Armuss Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 Special Forces versus Army is too strong! Cost 185 ~ 175! Army ~ 10`000 soldiers, Special Forces ~ 100? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt Andrew Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 It IS strong offensively, but defensive values are weakened. Leave it on the front line like an army and it'll quickly be back in your purchase pool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aesopo Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 It is also limited per nation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyazinth von Strachwitz Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 I think it`s like the "Pionier" unit in old Panzergeneral... it is good against entrenched units, because it kills entrenchment quicker. Not really good in defense lines.. but valuable offense unit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 IMO it's a sop to players who want all the bells and whistles and to hell with history (in terms of the scale of this game), along with flank, artillery, anti-tank aircraft, etc. Sadly (IMO) it seems that the majority of the paying public seems to have a view of WW2 that requires such things. Or at least grogs like me will grimace and buy the game anyway because there's nothign better available....whereas the "chattering masses" wouldn't buy a groggy game..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pzgndr Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 IMO it's a sop to players who want all the bells and whistles and to hell with history (in terms of the scale of this game), along with flank, artillery, anti-tank aircraft, etc. Sadly (IMO) it seems that the majority of the paying public seems to have a view of WW2 that requires such things. Or at least grogs like me will grimace and buy the game anyway because there's nothign better available....whereas the "chattering masses" wouldn't buy a groggy game..... S.O., as a game this series strikes a pretty good balance between the grogs and the wargame-lite crowd. The editor provides the tools necessary to make the campaigns even more fun or more historically accurate. In much the same way as TOAW is not just one game, SC2-WaW should morph into many different flavors once modders get into all the new features and capabilities. The default campaigns will set a standard, of course, but players have lots of choices ahead. :cool: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt Andrew Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 Wait till you get a chance to experiment with all the pieces before you get too frustrated (or excited) about them. Each new piece has it's pros and cons and place within strategy (it is a game after all). Old pieces revamped are also fun to try out now (rockets anyone?!). Special Forces can fall into a love/hate category, but I wouldn't dismiss them as easily as the rockets of SC/SC2. With cap limits on, they can be a valuable rook piece... hidden for much of a chess game behind pawns and knights on the front lines, but deadly when they arrive in the right situations! (I shudder to imagine what devilish deeds Terif will unleash with some of these units - a player who can turn the tide of a game so quickly that the WaW Alpha/Beta group nick-named one game event "The Terif Effect" during testing!) Some testers had some really great suggestions for this unit, and I know they're holding back to let everyone experience everything on their own. I'll be interested to read posts/AARs of people's experiences (both good/bad/embarassing) as soon as they get WaW. I'll be watching this topic too, to see what people's first, second, etc impressions of the Special Forces units are. I rarely post on the boards, and usually do so only when prompted by something that tugs at me. And reading about you guys drooling for WaW reminds me of watching my son about to open presents at Christmas! (Hubert, you'll find out what I mean by next year...) Just wait till you get a chance to play with all the new toys of WaW in a live/demo-free environment. You diehards (grogs included) will love it. I think you old timers will acknowledge that yet again, Hubert has intently listened to this gaming community and answered! And if you logically present issues that you have with ANY part of the game, you can be assured that you have a designer that is willing to take your idea and run with it. That's priceless when compared to the game designers these days that create games designed to appeal to shipping/PO quotas - rather than one with the gaming community in mind. While some (like Matrix) do a pretty good job of it, you know you've got that with Battlefront and Hubert for sure. //Resuming General Forum Lurker Mode Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 I gotta see the facts on this before giving my white paper on the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sombra Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 We cant say that Hubet didnt listen..many players wnated these units. Myself I have a problem with the scale of the units...Artillerie etc are fine for a scenario on small scale but on a stratgic map...ok Artillerie which supports 200 kmh ... attacks enemies 200kmh behind the Rhine.. specialforces which can damage a whole army... Arggh...dont think about it... SC1 was simple for me: Army was an army , corps more like a divison of soldiers..tanks a mechanical divison size group..etc. But its a game ..lets see how it plays .. I was allways dreaming of a new improved Panzergeneral with building strategy etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 Originally posted by pzgndr: The editor provides the tools necessary to make the