First Impression

[General_solomon]

I figured i start a thread to get user reviews. Hopefully by now some of you have play it a bit to tell us what you think. I have seen some videos of the first battle in the US campaign and could not see get a feel for the infantry behavior.

[Knokke]

The biggest change apart from the strategic campaign map is the infantry survival. Because of both the new fragmentation model and the use of a micro-detail terrain map, infantry is much less vulnerable to artillery shelling and is better protected from small arms fire. Infantry in trenches is also better protected than before.

An other change to the infantry is that by default, when you select a member of a squad, the whole squad is selected and the orders will apply to the whole squad. You can still give orders like previously to individual soldiers by Alt-selecting one or several soldiers and giving them a different order.

[General_solomon]

The biggest change apart from the strategic campaign map is the infantry survival. Because of both the new fragmentation model and the use of a micro-detail terrain map, infantry is much less vulnerable to artillery shelling and is better protected from small arms fire. Infantry in trenches is also better protected than before.

An other change to the infantry is that by default, when you select a member of a squad, the whole squad is selected and the orders will apply to the whole squad. You can still give orders like previously to individual soldiers by Alt-selecting one or several soldiers and giving them a different order.

they finally got this right. in tow2 infantry would die way too quickly because of perfect aiming by non-snipers.

I wonder if you can setup a test for me between tow2 and korea. place two trenches 50 meters apart. then, place two infantry unit to see how how accurate their weapons are and maybe another group in houses.

it would be interesting to see what happens. with the new changes, people would get more interested in smaller battles that is more infantry focused. The close combat series is good example.

[Knokke]

I'm pretty sure the AI is still aiming with the same accuracy as before. The increased survival rate of the infantry comes mostly from being better protected by the terrain when lying prone, and from the new fragmentation pattern of shells (most shrapnell falling perpendicular to the path of the shell rather than all around like previously).

As to the protection afforded by trenches, I experienced a big difference in comparison to Kursk:

To finish a mission, I needed to eliminate the last infantryman occupying a trench near the village I had to capture. The remaining ennemy was an officer (so, with a better scouting skill than the average trooper, and thus, better able to spot approching soldiers while remaining concealed). Not willing to take risks, I decided to try to shell him with guns and mortars while my guys will kept safely at bay. I used up all my remaining mortar ammunitions without hitting him, even if several shells fell really close (I would bet he would probably have died several time in Kursk). Even shells from infantry guns aimed at the parapet of the trench where he was hiding failed to kill him.

So I decided to have my infantry finishing the job. I had a whole squad giving covering fire firing at him from about 100-150m each time he was popping his head out, while a second squad was crawling toward the trench. The remaining ennemy managed to kill several of the attacking infantry, and was finally killed only when my guys entered the trench and managed to throw a grenade at him that fell directly inside the trench.

An other experience of surviving better while entrenched:

In one of the missions, I had a squad deployed alone in a trench with two AT guns located almost directly on the path of the attacking ennemy (It was not possible to relocate theses guys during the deployment phase, as they where outside the deployments zones where I was allowed to relocate my troops). When the battle started, before I could relocate them, an ennemy armored car appeared from the side, approched to 50-100m of the trench and started to open fire. The AT guns I had where quickly put out of action, and I thought the squad was lost and none would survive. In previous versions of the game, it was my experience that entrenched troops targeted by an armored vehicle would die rather quickly, but here, it was the opposite. I had my guys firing at the tires of the armored car, hoping that they might destroy its mobility thus keeping it away from the trench. At the same time, I directed my mortars to fire at the vehicle, to try to damage its wheels . Only two soldiers of the squad in the trench where killed in the process (the vehicle was firing directly in the trench as it came from the side, and was able to hit soldiers before I could relocate them in a portion of the trench that would give them some cover). Finally, the crew of the armored car for a reason or an other, decided to bail out and run away, even though the vehicle had not been damaged, and my squad suffered much less than I expected (two guns put out of action before they could turn toward the threat to retaliate, and two soldiers killed). I had two gun crew wounded and one member of the infantry squad wounded too.

