Jestre

My main question is how long will it take to break the Russian NM to the point of surrender. Once that is done will it then be possible to redeploy those units to the western front and then execute a Schlieffen type offensive in say 1916 or 1917??? If Belgium remains neutral and the western front has remained pretty much static in the Alsace/Lorraine sector that would be a possibility....

This is exactly what I was thinking of going with for the first game. Be very interesting to see what the AI will do with Belgian neutrality intact and no assault on France.

Been reading "A World Undone: The Story of the Great War, 1914 to 1918" by G.J.Meyer lately, great overview of the war. Meyers book gives a nice background on the origins of the war and the status of the major players leading up to the war.

Great!!!! options are always a welcome addition. Course I already pre-ordered so any new-to-me features are gravy Its funny but when I was young, teens to 30's, I hated WWI, was my least favorite period of military history. Now it is my most favorite period in history, not only WWI but the period around 1890-1930. Absolutely fascinating period and I believe the most formative period in modern history.

Speaking of which, the first thing I noticed that kind of disturbed me was the large unit base that covers the entire tile. Don't suppose there is the ability to reduce the base size for the units and show some of the underlying terrain???

Like we don't already have enough WWII games

One of my favorite Great War books also!!!

Are we still looking at end of February for the official release date???

Clark's "Butchers and Bunglers" is a bit over the top, however, Winter's assessment of Haig and the British High Command system was very compelling and believable. Basically Winter portrayed the British High Command as an 'old boy' network of second rate nobility that rated military efficiency well behind politics and diplomacy. Winter gives examples of how the more able and qualified militarily you were the less likely you would advance which is why most of the best generals were Canadian or Australian. Winter gave several documented examples in his book of British generals displaying a total disregard for any military theory or advances. Haig still envisioned cavalry as the tool that would breakthru and end the war during the Battle of Cambrai. It was in spite of Haig and some of the Army commanders that Tanks and rolling barrages were implemented to great effect. If Lloyd-George had had the power to make the changes he wanted in the British High Command the Brits may very well have become much more effective much sooner.

Was wondering if any of you have ever read a couple of fascinating WWI books that totally blow away conventional wisdom on the war; The Myth of the Great War: A New Military History of World War I by John Mosier and Haig's Command: A Reassessment by Denis Winter. I couldn't put either book down. You may not agree with the conclusions and analysis from either author but they both used rock solid sources and did some great detective work to uncover what they consider the real truth. Highly recommend both books.

Thanks for the shot!!

Sounds great thanks!!!

I searched thru all the screenshots on the game and did not see a single shot of a unit with information tab showing. Is there one available, did I just miss it??? Would love to see an example of a unit with all the information showing.

Quick question, will there be leaders included and if so at what level; Army Group, Army, Corps??? Would add a lot to the flavor of the game for myself even if the effect of leaders was minimal or non existant.

I think HFF is confusing one's interest in WWII with ones interest in game mechanics. I am an avid WWII grognard who salivated when I found out about SC who has absolutely no interest whatsoever for HOI. The reason I have no interest in HOI has nothing to do with its depiction of WWII but entirely based on the EU game mechanics employed which I find simply awful. The province based areas and the so called real-time combat are unacceptable.

I'm standing by my opinion that RTS is just an easy way out for programmers. With RTS there is no real strategy other than time-management. Look at AOE and all the knockoffs thereof; the central overriding concern is the speed in which one can build up one's infrastructure and armies. I challenge anyone to give me an example of an RTS game that has any kind of competent AI in a strategic/tactical sense.

I will post in french if I am on a french board...

Okay, now that I have my first few games of SC under my belt, a few impressions. I have been a wargamer for decades, started with AH's Afrika Korps and Guadalcanal and graduated up to SSI/SPI and all their great games. SC is a wonderful throw back to those great games I grew up with. I absolutely love it. Play is smooth, easy to learn, fun and fairly challenging. All the game mechanics mesh nicely. One thing I have noticed though is the immense impact that the research engine has on ones progress. The one game I lost in my first playings was when I had absolutely no luck in gaining research advances. I must of had but 1 or 2 advances total through 1942, even though I had all 10 points invested by then. It does make it quite interesting though as it adds some uncertainty to things. All in all this is one of the most enjoyable new games I have played in quite some time. [ December 05, 2002, 03:37 PM: Message edited by: Jestre ]

From the posts I have read on HOI I wonder just how much it should be called a WWII strategy game. Sounds more like an extremely loose depiction thereof... Perhaps Europa Universalis set in the WWII era would be more accurate...

Yeah and its Artillery not Artillary...

From the posts here from people who have played HOI it sounds like a very 'loose' interpretation of WWII. It also sounds like the 'real-time' combat engine is still used. Maybe its just me but I look at real-time as just a lazy way to program; having time-management replace real strategy/tactics...

I was very disappointed with the combat engine in Europa Universalis and thought the whole interface was kinda clunky. It's funny but the reviews on SC criticized SC for its old-fashioned graphics but I love them, course I grew up with SSI and SPI and AH boardgames and the graphics in SC are nostalgically reminiscent. Anyhows, unless HOI has drastically cleaned up the (real-time) combat mode from UE-I then I can't see it competing for space on my hard drive.

Schubert is another of my favorites although I sometimes think he went so far to 'not' sound like Beethoven that he limited himself. His March Militaire would be another great soundtrack selection for a wargame.

Not familiar with Walter's production. My personal favorite of Beethoven's 3rd and 5th is the recording done by the Orchestre Revolutionnaire Et Romantique lead by John Eliot Gardiner. Its completely authentic in regards to the use of period instruments and critically acclaimed. My favorite 9th version is the Chicago Symphony version with Solti conducting. The third movement (adagio) is my favorite movement also, the word ephemeral was made to describe it. I actually prefer both the 1st and 3rd movement to the finale, the 1st movement touches emotions no other piece of music can come close to. [ November 26, 2002, 07:37 PM: Message edited by: Jestre ]

Beethovens 9th would seem much more appropriate, its kinda the unofficial Anthem of Europe and probably the most amazing piece of music ever written...