campaigns even more fun or more historically accurate. I can't agree with that - IMO the mechanisms prevent any serious attempt at grog-level accuracy right off the bat - the Panzer-general-10-pt-must strength system for everything for starters...and htere's plenty to add on top of that. You can make it "as accurate as it can be in SC2".....but that's not the same thing for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pzgndr Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 I can't agree with that OK. So. Now what? :confused: I specifically stated that one can make the game more accurate (in the eye of the beholder of course), which is not the same as saying one can make it a perfect simulation emulating 100% historical accuracy worthy of a true grognard's fantasy. In the end, it is still just a game for a few bucks to be played for entertainment. Whatever. Artillerie etc are fine for a scenario on small scale but on a stratgic map...ok Artillerie which supports 200 kmh ... attacks enemies 200kmh behind the Rhine.. specialforces which can damage a whole army... Arggh...dont think about it... So, don't think about it. These special units should be considered in a broader context in this abstract game. Without unit stacking, Artillery can be thought of as moving forward to provide support as needed rather than trying to imagine they are actually firing from 200 km away. And Commandos represent a limited and expensive asset which can be used slightly differently than regular infantry. While they can damage other units in regular combat, there are better uses for these special forces and their unique abilities. Players should get a couple of full games under their belts and see how things work out now. Soon... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonslayer Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 With the editor these different classes of units can be recrafted to form multiple unit types that are more in-keeping with historical units. There is now enough variety to create pretty much any unit type you desire. Historical accuracy can be more strictly adhered to or thrown out of the window entirely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaMonkey Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 Don't fret guys, we're all subject(ive) to tunnel vision at times. Opinionated animals...these humans be. Luckily this is just about a game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 Originally posted by pzgndr: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> I can't agree with that OK. So. Now what? :confused: </font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaMonkey Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Are we being confrontational again SO? Hey, I don't know about anyone else, but I just did a little study in Sub hunting for WaW. Let me say that it is now pretty expensive for the Allied navies to find and kill the initial starting Uboats. Damn things dive and evade air attacks until they're weakened and only the DDs can sniff them out effectively using the "corral" technique. UK starting with only two DDs makes a good incentive to break out the other two(SS) into the North Sea. There are makings of extreme havoc if the Germans pursue this strategy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Artillery can be loaded several ways, on a Tank! On a Car! Or haulled! So that means that Yes(!) Artillery can fire 200 aprox. miles away and even with horses in a game turn, a horse can haul a piece up to the lines, what 10-15 miles? Then the Artillery can fire what 5-10 Miles? And naturally you'll deploy the unit right up on the frontlines with the Infantry so it can virtually fire over 1 tile, some Artillery can fire 20 miles. So what's out of the ordinary? A bit tactical but a way to eliminate the use of the Fighter unit as a Strategic/Tactical/Air Superiority unit! Which was far more ahistorical than artillery as unentrenching 1st tier units, inspire fear then attack! Artillery killed more armies than Fighters? It's not so impractical Gents... as for Commandos, a small breakthrough unit, also doing away with bloody mass Fighters and Bombers unentrenching units. Rockets could never fire accurately and hit a man in WW2, but we never much argued that? Though there were portable AntiPersonal Rockets, and portable TankBuster Rockets? Was it abstract, it didn't look that way... As for Destroyers, really a tiny tiny boat, but very very powerful, and there is a lot of Ocean in SC2, really mindboggling, wouldn't hurt to fill it up a little more and make it a little more interesting with the new submarine diving evasive rules! I think the general idea in this game is get away from UberFighters, of SC1 days, where now you build up 4 bars, with Manny who has 2 or 3 bars himself...and that makes him a level 12 HQ. And find other ways to cross a river, break a Mountain Entrenched Unit, kill a defensive Fortified line... Do away with the humdrum, Fighter Fighter Fighter... and if you're lucky in the older versions Allies bought bombers... Now the only question is will the Axis and Allies employ the new units and will they have enough cash to buy them. SC2 is fantasy, but as are all games. The feel however should give you a slight elusion that you are there. Kind of like an abstract Dream, if it does that, Kudos, if not then it needs work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 no Monkey - I'm not like you at all. I stated my piece...I have no requirement for anything beyond that. Liam there have been untold debates on here about rockets as battlefield weapons in SC2 - making them strategic weapons is a definite plus of WaW with no down side IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts