|
jwarrenw13 -> Finished my first game, thoughts... (6/27/2020 5:27:08 PM)
|
I finished my first game early this morning, winning on beginner level on a small Siwa world crafted using DasTactic's advice for beginners. I posted an AAR in the AAR section if you want to see how it looked. Here are my thoughts.
It may be the best game I've ever played. The best thing I can compare it to is playing the Korea 1950 scenario in The Operational Art of War I way way long ago -- I still have the CD -- and realizing with amazement what a computer could do for wargaming. I had played earlier games, dating back to a couple of Avalon Hill's Midway and a couple of others, but TOAW was something different. This was something different, a step forward. I want to discuss just a few things.
First, I had a very fortuitous initial setup, as described in my AAR. I was able to get my nation up and running with three well organized zones before I encountered any difficulties at all. So there is that.
Logistics. It was the most realistic portrayal of logistics I've ever seen in an operational/strategic level wargame. I was constantly having to battle to keep my supply lines open and running as I advanced. That was perhaps a bigger struggle than the actual combat on the front lines. There has been much talk about the logistics system. For God's sake, keep it. It felt real. Yes, it can be improved, and Vic will improve it, but it works. Don't simplify it or screw it up, especially when it hits Steam and the Steam crowd starts attacking it because it isn't easy. Yes, in the latter third of my game I had to micromanage my supply lines and work the map to set up roadblocks and keep the supplies flowing to the right place. But I found that challenging rather than annoying, and realistic.
I was reminded of REFORGER 1984, the major annual US exercise in (West) Germany during the Cold War. I led a convoy as a company commander from a staging site near the Luxemburg border to near the East Germany border. MPs and Polezei were there at every turn to direct me, until suddenly they weren't there at one intersection where I thought I was supposed to turn, and I hesitated and drove on, thinking they must want me to use an alternate route. Within a few minutes I realized I should have turned at the unmarked intersection and was fortunate to be approaching a factory parking lot where I could get my vehicles turned around. I still made my destination on time, and my battalion and brigade commanders never knew about the detour [:D]. And of course it was not in combat, so I got a pass and learned a lesson. But without stop signs and road markings, units really do wander off down the wrong roads. I know.
The movement and combat system. In this case Vic has simplified his system while leaving the workings of it intact. Fewer clicks, looks better, same results.
Managing the economy and resources. Very good. I kept dealing with shortages. Fuel in the beginning. Then metal at the end. I traded and micromanaged when I needed to. Very good system.
Research and unit models. I managed to build improved unit models and that helped me. Most important was upgrading infantry. I found that upgraded infantry is very powerful both on offense and defense. As is upgraded armor, if you can have fuel and can keep them supplied. Yet I think I just touched the surface of what is available and possible in the game with research and developing and models
Out of necessity I did create a second SHQ. It worked. I described it in more detail in my AAR. Maybe it was not the best solution, but I could not solve my problem using just one SHQ, though perhaps I could have.
Politics. DasTactic recommends a start with Government, Mind, and Democracy. But when I started playing, I quickly threw that aside and played a pragmatic game, a politician's game. When presented with choices I went with what made my leaders happy first and then with what made the people happy. Not in every case, but most of the time. That worked. I ended up with Democracy 66%, Mind 77%, and Commerce 61%. If the people were unhappy, I did not send in the troops. I paid the people. They liked that. That kept things running, and I won. But I also wonder how a game would be different if I roleplayed keeping a certain set of priorities, perhaps Fist.
I noted at the end I had high percentages of support for the Militia, Corporations, and Cults. I wonder what would happen if I opposed the Corporations or the Militia or the Cults.
I also generally agreed to whatever a Faction wanted. Then I ignored my agreement, because in the end it seemed that I was able to meet most of the demands just by progressing in the game. I didn't notice any problems if I failed to meet an agreement. I wonder now what would happen if a Faction got really mad at me. Looking back three of five eventual factions had happiness of above 80% and the others above 50%.
There are other things I wonder about. I realize I glossed over a lot of things and ended up focusing only on the things that I found I had to focus on to win the game. I also know I played on beginner level, so perhaps some of the effects of my decisions were not as big as what they might be on higher difficulties.
I will also note that playing on a small Siva world for 170 turns, I timed a couple of turns near the end and was getting about 2:30-2:45 wait time with end of turn processing. I run a Ryzen 5 1400 quadcore 3.20 ghz with 16 gb RAM.
So that is how I played on beginner level to get a win. I hope this information is helpful to someone, and as always any comments or critiques are welcome.
|
|
|
|
