To paraphrase Einstein: ideally, ideals and reality are the same; in reality, they aren't... We'll be reacting as early as next episode, and I'm sure it will continue from there. And in case you like it, you can pick up the core engine at no charge and play this scenario yourself.
Honestly, I would love to see a Ride of the Valkyries German campaign from you on this game. Not sure if you'll read this but... if you do then I hope you make one.
Can you imagine Patton saying, "Tell the 275th Armored Forward Artillery Batalion to support 2 Pl H Coy 3/32 Armored Rgt on the left flank." I don't think so. Great generals love efficiency and not longwinded pronunciation of tedious and impractical formal names......CO2 is a brilliant game concept but the implementation is tedious and boring, for one simple reason: You cannot rename a unit. You are constantly dealing with names like "D Coy. 83th Recon Bn," "AG Pl 48 Arm Inf Bn," and "2 Pl H Coy 3/32 Armored Rgt." All units have cumbersome names like that. They are historic, but oh sooooo tedious. A simple option to rename any unit---to give it a friendly name just for gameplay purposes---would make all the difference in the world. Names like "Buffalo," "Tuxedo," "Joe's Bunch," or anything the user chooses would make all the difference. I love the game but gave up playing it, because of the tedium of horrid names.
Wargames and military history might not be your thing then. It's just something you have to get used to when dealing with military history. I have tons of books on military operations that I really have to focus on because you constantly see the same long winded names again and again and again, that's just how it is and always will be. Of course Patton wouldn't say that, but this game isn't a simulation of what Patton would say, it's a simulation of what he would do and you can imagine him saying whatever you want.
Developers sell more product when it appeals to a broader audience, those who love history AND those who game for enjoyment without giving a Matt's grass about history.
You're really upset about this, aren't you? I've seen you post this same comment on multiple channels and videos. 🤣 The military doesn't call units things like "Buffalo" or "tuxedo." That's why the game doesn't do that.
in two sessions i have learned so much. its like watching a war movie.
Wow. Really exciting game. It's going to be interesting to see how to REACT to an enemy move. Ideally, we never need to do that but y'know...
To paraphrase Einstein: ideally, ideals and reality are the same; in reality, they aren't... We'll be reacting as early as next episode, and I'm sure it will continue from there. And in case you like it, you can pick up the core engine at no charge and play this scenario yourself.
very easy to watch. i've learned a lot about the game.
Thanks again, I'm happy to know it's helpful.
Thank you so much for this awesome LP
Honestly, I would love to see a Ride of the Valkyries German campaign from you on this game. Not sure if you'll read this but... if you do then I hope you make one.
hull mounted tank destroyeror casemate tank destroyer would be what you were looking for with the stug there
does allow the whole campaign and maybe play as axis cause come on tigers enough said
Yes, I would have a "blast" deploying tigers under my own command. It was hell going up against them in this series.
The stugs were assault guns, not tank destroyers, German tank destroyer equivalents would be the Panzerjaegers
the use of artillery seems a bit like in an rts.. i think i might play this without direct control of artillery.
A fair alternative. I go a bit crazy with it.
"Casemated". Is that the word you are looking for?
It looks like a while before released on Steam, December.
Thanks, that's quite a while. It will be very interesting to see how they transition it, considering their existing sales model.
Can you imagine Patton saying, "Tell the 275th Armored Forward Artillery Batalion to support 2 Pl H Coy 3/32 Armored Rgt on the left flank." I don't think so. Great generals love efficiency and not longwinded pronunciation of tedious and impractical formal names......CO2 is a brilliant game concept but the implementation is tedious and boring, for one simple reason: You cannot rename a unit. You are constantly dealing with names like "D Coy. 83th Recon Bn," "AG Pl 48 Arm Inf Bn," and "2 Pl H Coy 3/32 Armored Rgt." All units have cumbersome names like that. They are historic, but oh sooooo tedious. A simple option to rename any unit---to give it a friendly name just for gameplay purposes---would make all the difference in the world. Names like "Buffalo," "Tuxedo," "Joe's Bunch," or anything the user chooses would make all the difference. I love the game but gave up playing it, because of the tedium of horrid names.
Wargames and military history might not be your thing then. It's just something you have to get used to when dealing with military history. I have tons of books on military operations that I really have to focus on because you constantly see the same long winded names again and again and again, that's just how it is and always will be. Of course Patton wouldn't say that, but this game isn't a simulation of what Patton would say, it's a simulation of what he would do and you can imagine him saying whatever you want.
Developers sell more product when it appeals to a broader audience, those who love history AND those who game for enjoyment without giving a Matt's grass about history.
Sorry, but it's your complaint that's tedious.
Of cource he wouldn't say it. He was an army commander, so he wouldn't bother with ordering artillery support for just one tank platoon.
You're really upset about this, aren't you? I've seen you post this same comment on multiple channels and videos. 🤣
The military doesn't call units things like "Buffalo" or "tuxedo." That's why the game doesn't do that.