Jump to content

Recommended Posts

A month ago I got SC2 and have thoroughly enjoyed it, much to my wife's dismay. :)

But I am considering upgrading to WaW because of the new features. Question: What is the deal with some of the weapons (tanks, artillery, etc) having 2 strikes? Why the change and how is this more realistic?

Thanks and thanks for a fun game!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imho the changes that W.a.W.added make the game ALOT more fun but in a different way.Tanks having two attacks(France cant)represents the orginizational skills of the country in question.It also makes tanks the killers they really were in Europe,although two attacks can also result in more losses.

For Strat.bombers,this gives the Allies(they usually benefit more)the real chance of laying a beating on Germanys Ind.and forces the Germans to commit vast amounts of resources(like they did)to defend their cities from destruction.

Imho the biggest single change in W.a.W.or P.D.E.(which is also highly recommended)is the way the operational movement of ground units happenes.You will soon discover the VITAL importance of railheads and strategic rail junctions which if targeted properly can really enhance a given strategy.

I think the restricted operational movement of ground units was the single biggest improvment of W.a.W. & P.D.E.Thats why it makes sense to have both and see the difference.Some find it to restrictive,Imho its much more realistic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The double strikes represent greater operational flexibility that fast moving units give you. A large combat value allows only one attack, two strikes gives you the ability to attack two different tiles.

You also have flexible movement options. If a Tank group starts its turn next to an enemy unit, it can attack that unit, move and attack another unit. Remember we are talking about a week to a month of simulated game time per turn depending on the season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SeaMonkey:

From what I have heard many of the older players (SC1 ect) feel that WaW is too linear and prefer playing SC2 1.09/8. What do you or others have to say about this. Is it more realistic (railheads/supply lines) and causes the battles to follow a comon line or something else?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey IR, good to hear from you. I can only speak for myself and yes I think there is some context in what you say. SC2 is probably the most balanced format of the series and because of the operational feature allows for more flexibility. I'm sure you remember Terif's and my discussion regarding this and that is why Terif prefered SC2 and not WaW.

My position has always been that balance can be adjusted and each time new features are added we have to go down that tweaking path again. I understand where Terif was coming from, his was the gaming perspective and mine was the realism factor however abstracted. I still can't get with the ability to move air and land units all over the map in one turn given the ranges of WW2 aircraft and the moving player not possessing a string of airbases to transfer those assets to and from, not to mention land units with no railways.

In the final assessment though, SC keeps moving on down the road and although some features tend to be restrictive to the game playing aspect they add appreciably more to the simulation of reviewing WW2 grand strategy and exploring the "what if" possibilities that all us buffs contemplate, ponder, and wonder what might have been. Never in the annals of warfare has there been such a widespread conflict of pitting man and machine against one another. Sans the brutality, the dynamics of such a struggle for dominance, militarily and economically, will be forever intriguing.:)

Let's hope that SC will someday capture that essence.....well...at least for some of us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Iron Ranger you are correct in that railheads do put restrictions on strategy.Some say to much imho it makse sense to have railroads because you now have the option of either playing regular SC or W.a.W.,P.D.E.With railheads being so important Strat.bombers can really cause problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now see there IR, arado brings up an excellent point, restriction isn't always a matter of the map usage. Perhaps the narrowed geographic variations are offset by greater unit flexibility.

Isn't the game about unit versatility/interaction as well as widespread theater conflicts?

Its just a matter of individual preference, but I can't see a true SC master turning his back on the excellent edition that SC PT represents.

I think the only consensus for a better Pacific version would be expressed by patrons of 2 by 3's "War in the Pacific", and we all know what a monster that thing is. I'd rather have a life and SC PT!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I never liked the star trek telaporter system of moving units. Some of the other changes I'm not sure I would enjoy. I felt for a game the scope we had basic units were just fine and players could 'tweak' them with tech. WaW adds a whole scope or additional units. The change for armor I thought was a good one, but giving strat bombers two attacks seamed over the top.

So I guess from my reading and playing (demo only) SC2 is the better of the two however WaW does add more 'flavors' for players to mess with. I'm unsure how this all effect game play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I may make a suggestion IR, forget about WaW, blow right by PDE and get to the current version of SC which is Pacific Theater.

All the features of WaW are included in PT plus many more. Since we are slowly rolling down the track to Global SC, PT will soon be obsolete. Point being, your expert observations will be more valuable for the future editions and the game will move in a direction that you may be able to control providing you present logical cases for resolution.

You've been a valuable member of this forum for a long time and its obvious you stiil want to be involved, so get on the train that's leaving the PT station.

Don't dwell on the one that stopped a few towns ago.;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure you remember Terif's and my discussion regarding this and that is why Terif prefered SC2 and not WaW.

I'd be really interested in reading that discussion, but I seem unable to find it. Does anyone know where it is?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...