Strategic Command series

[Raghar]

Wheels definitely coming off in the West. Probably have to pull out of Belgium. If you don't get the full Schlieffen toward Paris, this route can't work as the front gets too stringy. Also, the AI is pulling hitting power out of its ass, so I keep losing units on the front to massive, cheap hits from guys who are not even as experienced or well equipped. I think maybe I should have been dumping more into research? I notice that the Allies have "barbed wire" for their trenches.

Also, the Serbs fell back to literally their third capital and still didn't capitulate, so I charged into it with multiple corps and artillery and they lucked out to 1hp and then boosted right back to 10, so instead of taking it in the Fall of 1915 I had to wait 'til May 1916.

I'm somewhat irritated that there are forts in the East I've surrounded for like a year now and they don't lose supply. So I just move past them, but have to requisition a few units to keep an eye on them. Morale is definitely flagging for the Ottomans, making them suck even more than usual.

Edit: to give an example of them pulling hits out of their ass, I just got counter-fired by artillery in the East with a basic Russian arty, which did 4dmg across 4-attacks. In my entire time in the West including the use of more advanced arty, I've yet to see it actually do unit damage with counter-battery fire.

Edit 2: I really have zero answer for Allied arty. I'm not even sure how they're dropping so many rounds, but every single turn they just rake the entire front and then kill a couple Corps.

I was wondering how you managed to pull off your relative successes, and I guess you neglected research, having fallen behind in both offensive (ARTY) as well as defensive (trenches). That might cause some issues.
In my games, I always tried to invest as much as possible in research, and even so I found it impossible to really outpace the Entente.

You mentioned two things I'd neglected to go into, Italy and the Ottomans.
About Italy, yeah, like you discovered the Italian front is just another trench to man - I mostly used the Austrians and a few Germans. Over time, I managed to advance a little bit, taking Venice and the surrounding area. Unfortunately, Italy also swamped most of it's territory with infantry units, supported by artillery, so I got bogged down. I even tried an amphibious landing with the Austrians, but even down in the south there were far too many Italian units. Managed to pull out my invasion forces with a bloody nose.

As for the Ottomans, there were two main theatres, the border with Russia and Egypt. Due to the difficult terrain, holding the Russian border is fairly doable, provided a few HQs have been sent over. Used most of my offensive power in Egypt, where I eventually managed to break through and take Cairo. Not that it did me that much good. By and large, I don't think the Ottomans are that bad, I even teched them up to have a tank unit late in the war.

Will be interesting to see if you can actually win the war this way.

I TOTALLY MURDERED ITALIANS. MY TROOPS SWARMED THEM FROM THE NORTH AND I KILED THEIR FLEET. I EVEN MADE A NAVAL INVASION AND THEY COLLAPSED. THEY EVEN HAD TO EAT THEIR DOGS TO SURVIVE. ALAS AI SEND TROOPS FROM FRANCE TO ITALY INSTEAD OF LETTING THEM BURN, AND THAT MADE MY ATTACK IN FRANCE MUCH EASIER.

NOT MUCH REPLAYABILITY WHEN YOU HAVE CLUE WHAT YOU ARE DOING.

I KINDA REMEMBERED ON BLOBERT WHEN I WROTE ABOUT HOW I MURDERED ITALLY, DUNO WHY.

 

[rezaf]

I TOTALLY MURDERED ITALIANS. MY TROOPS SWARMED THEM FROM THE NORTH AND I KILED THEIR FLEET. I EVEN MADE A NAVAL INVASION AND THEY COLLAPSED. THEY EVEN HAD TO EAT THEIR DOGS TO SURVIVE. ALAS AI SEND TROOPS FROM FRANCE TO ITALY INSTEAD OF LETTING THEM BURN, AND THAT MADE MY ATTACK IN FRANCE MUCH EASIER.

NOT MUCH REPLAYABILITY WHEN YOU HAVE CLUE WHAT YOU ARE DOING.

I KINDA REMEMBERED ON BLOBERT WHEN I WROTE ABOUT HOW I MURDERED ITALLY, DUNO WHY.

Cool story, bro. Link to your YT let's play, please. Otherwise, I'd like to claim that I single handedly murdered the germans playing as Serbia.

 

[Silva]

Oh, and UK started sending tanks, how do I deal with them?

Artillery inflicts direct damage to them, though not on every shot (it's a roll of the dice). So having an artillery division fully charged (10 shells) is great at softening them up for infantry to finish.

 

[Galdred]

For those who played both, how does it compare to warplan?

 

[Silva]

For those who played both, how does it compare to warplan?

Didn't play Warplan but watched a big part of a playthrough. My impression is that SC is more abtract/simplistic in it's systems and so feels a little more arcady. I think SC sings when you deal with the research, diplo and historical events as a whole, like in a strat/grand strat. If all you want is operational action, Warplan feels better/a bit more detailed and realistic. Both seem to aim at slightly different goals and to be enjoyable in tandem. I would classify as such:

HoI - grand strategy
SC - strategy
WP - operational


Edit: clarified.

 

[sser]

Wheels definitely coming off in the West. Probably have to pull out of Belgium. If you don't get the full Schlieffen toward Paris, this route can't work as the front gets too stringy. Also, the AI is pulling hitting power out of its ass, so I keep losing units on the front to massive, cheap hits from guys who are not even as experienced or well equipped. I think maybe I should have been dumping more into research? I notice that the Allies have "barbed wire" for their trenches.

Also, the Serbs fell back to literally their third capital and still didn't capitulate, so I charged into it with multiple corps and artillery and they lucked out to 1hp and then boosted right back to 10, so instead of taking it in the Fall of 1915 I had to wait 'til May 1916.

I'm somewhat irritated that there are forts in the East I've surrounded for like a year now and they don't lose supply. So I just move past them, but have to requisition a few units to keep an eye on them. Morale is definitely flagging for the Ottomans, making them suck even more than usual.

Edit: to give an example of them pulling hits out of their ass, I just got counter-fired by artillery in the East with a basic Russian arty, which did 4dmg across 4-attacks. In my entire time in the West including the use of more advanced arty, I've yet to see it actually do unit damage with counter-battery fire.

Edit 2: I really have zero answer for Allied arty. I'm not even sure how they're dropping so many rounds, but every single turn they just rake the entire front and then kill a couple Corps.

I was wondering how you managed to pull off your relative successes, and I guess you neglected research, having fallen behind in both offensive (ARTY) as well as defensive (trenches). That might cause some issues.
In my games, I always tried to invest as much as possible in research, and even so I found it impossible to really outpace the Entente.

You mentioned two things I'd neglected to go into, Italy and the Ottomans.
About Italy, yeah, like you discovered the Italian front is just another trench to man - I mostly used the Austrians and a few Germans. Over time, I managed to advance a little bit, taking Venice and the surrounding area. Unfortunately, Italy also swamped most of it's territory with infantry units, supported by artillery, so I got bogged down. I even tried an amphibious landing with the Austrians, but even down in the south there were far too many Italian units. Managed to pull out my invasion forces with a bloody nose.

As for the Ottomans, there were two main theatres, the border with Russia and Egypt. Due to the difficult terrain, holding the Russian border is fairly doable, provided a few HQs have been sent over. Used most of my offensive power in Egypt, where I eventually managed to break through and take Cairo. Not that it did me that much good. By and large, I don't think the Ottomans are that bad, I even teched them up to have a tank unit late in the war.

Will be interesting to see if you can actually win the war this way.

Yeah I didn't quite know the systems. I could tell I was falling behind when the Russians and French in one turn got the superboosted trenches while I was still working on t2.

I was just very aggressive after my venture West failed, sacrificing units for space so I could do the encirclements. Another element I didn't take into account, though, was that those supply strongholds HAVE to be taken. They cannot be starved out at all, as I had 2 way deep in my lines which I felt was really unrealistic but whatever. Once the tech turned against me I had no real answer for the Allies. Every turn there was massive bombardments and 1-2 Corps getting deleted.

My new game I'm shuffling with the Schlieff again, but this time being far, far more aggro in every regard. That's both in Serbia (taking Belgrade asap, for example) and in France where instead of Reinforcing I'm just keeping the pedal down. The only issue is that, as I retreat to more defensible positions in the East, the "mobilizations" put some Austrians on a dinner plate for the Russians and got instantly killed which I thought was a little lame. I'm also more aggressively researching as I realized the benefit of "chitting it up."

I might give the Civil War or Pacific theaters a go. They might be the most "flexible" in terms of having both strategy and tactics. Though I can tell pretty easily that the ACW one is a terrible simulation of the conflict, it still might be an entertaining game.

