J P Wagner

oops...double posted [ December 04, 2002, 12:14 PM: Message edited by: J P Wagner ]

I've mentioned the limits of real time in HOI, especially for the AI, on their boards but I am in the minority opinion there. Many HOI players are decendents of EU (like me) and think the real time aspects work. I don't however hold to that belief. Real time works in EU because of the vast historical time frame it covers. Real time in HOI condenses the same amount of activity in a much shorter time period (36-48) and it is just too much for the AI to handle effectively IMO. I enjoy playing it as I await further patches, but if I had to make a "desert island" choice of which game I would have keep me company, it's SC all the way. Sorry if I sound like an SC shill! [ December 04, 2002, 12:14 PM: Message edited by: J P Wagner ]

Rambo, how do you land troops on Malta when it's occupied with the air unit? If you can attack from transports then that's a new one on me.

Rambo, how do you land troops on Malta when it's occupied with the air unit? If you can attack from transports then that's a new one on me.

Do you have a HQ unit keeping your air fleet in readiness? An Air fleet attached to a HQ unit will perform better and probably knock the UK air unit down with your combined naval attacks.

Do you have a HQ unit keeping your air fleet in readiness? An Air fleet attached to a HQ unit will perform better and probably knock the UK air unit down with your combined naval attacks.

I can't see weather being added with the present turn system remaining as is. The reason for longer turn lengths now during the winter months is a reflection of weather....hopefully variable regional weather conditions, coupled with consistent turn lengths might be added in future versions...

Hey 82nd...no offence but how about tightening up that sig of yours....you turn what ought to be a simple scroll down to read a few posts into a marathon....you'll turn one page of posts into three if you become really active....

-Yes, it's a loose interpretation of WWII. -Yes, real time is not the way to play a game of this complexity and size. -Saying that, I enjoy playing it since I like EU2..if you don't like EU2 or not interested in an EU2 sequel then this game isn't for you...

Province based is more of a challenge because of their variable sizes...sometimes you think you have a front established but there may in fact be a small border which you left undefended which could be exploited; personally I like it. The longer I play HOI, the better I like it but it is not the WWII sim that I was hoping for...as I said, to me it's EU3, which in and of itself is not a bad thing....

When CVM gets wind of Finlands' success, he'll be aching to play HOI!..... [ December 01, 2002, 02:37 PM: Message edited by: J P Wagner ]

The tech tree does have a high learning curve but it's not as daunting once you get used to it...there is a s.o.p. regarding the tech tree, and what to prioritze...it does make each game different depending upon what you concentrate on...SC's research is much more streamlined that is true, but there have been many posters here who aren't totally happy with it either... perhaps there is a middle ground between the two extremes somewhere....

Playing HOI has made me appreciate SC all that more...mind you, this isn't a knock on HOI. It's a fun game to play but it's only an EU2 clone, not a WWII sim by any stretch of the imagination. I look forward to future versions of the SC line.

The game is still a bit buggy Bill, V1.02 will hopefully be out by Christmas....my initial impression is that they have made a mistake in using the EU engine and allowing you to play any nation. Too many ahistorical situations occur, like Romania conquering Russia, the Czechs marching into China ect. I think the game would have been better served if you were only allowed the play major powers, US, Germany, France, Italy, UK, Russia, Japan, China, and perhaps Spain. It plays too much like EU2 to the point they could have called it EU3-The Modern Years. Saying this, I do enjoy playing it, but it is not a World War II sim by any stretch of the imagination, there is simply too much latitude with the minor countries that turn it into a fantasy game...I'm not looking for a game that clones the actual outcome of WWII each and everytime but I want some degree of realism such as what SC supplies...I'll continue to play HOI and hope future patches make it more worthwhile.

I think that, like EU2, this game will improve quite a bit with future patches....I know that's a poor excuse for the current state of the game, but I will be patient with it...I'm playing it now more as a learning experience, to get used to the system...hopefully it wont be too long before future patches improve upon it...it may be wise for some to hold off purchasing the game now and await the patches...I'm impatient so couldn't wait...

Not at this time....if you played Europa Universalis, it uses the same game engine...

I'm hunting around for it today...hope to find it and give it a whirl....I won't turn my back on any Strategic WWII games; there are too few of them around for me too be picky! [ November 27, 2002, 01:09 PM: Message edited by: J P Wagner ]

Jersey John...ROFL... ...Hearts of Iron can't come out soon enough for me...between SC and HOI, I won't be bored staring at my monitor for quite some time!!!

Another totally pointless and useless thread that needs to be locked and hopefully thrown away... Obviously there are too many bored people staring at their monitors....me included for even bothering to read this drek! [ November 22, 2002, 09:13 AM: Message edited by: J P Wagner ]

But how does Germany fare after you have allowed Italy to have all these MMPs? I would think that Germany's production would be too limited now to be able to hold off Russia, Britain, and US. Is the new Italian war machine sufficient to offset this problem? I'll need to try this variant out to see. How has the end game been for those who tried this?

I never considered unit density, map scale, or how long it takes me to play a single game, as a major part of the complexity issue. Keep in mind, the game is not called Strategic Command I. That's a tag we put on it as with the tag SCII. So there is a mindset here that the next version of SC should follow close in the footsteps of SCET. It's as if some people don't veiw SCET as a completed game and expect the next version to simply tweek the original. In my mind, SCET is a complete game, which I continue to enjoy. I don't want to see a clone of the original come out with a few bells and whistes. It should be treated as a new gaming experience which may include many of the suggestions mentioned throughout these boards. However, saying all this, perhaps the obvious next game will in fact be "Stategic Command Pacific Theater", then perhaps "Strategic Command Global Theater." Who knows? We'll just have to wait and see....

A "Future Options and Wish List" forum for SC has been needed for quite some time. Afterall, it will give me the opportunity to once again pull out my "weekly turns with variable regional weather conditions" option from under the rug.... As far as more complexity, the pc versions of 3R and WIF are not very good and HOI has yet to come out and prove itself (though I will be getting it no doubt). Complexity does not mean that the game needs to become so undaunting, such as Grisby's War in the Pacific, but details and scale adjustments could be made to SC without undue sacrifice to ease of play. [ November 08, 2002, 08:44 AM: Message edited by: J P Wagner ]