So far it sucks

[dugustus]

I've only just got into playing having tried a few dozen battles and although the graphics are great and the realism factor for the units themselves supurb thats where the praise ends. Every scenario even the tutorials the basic expectation of the game is that you take your forces out for a world war one style slogging assualt against an entrenched enimey that outnumbers and out firepowers you at least 3 to one usually 4 to one. The computer ignores line of sight, firing constantly from the moment it sees you from it's entreched pre-programed killing spots, firing right through ridge lines and forests that completely prevent your own forces from shooting through or over. It will not give you a firing solution, and every micromanaged soldier the computer has is amazingly adept at never leaving a blocked line of sight. Your own tanks will further this by always choosing the path that affords the computer the best continual cover. Time and time again I watch the computers forces literally run right through my ranks killing at will and imipossible to shoot because there is never a clear line of sight some rock, bush, or fold in the flat bare road always seems to be the perfect place the computer has ran his soldier to. So we have 100% of the computer always hitting your ♥♥♥♥ hiding behind that forest and hill while in wide open fields it's impossible most of the time to even give the command to shoot at the enimey. Those guys that every scenario outnumber you 4 to one. As realistic as the units are, the battles are the opposite, every one a simple WW1 style meatgrinder assualt against greater entrenched forces. The defences are a bit better yet for some reason the computer gets 4 to one ods again and you don't, go figure. It constantly talks of the advantage of flanking as it gives you scenario after scenario of the computer being already in flanking positions and the battlefield is always too narrow to flank the enimy, attmepting to run up the sides only gives the computer flank shots. The tutorials are ridicuously easy as the computer simply doesn't shoot back. Then the actual scenarios are as far as I can see impossible without some sort of modding etc. The last battle featured me on the assault with only a platoon and two PzII's against 6 antitank guns, and 3 artillery guns, an entrenched platoon, a platoon that rushes your flank as soon as you engage, a handful of what appeared to be bren gun carriers, and at least two heavy tanks. Tried it three times and every time my own tanks get knocked out within seconds of sighting the enimies line. Only an total ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ of a commander would ever commit forces to such an assualt. What ever happened to assaulting with supremacy? Isnt' that how almost every assault of the war was? Where is the realism in always fighting an enemy that always starts with many times more strength than you and can shoot through anythign while your not allowed to shoot at men 4 feet in front of you. Best unit simulation I've seen, great graphics, worst tactical stiuations presented in a war simulation ever, most unfair line of sight mechanics I've ever encountered. When the computer can shoot you and you cant shoot it something is wrong with the LOS, or by design the game is unfair because the computer isnt' playing by the same rules you are.

[shogomad]

For these exact reasons(Great post btw), if you have a little knowledge on tweaking game files you can have so much fun with these games,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xE8s5NopDg&t=7s
I play on the hardest setting, and even with lots more units you still have to think before you make a move. The Unit models are so cool looking in the later games, I love to just watch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HteDj5evqBo

[dugustus]

Thanks for the comment! :) Great Yubtubs!!!

[Mipateuhpateuhpateuh]

Honestly i never experienced it that way its just a freaking hard game but i completed ever campaign and every mission, to my knowledge you can control the path of your units 100% and there is no "cheating AI" except from the fact that you are usually outnumbered
I think many people are just not used to actually playing a hard game anymore where you need lots of practising to win... I mean there is nothing wrong with it but its not the games fault it´s just not your game to play then , btw i played all parts of ToW

[dugustus]

I'm very used to playing much harder and unforgiving games than this one, however those beat me fair and square and don't leave me knowing how much i was just cheated by the game because it was sooooo obvious. No other game I've ever encountered had the LOS problems to the rediculous and obvious levels that this game has. To watch an enemy unit single handedly run across a 1/4 mile field under fire from a dozen sources, continue onto an open road, cross that road and up an open incline right into the middle of an enimy position, all while apparently in clear marked los yet not be shot by any the 20 guys with multiple machine guns he's running towards, Then watch this superman be surrounded by an entire platoon, have NONE of the platoon shoot at him, not even be allowed to target him manually, as he single handedly kills every man of your platton, to watch this play out over and over again, battle after battle, be it men or tanks, leaves one with no other obsevation than something is definately f***d with this game. Equally obvious is that this is absolutely no reflection upon the skills of the player whom has no control over what the game decides is or is not valid line of sight. You can mouse over the target all you want but if it doesn't give you the arrow (say straight down that open road mentioned) you cannot shoot the target nor will your unit fire on it's own perfering I guess to offer flowers to the enemy standing in the open right in front of them. When 20 guns can't get a line on one guy in the open when there is absolutely nothing in the way that's messed up ♥♥♥♥♥. It certainly isn't even close to a 'realistic' simulation of combat nor is this blatant unfairness in los application simply a difficult game with nothing wrong with it.

