NEW WARGAME INCOMING! -> Steel Division Normandy '44

Leave the RTS, just let us slow the time compression. Otherwise your titles kick ass and the new features look very, very tasty indeed...am saving my pennies, bring it on, then how about Kursk?
 
HOA_KSOP said:
Leave the RTS, just let us slow the time compression. Otherwise your titles kick ass and the new features look very, very tasty indeed...am saving my pennies, bring it on, then how about Kursk?
Click to expand...
Time compression/speed up, functions very well (in addition with pause) in Command Ops 2 which suits me well. Not turn based which I like the most, but with three speed settings plus pause it is the next best thing.
 
Wow this is great!!! And for the first 10mn recon only... HELL YEAH (said the former army recon soldier)
 
I totally get the decision to stay RTS - its what you do. My personal issue with real time only is that means I'll never get to play against humans. I rarely get a solid hour for game play and if I do its at 6am so turn based games work really well, real time not so much. Like I said my issue - I just don't fit the mass market.

So, can you play this vs the AI? What is your emphasis: AI vs Multiplayer?
 
You can pause or slow down the game to give orders (in solo campaign & skirmish vs AI).

Dutch Grenadier said:
Wow this is great!!! And for the first 10mn recon only... HELL YEAH (said the former army recon soldier)
Click to expand...
That's "Combat recon" phase. Not just recon.
Scouts and armored cars are the most common troops then, but you will still have light tanks, light support unit, ...
 
This sounds like a great project @MadMat and thank you for keeping us informed. I think you will have a large group of dedicated players here (if the game is that good of course :p;))
 
Is a Release month known? I will buy steel division. Steel division is a must habe for my wargame collection.
 
Wow, quite a bit happening since I last posted. Incredible we have an insider posting here!

Hi @MadMat.

I did watch the first Twitch video where the gameplay was first shown and I would like to share with you my thoughts on it.

From a "first impressions matter" kind of view of this initial presentation, I think the choice of having that guy from Paradox play and explain the game to us for the very first time was a huge mistake. Not sure why he was selected and not someone from Eugen who actually knows the game, knows the design decisions behind the features in the game and who would have had a much better understanding of the game. The video was like watching a clueless person with a vague knowledge of the game and it's context (WW2) playing a game for the first time. He seemed more concerned and interested in "not losing" in front of the Twitch audience than actually explaining the features, design decisions and mechanics of the game which he seemed to have only a very vague idea of.

I did read a comment somewhere where someone questioned the wisdom of the game having a definite/visible front line as a feature of the game that in many ways goes counter to the concept of needing recon, and I tend to agree. The simple questions I ask is why the game actually NEEDS to show players where the front line is? Why does the game need to show the players where it is? What difference to gameplay would occur if instead the dynamic visual front line graphics was instead made invisible to players, while still effective remaining an actual item that exists and is tracked by the game to determine victory but all occurring "under the hood"? I think this visual front line thing removes way too much of the FOW and is basically "free recon". I think this visual dynamic frontline concept might just be totally unnecessary and a negative feature of the game.

The other gripe I had was the use of indirect fire weapons, in particular I think it was some kid of mortar, as shown in the video. Not only were their use very poorly discussed and explained by the presenter, but what I saw left a lot to be desired. It seemed that a simple infantry mortar unit could target units outside it's own LOS without any spotter. What's the thinking behind that? Also seeing the mortar shell trajectories begin so flat was a huge immersion breaker.

The other thing that was surprising and a little off putting was the concept that ALL infantry units, regardless of what type they are eg. paratroopers, all seem to begin the game mounted in motorised transports, that magically seem to disappear from the game once the unit disembarks from the vehicle (EDIT: some infantry are loaded in vehicles that do not disappear once the infantry disembark). I actually thought that maybe at least the paratroop infantry would have an advantage of begin able to be deployed forward on the battlefield by parachute drop, or, at least be allowed to begin the game deployed further up on the map. Seeing the recon stage of the battle start with truck loads of "paratroopers" stream from the map edge to the forward positions on the map all seemed a bit too much of a stretch of reality. (EDIT: I heard from the second Twitch video that paradrops will not be included in the game. It is assumed the paratroop infantry have already been dropped and they are redeploying using motorised means)
 
Last edited:
OMG, I just found more Twitch videos of SD44 and unfortunately that same clueless guy from Paradox is showcasing the game.

