CrusssDaddy
Posts: 330
Joined: 8/6/2004
Status: offline
|
I'm enjoying it. My basis of comparison is TOAW III (excellent operational scenarios, but can't quite manage strategic reach), the Allied General-Panzer General-Panzer Corps style games (largely unsatisfying, much more tactics and individual battle focused), and World in Flames (great as a tabletop game, irretrievably broken and dated as a computer game) and a handful of other tabletop games. To my mind, StratCom successfully blends the dynamism of the General-Corps games with the strategic reach of WiF. Events are well managed and I like that many of the smaller operations that would otherwise break down if portrayed at large scales (invasion of Denmark & Norway, raid at Dieppe, etc.) are handled by using events and invoking a blend of units and the purchasing points engine. Very satisfying. More events, to allow greater diversity of choice and more ability to create a narrative, would be great.
The challenge for me is integrating the elements that differ from traditional tabletop experiences as I know them, primarily strict turn schedule and structure. It's also a task for me to move on from "alive or dead" unit potentialities and to the "alive on a scale of 1-10" vs. "dead" of this game. It's just the way the kids do it these days, facilitated by convenient computer oversight, so this objection is mostly of the "Back in my day..." variety. Mostly it's storytelling: "This CV began the turn as a 10 and now it's a 3, what exactly does that mean in terms of the battle's or the war's narrative?" As soon as I can more successfully internalize that process of presumed gradual degradation vs. outright destruction, I think I'll be more comfortable.
I think the convoy system, one of my main complaints about WiF, is handled well, with the correct amount of abstraction. I prefer WiF's sea areas and sea-box sections, though -- it just seems correct that naval movement and operations should be handled by completely unique rules.
The game does not allow stacking, only one unit per hex. This seems odd at the game's scale and hinders my immersion when parking a fighter group in a city blocks a tank corps from moving there.
Production seems fine, although I miss buying lots of units like in WiF, versus simply replenishing existing degraded ones. Again, "Back in my day..."
Diplomacy is a bit sparse -- pay points, earn minor math bonus on road to eventual ally status. Some things are handled with events, which is good, and opportunities to expand in that direction should be explored.
I haven't explored strategic bombing and attacks much, because the results aren't readily evident. Majors get lots of production points, so if an attack kills just a few points, it's kind of a "Why bother?" experience. I may launch a later war scenario for the express purpose of unleashing Bomber Command on German cities and seeing what happens.
I like the game. I expect to like it more as I become more familiar with it (got it on Steam last week and have about 10 hours under my belt).
|
Printable Version
So opinions? How is this game after all? - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread