justanotherwargamer1

First game was Tactics II. It used squares. It was fun till you realized "the other guy never runs out of reinforcements, and smashing through the line is nearly impossible if the other guy has any brains at all Nice training tool, but no real simulation of anything beyond WW1 trench warfare. The later Blitzkrieg was a bit better. But again, if your opponent wasn't a bowl of jello it became WW1 too often. Now I am currently playing the Panzer Tactics made for the DS. No stacking in it either, but it features some very capable supporting arms concepts. It's not like a game can't be any good without stacking, but when there is no excuse for it's omission, that's another matter. I'm recalling a show I watched just the other day. When the Germans would initiate a Blitzkrieg attack, the "front" could in some cases be as narrow as a single road! The focal point of the assault is not required to be even a single hexside. But the entire force will be massed there all the same. I consider a wargame great only when it can acknowledge the reality of what really happened. If it can't recreate what actually occurred, I expect the designer to keep working till they figure it out. After all, it might just be 50 bucks, but it's my 50 bucks. And it's not my responsibility for the game to earn a profit, nor am I responsible for the designers personal life's bills

Well I might be just another wargamer (wait, I actually am ), but I'm here to support the cause of the job isn't done yet. SC1 was a good game. I didn't enjoy playing it for no small reason. It earned my time. But it wasn't perfect, merely at the time without any competition worth comment. Actually, I think when it was released it didn't have any competition at all. SC2 though, despite the supportive comments from the blokes that worked on it, has no edge over CEAW also known as Commander Europe at War. Thing is, I guess I am equally biased, as I was involved in making CEAW. SC2 with WaW added, is getting close to a decent enough design, but it's a bit late getting there. And no matter how you tweak it, those tiles suck like a black hole. The out of the box unmodded map with tiles visible is only good for eye strain and headache generation. The pretty unit graphics will not hide the fact it is a board game loving, turn required wargamers type game, but with the wrong grid. But it isn't just the grid that makes me bummed out. It's the seemingly unexplainable inability to stack units. And you can bet I have griped about that over at Slitherine for CEAW too. Stacking is not some elusive impossibility like useful AI. Stacking exists in many wargames for the computer. There are so many wargames that easily manage stacking, that to claim it can't be done, is unacceptable. No stacking in the veteran Third Reich, would have ensured the veteran Third Reich never reached that status. What do you mean you can't justify an air unit and a ground unit and a naval unit in the same location? One word, Malta. So you put a plane there, and have to leave it without a ground unit? That's unacceptable. How about Gibraltar. And then there's the Pacific. Good luck making me care you have a global option for the game. I doubt the design can even do it justice. But I am thinking ranting about an SC3 is a foolish hope. I am not expecting to see an SC3 ever show up. Maybe I am being overly pessimistic. But when SC2 was first announced, I really didn't expect what showed up. I didn't expect the damn tiles, I had thought the design would evolve to something more sophisticated. I expected more than a shiny editor and a few gaffes like Ireland fixed. I am not placated by battle mode. And a few new units is not much of a change. If SC3 IS done, it better have at the least stacking, even if it keeps these worthless looking tiles. I'm not going to even bother asking for a clever AI, they don't exist. I've had access to 95% of the wargames made from industry giants like Steel Panthers to games I don't like such as real time travesties as Sudden Strike. And I've played the graphics demanding 3d designs as well. AIs come in two forms as I see it. Dull and average training tools, to brainless friggin morons. If you can't defeat the AI in today's wargames, it's because you suck From wave after wave of mindess attackers in Steel Panthers Long Campaigns acting like drones, to real time games like Sudden Strike where the units simply can't be left untended for a second. And there isn't an AI that understands the needs of amphibious warfare. Ok enough raging As we speak, if I have to choose what to play at the grand strategy level, it is NOT SC2 even with WaW added on. Number 1 slot goes to CEAW. SC2 is second place, and I rarely have time for runners up. CEAW wins only by virtue of a few details though. Hexes. Yes I want those damned hexes Several aspects of the design are just a little bit better. But it's enough. And in a contest, there has to be a winner. Give me hexes and stacking and you will get me back. And don't base my interest on giving me an editor. I play out of the box. I'm not interested in doing your work I can recognize an editor is a great asset to those that like one. I would rather the game be sold as basic and deluxe. Let those that want an editor, pay a little more and they can have it. Final word. Personal note. I've been in this hobby since it was created back in the Tactics II days. I've seen it all, played nearly everything. I'm not a noob. Don't let the post count fool you