 

[Silva]

Another element I didn't take into account, though, was that those supply strongholds HAVE to be taken. They cannot be starved out at all, as I had 2 way deep in my lines which I felt was really unrealistic but whatever.

What do you mean by supply strongholds? If you mean the resource nodes, I remember reading somewhere that you must place 2 units into or adjacent to it to damage it's value at 1 tick per turn until reaching 0. Once your units back away, they start repairing those values if still on friendly territory.

Still on supply, as a general rule, you want to keep to roads as much as possible, and cut the enemy off them. I took some time to learn this and kept placing troops outside roads and on poor terrain like mountains and forests, etc. Most times it's better to advance like an arrow through roads than to advance a whole front over bad/low-supply terrain.

 

[sser]

Another element I didn't take into account, though, was that those supply strongholds HAVE to be taken. They cannot be starved out at all, as I had 2 way deep in my lines which I felt was really unrealistic but whatever.

What do you mean by supply strongholds? If you mean the resource nodes, I remember reading somewhere that you must place 2 units into or adjacent to it to damage it's value at 1 tick per turn until reaching 0. Once your units back away, they start repairing those values if still on friendly territory.

Still on supply, as a general rule, you want to keep to roads as much as possible, and cut the enemy off them. I took some time to learn this and kept placing troops outside roads and on poor terrain like mountains and forests, etc. Most times it's better to advance like an arrow through roads than to advance a whole front over bad/low-supply terrain.

I had both flanked by detachments and they still never went down. Both were National Objective (sic) type objectives, though. Basically fortresses.

My latter flank involved actual supply-sacrifices in pitching Cavalry into the Russian marshes, then swinging out of it *deep* into White Russia and barreling down the backside of Ukraine. That worked pretty well, though getting pieced up on the Western Front made it all for naught anyway.

One thing I noticed as well is the need for more fighters. The Entente has a lot of air, and the UK in particular spreads them around. I saw English planes in every front, it seemed.

 

[Tanaka]

Another element I didn't take into account, though, was that those supply strongholds HAVE to be taken. They cannot be starved out at all, as I had 2 way deep in my lines which I felt was really unrealistic but whatever.

What do you mean by supply strongholds? If you mean the resource nodes, I remember reading somewhere that you must place 2 units into or adjacent to it to damage it's value at 1 tick per turn until reaching 0. Once your units back away, they start repairing those values if still on friendly territory.

Still on supply, as a general rule, you want to keep to roads as much as possible, and cut the enemy off them. I took some time to learn this and kept placing troops outside roads and on poor terrain like mountains and forests, etc. Most times it's better to advance like an arrow through roads than to advance a whole front over bad/low-supply terrain.

I had both flanked by detachments and they still never went down. Both were National Objective (sic) type objectives, though. Basically fortresses.

My latter flank involved actual supply-sacrifices in pitching Cavalry into the Russian marshes, then swinging out of it *deep* into White Russia and barreling down the backside of Ukraine. That worked pretty well, though getting pieced up on the Western Front made it all for naught anyway.

One thing I noticed as well is the need for more fighters. The Entente has a lot of air, and the UK in particular spreads them around. I saw English planes in every front, it seemed.

Yep I reported this on the Matrix forums:

Random British AI fighter in Russia?​

Post by Hubert Cater » Thu May 25, 2023 1:08 pm

So it looks like the issue is everyone is set to cooperative, and in this case the AI may send air units, like the British ones, to Russia in some cases.

This is normal AI behaviour because it thinks it can do this as everyone is cooperative, but it is of course not ideal.

The only way around this is to hard code something, but I'm not sure I want to necessarily go down that route for a specific set of campaigns, but I'll have a think on this.

 

[Silva]

The little "puzzle game" at the frontlines where you must rotate divisions around for attacking the same targets is a bit tiresome, besides feeling super arcady. Don't know if the default scenarios suffer from this, but the zoomed-in ones (like Ludendorf Offensive) definitely does. Wish the game had a better solution for this.

Edit: I like Warplan solution where one unit can make multiple attacks, and friendly adjacent units can support said attack. It feels more logical and realistic.

Edit2: I realize the game actually factors-in adjacent units in it's combat calculations. I'd still prefer it was done differently.

 

[Silva]

My Ludendorff Offensive game is starting to bear fruits. I'm about to conquer Soissons, and already took Reims and Verdun. This will clear the way to Paris. I hope I reach it before the Allies deploy more of those pesky tanks.

My starting, experienced infantry divisions ran dry and now I'm back to green troops. I guess it's realistic, as those represent stormtroopers which were irreplaceable talent, if I get it right.

It's fun breaking the enemy lines and doing encirclements/pincers. I wonder if I should get a couple cavalry divisions. I avoided it so far thinking that by 1918 it probably wouldn't make sense, but I'm reconsidering.

BTW, how do I use rail guns? I thought I've seen some events of them firing automatically at Paris but I'm not sure.

 

[sser]

My Ludendorff Offensive game is starting to bear fruits. I'm about to conquer Soissons, and already took Reims and Verdun. This will clear the way to Paris. I hope I reach it before the Allies deploy more of those pesky tanks.

My starting, experienced infantry divisions ran dry and now I'm back to green troops. I guess it's realistic, as those represent stormtroopers which were irreplaceable talent, if I get it right.

It's fun breaking the enemy lines and doing encirclements/pincers. I wonder if I should get a couple cavalry divisions. I avoided it so far thinking that by 1918 it probably wouldn't make sense, but I'm reconsidering.

BTW, how do I use rail guns? I thought I've seen some events of them firing automatically at Paris but I'm not sure.

You can shoot rail guns once a turn, so I used them against fortifications like Verdun and the like. IIRC they do heavy demoralization-damage.

 

[sser]

Playing World at War and having a good time (Allies, playing UK, Russia, and US only). The naval stuff is kinda messy, but it's a fun go of it. Playing it makes me wish they'd take all the concepts from Euro/Pacific and just make a game like that, with a much bigger map and more nuanced stuff. Edging closer to a Grigsby title mayhaps, but still. At the moment fighting in the Mediterranean, just for example, feels like quarreling in a phonebooth. You also have to be very, very careful moving stuff over the Atlantic. I ensconce troops/HQ's in ships to ensure they don't get picked off. The game would benefit immensely from an ability to stack ships into task forces.

The one thing I don't really care for are the "meta" nature of events -- there's a lot of events that just dump in infantry and combatants at a moment's notice. Knowing these things ahead of time is presumably a huge leg up in a multiplayer PvP experience. I have to imagine multiplayer is a mess with a ton of amphib assaults hitting everywhere, as the game really doesn't allow you enough guardsmen to properly shield the shores. Allies gotta be tough in multi, too, cause in a sense you have to be very onguard with the oceans compared to the AI which is more risk-averse in this regard. As Allies, too, it seems if you mess up an offensive operation then you are going to end up deep behind the 8-ball as it takes so much time to transition troops into position to take a risk in the first place.

I liked playing Russia a little close to the wire, basically focusing on industry until a few months before invasion. Once the invasion happened, I diverted something like 40% of UK's economy (also juiced by the USA) into Russia, and then just spammed armies all over the front. By mid-1942, I've blanketed the entire front in units, albeit somewhat under-equipped ones (Weapons-1 and was late to get the Armor training that allows 2-hit blitzes). Russia gets access to very nasty "Shock" troops that do massive amount of demoralization, making for a sudden turnaround on the Romanian/Hungarian/Italians lingering around. One thing to note is that Germany's AI seems to have a heavy focus on tactical bombers and tanks (makes sense), the former of which can really pull some unexpected can openers on you.

Japan's navy seems almost impenetrable and I find it takes awhile to get the USA's up to speed, that or I just overly focused on Industry with them as well. I have 8 destroyers + 1 escort carrier queued up to basically bee-swarm the seas while protecting the carriers. No idea if that will work, but anything that wanders too close to the IJN evaporates on contact.

 

[Silva]

I think I'd prefer playing the standalone Euro and Pacific games over WaW. Engine is already on the abstracted side and having a map so condensed feels like it would only worsen things. But keep posting your impressions, sser .

By the way, I find it interesting that, even if these SC games are operationally on the abstract/simplistic side, they manage to pose to the player the same dilemmas those commanders faced at the time. For eg, in my Ludendorf offensive I'm constantly torn between piercing deep into enemy lines for those juicy encirclements and trying to maintain cohesive communication and supply lines. It's a risk-reward affair that I imagine every general at the time, employing such early infiltration tactics, must have pondered too. I suspect this must be less of an issue in ww2 games due to the increased mobility.