Jump to content

Victory = Race to Heavy Artillery Level 2?


Recommended Posts

It is still early days and I have yet play against a human opponent, but I do have a concern. It seems to me that research of Heavy artillery and Gas/Shell Production is the key to victory. Once one power has Level 2 Artillery and a good supply of shells he can break any line and with two or three units or artillery deployed (no problem on a front for either side) victory is assurred.

I can't see an effective counter, I hope there is one (airpower?) because otherwise the game reduces to which side gets lucky in the research stakes.

Can anyone point me to a way to defeat Heavy Artillery?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would hardly say I have played it enough to give any kind of thorough analysis on this, but I'd say that infantry weapons and industrial research should counter it. Infantry weapons reduce the damage artillery does, when both the artillery and the infantry are fully upgraded the damage of the artillery is still only 0 (1 if you count experience, which artillery easily gets to the maximum). Industrial research then provides such a massive boost in economy that you'll easily overwhelm your enemy with much more and much more powerful infantry.

I rather doubt that a nation that has 3 points in shell production and 2 points in heavy artillery would be very successful against a nation with 2 points in infantry weapons and 2 points in industrial research instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blackcat,

Victory involves a bit more than that. I am playing a game with another Beta tester. I am Germany... it's late game... Germany has 4 arty at level 2 with 4 experience bars and Gas 3... Germany is slowly being constricted as the Allies have achieved the near collapse of A-H, Turkey, Bulgaria and Germany is being pushed out of Belgium.

There are other ways to win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gents, thank you for your replies to my questions. I am heartened by not entirley convinced.

Wushuki, I agree that 2 points in infantry combat would cancell out the 2 points of Heavy artillery as far as attack and defence factors go but the HA will still smash down the entrenchments before the inevitable infantry attack goes in.

As to the value of Industrial Capacity, the side that is researching HA is unlikely to forget this aspect. So there will not be a great disparity (remembering also the Germans can be generating 300+ MPPs a turn as early as 1915).

Abuduke, I am sure that there are many strategies that can lead to susccess, for either side. At the operational level I am not sure how level 2 HA with a good supply of shells can be overcome. You say that you are being pushe out of Belgium despite having four good HA units? Can you say how this is happening, please? Would A-H have been in such a hole if they had had level 2 HA, or Turkey?

I do wonder if HA is not too cheap for the effect it can produce. I also wonder if the solution is not upgraded bombers/ground attack aircraft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

God no, don't increase the effectiveness of aircraft. They're just right as is, a bother, but nothing terribly major. In the WWII versions of SC, it was invariably a race to high level air fleets, don't make this the same. As it is, I don't see HA as a war winner, but only a (large) contributor to victory. Sure, one HA fully loaded on ammo can reduce a position, but if the defender is playing intelligently, he's got a defense in depth, and unless you've spent a lot of money (Seeing as how upgraded arty is one of the most expensive units in the game) you probably won't have enough to defeat a good defense in depth. And if you spent that much, you're going to be lacking somewhere else.

Personally, I think the industrial research is the big one. In my CP game, I had Germany up to level 3 or 4 and was bringing in nearly 900MPP a turn (Though when I took the offensive in the west again, that was barely enough to just repair my casualties), and in my TE game, Russia was the one to get up to level 4. When you get that kind of income, you can overcome most any other shortcoming, by investing in more research if nothing else. I would actually recommend lowering the improvement to 20% per level rather than 25%, maybe lower.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wolfpack,

No, no, I wasn't suggestng any changes to the game. When I talked about upgraded aircraft I was thinking in terms of research on ground attack etc.. Like you I can remember the race for high level air fleets in the original SC. I am worried in case that the race for level 2 and a supply of shells is going to do the same thing ofr this new game.

You and the two guys above say that HA is not all powerful, but I have just finished a session (admittedly against the AI) where I used five level 2 artillery units to blow a hole right through the German line defending Belgium and now its effectively game over.

Defence in deptth can slow the process but no more and one can't be thick everywhere. In few days I shall start my first game against a human opponent and I need to finnd the counter to massed HA (plus shells) soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another player has reported to Hubert about the German's AI poor play behind their Western-France front lines (defending Belgium with HQ's). Perhaps the hole you blew through with the Entente won't lead to game over in the first patch.

In the meantime however, I do think that ground attack upgrades on aircraft is the effective counter. If you find artillery is getting too strong as the game progresses it is likely from major experience (+3 experience artillery is lethal). Use your air units to harrass the HA's experience and morale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps placing the same cap on heavy artillery as there is on the rail guns -- namely, a max of 5 rounds a turn instead of 10? That way the reseach for ammo production (levels 1-4) would match the capacity of the artillery itself. (And also cut the power of the artillery in half, but not reduce its effectiveness.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair ,artillery was a massive deciding factor in the war by 1917.I read a book regarding the trench war as expericiend from the german side and a british artilley bombardment was a stunning thing to behold by late 1917,they had perfected it too such a level by that time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I have been playing a bit more and I disagree that the artillery should be limited to 5 shells, at least for the time being.

Massed level 2 artillery with adequate shells is a game winner. In my last one I had three British and two French batteries and basically blasted the Germans out of Belgium and the war (though I did notice a marked drop in performance against infantry that had ben upgraded to level 1). However, that was playing against the AI.

To put together my massed battery took a big invertment in research and more than 1500 MPPs to build the units. That was only possible because the AI gave me the space and time to do it. The AI does seem to be quite a passive creature and once the West Front has settled into its trenches doesn't mount any concerted attack on land or at sea. The human player can therefore take the time and spend the resources necessary to build up what ever pattern of forces he wants to play with. In short it is possible for the player to sit on the defensive pour "money" into research and then launch the devastating offensive when he is ready. Now, in a human v human game I am not sure that the same model will possible.

SC is in many ways a rock-paper-scissors game. If your opponent is going for HA then the counter seems to be to go for infantry combat and long range ground attack aircraft. Whilst I am still concerned that the artillery maybe too effective, I am starting to think that the real problem is the passive AI. Therefore, I would disgree with those who want the shell limit reduced or other changes to the unit's abilities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...