[General_solomon]

this is great news for those who are still decided on buying this game. now its time to jump in and make some really good user created scenerious.

[General_solomon]

I just completed made an infantry only scenerio with three squads on each side and I will tell you this is the game we all wanted. its like the old day where someone can pick you off from miles away.

now you can really enjoy the fire fights that occur. also there is more room for tactics instead of a clickfest trying to save your guys.

how do I upload my user created map from the simple editor? also, where is it located on my computer?

[Redjac]

How are houses for LOS now. I found them OK in TOW2, but they took a step back in kursk and maybe caen where lone soldiers didn't look for LOS from within the houses or went to the wrong window, or the LOS was too narrow.

I realise Korea would not have strong houses like brick so this might not be a concern in this game.

[General_solomon]

How are houses for LOS now. I found them OK in TOW2, but they took a step back in kursk and maybe caen where lone soldiers didn't look for LOS from within the houses or went to the wrong window, or the LOS was too narrow.

I realise Korea would not have strong houses like brick so this might not be a concern in this game.

if you looking for a UI to be smart enough to take cover in houses or take cover when the enemy is firing, this version of tow is not it. First off, trying to place units behind cover is a nightmare. even if you get it right they dont protect themselves.

I think this game built for open ranges and is mostly a tank sim. I wish they used the men of war placement option where you see exactly where each man would be go. this way you can play those close quarter battle. at this time it would work well.

otherwise, if you place troops in houses, they do take the open windows.

[kakaprutt]

well, here is what i'm thinking after tour 3 of US campaign (btw i play Tow games as a micro management game) :

- absolutly dislike new unit selection mode, so switch to old one

- absolutly dislike the removal of the weapon pick up button, had to configure it on settings while it was not complicated to keep it on screen !!!

- the "random" order of battle is fun AND disturbing.

- like strategic "mode" a lot.

- got a lot, really a lot of problems with unit's path both with tanks and infantry, never met such ones in a previous tow game.

- feel like Xp gains have been reduced for troups after battle. not sure, but that's what i feel.

- icones of engineers units are f***** up. no icone for MG or bazooka.

- still want flamethrowers

[Lemonade]

For me, ToW3: Korea is a significant step forward since ToW2. Still there are some very annoying bugs present that thwart the effort put into development of this game. After playing five turns of North Korean campaign (with Historical Units Set option turned on), I'll try to point out both positive and negative aspects of the game in an objective and unbiased way.

Strategic mode

I will begin with the newest addition to the series that everyone has been waiting for - the strategic mode. The map of Korean Peninsula of PRK Campaign is divided into eleven areas (let's call them provinces from now on. More provinces are available in Campaign Generator. Something around 17 at once, so quite a lot). North Korean forces start the campaign with two of them under their control, each one containing pre-deployed battle groups: 203rd Tank Regiment and 1st Infantry Division.

The strategic screen is divided into four parts. On the right side is the very nice looking map, which we can zoom and move either by GUI buttons or by mouse drag/wheel. On the left side of the screen lies a panel with battle log, where information on campaign progress is displayed, available support and battle groups.

Each battle group can have up to two support types (Close support aircraft with Anti-Tank/HE/Fragmentation bombs, various light and heavy artillery including off-map mortars, tank reinforcements, etc.). Support assignment is achieved by drag-and-drop operation. Removal of already assigned support is accomplished also by drag-and-drop from the battle group icon back to the support placeholder. Strangely, this action also moves the map, which sometimes can be a little annoying. Placement of new battle groups is done the same way. Drag-and-drop from battle group placeholder to an empty province. I have not found a way to remove once placed group (not that I needed to).

