Supreme Ruler The Great War

Supreme Ruler The Great War

View Stats:
SRU vs SRU-GW
Is there any differences between SRU and this game besides different units and starting at a different date? From the videos i have seen the interface is exactly the same and i do not see any real difference.
< >
Showing 1-15 of 26 comments
GIJoe597 Jul 28 @ 8:19am 
As far as I can tell the interface is the same. Which is a plus for me as it is familiar and it works.

From what I can gather, the differences are mostly in how the game treats units. Or rather, due to the units involved, there is not as much spotting and stealth checks needed. During this time frame the ranges are very limited when compared to modern times.

I have not played far along enough to see what happens when there are a large number of units on the map, but I suspect the game will be less "sluggish" without 100,000s of units with very large spotting ranges needed to be checked.

I started in 1914, it is currently 1917. The largest military power on Earth is Germany, but they pale in comparison to modern games. Their build capacity is only 17/5/9/0. The next largest nation is the USA and they are at 7/2/8/0.

Due to the time period and economy is it difficult to amass a huge army and/or production facilities as you would in SRU.


Of course the nations are time period approriate with the corresponding alliances/pacts etc. The units are much slower and have less range, most of the ground units are leg infantry as you would expect from this era.
Last edited by GIJoe597; Jul 29 @ 8:15am
Krazyone Jul 28 @ 11:56am 
Thank you for the rundown. It is kind of sad to hear that they did not really add anything but it more sounds like they just added another start date to the existing game :(. I mean i was not expecting a rework of the game but i would assume they would add more options in diplomacy or a better fix on the crazy ammount of units that there are late game. It would be nice if they could more accurately simulate armies through the ages and make them smaller yet more deadly and effective.
GIJoe597 Jul 28 @ 1:15pm 
They were clear from the start what we would get. They have priced it accordingly. Many people requested a WWI game, BG delivered a WWI game.

Side Note: I had told them originally I was not interested in this type of warfare. I believed it would be boring.

Since I have been playing it, I have come to realize how not boring it is. Fighting in this time period is difficult. It takes a long time for things to happen. Twenty hours in and I still cannot get enough forces to Great Britain, who are blockaded by the Germans.


One huge example for me. I am an air power person, I will always rely heavily on planes. They pack a good punch and are very mobile and fast. I am spoiled by modern units with 10,000 mile ranges and 800+ mph speeds.

In my current play of SR:GW, I have struggled to get adequate units to Great Britain. My best fighter has a range of 500kms. My best Strategic Bomber, 499kms.

None of my starting or easily researched Escorts (Destroyers), have anti sub capabilities. German subs are ranging along the coast of GB. The German surface fleet is moving at will along GB's coasts.

Not more than 1 hour ago, I finally managed to get a convoy through to England. We had to land in Aberdeen, after routing north around the German navy. I was excited to finally get some units there. I had 7 tactical bombers, 7 strategic bombers and 7 fighter/interceptors.

Along with the transport ships I have brought 2 surface action groups. Each one consisted of;

2 x BB
1 x CA
4 x DD

Each SAG was lead by 4 of the best submarines I have available.

I positioned the tac's near the coast, moved both heavy fleets in, sat in ambush. Three engagements with the German navy, each one where I was sitting in ambush went badly. I only have 2 tac's left, I lost 18 of the 22 ships. Most of the time I never even saw the enemy subs until they opened fire.

Two battleships limped back to Bath Iron Works, in Maine, after again taking a large detour north around England and then to Newfoundland. They move so slow, top speed 22 kms.

At any rate, here I am with my tail between my legs, back in the continental US, trying to marshal more forces and do it all over again.

Each capital ship loss really hurts, in previous games. SR 2020 or SRU, I could shrug it off and order 20 more constructed. In this current game, I only have 8 Naval Production facilities. It will take me 560 days simply to replace the BB's, a year to replace the CA losses and six months to replace the DD's. Not even considering the subs lost.

The economy is so tight in 1914-1917 I cannot increase production capacity to counter losses. I am barely breaking even, money wise, for the last 3 years.

When it comes to land units, they are mostly leg infantry. I can produce 7 at a time across the USA. Then it takes them a month or more to walk across the country to get to a port. There are no Air Transports yet.


What I am getting at; I am fighting a huge war at home with logistics and I have yet to engage the Central Powers in land combat. There are no Allied forces on mainland Europe.

The Russian Empire is reeling, there was a revolution, Lenin took over. They do not seem to be able to stop Austria-Hungary or Germany. Moscow fell some time ago, the new Russian capital is Petrograd. It is surrounded on 2 sides by German forces.

The Central Powers have a production capacity of 21/5/9/0.

I, as the USA, only have 7/2/8/0.

I cannot wait to see if I can get to Europe, much less establish a beachhead.

Not boring at all.
Last edited by GIJoe597; Aug 3 @ 8:57am
chrisahl  [developer] Jul 28 @ 3:29pm 
Originally posted by GIJoe597:
... I had told them originally I was not interested in this type of warfare. I believed it would be boring.

