[Unknown Target]

Anyone else pick this up? It seems like a cool and very deep strategy game, but I'm struggling with the weird-me-out interface and lack of information on what units do, how I can call in reinforcements, etc. One of the things it seems the devs did was simulate pretty much every warfighting vehicle known to man in the 1980s; which is cool but it leaves me wondering: just what does a Chieften Mk I have against a Leopard Mk I? What about the MK II vs Mk III of both versions? I may have to dig up some military history books to really enjoy this game.

[Thaeris]

Some of that information is assumedly classified, so I'd guess that armor is only estimated in terms of performance with regards to thickness, slope, and type. It also depends on the engine and how settings in the game are established. Is it a simulation, or a game? Obviously, at some level it's both, but I think you understand my question.

As far as realism goes, if it's more like a strategy game focused on simulation (like Combat Mission), then there might not be much of a difference at all in NATO tanks, whereas a strategy game focused on being a game might try to balance tanks to being better at certain tasks based on what the designer thinks is right. I'm guessing their home webpage or forum is a better place to start for digging up that information than here.

[NGTM-1R]

Well, UT, that depends entirely on how well their simulation works. However there are significant differences between the vehicles you mention. (Particular a Leopard 1Awhatever and a Leopard 2Aanything.)

From what I've heard it's basically Steel Panthers on a prettier stage, and there were certainly detectable differences in that game between various vehicles.

[General Battuta]

I've been following this game for a while. I suggest checking out the SA thread, which has some of the game's best players and provides a pretty comprehensive intro for newcomers.b

This is a really unique, cool strategy game that doesn't follow the Warcraft/Dune 2000/C+C mold. Artillery, however, is not so much queen of the battlefield as supreme ****ing potentate.

[NGTM-1R]

Artillery, however, is not so much queen of the battlefield as supreme ****ing potentate.

Goddammit don't tempt me Batts, I've not been able to first-turn facerape somebody with artillery since Steel Panthers 3 stopped working reliably.

[Flipside]

Been playing it on and off for a couple of weeks, well designed and quite reminiscent of the original Ground Control in some ways. The problem with the wtflol interface has already been mentioned

The only complaint I would have with regards to the simulation itself is more down to the fact that it's not a simulation but is a game. In other words, the 'quality vs quantity' argument of NATO vs USSR has been deliberately stretched in some cases to give NATO a far more equal standing in conventional military than they actually had at the time. Panzers were damn good tanks, but not quite that good

[NGTM-1R]

The only complaint I would have with regards to the simulation itself is more down to the fact that it's not a simulation but is a game. In other words, the 'quality vs quantity' argument of NATO vs USSR has been deliberately stretched in some cases to give NATO a far more equal standing in conventional military than they actually had at the time. Panzers were damn good tanks, but not quite that good

You'll note that since about 1991 the Russians have scrambled for a new tank, with a new model of T-80 being put out shortly after Gulf 1, T-90 being developed to replace T-80 temporarily, and T-99 is in the pipe to give them a completely new hull to work with.

Their quantity model lost on the ground in Gulf 1, much as it lost in the air during the 1970s against the Israelis. (The development of the MiG-29 and Su-27 can be traced directly to the failure of the MiG-21 and MiG-23 in those battles.) The Republican Guard was actually well-trained and competent by Soviet standards, and we all know how well their T-72s (the quantity vehicle) fared against tanks that are very similar to the first models of Leopard 2.

In many ways, the First Gulf War was a theoretical World War 3 played out in miniature.

[General Battuta]

Last I knew Warsaw Pact was considered the slightly better faction in-game.