Having a modicum of basic psychology accredation and a ton of life experience, I've never ever trusted someone whom starts a statement with "Honestly". It's been my experience of many decades of seeing and hearing bullshite artists start with that; that like many a noted author and accreditied psycholigist has likewise observed and noted, only a person whom is lying starts a statement with "honestly". I suppose your not aware that most if not all basic training for interrogation covers this exact situation. That somone under interrogation using words like Honestly is probably lying. A person whom is actually speaking honestly has no need for such euphemisms.

If anyone doubts this they need but note how President Trump frequently starts his lies with "Honestly..........".

A person whom is wise and learned knows that to use such an opening is to completely loose all credibility in whatever follows. That someone using such an opener is compulsed to do so because they often lie, particularily in whatever format they are 'speaking in'. In more basic parlayance, if they use it in community posts, then community posts is where they spread the most manure.


A psychologist can tell you that such language is a byproduct of the subconcious need to differentiate this particular statement being made from other instances when the person has simply lied without any concern for the perception of being honest. Futher, since they are not being honest, they have the need to express that they are speaking in the contest of speaking 'honestly' refering to an action rather than a state, speaking honestly is acting, being honest is a state of being that requires no stage set for it. Having established for themselves the belief that they are expert on thier knowledge of other people; unawoke to the psychology at hand and how numerous people are who know better, they; in a very Trumpian manner, believe that simply by saying they are speaking honestly that they will trick everyone into thinking they are being honest and the two are not the same.

In other words, usually someone starting a statement with Honestly, isn't just about to lie, they are about to ego trip as well. Breaking down the last post we see evidence this connection is valid. Starting with the euphamism we immediately proceed to the ego trip.

I'd even wager that anyone who's ever watched CSI or any other regular tv cop shows knows that anyone starting with 'Honestly" is probably not going to be.

To speak "honestly" is to ACT as though being honest and is often a sham intended to decieve. To be honest is to speak earnestly and someone whom speaks earnestly and is completely honest never needs attempt to persuade another about the validity of thier words.

I don't think your trolling my gaming skill has any validity. Really what makes you an expert about my gaming skill? Where in my post here do you see me complaining about anything other than the mechanics of the game and tactical considerations to it calling itself a military simulation? Where in this do attain knowledge about how good I am at playing a hard game? Beyond my limited use of Steam and a scan of my profile WTF do you know about what games I've played or how good I am at playing a hard game? Beyond this account WTF do you know about who I am? But you'll be the "honestly' judge of my gaming?

Check your ego dude, you have no clue what level of gamer I am, you have no clue about what games people other than yourself are 'used' to playing. It's a real Donald Trump who goes around crowing about themselves and putting other people down. No matter how "honestly" they say they are speaking.

Ok Mr. Trump we will all sit back in awe about your 50 hrs of gameplay with this game where you played every part and you could control your units more than the game allows you. Not to mention how great your amazing ability to judge my gaming skill and recommend that this perfectly flawless game is simply too tough for me is. I'm honestly amazed with how much insight about my gaming you must have. Thank you so much for enlighting me that I'm just not upto the challenge of this perfect game.

As far as my ability to play a hard game that you so blythly and ineptly troll. I've played and excelled at almost every military game on your account, found none of them to be as bad as this game is on these points, although most of them are admittedly lame pay to win games, and did not find any of them particularily challenging in regards to playing vs the AI or defeating the game. Judging by your list of games and my own success record with them I don't think you are any better at playing a hard game than I, in fact it's obvious you're not; as none of your list is what I would actually consider a truly hard game.

Thus in addition to your not having any right to be the judge of my gaming skill, you don't have the worth to do so. You haven't played anything I haven't. You're no better a judge or player in regards to hard games than I and you have no basis of fact whatsoever to make such claims. You don't know me, don't troll me.

To return focus to the game itself:

I don't consider this game hard, I consider it unfair and frustrating to enjoy due to it's player only application of LOS, how often I see an impossible to shoot enemy in the open mow down my guys who are behind cover is simply wrong and other have agreed with this here and in other threads, and it's supercharging of it's own units. There is a big difference between technical problems with a game and the game actually being tactically challenging.

This game uses all the lame AI tricks seen in a multitude of other games to simulate an AI without actually having one, it's all too obvious that this game is only following pre-planned moves for each senario, that there isn't any actual dynamics to the play at all. Like many other such games it makes up for it's lack of AI and lack of ability to think during the battle with pre-planned advantages that rely on the fact that the player and the AI are not playing by the same set of governing rules, most noticable in key areas like establishing a target.

Among the hundreds of different military simulation games I have played; this game is by and far the worst for lopsided play and the most frustrating for establishing los when it should be easy (clear ground to target for example), all to make up for a stupid AI that simply charges you without any concern for it's own cover (since it doesn't need to be concerned obviously). This games level of AI 'cheating" is simply too obvious to miss far too obvous for anyone to claim that there is nothing wrong with it, in face of multiple threads talking about everything wrong with it, and other posters already agreeing that the games has the faults I've been on about. Even if you allow that the LOS problems are a glitch, the superman units are an obvious AI cheat common to so many games.

It's not enough that the game forces you into a stupid situation of attacking entrenched forces of superior stregth and firepower, something no sane commander would doom his men to, the game then completely relies on obvoiusly lopsided LOS application and pre-programmed moves and fire effects. LOS rules are only for the player and do not apply to the game AI. The AI can shoot through forests, over hills, into trenches from lower elevation, and through walls, the player on the other hand is lucky if he can target something in the open accross bare and flat ground like a paved road. LOS fairness is the very basic fundimental of any game that involves two entities shooting at each other, and this game does not live upto the requirement of basic fairness to have playablity. I don't enjoy or respect games that you HAVE to mod just to play just for the game to be fair or function properly. My complaint is echoed on webpages and other discussions. Were this say call of duty applying the same f**d los we would have players being shot through walls, and unable to shoot enemies that are standing in an open roadway right in front of them, but someone would come along and say. "Honestly, there isn't any problems and I rock at this broken game so it must be you."

BTW you cannot control if the game gives you an LOS line; my key complaint (how often it will not give you that line on a target in the clear and yet it can fire from along the same LOS and hit units in cover), and no you can only issue orders to units and then they move according to the games programming, there is no direct movement control, no 100% control over units at all, even if you pause every momen, you can still only issue goto commands, you do not control how the goto is carried out except to issue more goto commands, as stupid as that is to have to do. Other than the goto command you have zero control not 100%. The game will dictate exactly how the unit gets there, usually picking the worst path, often immediately moving to expose itself unlike how the games own units move somehow always being in cover even on an open road.

It appears to me that your comments made have added nothing to this discussion save a very lame attempt to inflate your own ego with BS about your trouble free success with this game during your whole amazing 50 hours of play and to attempt to troll me as a somehow inferior player, who can't handle a tough game even though this isn't one.
Sadly, most such Trolls I've encountered have to rely on mods and cheats just to hold thier own in the games they play, or are actually only expert at using visa sticking to hours of pay to win games.
Then they use worlds like "honestly" as they claim to have amazing skills and troll other players, when we all know just how honest such statement from such trolls are.
Most of your games I note are freemium pay to win games like the one your currently playing, IMO perhaps we've learned more about your gaming skill in this conversation than mine that you've decided to troll.

Lets see... For being such a judge of other people not being able to play hard games, you don't play hard games much yourself do you? You primarily play pay to win freemium games, the vast bulk of your hours are not spent playing anything tactically challenging at all, just pay to win pvp bash ups, freemium games won by visa not skill. So who are you to judge me whom due to my limited use of steam you know nothing about except that I don't do much gaming on steam. I'm curious who made you the judge of anyone else's gaming skill just because you spend hundreds of hours playing easy tactically unchallenging pay to win games.

Honestly, only people who pay to win play pay to win games for hundreds of hours they don't make great authorites about other peoples gaming skills, usually wihtout the visa they can't play a hard game at all. So they play games you can only win by buying the sniper rifle and armor plating or the jet plane to shoot down the bi-planes of the noobs with, then they can judge other peoples ability to play a hard game because thier visa made them such a great player.

[dugustus]

If the only way to improve my experience with this sad broken game is to put up with trolls claiming the game is flawless, I'm now certain I won't be playing it anymore in the future. I"m thankfulll it was super cheap, and regretfull that I bought all the "parts" as I'm not even going to bother opening any of the add ons even though I bought them all expecting a game that 'plays fair', and I think it's too late for buyers remorse on them. I think I picked the perfect title for this thread, trollings aside. The game sucks buyer beware and apparently don't complain or you'll be trolled, the only thing that gets a passing grade is the graphics and that's not worth spending an hour more on let alone 50 or more. The only way to make it playable appears to be mod the ♥♥♥♥ out of it and that's sad and proves that it was a waist of my time to begin with.

