RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers - 1/8/2005 12:04:54 AM

freeboy

Posts: 9088
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline

I'm cautiously optimistic with HOI II. If the wargamer review isn't accurate in it's glowing recommendation, then they will suffer in credibility. I would think that with a release this big they will have to be objective or suffer the consequences. As an aside, I find it an interesting contrast between Paradox and Matrix. The former sells their wargame for $40, comes in a DVD case, and includes a printed manual. Matrix, on the other hand, charges $60, CD comes in a paper sleeve, and no printed manual. I've always gritted my teeth when purchasing a Matrix game because of the cost and no manual, but when another company can come out with a game such as HOI II for much less the cost AND a manual, well.... it makes me look at Matrix with a less than favorable impression and even though I enjoy playing their games, I doubt I'll be making any purchases in the future. Probably my loss, but I'm voting with my pocketbook

economies of scale.. the HOI2 is a mass market game.. buy it everywhere and thus the differnt "value"

< Message edited by freeboy -- 1/8/2005 6:05:36 AM >

(in reply to shredder)

Post #: 61

RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers - 1/8/2005 1:31:30 AM

Charles2222

Posts: 3993
Joined: 3/12/2001
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: elmo3

To get back somehwat on topic, I see Paradox will not allow any bugs to be posted in the HOI2 forums. People have to email them to Paradox instead. Apparently the previous bug forums for HOI, CK, and other games took up too much support time for Paradox.

If they are really doing that for that reason, how do individual emails about the same problems over and over get more efficient? Think robot.

(in reply to elmo3)

Post #: 62

RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers - 1/8/2005 2:44:49 AM

Warfare1

Posts: 658
Joined: 10/20/2004
Status: offline

Like the next wargamer, I hope all the next wargames are good, especially the larger, strategic types, like SC2, WaW, and HoI2.

However, getting back to the review of HoI2, I would have to say that it should be called "The Hearts of Iron 2 Light Review".

I am sure the reviewer is a very nice person, and this is no reflection on him. Heck, he probably loved everything he saw in the game.

My main concern is the fact that NO mention was made about how the AI played in the game. While the reviewer waxed poetic about the new slick interface, and that this would be the greatest WWII strategy game of all time, absolutely no mention was made about how the AI performed, to wit:

1) What country did he play?

2) How did the AI react to his moves?

3) How well did the AI do in strategic defence?

4) How well did the AI do a couple of years into the game? Was it falling apart?

5) Did the AI transport reinforcements to endangered territory?

6) Did the AI protect its capitals and other vital provinces?

7) What about ampibious landings? Were they good? in sufficient numbers?

8) Is the market economy stable and functioning as it should? How so?

9) Are carriers (and to a larger extent naval operations) worthwhile (especially in the Pacific?).

10) Did the AI build the proper military units and do research properly?

etc...

Again, absolutely nothing of any substance was really included in the review.

What are we to make of this fact?

< Message edited by Warfare1 -- 1/8/2005 12:46:35 AM >

(in reply to Charles2222)

Post #: 63

RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers - 1/8/2005 3:04:18 AM

RBWhite

Posts: 1484
Joined: 8/28/2004
From: Somerdale, New Jersey, USA
Status: offline

If we/you/me are the devout Wargamers that we all profess to be, than sooner or later were going to buy HOI II, or any other wargame we hate or think bites, why, because we have to.

We have all been burnt a time or two purchasing a game, that wasn't what it was suppose too be or we just didn't like.

As the old saying goes, Fool me once shame on you, Fool me twice shame on me.

I really hope Paradox is not that foolish.

_____________________________

(in reply to freeboy)

Post #: 64

RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers - 1/8/2005 3:09:42 AM

rhondabrwn

Posts: 2570
Joined: 9/29/2004
From: Snowflake, Arizona
Status: offline

quote:

Again, absolutely nothing of any substance was really included in the review.

What are we to make of this fact?

That it should have been titled: "First Impressions" and not billed as a "review" of the game.

_____________________________

Love & Peace,

Far Dareis Mai

My old Piczo site seems to be gone, so no more Navajo Nation pics :(

(in reply to Warfare1)

Post #: 65

RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers - 1/8/2005 3:40:48 AM

Warfare1

Posts: 658
Joined: 10/20/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rhondabrwn

quote:

Again, absolutely nothing of any substance was really included in the review.

What are we to make of this fact?

That it should have been titled: "First Impressions" and not billed as a "review" of the game.

I fully agree.

The true test of the AI will be when the player gets a couple years into the full campaign.

I'll be sitting back and watching what other players have to say...

It may take a couple of weeks of playing to get a full view of what the game is like...

(in reply to rhondabrwn)

Post #: 66

RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers - 1/8/2005 4:36:37 AM

CatLord

Posts: 312
Joined: 10/21/2002
From: Lausanne, Switzerland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Warfare1

My main concern is the fact that NO mention was made about how the AI played in the game. While the reviewer waxed poetic about the new slick interface, and that this would be the greatest WWII strategy game of all time, absolutely no mention was made about how the AI performed, to wit:

1) What country did he play?

2) How did the AI react to his moves?

3) How well did the AI do in strategic defence?

4) How well did the AI do a couple of years into the game? Was it falling apart?

5) Did the AI transport reinforcements to endangered territory?

6) Did the AI protect its capitals and other vital provinces?

7) What about ampibious landings? Were they good? in sufficient numbers?

8) Is the market economy stable and functioning as it should? How so?

9) Are carriers (and to a larger extent naval operations) worthwhile (especially in the Pacific?).

10) Did the AI build the proper military units and do research properly?

etc...

Again, absolutely nothing of any substance was really included in the review.

What are we to make of this fact?

Have we read the same review ?

"Toughen AI

With all the new elements combined Hearts of Iron 2 really does feel like a grand strategy game. I could sit here and wax lyrical for hours about my experiences of the Great Patriotic War as the Soviet Union, my grand defence of Finland in the Winter War, and of great flanking manoeuvres, encirclements, and Blitzkriegs.

The opposition in the form of the AI has also been polished. The original AI often times acted stupidly as it controlled nations. Now, while it does feel somewhat like the AI takes a defensive mindset when it comes to the conduct of war, players who crank up the difficulty level a bit can kiss their Panzers goodbye. The AI is not opportunist, nor lethargic, but rather it feels as close to a real opponent as one can get."

So at least he has played Soviet Union...

Anyway, I am not sure I judge a game on its AI, mainly (apart if it is really appaling)... I cannot say that the SPWaW, UV or WiTP AI are top notch to be honest (poorly protected convoys near the front line, anyone ?)...

As long as the AI is decent enough to help me learn the game and enjoy it, I am happy. I know that any AI will be beaten by a human player sooner than later (apart if the AI is cheating like mad as in Civ III, or if the game is grossly unbalance)... That's why there is multiplayer and/or PBEM features in games...

Cat

< Message edited by CatLord -- 1/8/2005 2:39:10 AM >

_____________________________

Member of the Revolution Under Siege development team.

(in reply to Warfare1)

Post #: 67

RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers - 1/8/2005 5:43:41 AM

Warfare1

Posts: 658
Joined: 10/20/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CatLord

quote:

ORIGINAL: Warfare1

My main concern is the fact that NO mention was made about how the AI played in the game. While the reviewer waxed poetic about the new slick interface, and that this would be the greatest WWII strategy game of all time, absolutely no mention was made about how the AI performed, to wit:

1) What country did he play?

2) How did the AI react to his moves?

3) How well did the AI do in strategic defence?

4) How well did the AI do a couple of years into the game? Was it falling apart?

5) Did the AI transport reinforcements to endangered territory?

6) Did the AI protect its capitals and other vital provinces?

7) What about ampibious landings? Were they good? in sufficient numbers?

8) Is the market economy stable and functioning as it should? How so?

9) Are carriers (and to a larger extent naval operations) worthwhile (especially in the Pacific?).

10) Did the AI build the proper military units and do research properly?

etc...

Again, absolutely nothing of any substance was really included in the review.

What are we to make of this fact?

Have we read the same review ?

"Toughen AI

With all the new elements combined Hearts of Iron 2 really does feel like a grand strategy game. I could sit here and wax lyrical for hours about my experiences of the Great Patriotic War as the Soviet Union, my grand defence of Finland in the Winter War, and of great flanking manoeuvres, encirclements, and Blitzkriegs.

