Once a person with at least minimal interest in history gets a war simulator, he should automatically want to try at least one of the countless “what if” scenarios. It is the war that offers similar fanatics a lot of unrealized scenarios in style, if Poland were able to defend Germany, and what if the Soviets did not attack them. What would happen if the Japanese kept away from Pearl Harbor and devoted only to China? Not one of these scenarios has passed to our expectations.
On the queue calm
The latest addition to Fury Software’s popular family strategy series, Strategic Command, builds on War in Europe and the world’s first major military conflict in history, and puts players in the role of Commander-in-Chief of the Allies or Axis. If you have not had any of the games in this series, you do not have to worry. In addition to hours of gradual learning, there is also a comprehensive manual available that only enhances the clear set-up of the whole series. Forget epic detailed modeled battles. Strategic Command is played on a much larger area and the player is “spared” such a number of detailed decisions as in Paradox games, certainly not coming, because the war machine can not manage itself.
In Strategic Command WWII: World at War, the player takes on tactics, the distribution and acquisition of troops, their movement on the map, as well as any relatively similar primitive research and diplomacy. Everything, of course, depends on the chosen fraction of the conflict. However, you can choose just one of the nations (for example, the Japanese) and leave the rest (Germany and Italy) on the computer, while having the opportunity to become an active player all the time.
So if you decide to invest in German research, nothing prevents you from doing so, but at the same time you can leave your chosen nation under the patronage for the overall simplification of the game. It’s not a bad option because driving an allied force, for example, is really long, and it’s much more fun for the beginner to focus on managing one army.
The player can choose one of the pre-prepared scenarios that will put him in a starting or already running war, and then he’s on it as he fights with the events. The game also tries to offer some added value and keep track of the backgrounds of the war (X movie died, ruler Y has died) and offers you the points of reference that you should keep in order to preserve the real course of history.
For Japan, you get clear directions straight away from the county to stay away from US and British possessions, and ideally do not start war with China either. On the contrary, in the case of the war on Britain, it is recommended to maintain the morale of the local population and to keep the troops in close proximity to selected cities. If you do, it’s up to you, and then these moments will be great to watch when the community enters the game and starts making your own scenarios in the attached editor.
Victory in statistics
However, what might appear to be the main theme of the game is the background to the gameplay pillar. The player has to plan a lot in advance, because practically everything he does in the first round (except for a direct confrontation on the map) will take a long time, even to a limited extent. The player has a so-called MPP (Military Production Points) on each round that invests either in new editions, research, or diplomacy.
We will not go into the details of how each aspect works (there are almost 300 pages of the manual), but the shift between strokes takes place within months, so your September bomber will be ready in March next year (production can take up to eighteen months ). In the meantime, the player has to do with what he has and pray that he will not have to change Pandora.
Similar research has been delayed, although it is limited to a very auspicious interface (as a whole game) but its contribution is increasingly important over time as it can fundamentally change the development of the war in the player’s favor. Improve anti-tank defense, mobility, or invest in amphibious warfare, without which Japan can not get around well.
Research, with many other factors, affects the results of specific engagement on the map. The player fights on land, air, and water, and avoids anything from bad weather to opponent’s power up to whether his (or enemy) units fall under HQ. This can fundamentally change the map conditions while also generating the resources necessary for effective warfare. The positions of the units on the map, terrain, the weather or even the unmapped air base can change in a blink of an eye otherwise hopefully looking situation.
For the skimmers
We could gradually overwrite the entire game manual to make it clear to the newcomers of this turn-based series, how complex and sophisticated this otherwise bizarre game is. As soon as one goes in and is ready to overcome the absence of a proper tutorial or a not too wise idea to start with Poland in 1939, nothing prevents him from starting in the mechanics and just watching the clocks he has played.
This, unfortunately, is helped by the fact that before you succeed (otherwise excellently working) AI to play the move for allies and enemies, you can calmly go get a coffee. After longer playing, the breaks between the moves are very frustrating and it is better to play the game because waiting in the middle of a successful development for a few minutes to another move is not exactly the case for the stratagem who has blood in the veins.
If you want to try something other than Hearts of Iron, you are in the right place, the right game. Strategic Command WWII: World at War is a great game for challenging players that offer nothing but hours of ant tactics and territory management. She does not look at her well enough, she does not cooperate in the high resolution and may seem blurred. But hand on heart, no one will play this game because of graphics. Fans of the genre should not miss this part of the Strategic Command, others can go with a clear conscience about the house.