Harvey Birdman
Posts: 143
Joined: 1/8/2006 Status: offline
|
Do you own SC or SC2? I've played SC and only played the SC2 demo? SC was too dominated by Carriers and airpower. ie you had to gain air supremacy to punch holes in the enemy line. So if you teched up you airpower rapidly, you'd get the experience advantage and then air supremacy and then game won. In CEAW units can be forced to retreat so you don't have to rely on 2 armies or armour and brute airpower to break a line. In the CEAW economy you've got economic and manpower and oil(if you play with the oil option) production, which make the economy more challenging. If you use up too much manpower your corps have lower quality/efficiency and if you use up all your oil, all your units that use oil can't move or fight. In Ceaw, you've got garrisons, inf corps, motorized inf corps, tank corps, fighters, tac bombers,strat bombers, CV's,BB's,DD's subs and convoys. Since all the land units are corps, you've got a much bigger map to manuever on. The land combat system in Ceaw is more complex. The attacker gets a shock attack to suppress enemy strength points, then the defender gets a regular attack to destroy attacker strength points, then finally the attacker gets a regular attack to destroy defender strength points. So if the attacker is unlucky you can get whacked. Since armour is expensive to repair: 1st attack air/BB bombardment, 2) infantry attack and 3) armour or infantry attack. Each unit has 14 combat values. So on the surface the combat system looks simple, but it's more complex then you think it is. Yeah, Ceaw is worth the simple ww2 strategic game price of admission.
_____________________________
Indirect tactics, efficiently applied, are as inexhaustible as Heaven and Earth, unending as the flow of rivers and streams; like the sun and moon, they end but to begin anew; like the four seasons, they pass away but to return once more. Sun Tzu
|