Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa



Message

Templer_12 -> Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (11/25/2015 3:11:40 PM)

I am on the fence, but:

• Only a single scenario
• No Manstein
• Only 1941/1942
• Airwar and artillery abstracted
• Price

The fact is, with each title of the Decisive Campaigns series the developer Victor Reijkersz presented interesting and fun raising innovations.
Also the AI was competend, always good and should be improved with the game now.

I had a lot of fun and satisfaction playing the two predecessors, Decisive Campaigns: The Blitzkrieg from Warsaw to Paris and Decisive Campaigns: Case Blue.

Airwar and artillery abstracted – a bit confusing.



stormbringer3 -> RE: Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (11/25/2015 4:01:46 PM)

After playing WiTE I'm glad they abstracted the airwar. The airwar in WiTE had a lot of problems. Also for me, the support unit concept got old, too much effort to move them around.



Vic -> RE: Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (11/25/2015 4:08:40 PM)

Hi Templer,

Since you own the previous games here is a quick and dirty explanation.
Divisions have divisional artillery included. Its just that there is no artillery attack mode anymore.
All the corps, army level artillery assets have been abstracted in a card that you can use to focus artillery on a specific frontage.
Exception and addition is a siege artillery card.

There are no air unit counters on the map but there are airfields and you have to make decisions when to relocate the Luftwaffe forward deeper into Russia as well as deal with how the Luftwaffe will need to be employed by events and action cards. Bonusses are provided for the armies that receive tactical air support. Furthermore cards also provide air resupply options.

The AI is my best so far imho and I am quite proud of it.

As for the one scenario... its deep and plays differently each time. But I am biased, other players might give you more objective feedback.

Best wishes,
Vic



DerGrenadier -> RE: Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (11/25/2015 4:48:28 PM)

So thats 50,00 € for 1 scenario. Thats pretty steep. I think Ill pass on this one.



Xornox -> RE: Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (11/25/2015 7:30:52 PM)

Boxed edition €86.94 with taxes and shipping. I know that I will resist again couple of months but eventually I will buy this. The price is horrendous and I am stupid.




nikdav -> RE: Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (11/25/2015 7:44:03 PM)

Yes actually there is only one scenario , but don't forget the editor and the fantastic Community Project engine!
When we were able to manage the engine i am sure we had many scenarios and mods.[;)]



Queeg -> RE: Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (11/25/2015 7:48:24 PM)

I'd rather have one scenario done really well - and with a unique point of view - than a dozen done in the same old way.



Vic -> RE: Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (11/25/2015 7:53:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: nikdav

Yes actually there is only one scenario , but don't forget the editor and the fantastic Community Project engine!
When we were able to manage the engine i am sure we had many scenarios and mods.[;)]



About the Community Project BETA. Its an extra from VR Designs.

It should be made available in 1-2 weeks (or close to it) to all DC:Barbarossa owners. I just want to deal with the initial release of Barbarossa first.

You can already see the initial docs over here:
http://www.vrdesigns.nl/atwiki/doku.php?id=dcx

best wishes,
Vic



Erik Rutins -> RE: Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (11/25/2015 8:12:14 PM)

To be fair, I think it's understating it more than a bit to call Operation Barbarossa a 'scenario'.



Rosseau -> RE: Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (11/25/2015 8:17:52 PM)

Templar,

WitE, two expansions; WitW and one expansion. That's a lot of dough. I honestly would not miss out on this one for $50. I still play small WitE scenarios, but it is more of a chore because I have not invested my life in learning the rules, and then re-learning them again as they change.

DC3 played right out of the box after watching videos. Also, it is a long scenario with tons of options and replayability as it is right now. Some people like the micro of WitE, but I think DC3 hit the sweet spot so far.



Krupinski -> RE: Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (11/25/2015 8:34:41 PM)

For my the price tag is absolutely ok. It`s the most innovative wargame i own! Enough said! [;)]



Templer_12 -> RE: Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (11/25/2015 8:53:44 PM)

When do the game end?



elmo3 -> RE: Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (11/25/2015 8:56:06 PM)

February '42.



Templer_12 -> RE: Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (11/25/2015 9:12:04 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: elmo3

February '42.

So, there will be no:
• Tiger
• Panther
• Stalingrad
• and no "Russia strikes back for justice"?



Panzeh -> RE: Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (11/25/2015 9:13:56 PM)

Believe me, Russia can strike back in this game something fierce, especially in the last two months when the Germans are on the end of their rope and the Soviets get their better organizations.



rjh1971 -> RE: Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (11/25/2015 10:40:58 PM)

Actually I wouldn't say it's only one scenario, since you can play the game from the Soviet side as well and believe me it's a completely different approach, the feeling of playing one side or another is very different and the decisions events you must undertake each turn adds hundreds of possibilities when replaying the game.



TheWombat_matrixforum -> RE: Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (11/26/2015 12:39:27 AM)

Not every game has to cover the entire war. The first few months were, arguably, the most decisive, but even if you really like the middle or end bits, there's nothing wrong with having a game focused on one part. Case Blue focused on the middle bit. There are games out there on Bagration and the end of the campaign. But this one happens to look at the beginnings.

I think what throws some people is that, unlike say a game on the Bulge, where you have a defined battle or campaign and cover it all, a game on the "Eastern Front" carries with it for some folks the connotations of the whole epic conflict. Just think of Barbarossa as, for instance, a campaign like the Stalingrad campaign, or the Kursk campaign, only bigger. It's limited by design; there are other games that attempt to cover everything.