At least Shagomad had a worthwhile contribution, that I was thankfull for, perhaps this convo could have gone somewhere, too bad OG can't just delete the trollings.
I had returned to this convo to see if anyone else had posted anything helpful or worth the read, like a mod to fix the faulty LOS, but nope just a troll proving that it was pointless to start this thread save to warn off any other potential buyers of the game as to how much it sucks.

Thats right, the only take away from all this is this.. don't bother with this game it's seriously flawed in many ways. Take heed of all the other threads condemning this game.

So on that note, to the non-trolls please don't bother trying to post any more help for me with this game, as much as I appreciate the actually helpfull post I'm done with this garbage bin game.
If I could close this thread I would.
I've made my points about it to warn any other potential buyer to avoid it, especially if they are seeking a hard and fair tactical game. I'm done with the pay to play expert trolling my gaming ability, and I'm done with this conversation.

[dugustus]

<------ Hits the Unsub button

[Lich]

tl;dr get good or go back to company of heros

[Letarsier]

Well, even if Shogomag's vids are great, and they are, he did not explain HOW to tweak the game's files, which is a bit disappointing, imo

[shogomad]

Originally posted by Letarsier:

Well, even if Shogomag's vids are great, and they are, he did not explain HOW to tweak the game's files, which is a bit disappointing, imo

Hi, I have some "How-to" vids but I keep them unlisted. Send me a PM on my Youtube channel and I'd be happy to help you any way I can. My tweaks involve changing the game files(copy/paste) and can be time consuming. If done right you can get hours of game play. All the ToW games can be tweaked. The hardest is ToW3 Korea.
https://youtu.be/wCr20wQtTCU

[dark_horse_spirit]

I've never experienced this game the way that you have, That being said when I want a challenge I usually come back to this one. It is by far one of the hardest ww2 games to play. I think it is best enjoyed in multi. But have only ever played a multi twice, and it was fun. you should try creating a server and loading the enemy with bots. As far as realism goes, vehicle speeds are accurate, If yo want fast games where the vehicles take off like sports cars and can't hit a target at 100m you want COH or WG series. At least Eugene games have the slower speeds button,TOW series is good with Tunisia 43. My only complaint about this game is the crappy infantry animations. They look like they are running in high heels..lol

[jcmiller101]

I put more than 100 hours into this game. You have to enjoy micro'ing, but the detail & exactness of the modelling is really good.
On playing thru the German campiagn I had a memorable moment that showed me just how exact the engine was.
I had deployed (& saved!) prior to a Russian armored onslaught. I watched the lynchpin Pz.IV get killed & the whole plan went up it smoke. Lost pretty much everything.

I then reloaded my save & moved teh pz IV back 2m, thinking that that could just give him first shot at the leading T34.
I was amazed to see the Russian assault broken by the one simple adjustment.

Lot of fun to be had if you like wargaming & lots of micro'ing - I guess they tried to copy table-top games style.

[Brother PaciFist]

I do not get it. The game is not tactical at all.

First german mission i get destroyed by the polish Anti tank guns. All tanks just get shot to pieces in seconds on easy, when they enter the map. The same missions as poland the anti tank guns get destroyed in seconds by the german tanks. Enemy AI gunner have pinpoint accuracy, while player units do not hit anything. There is no tactics involved at all.

German campaign France mission 1 Get slaughtered by anti tank guns. Nothing i can do about it. Anti tank guns have excellent field of fire and just kill everything.

Infantrry gets slaughtered in open fields and are completely useless. Infantry ducks into cover und can not be shot until you get into point blank range. Infantry in trenches is completely untouchable while ducking in cover but keeps popping up their heads. Again no tactic involved, hope that your tanks can destroy the anti tank guns and drive close to the trenches, just wait until every enemy is destroyed eventually. Infantry attacks are somehow pointless. Combined attacks useless. Your guys get shot to pieces. Own infantry does not attack, they try to get into point blank ranges to make bayonette charges it seems.