The opposition in the form of the AI has also been polished. The original AI often times acted stupidly as it controlled nations. Now, while it does feel somewhat like the AI takes a defensive mindset when it comes to the conduct of war, players who crank up the difficulty level a bit can kiss their Panzers goodbye. The AI is not opportunist, nor lethargic, but rather it feels as close to a real opponent as one can get."

So at least he has played Soviet Union...

Anyway, I am not sure I judge a game on its AI, mainly (apart if it is really appaling)... I cannot say that the SPWaW, UV or WiTP AI are top notch to be honest (poorly protected convoys near the front line, anyone ?)...

As long as the AI is decent enough to help me learn the game and enjoy it, I am happy. I know that any AI will be beaten by a human player sooner than later (apart if the AI is cheating like mad as in Civ III, or if the game is grossly unbalance)... That's why there is multiplayer and/or PBEM features in games...

Cat

Hi

Well, I stand by what I said.

When the reviewer played the Soviet Union, was it in the long campaign? Or was it in a scenario?

The AI can be made tougher in a scenario (with design restrictions). Heck even the original HoI had decent playability in the 1944 scenario.

But the REAL test will be how the AI performs in the long campaign, since this will be what the majority of people will be playing.

The reviewer talked about HIS experiences:

quote:

my experiences of the Great Patriotic War as the Soviet Union, my grand defence of Finland in the Winter War, and of great flanking manoeuvres, encirclements, and Blitzkriegs.

and NOT how the AI performed. His statements were all general statements about the AI which mean nothing....

Did the AI carry out flanking manoeuvres, encirclements, and Blitzkriegs?

Where are the specifics?

What tactics did the AI use?

Did it build military units correctly?

Did it research properly?

The fact that you say that you don't judge a game on its AI goes a long way in explaining why the reviewer did not go into specifics about the AI.

After all, who cares about the AI in a WWII strategy game... *rolls eyes*

Before I buy a game I want to know how well the AI is going to do, especially when the game comes from a company with a terrible game release history such as Paradox. And I want to know specifics.

The fact that this "preview" was general in its nature, and not specific about game and AI content, means that I, as a consumer, will wait until the game is being played by people who will know if the game and AI are any good.

I do not intend to be a paying beta tester...

< Message edited by Warfare1 -- 1/8/2005 3:51:42 AM >

(in reply to CatLord)

Post #: 68

RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers - 1/8/2005 6:13:54 AM

Warfare1

Posts: 658
Joined: 10/20/2004
Status: offline

CatLord:

I note that you are a moderator on the Paradox forums. So I can understand your defence of their games.

And yes, I own and play EU2 (which I think is Paradox's best game).

Were you also a HoI2 beta tester?

The fact that you defend HoI2 as well as NOT care about the AI in the game, does raise red flags for me...

(in reply to Warfare1)

Post #: 69

RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers - 1/8/2005 6:14:42 AM

Hanal

Posts: 2312
Joined: 11/1/2003
Status: offline

Well there can be no denying by anyone that all of us who bought HOI was in fact a "paying beta tester" which is why, as I said earlier, I will not even consider purchasing HOI2 until it is out for about two months, at least......

(in reply to Warfare1)

Post #: 70

RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers - 1/8/2005 6:39:43 AM

EnPeaSea

Posts: 42
Joined: 12/20/2004
Status: offline

The IGN review is up. It is an interesting read.

http://pc.ign.com/articles/577/577912p1.html

The reviewer gave it an 8.7 out of 10.

(in reply to Hanal)

Post #: 71

RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers - 1/8/2005 7:11:14 AM

ravinhood

Posts: 3891
Joined: 10/23/2003
Status: offline

"At $10 billion, the game industry has already overtaken Hollywood and a new report shows game revenues could surpass sales of music within the next five years"

http://keathmilligan.net/view.php?id=448

This is another reason I now expect "quality and performance" to the maximum in computer games now. They are making billions and selling us crap out of the box 99% of the time. It's time we speak with our pocket books and put a stop to this policy.

We don't get movies that aren't complete out of the dvd case. And we don't get songs that aren't complete either. So, it's time the gaming industry did the same, FINISH the product before releasing it.