I've only played a few turns (after reading the generally good manual) and this is definitely a very distinct, very interesting take on the campaign.



demyansk -> RE: Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (11/26/2015 10:15:45 AM)

I played three turns and I find this the first war game that is actually trying something different. I hope we have mods for this and I will have my $ worth after a week. Look at all the crappy movies out there for$10 a pop



supersixfour -> RE: Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (11/26/2015 10:32:32 AM)

I was about to buy this, but then I realised the game covered only 8 months of the war.
For 50€, I'll pass for now.



krieg63 -> RE: Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (11/26/2015 11:24:36 AM)

crazy prize 70$
no demo

and an other game I will pass ....

in 5 years, digital prize increase to boxed edition.
really unfair.
consequence, year after year I bought less game ....



SuluSea -> RE: Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (11/26/2015 12:18:38 PM)

I have to say this is my favorite part of WW2 in Europe but given the price, limited scope and look of the
map I'll sit this one out for now. I have made some poor decisions on my purchases in the past
usually during the euphoria of release which has made me more reluctant to pull the trigger.
I admit this developer has my attention & I may revisit my thoughts after the first of the year. Best of luck going forward!!



Franciscus -> RE: Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (11/26/2015 12:27:22 PM)

Hi

Also on the fence, and likely will pass, although I would like to support the devs.
The new rpg elements are interesting, and I can live with abstractions and a poor map.

But 50€ for a game with only one scenario is not reasonable. Specially for me, that usually have no real time for a "big" campaign and would very much like if some more small scenarios were included.
Proposing an editor for the community to make such scenarios is not exactly a reasonable proposition...

Regards



Delaware -> RE: Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (11/26/2015 12:59:39 PM)

You folks keep saying there is only one scenario, but this isn't a scenario based, tactical game. This is a true operational game, one of the most unique and incredible simulations of overall command I have ever played. The nature of the game means its focus is on the long term consequences of operational decisions, of which there are many and have different impacts. So playing "Stalingrad" would completely defeat the scope and purpose of the game. Trust me when I tell you it's not like any other war game you have ever played.



Franciscus -> RE: Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (11/26/2015 1:44:23 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Delaware

You folks keep saying there is only one scenario, but this isn't a scenario based, tactical game. This is a true operational game, one of the most unique and incredible simulations of overall command I have ever played. The nature of the game means its focus is on the long term consequences of operational decisions, of which there are many and have different impacts. So playing "Stalingrad" would completely defeat the scope and purpose of the game. Trust me when I tell you it's not like any other war game you have ever played.


I understand your point, but for some reason an editor for the community to make smaller scenarios is to be released, or am I wrong ?

If that is so, for 50€ the full campaign and several smaller scenarios would be reasonable. Otherwise, this belongs IMHO on the 30-35€ price range.

(As a comparison, WWIIE from Schwerpunkt was sold at 50$, with more than 50 scenarios at release (including Barbarossa), with several more being steadily released for free, up to more than 100 campaigns and scenarios)
Just my opinion, hope you guys enjoy the game and the devs are successful.

Regards



Templer_12 -> RE: Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (11/26/2015 2:03:30 PM)

If I can thus find many exciting hours, I'm happy to be willing to pay € 50.
I just have to find out if the current version of the Decisive Campaign series, Barbarossa, is worth for me.
To this end, I am still skeptical.

• Only 1941/1942
• Only a single scenario, and only 8 month covered
• No Tiger
• No Panther
• No Stalingrad
• No Manstein
• Airwar and artillery abstracted
• Price

Heavy on the plus side, what also speaks for the game in my eyes is the outstanding support and the product care by VR Design.
Vic is always quick with answers in the Forum.
And can you remember the huge patch/update for Decisive Campaigns: The Blitzkrieg from Warsaw to Paris after [sic] Decisive Campaigns: Case Blue was released?



zakblood -> RE: Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (11/26/2015 2:20:34 PM)

Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa Release Stream! Nov 24th Twitch feed is up to watch http://www.twitch.tv/slitherinegroup/v/27484594

more depth, more info, and a chance to see it in action as the one before this was a beta version[;)]



budd -> RE: Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (11/26/2015 2:25:21 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Templer

If I can thus find many exciting hours, I'm happy to be willing to pay € 50.



This pretty much sums up my thoughts. I too get caught up in the "how many scenario/campaigns come with the game" If i get hours and hours of enjoyment does it matter how. 1 big scenario or 10 smaller scenarios. Now if its a counter number thing, i get that as i have trouble with games with a lot of counters. I don't have the game yet, but i will sooner or later. It's tasks me, it tasks me and i shall have it.



gwgardner -> RE: Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (11/26/2015 2:45:40 PM)

There are so many options and varieties of play in this game that to me there is an unlimited horizon of replayability for the one scenario.

Just one example: 'posture' is a key concept in the game, whether your individual armies are in blitzkrieg, sustained offensive, or defensive posture. Each posture has impact on combat capabilities, supply and fuel usage, APs (action points), fatigue. I have played the campaign through without ever changing off blitzkrieg posture - my Panzer armies were sucking air, my infantry were flopping on the ground, by mid October. Then I have tried the campaign with an arbitrary timetable for when I'd switch over to sustained offensive, and then I have tried a campaign with using the reports carefully, on combat losses, fuel usage, fatigue, to determine when to change posture. Just altering this one single aspect of play, and I have played much different campaigns.

There are so many factors like 'posture' in this game that give it so much replayability.



Templer_12 -> RE: Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (11/26/2015 2:49:51 PM)

You already completed campaigns?
Do this means the game seems not to be long time fun? [:(]



zakblood -> RE: Skeptical about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa (11/26/2015 2:52:45 PM)

no, what he means is it is long term fun, as there's plenty of opportunity for re playability regarding the options used and chosen, as even with the same settings used, no 2 games are the same[;)]

quote:

There are so many factors like 'posture' in this game that give it so much re playability.
[&o]

edited (typo) [X(]



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.9375