[Flipside]

I suppose that's the thing though, things are pretty well balanced because it's a game, so there has to be some median between the two forces, but an actual land-war between the countries wouldn't be

[NGTM-1R]

Some of the stuff in this game is far too obscure. I'm having trouble proving the PT-90 variant ever existed outside of some deranged game designer's head (the only 90mm armed variant I've been able to find is actually made as a refit in Israel, for export), and the PT-85 is only known through some fragmentary comments about the invasion of Czechoslovakia. The V variants? ohgodwat, the V was a base security vehicle back in the days when people expected Spetznaz to show up before the tanks rolled through Fulda Gap (and before the Hummer was designed), why is it even in this game?

[NGTM-1R]

Also, I note that tanks can generally take more than one hit from other tanks' main gun rounds, and I recently had cause to prove my Leopard 1A4s could soak at least one Sagger, but a direct hit from a LAW-type weapon destroys the vehicle instantly.

This has both frustrated me, and been incredibly useful (bushwhacking T-72s rather than executing a complex flanking maneuver with my Challengers and Leopards), but it's still intensely weird if I can soak a Sagger or a 125mm HEAT shell that my tanks will get taken down by an RPG, or that their tanks can soak an L7A1 round and yet get taken down by a Blindicide.

(And why did the Czechs copypasta the Sdkz. 251 design for a halftrack?)

[StarSlayer]

I checked out some vids, this I will be getting soon as I get home.

Course I find my time for playing games is pretty limited these days.

[NGTM-1R]

A well-executed rocket barrage answers to no man and suffers no equals.

[NGTM-1R]

Anybody out there figured out what constitutes line of sight for ATGMs? It doesn't quite seem beholden to the same limitations as tank guns.

[StarSlayer]

I dunno but my Raketenjagdpanzers must have fired a dozen ATGMs to take out one katayusha rocket truck that wandered over to my FOB

[General Battuta]

I dunno but my Raketenjagdpanzers must have fired a dozen ATGMs to take out one katayusha rocket truck that wandered over to my FOB

ATGMs really need vet to be useful.

[NGTM-1R]

Some of the missiles seem to be less-sensitive to elevation changes than guns. Although every time I see a wire-guided missile fired through a forest I wonder what the game designers are on.

[Unknown Target]

After giving the game some more time, I'm really starting to understand it and even enjoy it a whole lot more. It's definitely interesting, I just wish its interface was a bit more intelligble.

[StarSlayer]

This is most fun.  I think I have built a pretty decent NATO deck, Bundeswher themed with a few select units from other NATO factions.  I'm looking forward to dedicating some time to get shellacked in multi and until I temper my craft.  Lot of macro/micro balance I need to sharpen before I'm satisfied.

If anybody knows how do you assign and select control groups?  That's probably the biggest command and control issue I have right now.  Not being able to instantaneously call up units such as my artillery or mortars while I'm observing the front is a major pain in the rear. 

[Mefustae]

I'm actually quite fond of the game. Having a lot of fun both playing serious games over multi, and just screwing around with a mate. I've built a Soviet-centric deck, although I think it's pretty tank heavy, and i've been running into some supply issues in longer-running games lately, so I may have to rethink some of it.

Love the artillery. I love the effect on both the troops and the enemy player when you saturate a control zone with shells, I've found that it can really create a panic to take out the artillery, even if it's of negligible effectiveness. I've taken out many an ill-advised thrust or shot down exposed aircraft that way. Plus, Soviet artillery is just boss.

My only major gripe is the total lack of fast-mover air support. I want to be able to call in an A-10 for assistance! Granted, this type of gameplay doesn't really lend itself to that sort of thing. But maybe a tactical power system akin to World in Conflict would work well. I don't know, I just feel that it's missing a large part of the conflict by not including aircraft beyond helicopters.

If anybody knows how do you assign and select control groups?  That's probably the biggest command and control issue I have right now.  Not being able to instantaneously call up units such as my artillery or mortars while I'm observing the front is a major pain in the rear. 

The old RTS standby of "Ctrl+[number]" for numbered control groups, as far as I'm aware. Very handy for microing a scout helicopter and laying down artillery fire with minimal fuss.