"This need to pause the game again and again, particularly as your armies grow in size, makes it unwieldy for multiplayer. When the hours pass in seconds, you'll find yourself taking weeks of game time just to plan a simple attack. "

The above from the IGN review, uh huh, see there we have it, it's not multiplayer friendly, because of a need to pause because of armies growing in size and taking weeks of game time just to plan a simple attack. Well, now, the first "negative" about the game comes to light and it's a BIG negative for many of us are multiplayers. I knew that real time crap wasn't going to work. Now multiplayers will have to find niche groups willing to allow "frequent" pauses to be able to setup attacks and defenses and other things. This will just cause a decrease in the amount of players to play against.

"Multiplayer doesn't easily fit with the game's mechanic." from IGN reviewer last page

It appears the very last page, page 3 speaks out the most about this version. While an improvement to the reviewer, it still has qualities missing (perhaps seen in the next version HOI 3? lol another $40 please lol)

As I suspected, they just "streamlined" a lot of things from the origional, that's what "polish" is, thus I stick by my statement this is just HOI patch 1.07, what HOI should have been, but, wasn't, but, they need more money so $40 please! lol

< Message edited by ravinhood -- 1/8/2005 12:32:19 AM >

(in reply to EnPeaSea)

Post #: 72

RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers - 1/8/2005 9:15:21 AM

pasternakski

Posts: 6565
Joined: 6/29/2002
Status: offline

I wouldn't have a Paradox game stuck up my @$$ sideways even if it felt good.

So go advertise them somewhere else.

(in reply to ravinhood)

Post #: 73

RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers - 1/8/2005 10:57:08 AM

Pippin

Posts: 1233
Joined: 11/9/2002
Status: offline

LOL!!!!!

It is 4:04 am here, I am browing this thread and just so LMFAO!!

_____________________________

Nelson stood on deck and observed as the last of the Spanish fleets sank below the waves�

(in reply to pasternakski)

Post #: 74

RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers - 1/8/2005 1:19:39 PM

Koper

Posts: 34
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline

quote:

"This need to pause the game again and again, particularly as your armies grow in size, makes it unwieldy for multiplayer. When the hours pass in seconds, you'll find yourself taking weeks of game time just to plan a simple attack. "

The above from the IGN review, uh huh, see there we have it, it's not multiplayer friendly, because of a need to pause because of armies growing in size and taking weeks of game time just to plan a simple attack. Well, now, the first "negative" about the game comes to light and it's a BIG negative for many of us are multiplayers. I knew that real time crap wasn't going to work. Now multiplayers will have to find niche groups willing to allow "frequent" pauses to be able to setup attacks and defenses and other things. This will just cause a decrease in the amount of players to play against.

"Multiplayer doesn't easily fit with the game's mechanic." from IGN reviewer last page

Sigh... What about shared country control, which is not even mentioned by reviewer? Apparently, he never checked it... It's not so hard to play USSR, when your friend takes half of units (for example north of Pripet marshes) and you take the rest? Or USA - where one player controls Pacific and other - Europe?

Sorry Ravinhood, but this reviewer totally missed the point of changes in MP game of HoI2. I suspect he just started MP session as Germany in 1941 Grand Campaign, played a bit, then wrote what he saw. Sure, that's his job. But it not tells everything about the game...

< Message edited by Koper -- 1/8/2005 12:37:10 PM >

(in reply to ravinhood)

Post #: 75

RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers - 1/8/2005 1:22:28 PM

MrFag

Posts: 1
Joined: 1/8/2005
Status: offline

Kinda funny seeing the same Matrix buttcrawlers trying to put down other companies archievments.

If I remember correctly, Matrix tried to cheat me out of my money by using false conversion rates, didnt show taxes until after I actually bought the game (oh sorry, youre game doesnt cost you 64,99$, it will be 76Euros- sorry HAHAHA).

Then I got a total unplayable piece of junk, which you whimps call a "great game"- really funny. The AI sucks, the gameplay sucks, its still full of bugs and 1.4 will be the last patch. Multiplayer takes ages, nearly as long as the second world war, and you dismiss other games because they take too long to play MP???

Major LOL.

And then it seems to be forbidden to talk about other companies games in the GENERAL forum.

While I agree that many Paradox games nearly unplayable buggy (I own HOI and CK), I really prefer they acceptable prices and modding support over rip offs from Matrix. I am glad I have managed to get rid of WITP, this must be one of the worst wargames I have ever played- its a single bug with a horrible arrogant community like Mr. Frag and the likes.

