Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Each time I read an AAR it appears the rockets won the game or are winning the game. This seems a little strange. Am I just reading the wrong AAR's or are the rockets overpowered.

I feel the whole rocket concept is way overblown in this game but then I like historical games and rockets just didnt see much use in the war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a big difference, reducing a city means you are hitting resources which are often not very well protected. Cities are to some extent a representation of an industrial sector.

Hitting units is more difficult because they are for the most part mobile or well protected (or both) and require much better accuracy since a unit on a tile does not mean they are all bunched up together.

It is allot easier to hit some big buildings than it is troops and cause extensive damage.

BTW, you can still damage troops although they are no longer laser beams like in SC2.

I think you'll find a few things interesting about them, two specific things I know you'll go gaga for. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by targul:

Sounds like it was overboard but is now more accurately portrayed.

Goodie!!

Correct and by adding in the Artillery unit we now have a true and proper separation between what a Rocket, i.e. a V1, V2 represents and what Artilley should represent.

With WaW, Rockets can now become the strategic wonder weapon they were always meant to be in SC and Artillery is just artillery. Worked out quite well actually smile.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like this change, more 'real' and thats what I perfer. One the other hand, rockets were not that big a deal. Yes they were overpowered if you let that happen, but for the axis there is a max of 5 (4 german), against rookies I'm sure they are a game winner. I'd say not so much vs someone experanced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rockets were obviously an anti rookie weapon. I only played humans twice and each time those things just destroyed everything before I even got to move.

I stopped playing humans due to this desire to prove you can destroy someone new to the game.

I like the AI alot though it plays really well.

I know in other games I play I have always tried to be careful to teach new players so I will have a good opponent in the future and they will want to play again. So most of those I have played in other games we have been playing for years so that worked well for me.

I know in CWIE I am still playing many of the opponents I started playing with in 95 we have almost become a family.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by jon_j_rambo:

Okay, guess I'll wait & see what's in the next Hubert Mousetrap. I'm burned out on SC-2 anyhow, my heart & desire are ready for the next drug.

Try Guns of August over at Matrix - an entirely new experience - a strat level WW1 game that is simple, subtle, complex, immersive and "accurate" while still allowing any number of "what if's".

Disclaimer - I have no commercial interest in GoA!! smile.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bought that Civil War game they came out with and really didnt care for it much too complicated. Didnt buy Gus of August and have heard nothing but good things.

I just cant picture a good WWI game. Uhmmm, I may have to take a look but I dont want to get involved while I am awaiting WAW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't got any of Frank Hunters other games so can't compare them sorry.

I see on the Matrix CEAW forum you're intersted in games that are deeper than a mud puddle - so I think you might find GOA quite interesting.

[ August 21, 2007, 08:16 PM: Message edited by: Stalin's Organist ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm playing several PBEM games - but the AI is no slouch, probably because the system is reaonably simple so it's easier to set it up with objectives and stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...