American mission 1 normandy. Infantry behaves like incompetents. They walk into 5 m range of enemies to shoot them. Enemy infantry storms in mass around corners to be slaughtered by infantry waiting there, at the church. Bazooka troops walk casually in front of tanks or here recon vehicles and cant hit them. The best part is that they change their weapons from bazooka to small arms when i order them to attack.

The game feels like completely pointless. AI makes the game unfun and impossible to play. It is more like a benny hill simulator then everything else. It is fun to spectate your moronic troops playing war for a while. But then. For a supposedley war simulator the game is a bad joke. Íf the goal of the game is to point out the utter uselessness of war, then it is very well done.

Bad perhaps i am doing it completely wrong.

Thanks for reading have a nice day.

[Fernan]

I agree completely- The campaign missions are ridiculous "♥♥♥♥♥♥ troops simulator" of your forces, meanwhile AI troops are "super captain america" soldiers. If you play Germany, your tanks are ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ made from paper and the enemy AT guns are directed by computer systems with extreme accuracy. BUT if you play Poland your AT guns are manned by blind old-nanny soldiers, and AI tanks seem to be not PzKW I but Abrams MBT...

Oh and some great. Reading about it on forums searching for solutions the recommended one is: "TRY OTHER CAMPAING".... IS THIS THE BEST OPTION??? TRY ANOTHER??? NOT BETTER TRY ANOTHER GAME???? ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥. And afterwards a "smart guy" adds "I finished it on one hour"... HOW DID YOU IT LIAR BASTARD SCAMMER CHEATER???

Btw I'm very interested in how to modify game campaign files. Where can I find about it?

[pierre]

i have to confess the first polish misson is well not to hard if you just use 75mm guns and ues the hill at a big shield the second polish mission is jush had as balls had to do it a few times and lose half of my army to get to mission 3 from there it was just let all of your men die so that you can hold the point and yes its just unbalenced as ♥♥♥♥ i find it funny that french captured 75mm mod 1897s feild guns can penn and kill a t34 from 700m away i dont get that at all

[Mr Noseybonk]

I have to agree and disagree here. I used the mission generator to set up a test a 1 v 1 standard infantry squad duel. Both on "regular" skill. Both in the same field (so therefore the same terrain), both about 100m distance from each other.

On easy difficulty my squad won easily every time, scoring 10 vs 2 losses at the worst.
On hard difficulty my squal lost everytime, only scoring around 5 enemy against all 10 lost.
But medium was the worst..... that was a total loss scoring 3 enemy down, against all 10!

So it looks like easy is too easy, and the other two levels are just stupidly unfair - with no happy ground inbetween! It appears this "super computer accuracy" is prevalent when on medium or hard. On easy, it is not so.

On each test I tried to make sure I set my squad in the same prone stance and give the same "assault area" command to keep things as standardised as possible.

I also tried one with 4 x 7TP tanks vs one Matilda MkII. In this I also tested dugustus's theory that the enemy AI can shoot through hills, by placing the tanks within 250m of each other, but with a whacking great hill between them. The enemy AI did not spot nor attempt to shoot my Matilda through the hill. But when I drove around the hill, into their clear LOS they did begin to fire.
However the Matilda's front 78mm armour was penned all too easily from 200mm by the 7TP's 37mm Bofor 36 guns. These should have a maximum of 60mm pen point blank, at 200m it should be about 45 - 50mm penetration. The Matilda's 78mm should be immune. Yet one of the crew was still killed by a penetrating hit and the other three crew wounded. They then proceeded to be "panicked" and would do nothing but back away from the 7TPs. Of course this may be damage caused by internal spalling that even a non-penetrating hit can cause. Hence modern tanks having kevlar spall liners on the inside!
If so, this game is modelling vehicle hits quite realisticaly..... but my jury has yet to come to a verdict on that!
I have not yet tested the same thing using 3D objects (buildings, trees etc) to see if they work, as they should, as obstacles to LOS and fire - but dugustus was, despite his huge essays, wrong about the actual ground terrain being transparent. And as for this rabid pyschology lecture about the word "honestly" and his obviously militant Guardianista leftism, don't get me started mate. All brain and behaviour science is utter ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ in my opinion! But I will agree with him that the game is a disappointment. I was expecting better for a 2007 game. Especially in the graphics, they use the same scenery engine IL2 Sturmovik has had since 2000, yet seem WORSE even that the first IL2 releases - and the game's pace is slow and rather dull, though that's not a major issue with games of this type - I can live with it.

I also agree with fernav2008, when it comes to your troops, it IS a "♥♥♥♥♥♥ troops simulator". REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEETAAAAAARD even!