I will say that doomtrader and the team have given them a good tweaking, and there are surprises in store for players. If we can actually get a bunch of event modding going on we should be able to surprise ourselves.

With regard to following the historical path : I have done games that were close, but now I like to try less travelled paths. In my current game I am playing only the Soviets and have attacked and taken Turkey and Greece, and am campaigning in Yugoslavia. As much as I play I still find ways of doing thing differently, and for the World War One mod, count me in, a great idea!

Chuck

(in reply to RAM)

Post #: 10

RE: First impressions anyone? - 7/19/2009 4:20:27 PM

mavraamides

Posts: 447
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline

I started the main campaign a couple days ago. This was my first game but I'm extremely experienced with these sort of operational / strategic European Theater games (SC, SC2, HOI II, TOAW, etc)

I was in Paris by Jan of 1940 but it took me a while to finish them off. Its April now and Vichy has been formed and I'm beginning my buildup on the the Eastern Front for the Soviets. I thought I was doing well till I read the AAR on Wargamer and saw that France had fallen by the end of 1939!

The AI hasn't put up much resistance so far. In France in particular I was surprised by a couple of things:
1) The AI started attacking my from France before I was done with Poland. But all my units on the Western front were still frozen so I couldn't fight back! I had to buy a bunch of divisions so I could deal with them. The worst part was, the French left the Maginot line and left parts of it undefended so I was able to create a breach by simply moving in one of my units.
2) When I got to Paris, there was only 1 unit there and it left! So I walked into Paris without a fight.
3) In general, I had trouble even finding the French. They seemed to get out of my way and just give me a free path to Paris.

Also, the air seems much better but the naval still confuses me. I love the fact that I can directly attack an enemy air base (if I can find it). I also really like the spotting so I can 'peek' behind the enemy lines with my air forces and better plan my advances.

Overall, I think its a lot of fun but it feels like the AI needs some tweaking. The scale is epic in terms of land hexes and its probably a blast to play PBEM

Is it possible that by getting to France so early, the French simply haven't had time to build up an army yet? In the real war, the attack didn't start till May 10. Would 5 more months have allowed the French to build a better defence or would it just have allowed the Germans to build up even more of a gap?

Not sure how it could possibly take any longer to get to France. Maybe the units are moving too fast?

< Message edited by GordianKnot -- 7/19/2009 4:22:33 PM >

(in reply to RAM)

Post #: 11

RE: First impressions anyone? - 7/19/2009 4:23:42 PM

Kharkov

Posts: 33
Joined: 6/7/2003
From: Birmingham
Status: offline

Bought the game on Friday, and so far have spent around 8 hours playing it. I dont have Road to Victory so coming in as a virgin.

Played the Polish campaign to get my bearing and then jumped straight into the Grand Campaign playing USA then USSR.

Game system is easy to pick up although the naval side to things doesnt seem to fit with the rest of the game. I thought it would of been better to represent the naval units on the actual map rather than have an abstract system which is used. Maybe its just a case of getting use to it.

Playing the USSR, when Germany invaded, the AI didnt really use his airpower, just the odd attack it here and there it seemed. Maybe the AI could be beefed up in this area.

The map while adequent is a bit basic. Look at examples like World in Flames for good looking maps and this doesnt compare.

Each unit doesnt have any relationship with any other unit so I would like to see some unit organisation as someone above mentioned. Like group units into Armies etc and appoint leaders to these armies.

Overall though a very good game, easy to play and understand but still deep enough to keep your interest. AI seems very good (except the airpower), the Germans were probing my lines with their panzer and motorised troops and exploiting any weaknesses. Several times they broke through and encircled a large body of my troops much to my discomfort :P

Oh and I noticed several spelling mistakes in the English texts and I had several CTDs so just remember to save your games on a regular basis.

I would give it an 7.5 out of 10, nice work :)

(in reply to cpdeyoung)

Post #: 12

RE: First impressions anyone? - 7/19/2009 5:03:45 PM

Bleck

Posts: 741
Joined: 3/8/2009
From: Poland
Status: offline

quote:

I noticed several spelling mistakes in the English texts

Please report so we can fix them :)

_____________________________

Wastelands Interactive member (Programmer)

(in reply to Kharkov)

Post #: 13

RE: First impressions anyone? - 7/19/2009 5:10:10 PM

oldspec4

Posts: 746
Joined: 11/1/2004
Status: offline

I'm also playing at normal as Russia into turn 11 or 12 of Barbarossa.

Germans/Italians/Rumanians/Hungarians have all hit me w/ lots of airstrikes and are pressuring me at Leningrad, Smolensk, and Odessa.

Agree that a more realistic organization of troops would be good but the game is very good as is.

Haven't had any CTDs so far.

(in reply to Kharkov)

Post #: 14

RE: First impressions anyone? - 7/20/2009 1:23:06 PM

Leeds

Posts: 75
Joined: 3/5/2003
Status: offline

As a long time wargamer I am proud to continue as a member of the Europa Association; I have played Battlefronts Blitzkrieg; Schwerpunkts Russo German and Anglo German wars; Hearts of Iron and of course Road to War.

Thus after playing 2 scenarios, my early impressions.

* The map (with the exception of city hexes) is beautiful and a great improvement; The basic counters obviously need to be worked on - as I am sure they will.
* The simplified technology, morale and diplomacy is a relief and doesnt weigh the game down.
* I have always liked counter and hex based games so this too is good.

However,

* The AI is a bit dodgy;As the Axis player, I saw France declare she would stay behind the Maginot (as historical) but she then proceeded with a mass armor attack into the Saar. As my forces in this area where Frz (frozen) I could not respond!

This was the zenith of some ahistorical features that I found in the game, for example, Western countries (and even the USSR) did not mass their armor in the early war period - it was against their doctrine.

This and the utilization of air forces needs to be addressed.

* Armor does not seem to have the punching power (AEC) that it should or should I say, early war enemy infantry is able to repel it too easily.

* I believe their should be an advantage given to combined arms (blitzkrieg) attacks - but this is hard with the way air is handled.

* The naval element I found very unwieldy; There should be an option to withdraw my naval forces when I am faced with heavy odds!

Lastly for now, Britain (and France) should be allowed the option to invade neutrals (they so nearly did invade Norway to preempt the Germans) and face the repercussions.

Initial thoughts and looking forward to the progress of what is thus far a good start!

< Message edited by Leeds -- 7/20/2009 1:25:05 PM >

(in reply to oldspec4)

Post #: 15

RE: First impressions anyone? - 7/20/2009 2:23:42 PM

Plainian

Posts: 212
Joined: 9/22/2006
From: Dundee in Scotland
Status: offline

One partial fix for this would be to mod the leaders so they were effectively Army HQ's or Panzer Groups or whatever. Restrict the number available to roughly historic levels. These HQ's would then be assigned to rear area units (infantry divs or motorised etc) and they would pass out there bonuses to units within range.

Obviously this takes away a lot of the flavour and tactical play of the game but adds a strategic feel to the game.

This isn't an original idea by the way. I'm pretty sure some of the regular RTV stalwarts already use this idea in their pbem games. (Uxbridge?) Perhaps they can mod the TOW leaders csv file and post it for use as a mod?

quote:

ORIGINAL: oldspec4
Agree that a more realistic organization of troops would be good but the game is very good as is.

(in reply to oldspec4)

Post #: 16

General Observations - 7/20/2009 5:07:41 PM

Tac2i

Posts: 2001
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: WV USA
Status: offline

Just to better familiarized myself with game mechanics I played the Fall Gelb scenario (Battle for France). Played Germans as human, Italy as AI. Basically ignored the naval part of the game during this learning experience.

1) Broke through the French line and captured Paris rather easily.
2) Headed for the beach as in history and Brits evacuated.
3) Later, to my surprise, found a large force of Brits in the south of France.
4) Occasionally small French units would appear behind my lines (partisans?).
5) The AI Italians moved lots of units (ground and air) into my German area of operations in northern France. (?)
6) As others have noted, aircraft losses seem rather brutal.

Just what triggers the Vichy Option? If this detail is in the manual I overlooked it.

General speaking, must you capture all VP cities to conquer a country?

(in reply to Plainian)

Post #: 17

RE: General Observations - 7/21/2009 12:03:27 AM

killroyishere

Posts: 639
Joined: 4/23/2008
Status: offline

quote:

The AI hasn't put up much resistance so far. In France in particular I was surprised by a couple of things:
1) The AI started attacking my from France before I was done with Poland. But all my units on the Western front were still frozen so I couldn't fight back! I had to buy a bunch of divisions so I could deal with them. The worst part was, the French left the Maginot line and left parts of it undefended so I was able to create a breach by simply moving in one of my units.
2) When I got to Paris, there was only 1 unit there and it left! So I walked into Paris without a fight.
3) In general, I had trouble even finding the French. They seemed to get out of my way and just give me a free path to Paris.