Since I have been playing it, I have come to realize how not boring it is...
:D
Fistalis Jul 28 @ 5:33pm 
Originally posted by Krazyone:
Thank you for the rundown. It is kind of sad to hear that they did not really add anything but it more sounds like they just added another start date to the existing game :(. I mean i was not expecting a rework of the game but i would assume they would add more options in diplomacy or a better fix on the crazy ammount of units that there are late game. It would be nice if they could more accurately simulate armies through the ages and make them smaller yet more deadly and effective.
They made it clear that any additions would be to more effectively simulate this particular time period.. so trench warfare..chem weapons etc have been added but yes there is not any HUGE engine or graphical etc changes.
GIJoe597 Jul 28 @ 10:45pm 
Well, I have no idea what happened. I finally landed in Great Britain 2 seconds after it fell. I landed about 150 units, a mix of Marines, (strongest unit) and Mounted Infantry. When we met the Germans, my units melted. There is no other way to describe it. They were in supply and fighting, but they just ... melted. According to stats, my units were better and I had max Pay and Training.

Nothing I could do but entrench and watch what on paper was an inferior German army annihilate me. Sorry Great Britain.


Again, not boring in the least.
Last edited by GIJoe597; Jul 28 @ 10:45pm
Krazyone Jul 29 @ 1:52pm 
Originally posted by GIJoe597:
They were clear from the start what we would get. They have priced it accordingly. Many people requested a WWI game, BG delivered a WWI game.


Not boring at all.

(Cut down so i don't take up the entire page) This actually sounds really interesting and i really really hope i don't regreat getting the game. I think you sold it with your breakdown of what is going on and how the combat feels.

The issue i always had with SRU is the tidal wave of mass units.

Originally posted by Fistalis:
Originally posted by Krazyone:
Thank you for the rundown. It is kind of sad to hear that they did not really add anything but it more sounds like they just added another start date to the existing game :(. I mean i was not expecting a rework of the game but i would assume they would add more options in diplomacy or a better fix on the crazy ammount of units that there are late game. It would be nice if they could more accurately simulate armies through the ages and make them smaller yet more deadly and effective.
They made it clear that any additions would be to more effectively simulate this particular time period.. so trench warfare..chem weapons etc have been added but yes there is not any HUGE engine or graphical etc changes.

I don't care about graphics. For me it is more the adding something to the game. From what i see (videos and reviews i have watched) it looks like it could be just another scenario in a game and that is pretty saddening for me because i love the games but i just can't justify putting down money if its not a really big change. From what GIJoe597 said it sounds like it is more than that and i really hope i do not regret the decision to get the game
GIJoe597 Jul 29 @ 3:59pm 
Keep in mind I have yet to really experience land warfare. My landing in England was not a good experience. It was more of a turkey shoot.

I am not sure if there will be masses of units once I engage in proper combat.
Last edited by GIJoe597; Jul 29 @ 4:00pm
Originally posted by GIJoe597:
Keep in mind I have yet to really experience land warfare. My landing in England was not a good experience. It was more of a turkey shoot.

I am not sure if there will be masses of units once I engage in proper combat.

Your posts makes me want to dive in deeper in to the game. I really want to play the game from WW1 tech and onwards and your posts seems to make me more excited about it.
Krazyone Jul 30 @ 11:50am 
Originally posted by GIJoe597:
Keep in mind I have yet to really experience land warfare. My landing in England was not a good experience. It was more of a turkey shoot.

I am not sure if there will be masses of units once I engage in proper combat.

Do they give germany a stealth boost? It feels like they do in SRU as well. Even when troops are at 100% efficiency they just seem to get rolled by german troops. Or are there stats on the units just not displayed?
GIJoe597 Jul 30 @ 1:56pm 
I have no idea if that is the case for a game with Military Difficulty set to Normal or below. I am playing on Hard. I do not think there are any stats not shown which would affect combat results.
Fistalis Jul 31 @ 10:59am 
Originally posted by GIJoe597:
I have no idea if that is the case for a game with Military Difficulty set to Normal or below. I am playing on Hard. I do not think there are any stats not shown which would affect combat results.
Close combat vs open terrain is my guess. But i will say in my last game GB fell rather fast to germany.. followed by france.. i was gifting units but likely made very little impact as the US since it takes so long for units to get transported that far.
Last edited by Fistalis; Jul 31 @ 11:01am
GIJoe597 Jul 31 @ 6:18pm 
That was the kicker, in addition to falling just as I landed, I had sent them 50 units of mixed leg and mounted inf. All gone. But, one day!
Milking the same goat year after year version after version. Same crappy tactical gamepay and graphics, drag a box around all the units and send them to fight some other blob of units. What a shame their games are ruined by the combat, many years past due for an overhall, time to stop milking the goat.
chrisahl  [developer] Aug 1 @ 4:36pm 
I have no shame in paying my team for the hard work they did adding new units, meshes, technologies, events, campaigns, leaders, flags, relationships, audio, graphics and other content so that those in the community interested in WW1 have a strategy game to fill that gap. We are up front about what the game is and only make money if we're correct that there is demand for this title.
< >
Showing 1-15 of 26 comments
Per page: 15 30 50