Battle groups movement range is determined by their type and fuel they have available. Tank Regiment for example can move up to three provinces per turn, infantry division - only by one. Only one group can occupy the province at a time and the movement is done in real time, so you can't switch places of two neighbouring formations in any way. This can quickly lead to trapped units and front line choke up, if you're not careful and you fill rear provinces with new battle groups.

I don't know how it's with US of A campaign, but after three turns of PRK campaign I found my units disappearing from battle groups after having fought the tactical part of the game. (posts: 4, 5, 8 and 10 of http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=95541 thread) so after turn five I found myself unable to continue the campaigns due to lack of troops in the battle groups (even though I have not lost a single unit). I couldn't pull new, fresh formations to the front line due to every province on the way being occupied by other battle groups (and the units in the back of the front line was infantry divisions that can move only one or two, when motorized, province at a time). Unless this bug is fixed, and I'm pretty sure it's a bug, the strategic part of game is, well, unplayable for me.

Tactical battles

Here things are much better.

First of all, there are much less units participating in a single battle than in Kursk, which has a great impact on the overall performance of the game. It runs much smoother now. The Korean landscapes are very beautifully modelled and textured, with narrow mountain passes everywhere. Quite difficult terrain to fight in. In this circumstances even a small force can blunt or even completely stop enemy advance.

Battles are more dramatic and dynamic with tracers everywhere. Distant explosions and machine gun/small arms fire sound great. It's a real candy for eyes and ears.

The new fragmentation damage algorithms as well as the cover ground layer works extremely well, decreasing significantly infantrymen mortality rate. If in a proper terrain and with a bit of luck, troops, can survive even quite devastating bombardment. The Trenches-of-Death and suicidal weapon pits are finally gone. They now give very good protection against all kind of fire (with an exception of high mortar lobs). If under enemy small arms, machine gun or HE/Fragmentation shelling, you really want to crawl into them.

The new squad control system is really a slight change in squad selection. Now a single click on any member of a squad selects it as a whole. Selection of single soldiers is done by ALT-clicking him. It would work, if the advance order would dynamically adjust the position of the soldiers according to nearby cover and the direction they will be facing. Unfortunately group movement is just the same as in the previous instalments and strictly follows the formation shape you have currently selected for the squad (line, column, wedge, custom). It is not cover dependant. Therefore, I found the new squad control method very confusing, especially the ALT-click-a-soldier, so I quickly disabled it, thus reverting back to the old selection method which, I think, gives you much better control over pixel soldiers. Until the group infantry movement works like on the picture below, I think I'll stick to micromanaging.

You now have the ability to area fire with machine guns. This, with an addition of a new morale system (which works great), makes suppressing enemy positions very helpful during assaults. Under MG fire, the enemy will fire back only occasionally and if under very heavy fire they might even route. So give'em as much hell as you can before storming their positions. If a friendly infantry is close enough to hostile unit with low morale, the enemy might surrender. This is represented as a hostile unit becoming a neutral one. All inventory items being in his possession can be taken by your troops. I do not know though, whether the surrendered soldier can be saved, or not. Anti-tank gun crews will panic too if under heavy fire which is (in my opinion) much more realistic than having them remaining in their positions in some suicidal trance.

Heavy machine guns are now moveable which adds even more of tactical element, especially to defence missions. They, as well as mortars, can't be loaded on trucks though, but I rarely found the need to relocate them over greater distances.

Engineers have finally gained the ability to lay/clear mines which is carried out by two separate commands. Each engineer has either 10 anti-personnel and 2 anti-tank mines or X anti-personnel and 5 anti-tank mines. Engineer squad leader also has mines in his inventory but he cannot lay them, so I think this is a bug. You can queue mine-laying operations by holding SHIFT and clicking on the multiple points on the ground. Sometimes though, engineers stop laying mines from no apparent reason. Also, there's no information on finishing mine-laying orders (apart of a simple info that a mine has been placed), so in queueing - babysitting is required. Mines can really help in defensive missions if enemy tank activity is suspected.

Most of the maps have plenty of entrenchments available (still being a part of the map in this instalment), although only a small part of them are available for your units to man during the deployment phase. Still present, is an inability to move the units between the disposition rectangles either overlapping (see http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=95566 thread) or between disposition islands (not that there are any). There are nine tactical maps, all of which are not dependant on the province, meaning that you can find yourself fighting the same map ins different peninsula regions. Each map is divided into six types of engagement: PRK Assault, USA Assault, PRK Attack, PRK Defend, USA Attack, USA Defend and are located in the Generator/Campaigns/PRK or USA directories. Strangely, Mission Editor has trouble reading the files and asks for permission to save each XML into Missions directory. I think that's because the Mission Editor bundled with ToW3 is actually a ToW2 editor. The difference between each map's engagement type is in the location of disposition zones and unit type slots that can participate in the battle, so I think this, and the small amount of maps available, could make the campaign a bit repetitive after a while. There are also some errors with disposition zones. Some missions have multiple overlapping deployment areas or units outside of them. This can be fixed in the mission's XML file.

Sneak and movement types of orders have been removed from the game, so it's now necessary to babysit scout troops and order them to lie prone if enemy activity is suspected nearby. The lack of movement order in tanks means that if you want to advance the tank with its turret facing forward, you have to give it a rotate order first. So it's two commands now instead of one.

Unfortunately, the support a battle group has assigned, can only be used after you win certain amount of victory points in a battle. This means that you cannot use the support at the very beginning of the tactical phase, until you destroy some enemy materiel. While in case of an air support which requires ~500-800 VP it might not be a problem, you will find the artillery support costing 1000 to not be of much use. By the time you win 1000 or more points, it would be just mopping up the map from the remains of the forces you have mostly destroyed. So no need to call arty. I didn't expect that 1C will repeat that mistake from Kursk/Caen. I think that the cost can be zeroed by a player by a simple change in one of the files.

All in all, best in the series. But 1C has to fix that awful bug!

[General_solomon]

as lemonade said, I devs should try to program for the next patch the infantry behavior to seek cover. it really turned me off when trying to hide behind walls or buildings. if done correctly, this game will rock. if they ever plan on making future installments which features larger towns or cities, they have to fix this.

I do like the survivability of the infantry. In one test, there was a fire fight with squads for quite a long time. this would have never occurred in the previous games.

I just hope sneaksie can rely some of suggestions to the devs. This is a beautiful game that can compete with cmbn if they concentrate on the infantry behavior and placement model.

[Chargin Smith]

Is there an Editor with this game?

[General_solomon]

Is there an Editor with this game?

yes, they have 3:

1. simple editor (make quick battles from a current map)

2. map editor (you make change to terrain and add road,house etc)

3. campaign editor

[Knokke]

well, 4 editors actually

1. simple editor (quickly create a basic battle that you can improve upon in the normal mission editor)

2. Mission editor (full mission editor)

3. map editor (an editor to create brand new maps and/or modify existing maps).

4. campaign editor

[Smash]

nice report.

thanks

For me, ToW3: Korea is a significant step forward since ToW2. Still there are some very annoying bugs present that thwart the effort put into development of this game. After playing five turns of North Korean campaign (with Historical Units Set option turned on), I'll try to point out both positive and negative aspects of the game in an objective and unbiased way.

Strategic mode

I will begin with the newest addition to the series that everyone has been waiting for - the strategic mode. The map of Korean Peninsula of PRK Campaign is divided into eleven areas (let's call them provinces from now on. More provinces are available in Campaign Generator. Something around 17 at once, so quite a lot). North Korean forces start the campaign with two of them under their control, each one containing pre-deployed battle groups: 203rd Tank Regiment and 1st Infantry Division.

The strategic screen is divided into four parts. On the right side is the very nice looking map, which we can zoom and move either by GUI buttons or by mouse drag/wheel. On the left side of the screen lies a panel with battle log, where information on campaign progress is displayed, available support and battle groups.

Each battle group can have up to two support types (Close support aircraft with Anti-Tank/HE/Fragmentation bombs, various light and heavy artillery including off-map mortars, tank reinforcements, etc.). Support assignment is achieved by drag-and-drop operation. Removal of already assigned support is accomplished also by drag-and-drop from the battle group icon back to the support placeholder. Strangely, this action also moves the map, which sometimes can be a little annoying. Placement of new battle groups is done the same way. Drag-and-drop from battle group placeholder to an empty province. I have not found a way to remove once placed group (not that I needed to).

Battle groups movement range is determined by their type and fuel they have available. Tank Regiment for example can move up to three provinces per turn, infantry division - only by one. Only one group can occupy the province at a time and the movement is done in real time, so you can't switch places of two neighbouring formations in any way. This can quickly lead to trapped units and front line choke up, if you're not careful and you fill rear provinces with new battle groups.

I don't know how it's with US of A campaign, but after three turns of PRK campaign I found my units disappearing from battle groups after having fought the tactical part of the game. (posts: 4, 5, 8 and 10 of http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=95541 thread) so after turn five I found myself unable to continue the campaigns due to lack of troops in the battle groups (even though I have not lost a single unit). I couldn't pull new, fresh formations to the front line due to every province on the way being occupied by other battle groups (and the units in the back of the front line was infantry divisions that can move only one or two, when motorized, province at a time). Unless this bug is fixed, and I'm pretty sure it's a bug, the strategic part of game is, well, unplayable for me.

Tactical battles

Here things are much better.

First of all, there are much less units participating in a single battle than in Kursk, which has a great impact on the overall performance of the game. It runs much smoother now. The Korean landscapes are very beautifully modelled and textured, with narrow mountain passes everywhere. Quite difficult terrain to fight in. In this circumstances even a small force can blunt or even completely stop enemy advance.

Battles are more dramatic and dynamic with tracers everywhere. Distant explosions and machine gun/small arms fire sound great. It's a real candy for eyes and ears.

The new fragmentation damage algorithms as well as the cover ground layer works extremely well, decreasing significantly infantrymen mortality rate. If in a proper terrain and with a bit of luck, troops, can survive even quite devastating bombardment. The Trenches-of-Death and suicidal weapon pits are finally gone. They now give very good protection against all kind of fire (with an exception of high mortar lobs). If under enemy small arms, machine gun or HE/Fragmentation shelling, you really want to crawl into them.

The new squad control system is really a slight change in squad selection. Now a single click on any member of a squad selects it as a whole. Selection of single soldiers is done by ALT-clicking him. It would work, if the advance order would dynamically adjust the position of the soldiers according to nearby cover and the direction they will be facing. Unfortunately group movement is just the same as in the previous instalments and strictly follows the formation shape you have currently selected for the squad (line, column, wedge, custom). It is not cover dependant. Therefore, I found the new squad control method very confusing, especially the ALT-click-a-soldier, so I quickly disabled it, thus reverting back to the old selection method which, I think, gives you much better control over pixel soldiers. Until the group infantry movement works like on the picture below, I think I'll stick to micromanaging.

You now have the ability to area fire with machine guns. This, with an addition of a new morale system (which works great), makes suppressing enemy positions very helpful during assaults. Under MG fire, the enemy will fire back only occasionally and if under very heavy fire they might even route. So give'em as much hell as you can before storming their positions. If a friendly infantry is close enough to hostile unit with low morale, the enemy might surrender. This is represented as a hostile unit becoming a neutral one. All inventory items being in his possession can be taken by your troops. I do not know though, whether the surrendered soldier can be saved, or not. Anti-tank gun crews will panic too if under heavy fire which is (in my opinion) much more realistic than having them remaining in their positions in some suicidal trance.

Heavy machine guns are now moveable which adds even more of tactical element, especially to defence missions. They, as well as mortars, can't be loaded on trucks though, but I rarely found the need to relocate them over greater distances.

Engineers have finally gained the ability to lay/clear mines which is carried out by two separate commands. Each engineer has either 10 anti-personnel and 2 anti-tank mines or X anti-personnel and 5 anti-tank mines. Engineer squad leader also has mines in his inventory but he cannot lay them, so I think this is a bug. You can queue mine-laying operations by holding SHIFT and clicking on the multiple points on the ground. Sometimes though, engineers stop laying mines from no apparent reason. Also, there's no information on finishing mine-laying orders (apart of a simple info that a mine has been placed), so in queueing - babysitting is required. Mines can really help in defensive missions if enemy tank activity is suspected.

Most of the maps have plenty of entrenchments available (still being a part of the map in this instalment), although only a small part of them are available for your units to man during the deployment phase. Still present, is an inability to move the units between the disposition rectangles either overlapping (see http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=95566 thread) or between disposition islands (not that there are any). There are nine tactical maps, all of which are not dependant on the province, meaning that you can find yourself fighting the same map ins different peninsula regions. Each map is divided into six types of engagement: PRK Assault, USA Assault, PRK Attack, PRK Defend, USA Attack, USA Defend and are located in the Generator/Campaigns/PRK or USA directories. Strangely, Mission Editor has trouble reading the files and asks for permission to save each XML into Missions directory. I think that's because the Mission Editor bundled with ToW3 is actually a ToW2 editor. The difference between each map's engagement type is in the location of disposition zones and unit type slots that can participate in the battle, so I think this, and the small amount of maps available, could make the campaign a bit repetitive after a while. There are also some errors with disposition zones. Some missions have multiple overlapping deployment areas or units outside of them. This can be fixed in the mission's XML file.

Sneak and movement types of orders have been removed from the game, so it's now necessary to babysit scout troops and order them to lie prone if enemy activity is suspected nearby. The lack of movement order in tanks means that if you want to advance the tank with its turret facing forward, you have to give it a rotate order first. So it's two commands now instead of one.

Unfortunately, the support a battle group has assigned, can only be used after you win certain amount of victory points in a battle. This means that you cannot use the support at the very beginning of the tactical phase, until you destroy some enemy materiel. While in case of an air support which requires ~500-800 VP it might not be a problem, you will find the artillery support costing 1000 to not be of much use. By the time you win 1000 or more points, it would be just mopping up the map from the remains of the forces you have mostly destroyed. So no need to call arty. I didn't expect that 1C will repeat that mistake from Kursk/Caen. I think that the cost can be zeroed by a player by a simple change in one of the files.

All in all, best in the series. But 1C has to fix that awful bug!

[Xerxes the Great]

well, 4 editors actually

1. simple editor (quickly create a basic battle that you can improve upon in the normal mission editor)

2. Mission editor (full mission editor)

3. map editor (an editor to create brand new maps and/or modify existing maps).

4. campaign editor

Knokke,

Do you know if the Multiplayer maps can be modified as well and played in Multiplayer?

There are 9 maps in Multiplayer mode. I'd love to edit a few to include more cities and add more blocking mountains so the 2 sides don't immediately get LOS on each other and start shooting. Would this be possible for Multiplayer maps?

Over.

[Rosseau]

Thanks Smash for the post. It would have taken me a lot of playing to notice that stuff. Hope 1C reads it, too.

[czinger]

This is my first Theatre of War game. I love the distant sounds, the long range combat, bullet/explosion physics detail. Also the big maps. This is the only stragey game that feels real.

Some say World in conflict is one of the best ones. For me it was too arcadey. Small maps, and seem like everyone was on top of each other. Like most games in this area. Loved the story though.

I really dig Theatre of War 3. One comment from me, is to expand drasticly on the Dynamic Campaign side. More depth would be amazing.