Oh BTW- I was a Gary Grigsby fan for over 15 years and own many classics as Kampfgruppe or Second Front of him. So dont come me with Paradox fanboy or similear BS.

(in reply to Pippin)

Post #: 76

RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers - 1/8/2005 2:26:36 PM

Hartford688

Posts: 261
Joined: 3/23/2004
From: Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Status: offline

Why are you here? Other than offensive comments about other members, general whine and anti homosexual joke name?

Go to another forum you like if you hate it here.

< Message edited by Hartford688 -- 1/8/2005 1:27:44 PM >

(in reply to MrFag)

Post #: 77

RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers - 1/8/2005 2:36:08 PM

Koper

Posts: 34
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline

This thread is degradating in fast rate... Maybe it would be better to close it for a while, until some people chill out?

< Message edited by Koper -- 1/8/2005 12:52:02 PM >

(in reply to Hartford688)

Post #: 78

RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers - 1/8/2005 2:46:29 PM

RBWhite

Posts: 1484
Joined: 8/28/2004
From: Somerdale, New Jersey, USA
Status: offline

The moon must be really full where lives.

I agree Koper, but it hasn't been that bad, until Mrfag.

I've seen alot worse im my short time. May have been locked up once or twice myself.

It only takes one bad attitude.

Rick White

< Message edited by RBWhite -- 1/8/2005 12:53:36 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to MrFag)

Post #: 79

RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers - 1/8/2005 2:50:49 PM

Koper

Posts: 34
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline

Sure, pasternakski comment, on the other hand, was very good.

< Message edited by Koper -- 1/8/2005 12:50:55 PM >

(in reply to RBWhite)

Post #: 80

RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers - 1/8/2005 2:58:05 PM

RBWhite

Posts: 1484
Joined: 8/28/2004
From: Somerdale, New Jersey, USA
Status: offline

Well he has been around awhile.

And he did use proper gramar

Could have been alittle less descriptive.

He also does seem to get right to the point.

< Message edited by RBWhite -- 1/8/2005 1:01:44 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Koper)

Post #: 81

RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers - 1/8/2005 3:24:07 PM

Hortlund

Posts: 2884
Joined: 10/13/2000
Status: offline

Well, I dont think too many of you guys realize it, but you have just witnessed the end of cwif.

_____________________________

The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..

(in reply to freeboy)

Post #: 82

RE: Revew of HoI2 at wargamers - 1/8/2005 3:29:25 PM

Hortlund

Posts: 2884
Joined: 10/13/2000
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

quote:

Play the game first please...

Can't do that ... that would require that I buy it ...

A bad rep is a bad thing in the software business ... once you get it, there is no way to undo it.

Since I can't return it for a refund, I will never lay out the money.

Their only real solution is to produce a demo which is the full game and lets people play for 30 days with a key they get. Pay and the key gets converted to non-demo.

Thats what happens once you've lost your customers faith. It costs you to get it back.

You should be very careful with what you are saying about losing customer faith. Witp is at 1.4 right now, and we still have land units retreating through enemy units and the leader bug is still alive and well. I remember what you said months ago about how multiple patches that dont fix the real bugs is a sign of something...do you remember what it was?

Can I return witp for a refund? Did you have a surprise tax-issue pop up and make the game more expensive to the customer than it first appeared? Was there a very peculiar $ to � convertion debacle?

The Paradox bashing is getting very old, especially since Matrix track record aint exactly spotless either.

_____________________________

The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..

(in reply to Mr.Frag)

Post #: 83

RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers - 1/8/2005 3:41:12 PM

Warfare1

Posts: 658
Joined: 10/20/2004
Status: offline

Well, if a review of a game calls it "The Greatest WWII Strategy game ever made", then it will fall under close scrutiny.

Personally, I hope HoI2 is a GREAT WWII game.

The IGN review was better than the wargamer review, in that it went into more specifics. It also detailed the first hints of problems with the game (manual still not effective enough; numerous pop-up windows; chore of selecting units; complexity not for MP; etc).

However, the IGN review also failed to mention a single thing about how the AI performed. The reviewer of this article mentioned that he played HoI2 over the holidays, so he must have had lots of time to play the game.

Yet, not a single word was written about how the AI performed in both the scenarios and the Grand Campaign.

I just find this quite puzzling, since this was such a big issue with the original.

Again, I hope this is a great game.

But I am still being cautious with this title...

(in reply to RBWhite)

Post #: 84

RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers - 1/8/2005 3:42:12 PM

Hortlund

Posts: 2884
Joined: 10/13/2000
Status: offline

Having worked on HoI2 since January last year....what exactly is it you want to know about the AI?

_____________________________

The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..

(in reply to Warfare1)

Post #: 85

RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers - 1/8/2005 3:44:29 PM

Hortlund

Posts: 2884
Joined: 10/13/2000
Status: offline

Eh..."not for MP"?

To my knowledge, HoI2 is the first strategic wargame that allows several players to control the same nation. You can have a MP game with 5 guys playing Germany against the AI or 3 guys playing UK and 2 Germany and 2 Russia...or whatever.

_____________________________

The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..

(in reply to Hortlund)

Post #: 86

RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers - 1/8/2005 3:45:27 PM

Kung Karl

Posts: 323
Joined: 7/1/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: pasternakski

I wouldn't have a Paradox game stuck up my @$$ sideways even if it felt good.

So go advertise them somewhere else.

Mature statement. Myself I am lucky enogh to be open minded and play both Matrix and Paradox games. I do not refuse to play some compnies games. So I have more games to choose from and probably don't mis many titles becasue of me being a fanboy of one company.

< Message edited by Kung Karl -- 1/8/2005 1:46:10 PM >

(in reply to pasternakski)

Post #: 87

RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers - 1/8/2005 4:04:22 PM

Warfare1

Posts: 658
Joined: 10/20/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

Having worked on HoI2 since January last year....what exactly is it you want to know about the AI?

Hey, thanks for the offer

As a beta tester, you are allowed to talk about the game?

Great.

The nitty gritty (or what I would like to have seen detailed in a review):

How does the AI stand up in the Grand Campaign when the player chooses Germany? Does the Soviet AI defend properly? Does it protect its capitals and other strategic areas (since the USSR will fall if these are captured). And how long, generally, does it take for the USSR to fall? ie Is the East Front a slugfest?

Does Britain perform well? Does it send reinforcements to North Africa and India?

What about the Battle of Britain? Will German AI bomb and British fighters defend? How effective is this? In original HoI this just didn't work very well.

Is the world economy stable? Is there really a need to trade? Is the player awash in resources in a just a couple of years? Are there any scarce resources?

Will the AI counter your flanking moves?

In the Grand Campaign will the USA AI launch EFFECTIVE amphibious landings in Europe? How good are they? Will Britain do the same? If the player is Germany, will these landings test him?

Since this game will rise and fall on how well the USSR AI holds up, just how good is the USSR in research, building units, deploying and fighting? How long does the USSR AI hold out against a human playing Germany?

How well does the USA AI do against Japan? Are there naval clashes? Will both Japan and the USA take over islands? Are carriers effective in the game (ie do they actually work?) Will Japan expand in Asia? Does Britain/Australia counter these moves?

As a player have you been surprised by any AI moves and strategies?

These are just a few questions off the top of my head that NO review to date has even hinted upon, and yet are things that every wargamer needs to know.

These questions are mainly aimed at the Grand Campaign. I haven't touched upon how good the individual scenarios may be.

Thanks for taking the time to answer

< Message edited by Warfare1 -- 1/8/2005 2:07:59 PM >

(in reply to Hortlund)

Post #: 88

RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers - 1/8/2005 4:18:49 PM

VicKevlar

Posts: 881
Joined: 1/4/2001
From: Minneapolis, MN
Status: offline

Alrighty......only gonna say this once. We are not going to tolerate flame wars with other boards or companies. Take those comments to the locations where they belong....but not here.

Any and all personal shots/insults are an absolute no go at this station. All they will get you is a fast exit from Matrix. Period.

Now, let's see if this thread continues on topic. If not, it will be locked.

_____________________________

The infantry doesn't change. We're the only arm of the military where the weapon is the man himself.

C. T. Shortis

(in reply to Warfare1)

Post #: 89

RE: Review of HoI2 over at wargamers - 1/8/2005 4:40:39 PM

Hortlund

Posts: 2884
Joined: 10/13/2000
Status: offline

quote:

How does the AI stand up in the Grand Campaign when the player chooses Germany? Does the Soviet AI defend properly? Does it protect its capitals and other strategic areas (since the USSR will fall if these are captured). And how long, generally, does it take for the USSR to fall? ie Is the East Front a slugfest?

The AI in HoI2 is very good. That goes for all nations. Each nation has a specific AI designed for that nation only. Most of the big nations have separate AIs for different parts of the war. So for example, USSR might start in 36 with a buildup AI (focused on building stuff) then change in 39 to an agressive AI (focused on places like Finland and Baltics etc) then swithch again in 41 to a defensive AI, then in 43 to an offensive AI etc etc. The USSR usually dont fall.

quote:

Does Britain perform well? Does it send reinforcements to North Africa and India?

Same as above really. UK too has different AIs for different periods in time.

quote:

What about the Battle of Britain? Will German AI bomb and British fighters defend? How effective is this? In original HoI this just didn't work very well.

Same as above. The German AI favours pretty historical moves in the early war. Thus you should see attacks on Norway and Denmark after Poland has fallen and before France etc. But all of your questions so far are AI-related, and since the AI switches over time via hidden AI-events its kinda hard to give a general answer. During some parts of the game, the AI will defend, during other parts of the game it will be agressive.

quote:

Is the world economy stable? Is there really a need to trade? Is the player awash in resources in a just a couple of years? Are there any scarce resources?

World economy is completely reworked. There is no world market anymore. If you want to trade for resources you have to strike individual deals with individual nations. Resources, like they should be, very scarce for certain nations. Japan and Italy will have a *very* hard time to get the economy to work because of lack of resources.

quote:

Will the AI counter your flanking moves?

The AI will react to them very quickly, and contain them. In a game as Japan, I tried to land in Shanghai to outflank the Chinese. A few weeks later I was desperately struggling to save my units as the landings had been surrounded by hordes of Chinese troops.

quote:

In the Grand Campaign will the USA AI launch EFFECTIVE amphibious landings in Europe? How good are they? Will Britain do the same? If the player is Germany, will these landings test him?

Yes. They are good. Again, this is something that is coded in the US and UK AI-files. At some point during the game, the Allies will switch from defensive to offensive AIs. Where exactly the landings will take place will be dependent on where you have your forces as Germany and what the AI believes is the best area to attack.

quote:

Since this game will rise and fall on how well the USSR AI holds up, just how good is the USSR in research, building units, deploying and fighting? How long does the USSR AI hold out against a human playing Germany?

Like I said, the USSR AI will switch focus over time. At first it will be building stuff, then going agressive, then defensive, then agressive. It is very hard to get as far as Germany did in 41 in HoI2 because of many new changes to the game engine. Supply is a critical factor that will directly influence combat ability. A German player who neglects to expand infrastructure in Germany and Poland will have a very very hard time inside Russia.

quote:

How well does the USA AI do against Japan? Are there naval clashes? Will both Japan and the USA take over islands? Are carriers effective in the game (ie do they actually work?) Will Japan expand in Asia? Does Britain/Australia counter these moves?

The naval system is completely reworked in HoI2. The entire naval scope of the game is amazing now, with combat ranges and positioning. Two carriers with proper screen will kill a fleet of 15 battleships now. The CVs will simply hover at 150-200 km range and bomb the battleships to bits. Changes has also been made to amphibious invasions. You cant be too far from the originating base to the landing zone without some severe penalties. That means that if you will need to secure a continuous line of bases from Pearl to Okinawa before you can even think about invading Japan. There will not be any invasion fleet leaving port at San Fransisco and invading Guadalcanal or something like that. As for the AI-questions, I think I have covered them already.

quote:

As a player have you been surprised by any AI moves and strategies?

Yes. Mostly I have been frustrated at how good it is to counter my clever flanking moves.

quote:

These are just a few questions off the top of my head that NO review to date has even hinted upon, and yet are things that every wargamer needs to know.

These questions are mainly aimed at the Grand Campaign. I haven't touched upon how good the individual scenarios may be.

Thanks for taking the time to answer

NP, keep em coming if you have more.

_____________________________

The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close.
In its place we are entering a period of consequences..

(in reply to Warfare1)

Post #: 90