This is fine for a Basic Game, however . . .

[Der Kriegsherr]

I would like to see an Advanced Game that offers more sophistication such as: 1) unit stacking; 2) armor units that can exploit holes in the enemy line.

[Carl G. E. von Mannerheim]

try any of the games in talonsoft's campaign series

[Rediroc]

Three words, Hearts of Iron.

[Carl G. E. von Mannerheim]

oh yeah that too........

[Der Kriegsherr]

I like the scale of the game, but there should be an Advanced Game version to make it a better simulation. Also the North Africa portion of the board is too narrow.

This game is not even as deep as the original Third Reich released as a board game in 1975.

[pzgndr]

HOI looks interesting, but it will not be hex-based or turn-based, and I'm one of those old gamers who still cares about that kind of thing. The global scale and level of detail will certainly provide for a higher level of play for those who want to micromanage events. Whether it will be "playable" for gamers to complete a campaign game over a long weekend is a concern. I've enjoyed 3R/A3R over the years because you can actually play a complete game measured in hours and days, not weeks or months. WiF appears to be a great game, but I have not played it because it is too much. HOI may also be another great game that gets more admiration than play time.

SC has a great scale, and the foundation work Hubert's done with the AI, politics, research, FOW, etc. is fantastic. It's an addictively fun game to play quickly, even with some of the game mechanics issues many of us don't care for (ie, variable turn length, seasonal effects, airborne capability, etc.) Hopefully we'll see improvements in the future that make SC somewhat more "realistic," either as a revised game or one with more options and variants for advanced play, without making it too complex. Based on what I've seen with SC and read about HOI, I'll stick with SC and watch it grow.

[Desert Dave]

As originally posted by Der Kriegsherr:

This game is not even as deep as the original Third Reich released as a board game in 1975.

SC's combat formulations are much better, and the naval (... and Air-combat) game less abstract.

Strategic warfare was improved in A3R, but still, not as good as this (... remember, we do not know how the strat-bombing will play out -- the one year demo does not provide a true reflection).

Just as 3R evolved into A3R, I suspect that SC will eventually include many of the more hstorical details, variants, diplomacy, and a larger map size. At least Hubert's comments thus far would suggest this, and I am hopeful.

A computer game cannot be compared to a board game. Their is a tactile, dice-rolling feel that is missing. OTOH, who wants to constantly be checking supply lines or toting up economic points?

And the editor provides opportunity to set up many what-if scenarios.

All in all, I think SC is an advancement over any of the games mentioned thus far. That doesn't mean I am fully satisfied -- I have always asked for a better Afrikan campaign. But, we are about to get a game that is good now, and likely, will only get better.

[DaVillan]

Then make it yourself.

Whew....picky picky picky.

Man, everyone wants everything.

Hey Hubert...... I like the game Just the way it is.

Youre the man.

Thanks!!!

[Desert Dave]

As originally posted by DaVillan:

Then make it yourself.

Whew....picky picky picky.

Man, everyone wants everything.

It would be helpful if you would indicate who or what you are referring to, so another person might decide if they want to respond.

[pzgndr]

Whew....picky picky picky.

So, what's your point? If Fort Benning had issued me any feelings, they might be hurt by now.

Seriously, I'm amused. You really wouldn't use airborne corps units even if the game provided them? You really wouldn't want historical seasonal effects like spring mud in Russia to slow down your panzers even if it was included? You wouldn't want a slightly larger map even if Hubert screwed up and gave it to you anyway?

Come on, there's got to be something on your wish list for Santa. Don't be shy. This is like group therapy, just let it all hang out.

[Norse]

Originally posted by Der Kriegsherr:

I would like to see an Advanced Game that offers more sophistication such as: 1) unit stacking; 2) armor units that can exploit holes in the enemy line.

Unit stacking? I don't think you grasp the scale of this game. Most other games that allow stacking are playing with units at *smaller* sizes, and "bigger" mapboards.

Armies are "already" stacking, but I reckon you never thought about that.

Well how fast do you want the panzers to move? 450 MPH? Other games that allow blitzing in breakthru's have turns that last atleast a month at the time. Like third reich... SC is one *week* at the time, soo, how speedy must a tank be to blitz from Berlin to Moscow in one turn? 800 MPH? And that in combat movement too! Wow, watch em tanks fly!

And North-Africa, although it saw alot of action, never had more than a few units of this scale slugging it out at once. Ever heard of Rommels Panzer corps? Alright, that's about 1 unit+HQ+fighter, and a couple Italian armies hanging around.

If you want more detail then you should have a look at World in Flames. That game took me and my friends only about 25 months to complete, so there ya go. I really do not want SC to be like that!

SC is already at it's correct path to glory, keep it up Hubert!

[DevilDog]

I'll second that sentiment, Norse.

I have to admit the first time I saw SC I thought "you've got to be kidding - this'll never hold a candle to CM. Talk about simplistic...". But then I downloaded the demo, played the first game and was hooked. The scale is just perfect. Hubert is a genius, just plain lucky, or a combination of both to have come up with this. There is enough detail to make each game different and to require a well thought out strategy to win, yet each turn can be played in a short amount of time, allowing fairly rapid e-mail play.

Great job, Hubert! Now release it already!

[ July 01, 2002, 11:32 PM: Message edited by: DevilDog ]

[pzgndr]

Guys, don't misunderstand where I and some others are coming from. SC is great and should NOT be made more complex like WiF. Some of the abstractions are actually fun and allows you to pursue alternate strategies. If it gets TOO detailed and REALISTIC, then sides tend to get mired in the same decisions made historically, and that leads to some dull repetitive games.

However, some relatively minor changes or additions to the game could add a bit more accuracy so players can deal with historical challenges like the weather in Russia and maneuver warfare in North Africa and such. SC can also be a useful educational tool to teach young players about WWII, but not if it's too abstract or allows for bizarre deviations from history. Hubert can provide a real service here.

If you go back to some of the old boardgames, you'll find the rules generally provided different levels of play for a basic game, advanced game, and options/variants. And then you had house rules where you could do whatever you wanted. A future version of SC should provide some advanced features for those who want them, and a full function editor to tweak game parameters and the map.

So, yes, SC is great as a basic game and I'm anxiously waiting for its release. However, it can and should offer more. Hubert has indicated that he will consider future enhancements, and that's good enough for now. There's no point slinging mud at each other.

But as for those beta testers! Where the heck are they? Where's our game already? :mad:

[SuperTed]

Originally posted by Bill Macon:

But as for those beta testers! Where the heck are they? Where's our game already? :mad:

ZZZzzz...Huh? Wha? Did somebody say something? No? Okay...zzzZZZ...