First Impressions - Strategic Command: WWII World at War - Sneak Peak - Part 3
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 окт 2024
- In this video, I take a moment from our series on the upcoming Grand Strategy Game, Strategic Command: World War II War in Europe, to provide my initial impressions of the game. This isn't a review it's just my first thoughts about this game after about five hours with it.
Strategic Command is an upcoming Matrix/Slitherine game developed by Fury Software. This turn-based grand strategy game is the successor to the game Strategic Command: War in Europe and the Strategic Command series originally published by Battlefront, developers of Combat mission.
Strategic Command Launches December 6th! Check it out Here: store.steampow...
Check out our podcast Single Malt Strategy, on iTunes at:
Or on Android at: play.google.co...
![Natanael Cano - Amor Eterno [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EO4prCs6WpM/mqdefault.jpg)
Thank you for this fairly in-depth sneak peek series. In this third summary video, I feel you do a good job of letting the prospective buyer know what to expect in gameplay. I do like the game's level of complexity; it doesn't take either a degree in rocket science to understand or an eternity to finish. And I agree with most of your criticism (or questions) about some of the developers' design decisions (i.e., diplomacy, game turns, etc.). Nonetheless, I've experienced lots of fun playing the earlier SC games, so I'm pretty sure I'll go ahead and plunk down the cash to get a copy of this one. (If you CAN get an interview with the developers, and ask them about some of their design decisions, that would be awesome; I can't for the life of me get over why this game's combat mechanics haven't been overhauled.) Thanks again for taking the time to preview this game.
you need to use those HQ units when your units doesnt have enough supplies. For example you need one HQ unit in Africa to be able to reinforce your troops to maximum. And you will need at least two armies in tobruk to defend against UK when Italy joins war. If i am not mistaken all their games have that rule about time. 1 turn = 2 weeks and during winter 1 turn = 1 month. I agree about diplo, no point investing anything there, only thing you can do with diplo is to get one country few turns earlier.
Your videos got me interested in this game, and I think I'm going to buy it at some point. Btw I love Panzercorps so much.
I'm sure I'll be covering Panzer Corps II when it comes out :)
I really like this series, imho there is just one flaw and that is it is nearly impossible to make a real Schwehrpunkt, the frontline once filled is a match of shuffle your attacking troops to keep the pressure on. It is to the credit of the overall game series that this fundamental handicap does not kill the game. Same with ships, your fleets end up covering a huge area, regardless of “class”. It is a Panzer General approach of a grand strategy game. The loss of hex resolution compared to War in Europe, by going global it is now c. half the number of hexes to cover the same territory, will only make this worse. Agree on unit redundancy, although iirc arti helps softening up defensive units - but at this scale, indeed like you said it would be better to add support units as upgrades to the regular units? That said, I am looking forward to the latest game in the series.
The Matrix Games website speaks of 40,000 hexes… 🙂
So far, do feel that certain strategy choices can really effect how the game plays out in the long run? Say for example Germany taking Gibraltar before the North African campaign starts and thus possibly denying the allies the Mediterranean Sea? And thus allowing Germany and Italy to reinforce forces in North Africa?
Please continue your lets play of this, I can't wait to pick up this game. For the whole diplomacy part, I'd say that it'd definitely an option to try and sway a country to your side. for example, Sweden, Spain or turkey to join the war, however it's very hard to do. As it was in real life, I like that it stays way more historical and you more or less know the beats of each game are gonna be. However it can be shaken up by how players pick decisions and if one neutral country does join one of the factions. I agree with you that these kind of games are like a race against time, you have to do the best and most effective options so that you meet the historical timeline as they did in real life. Which can be very stressful.
Thanks a lot for doing this first impression because I had no idea this game was coming out and I'm totally going to pick this up!
RE diplomacy. It doesn’t cost a tank division to send diplomats to Russia. It’s what the diplomats give up to the Russians while they are there. Ie. trade deals, war supplies, information, technology, concessions that impact your domestic support or support from Allies
Looks to me a lot like Matrix's Games War in the Pacific light, expanded to a global scale. I'm in.
* - Let the computer take control of some of your allies so you can concentrate on your favorite theaters.
Strategic bombing played a vital role in ww2, the bombing of railways and canals along with the bombing of Ploesti and the symthetic oil factories were massive weak spots in the german economy. The bombing of the railroads and roads also did wonders in slowing down german movement of troops, one of the reasons, and in my belief the main one, why the germans were not able to move troops quickly enough to counter the normandy landings. Not being able to bomb the railroads, roads, canals and specific resources areas is complete bullshit.
I liked the historical education this game seems to provide but does the historical scripting also lead to foregone conclusions/outcomes?
Great overview.
ps England is not Great Britain.
Hello.
I made a group on Steam called the historical gamers in arms, unaware of your channel. I just watched one of your videos and caught your name, so I wanted to check with you to make sure you are fine with that group.
If you are, you should join the group, it'd be a great addition to the 5 members we have.
So no matter what in the end the allies win - is it that close to the history with this games events, economy, and diplomacy model?
No the Axis can win, anyside can win in these kind of games. The events you can get are based on history but you can go a different route, say for example as Italy there is an event that asks if you want to invade Greece. If you say yes it'll spawn some corps in Albania for you at half strength and you'll get a morale boost for your country but if the allies push into one hex into Albania you'll lose morale. Or you can just say no and not attack Greece at all. The allies can then put diplomacy tokens in Greece to sway it to the allied side eventually if the axis don't counter it with diplomacy. I'd say it's close to history but things can change up, Sweden can join the axis or allies if enough diplomacy token are spent on her, the only question is, would that be worth your production or not.
Are atomic bombs in this game?
While game is fine, I do not like it. It is too wide in scope and thus it can't really focus on doing anything well. Entire wars seem to be very simple in order to make entire WW2 manageable to play. It might appeal to some, but it is very niche game.
Hmmm I hoped for more gameplay....
Then episode 4 shall have it!
@@thehistoricalgamer This Video in the series sounded like you where payed or forced by the developers to repeat all who is said in video 1 and 2 pluss pluss.