Thanks for that review of the ai. I was on the fence on this one, but, that info made my decision for me. Yet another strategic game that doesn't muster up. I sure hope WIF ai isn't that bad. Even Making History's ai isn't that bad when trying to take France.

(in reply to Tac2i)

Post #: 18

RE: General Observations - 7/21/2009 12:40:27 AM

gwgardner

Posts: 6722
Joined: 4/7/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: killroyishere

quote:

The AI hasn't put up much resistance so far. In France in particular I was surprised by a couple of things:
1) The AI started attacking my from France before I was done with Poland. But all my units on the Western front were still frozen so I couldn't fight back! I had to buy a bunch of divisions so I could deal with them. The worst part was, the French left the Maginot line and left parts of it undefended so I was able to create a breach by simply moving in one of my units.
2) When I got to Paris, there was only 1 unit there and it left! So I walked into Paris without a fight.
3) In general, I had trouble even finding the French. They seemed to get out of my way and just give me a free path to Paris.

Thanks for that review of the ai. I was on the fence on this one, but, that info made my decision for me. Yet another strategic game that doesn't muster up. I sure hope WIF ai isn't that bad. Even Making History's ai isn't that bad when trying to take France.

I think you've jumped to conclusions too fast.

1) as stated, the player began the attack on France in '39. A lot of production and movement could have taken place by the AI if the attack had come more historically.

2) The French decision to freeze their maginot troops in place did not keep them from making incursions into Germany historically - I don't find that situation bad at all. The issue of the German troops being frozen on the West Wall is being addressed by the developers, I think.

3) Paris being open - that's completely historical, but I doubt if it is typical of the AIs actions if it is given more time to prepare for the attack.

4) I haven't played France '40 in ToW yet, but from what I've seen on the Eastern Front, the AI is not capable of putting up a decent fight.

5) The AI will be better with more troops available, and that can be achieved by changing the difficulty level of the scenario and/or by holding the attack until the Spring of '40.

_____________________________

(in reply to killroyishere)

Post #: 19

RE: General Observations - 7/21/2009 2:01:12 AM

Wolfe1759

Posts: 798
Joined: 1/20/2008
From: Shropshire, UK
Status: offline

Overall first impressions are pretty positive.

Found it to be easy to get into interface and rules wise, probaly on a level with Commander Europe at War and easier to get started on than WaW, SC and Making History.

I like the multi-hex attack ability and I think for me this pretty much overcomes any potential problems with the lack of stacking of units which was a minor niggle with CEaW.

I also like it because of all the grand strategy WWII computer games I've got it feels most like a good board game such as Third Reich or Totaller Krieg with similar concepts and the ability to quickly assess a situation with the familiar 8-3 type combat-movement notation on units.

Seems to be striking a good balance between complexity (which is to the lower end and this is a positive) and depth to make a fun game

< Message edited by Wolfe -- 7/21/2009 2:04:09 AM >

(in reply to gwgardner)

Post #: 20

RE: General Observations - 7/21/2009 2:04:19 AM

GeorgePatton

Posts: 99
Joined: 2/11/2005
Status: offline

Notwithstanding some minor hiccups (i.e., lack of detailed naval/land/air loss reports), I really do like this game so far after having played my first campaign game up to Nov 1940.�

I am wondering though if there are any national restrictions on units operating beyond their borders (e.g., not allowing Bulgarian units to operate anywhere in Russia as they historically did not etc) or having Finns only operate as far as Leningrad area but not to go beyond it (i.e., the Finns wanted only to recover their lost lands in the 1939 war).

Right now I'm seeing Iraqi units in Libya cooperating with the British

Did Iraqi units serve with the Brits in North Africa?

I realize that the game has to be abstracted so these issues would only be very minor points.

Overall I give it thumbs up! Definitely worth getting.

7.5/10

< Message edited by GeorgePatton -- 7/21/2009 2:07:07 AM >

_____________________________

War...war never changes.

(in reply to gwgardner)

Post #: 21

RE: General Observations - 7/21/2009 4:03:27 AM

lomyrin

Posts: 3741
Joined: 12/21/2005
From: San Diego
Status: offline

In the 1939 campaign game the Germans are able to build units in the western cities and use them to go after Netherlands, Belgium and France long before the historical time frame and the unfreezing of the border area units. Is this an ovesight or is it intended ?

Being used to World in Flames there are no restrictions of this sort.

(in reply to GeorgePatton)

Post #: 22

RE: General Observations - 7/21/2009 12:54:05 PM

cpdeyoung

Posts: 5368
Joined: 7/17/2007
From: South Carolina, USA
Status: offline

Notes on play of games on this level, especially influenced by "Road to Victory" :

Some of the points being raised have to do with events and patterns that occur in games of ToW, but did not occur in the actual Second World War. I think if a player sets all nations to human control it would be possible to come pretty close to simulating the war as it happened. Some AARs of RtV came close to the feel of the occurences in the war. However we all play the game in hindsight. The game is structured to be a contest between three coalitions, generously calling the Soviet Union a coallition, that nation without a friend. The players too, are seeing a conflict in the East as inevitable, and so we play to get the edge on the original decisions. It is a rare Axis player who will sit contemplating the shores of the Channel for all the months Hitler did. It is a rare Soviet player who will trust the Germans. You can, however, play these patterns and the game should be a more or less successful simulation.

If the events were changed I think we could simulate World War One with this engine, and I have modified RtV to start before the events of Munich occured. After multiple plays the "normal" pattern of events is going to be stale. You will play as well as possible and operations will run as clockwork. I tend to take the situation I am given and try to play optimally, moving the forces under my command without concern for where they went actually. This gives me N games, but then I have to try variants, such as taking the USA out of the war, which can be done quite easily with F12 to adjust production points.

I have a technique which I think gives a very good gaming experience against the AI. I play one side until I see a tipping point. Perhaps this would be an Axis observation that 'Unless the French plug that hole I will have a breakthrough". At that point I save the game and continue as the Axis, watching the breakthrough occur. Later I go back to that saved game and set the Allies to human control, the Axis to the AI, and then I try and hold off the very invasion I was so successful with. Frequent saves will give you interesting points to play turnaround. If you try this I think you will have favorite saved points, which resemble scenarios. It works very well for me.

With all the possibilities this game will repay the time you invest many times over, at least it has for me.

Chuck

(in reply to lomyrin)

Post #: 23

RE: General Observations - 7/21/2009 2:48:20 PM

micheljq

Posts: 791
Joined: 3/31/2008
From: Quebec
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: GeorgePatton

Right now I'm seeing Iraqi units in Libya cooperating with the British Did Iraqi units serve with the Brits in North Africa?

Iraq was occupied by British troops because his government was not enough Pro-Commonwealth. I think there was a coup and a Pro-Axis government was in place, so the british did send forces and occupied the country.

(in reply to GeorgePatton)

Post #: 24

RE: General Observations - 7/21/2009 3:24:22 PM

SlickWilhelm

Posts: 1854
Joined: 7/22/2007
From: Rochester, MN
Status: offline

Personally, I'm glad to hear that things are not unfolding in everyone's game just like it happened historically. The point of a good wargame, IMO, is to give the correct historical setup and then allow us to make all the historical decisions as really happened....or not.

I wouldn't look at the French using their tanks in mass formations as an AI "mistake". I would look at it as a positive sign that the AI is smarter than the real French high command was in using their assets!

I really love the decision by the design team to allow us to play as one of the small countries. I just bought the game on Friday, and that's how I plan to start learning the ropes.

_____________________________

Beta Tester - Brother Against Brother
Beta Tester - Commander: The Great War
Beta Tester - Desert War 1940-42

(in reply to cpdeyoung)

Post #: 25

RE: General Observations - 7/24/2009 11:33:03 PM

Gloo

Posts: 272
Joined: 4/4/2001
From: Chapelle-Guillaume
Status: offline

I just played for about an hour now but I've got a "first impression" yet

Globally I'd say I need to play a couple of hours more, before I'd say that I like the game. For now, I've got a mixed feeling about it. Seems to be deep and entertaining but I'd say it lacks a bit of polishing, on the corners. Some details tend to give me the impression it's been marketed a bit too early. Details like some options missing, the text files overlapping some info boxes and so on. I wouldn't say it's a showstopper for me in any way, for the core of this game sure is appealing !

I don't think I'll change my mind and finally say that's not a game to own and play, though. I'm already pretty sure I'll like it more when it is patched. I'll probably say it's one of the best war games I've played recently (and I played a lot...) but for now it's only an impression, not a certainty

I'll give my final thoughts here when the first patch is released and if you can read French, you'll have my full review at your disposal on Cyberstrat�ge a few days earlier...