I literally just flicked through a video quickly and have already found further evidence of how clueless and cringeworthy/detrimental this guy is at showcasing the game to an WW2-philic audience like this. It was so cringeworthy I had to come back here and share the cringe. I honestly am surprised just how clueless this guy from Paradox is when it comes to basic WW2 knowledge, especially as he is from Paradox which is known for its rather in depth researched WW2 wargames and history. Please, get him away from presenting this game.

In this video:

Jump to 6min 18 sec:
The game designers actually name it correctly (Gammon bomb) in the game yet he chooses to instead refer to it using infantile language? This guy really could not give a toss about the historical research gone in to the game.

Jump to 24min 42sec:
Seriously???? Even the clueless host guy lets him get away with calling it a "British Butterfly". Cringe!!!
 
Bullman said:
OMG, I just found more Twitch videos of SD44 and unfortunately that same clueless guy from Paradox is showcasing the game.

I literally just flicked through a video quickly and have already found further evidence of how clueless and cringeworthy/detrimental this guy is at showcasing the game to an WW2-philic audience like this. It was so cringeworthy I had to come back here and share the cringe. I honestly am surprised just how clueless this guy from Paradox is when it comes to basic WW2 knowledge, especially as he is from Paradox which is known for its rather in depth researched WW2 wargames and history. Please, get him away from presenting this game.

In this video:

Jump to 6min 18 sec:
The game designers actually name it correctly (Gammon bomb) in the game yet he chooses to instead refer to it using infantile language? This guy really could not give a toss about the historical research gone in to the game.

Jump to 24min 42sec:
Seriously???? Even the clueless host guy lets him get away with calling it a "British Butterfly". Cringe!!!
Click to expand...
I could not watch the vids. I had no clue as to what the guy was talking about most of the time.
 
Bullman said:
From a "first impressions matter" kind of view of this initial presentation, I think the choice of having that guy from Paradox play and explain the game to us for the very first time was a huge mistake. Not sure why he was selected and not someone from Eugen who actually knows the game, knows the design decisions behind the features in the game and who would have had a much better understanding of the game. The video was like watching a clueless person with a vague knowledge of the game and it's context (WW2) playing a game for the first time. He seemed more concerned and interested in "not losing" in front of the Twitch audience than actually explaining the features, design decisions and mechanics of the game which he seemed to have only a very vague idea of.
Click to expand...
Paradox has its own ways regarding Twitch presentation, we do not chose who's doing it.
On Friday, there were several others from EGX London, with my boss Alexis Le Dressay being hosted (and playing) for one, and interviewed in another. Those might be more to your liking, especially regarding the explanation of features, design decisions, ...

(I can't find the interview's video ... :( )

Bullman said:
I did read a comment somewhere where someone questioned the wisdom of the game having a definite/visible front line as a feature of the game that in many ways goes counter to the concept of needing recon, and I tend to agree. The simple questions I ask is why the game actually NEEDS to show players where the front line is? Why does the game need to show the players where it is? What difference to gameplay would occur if instead the dynamic visual front line graphics was instead made invisible to players, while still effective remaining an actual item that exists and is tracked by the game to determine victory but all occurring "under the hood"? I think this visual front line thing removes way too much of the FOW and is basically "free recon". I think this visual dynamic frontline (DFL) concept might just be totally unnecessary and a negative feature of the game.
Click to expand...
The dynamic frontline is actually one of the game's main feature. It serves two purpose:
- victory points are calculated by the amount of ground you hold, so the DFL immediatly displays who wins and who's losing grounds.
- the most efficient way to destroy an ennemy is not to kill it to the last man, but to force it to surrender. To do this, isolating it is the quickest way, and that means "pushing" the DFL in order for enemy units to be trapped (hence, surroundered) on your side of the DFL. It is the real-time strategy/non-hexagonal way to model a unit being trapped in the enemy's zone of control.

Regarding the DFL provinding "free recon", it is both true & wrong.
It indeed provides you with a quick overview of the battlefield, and were the enemy is advancing. But it doesn't show you everything.
- Recon troops do no affect the frontline, and don't care about being on the wrong side. Which means a "recon in force" group could be advancing being your lines, either setting up observation post for the artillery/air force, capturing supply or ambushing key assets (especially artillery).
- A good player can use the frontline to give the enemy wrong information, but sending a few units in an undefended sector to create a quick collapse of the frontline in this sector, and thus leading the enemy to believe a major offensive might be in progress there.

If you have played our ealier game, R.U.S.E, you might know what I'm talking about: we're giving the player a tool giving him a good insight of the battlefield, but there are way to "trick" that seemingly godly overview.

Bullman said:
The other gripe I had was the use of indirect fire weapons, in particular I think it was some kid of mortar, as shown in the video. Not only were their use very poorly discussed and explained by the presenter, but what I saw left a lot to be desired. It seemed that a simple infantry mortar unit could target units outside it's own LOS without any spotter. What's the thinking behind that? Also seeing the mortar shell trajectories begin so flat was a huge immersion breaker.
Click to expand...
If an enemy unit could be targeted, it means it was in the LoS of some other allied units. You can't see/target a unit if it isn't spotted by an allied unit.

Bullman said:
The other thing that was surprising and a little off putting was the concept that ALL infantry units, regardless of what type they are eg. paratroopers, all seem to begin the game mounted in motorised transports, that magically seem to disappear from the game once the unit disembarks from the vehicle (EDIT: some infantry are loaded in vehicles that do not disappear once the infantry disembark). I actually thought that maybe at least the paratroop infantry would have an advantage of begin able to be deployed forward on the battlefield by parachute drop, or, at least be allowed to begin the game deployed further up on the map. Seeing the recon stage of the battle start with truck loads of "paratroopers" stream from the map edge to the forward positions on the map all seemed a bit too much of a stretch of reality. (EDIT: I heard from the second Twitch video that paradrops will not be included in the game. It is assumed the paratroop infantry have already been dropped and they are redeploying using motorised means)
Click to expand...
Unarmed transports, such as trucks or jeeps, are indeed disappearing once their passengers/gun has disembarked.
Had we left them as unarmed empty unit on the battlefield, players would have used them as shield for their combat units, to scout or to wait enemy ammunitions. Just as they did in Wargame.
Representing the division's limited motor pool, we're considering they're driving back as fast as possible to get back with more troops later.

Armed transports (jeep with .30, SdKfz, half-tracks, ...) stay on the battlefield and can be re-used as transport or to pull guns during the battle.

Multiplayer battles' divisions cover the whole of the Normandy campaign, from D-Day to the liberation of Paris. Not the very first morning, hence paratroopers aren't dropped, but used as regular (elite) infantry, although with some special rules. i.e. paratroopers (of every nation) can't be surrounded fir the are used (and trained) to fight isolated behind enemy lines.
 
So if players are using transport as expendable shields or impromptu scouts, why don't you introduce some kind of victory point penalty. If the DFL is instrumental in determining VP's you might penalize player if he gets soft transport killed in between the DFL and his own combat units...
 
Picked up and enjoying immensely so far @MadMat

One question, the AI is not cheating in skirmish mode correct?
 
Bought it today and got instant acces to the Beta ! Very enjoyable,
Only 2 maps(wich feel very different depending on how many players are on it) and 4 divisions(2 each side) for now but still very fun.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom