Mannheim Tanker

Hehe...I'm hardly trolling, SuperTed. I've been on the BTS board for over 2 years, and this is the first time anyone has even insinuated that I'm trolling. Straha, perhaps my wording was imprecise as Bloody Bucket pointed out. However, my point stands that several people on this board avoid the question What's new in SC that I can't get in other games?. Or worse, instead of answering the question, they/you make excuses for why it's not different. I've never said that I'm correct and Hubert et al. are not, so I'm not sure why people are leaping to that ill-gotten conclusion. :confused: Rather, I'm posing some questions that I and otherse obviously feel should be addressed. If I can play a strategic level WWII game that is several years old and offers more than SC, then something is wrong here. This is the crux of my critical postings...if you want to take that personally, than by all means stew over it if that makes you happy. That was hardly my aim, however, but I had to word my concerns a bit more strongly seeing as I was continually blown off up until this thread with regards to my central question.

Why not? Just look at how many Polish pilots and soldiers escaped to return again in '44.

What do you mean by this? Straha</font>

Ummm...but if it was done right in the first place, there should be no need to use the editor to build a "correct" scenario. Hehe...it's pretty funny how many apologist lackeys there are on this board.

I agree with you. My complaints about SC have nothing to do with it being "not fun", but rather that there is little improvement over its predecessors or competitors. If you're going to make a new strategic-level WWII game, at least add something new to the idea than what's already been done. Hehe...even the boat sounds in SC sound like an exact ripoff of the .wav files used in TOAW.

I tried out the demo, and it's certainly fun. I was disappointed, however, that it didn't really add much that I can't already do in Europe Aflame. In fact, it's missing quite a few aspects of that are available in EA, as I suspected. The replay factor probably won't be too high, as your options appear to be fairly limited. It's a fun beer and pretzels game, which is in its favor if you're looking for a quick pseudo-strategic level wargame. If you're looking to recreate WWII beyond an Axis and Allies level game, you'll probably be disappointed, as I give it about a 3 on the realism scale. I might still buy it, however, for when I'm in the mood for a quick WWII fix.

Downloaded in 2 minutes, 50 seconds. Gotta love DSL! Too bad I'll be out of town until next week, so it will have to wait until then.

I bet a Ma Deuce would be a helluva lot more effective than the pepper spray I use on my neighbor's cats when I catch them on my porch (not to mention infinitely more fun).

Canadian Army? When has Canada had an army? Canadian military? Jeff</font>

Upcoming offensive!? Hmmm...what do you have up your sleeve, Titan? :eek:

I suppose we can expect gamey lawn-mower rushes in CMBB.

"BTS Please fix or somefink!" - unknown (or unremembered).

That's very interesting. Could you perhaps be a bit more specific? In what situations would tanks jink? What exactly is 'jinking' iro tanks? Were WW2 AFVs nimble enough to jink?[/QB]</font>

From experience with modern tank gunnery, I can tell you that jinking does make aiming and inducing lead more difficult. It doesn't sound like this is programmed into the game however.

It sounds to be a 4, fun but not very realistic. I'm really hoping someone will come out with something in the 6-8 range. If it's at least a 4, I'll buy SC. Anything less than that is best kept as a board game where the fun lies in having real people (your buddies) smoking and joking with the game as a focal point.

Not if you play it as PBEM. Sure, it has it's limitations, but I can still land paras on Crete and blow bridges behind the French front, right Titan. Playing by PBEM allows you to use a few player-honored rules to make up for the chinks in the strategic layer. They are subdued enough so as not to interfere with game play. You should give EA a try some time. Right now, we're in the Sitzkrieg, and I've taken out Poland, Norway, Denmark, Yugoslavia, and have occupied northern Greece. The scenario allows you many options, including an Eastern Crusade, where Germany launched an early invasion of the USSR with her eastern European allies (using an early, pre-war buildup of forces of course). My opponent could have opted to extend the Maginot line from Switzerland to the sea if he wanted to, but it would have cost him in other areas. In short, there are a lot of the options that people here are talking about. I'm not touting EA as the end-all, be-all of strategic WWII wargames, as I certainly hope someone will take it to the next level. Rather, I hope that SC will strive to at least meet the standard of play that I see set in EA. After all, a newer game should be an improvement on something as old as a scenario for TOAW! If SC can't do at least a few of these options, it's a no-go for me. BTW, if you're finding it to be a war of attrition, you're doing something wrong. The key to Fall Gelb is movement, baby. [ May 14, 2002, 09:16 AM: Message edited by: Mannheim Tanker ]

I'm hoping that it's at least as good as the Europe Aflame scenario for TOAW. If it can accomplish this in the demo, then I'll buy it, otherwise I'll just stick with EA. I'm playing a game with Titan right now, and all I can say is what a blast!

Why is it gamey? It could be done in real life, hence there's no way you could call it gamey. Ahistorical maybe, but not gamey.

Yeah, I'm sure you're right there. A scenario editor makes a world of difference in any game.

Agreed. Bloody Bucket makes a good point that the grogs will always ask for too many little details, but I don't think this is the case here. There comes a point where you can oversimplify the game to the point where you lose out on a lot of really good options. A lot of games are playable, but aren't very replayable because the oversimplification means your options for varying strategies are quite limited (Panzer General 3D anyone?).

Good ideas. You certainly can't completely dismiss the idea of effectively using AB like Rommel appears to be doing (I think you're oversimplifying the example - it's not a binary choice of drop and die...think of it in TOAW terms perhaps). There's a historical precedent for using AB units at this scale, as well has precedents in other games of this scale where the inclusion of AB units added a lot to the game. As stated above, I'll certainly try the demo out and make my decision based upon that. When buying a game, I look at the replay factor as much as anything, and that will likely make my decision. Sounds pretty good so far, Hubert! (nothing is perfect, especially in v1.0).

I agree regarding teh specialized support units (e.g. engineers), but AB is not an extention of the air arm. It's a strategic element in its own right, just like having a navy means one can project power overseas. Check out the TOAW scenario, Europe Aflame, and you'll see what I mean. They implement airborne units there, and it blends well at that scale.

Exactly! This is the same dilemma faced by the leaders in WWII. Remember that an AB drop isn't practical just anywhere; there must still be an opportunity to quickly link up with the airborne to prevent it from being isolated and destroyed by mobile, armored forces. A relatively small mobile reserve would suffice. This sounds like a cool game, but it looks like it's missing a few key components (AB and air units for example). Check out World at War, an online PBEM that features WWII-type strategic combat and you'll see what I mean. That game would be a bore if you took away the air units and airborne, as it would quickly turn into a grind fest. Adding strategic options for the player (especially ones that existed in WWI) will add dramatically to the playability of the game.

:eek: I couldn't disagree more. As was mentioned above, the Airborne is important due to the increased strategic options that are opened up by being able to drop a corps in the enemy's rear. This scale is perfect for airborne.