Noob?! No way - Game mechanics misunderstanding?

[Tank Girl]

I don't even..

I've never seen anyone give such an outrageous blanket statement before, saying that Conquest players don't have to control their tanks.

It's almost like you want people to hate on your posts by saying "play nothing but 12.SS" and "don't play Conquest". It's mind-boggling..

Haha,
yeah, well. After years of Wargame I had my own experience.

And I didn't write that conquest players cant control their tanks, I just said they dont have to learn it necessarily. Other things are just more important in that mode, at least from my experience.

But twisting words is the real best discipline of the conquest crowd, so

 

[FatRefrigerator]

Haha,
yeah, well. After years of Wargame I had my own experience.

And I didn't write that conquest players cant control their tanks, I just said they dont have to learn it necessarily. Other things are just more important in that mode, at least from my experience.

But twisting words is the real best discipline of the conquest crowd, so

Have you played SD yet? It's got this really neat frontline mechanic very much unlike Wargame's conquest control zones. You move your tanks up with your infantry and try to push the enemy back. Instead of having a sitzkreig and just arty'ing away for lucky points in destruction. You should give the game a try!

 

[LKHERO]

Haha,
yeah, well. After years of Wargame I had my own experience.

And I didn't write that conquest players cant control their tanks, I just said they dont have to learn it necessarily. Other things are just more important in that mode, at least from my experience.

But twisting words is the real best discipline of the conquest crowd, so

I don't see how people are twisting your own words at all.

"Play 12th SS only.
Dont play Conquest like ever."
--you

"..you need to be able to control your tanks efficiently.
Something especially conquest players just dont have to do, since tanks do not decide those games (or at least very rarely)."
--you

You really need to stop labeling people, really. You're literally digging yourself into a virtual hole where no one will ever take you seriously.

 

[safe-keeper]

The Wargame/steel Division franchise is very different from classic strategy games. They're brutally unforgiving, and they require completely different skills (except maybe being able to achieve thousands of clicks per minute, as they can become ridiculously hectic ). Even having played other tactical games such as World in Conflict doesn't neccessarily help much.

Don't have any advice that hasn't been said yet, but watching Stealth17's videos on YouTube helped me a lot, so that's my main suggestion. Oh, and yes, watching replays can teach you a lot.


Slightly off-topic: as a newbie who's "only" played 40-ish hours of European Escalation and Red Dragon, why do so many of you seem to dislike Destruction so much?

 

[FatRefrigerator]

The Wargame/steel Division franchise is very different from classic strategy games. They're brutally unforgiving, and they require completely different skills. Even having played other tactical games such as World in Conflict doesn't neccessarily help much.

Don't have any advice that hasn't been said yet, but watching Stealth17's videos on YouTube helped me a lot, so that's my main suggestion. Oh, and yes, watching replays can teach you a lot.


Slightly off-topic: as a newbie who's "only" played 40-ish hours of European Escalation and Red Dragon, why do so many of you seem to dislike Destruction so much?

As a 1000+ hour Wargame: RD player, the problem with destruction was that with precision artillery and bombing and ATGMs it was much easier to simply throw up a defense and sitzkreig and slowly get points by sniping expensive units and not actually taking territory. In fact an unfortunate number of games ended with the team holding less ground actually winning simply because they managed to kill more point value of units than the other team.

 

[LKHERO]

The Wargame/steel Division franchise is very different from classic strategy games. They're brutally unforgiving, and they require completely different skills (except maybe being able to achieve thousands of clicks per minute, as they can become ridiculously hectic ). Even having played other tactical games such as World in Conflict doesn't neccessarily help much.

Don't have any advice that hasn't been said yet, but watching Stealth17's videos on YouTube helped me a lot, so that's my main suggestion. Oh, and yes, watching replays can teach you a lot.


Slightly off-topic: as a newbie who's "only" played 40-ish hours of European Escalation and Red Dragon, why do so many of you seem to dislike Destruction so much?

Let me try and answer this, to why people despise Destruction:
> It greatly promotes passive, defensive play.
> There is simply no objective other than destroying units for arbitrary points, making each victory feel Pyrrhic because there are no goals.
> This is all people had in previous titles until Eugen added Conquest late-ALB. RD was the first title that shipped with Conquest.

So when you factor in the history of Wargame players being subjected to grindy, passive gameplay, with no other game modes to encourage aggressive action, a lot of veteran Wargame players shun the thought of Destruction.

 

[FatRefrigerator]

Let me try and answer this, to why people despise Destruction:
> It greatly promotes passive, defensive play.
> There is simply no objective other than destroying units for arbitrary points, making each victory feel Pyrrhic because there are no goals.
> This is all people had in previous titles until Eugen added Conquest late-ALB. RD was the first title that shipped with Conquest.

So when you factor in the history of Wargame players being subjected to grindy, passive gameplay, with no other game modes to encourage aggressive action, a lot of veteran Wargame players shun the thought of Destruction.

And then Red Dragon also had the weird in-bred basket case that was Economy mode

 

[safe-keeper]

As a 1000+ hour Wargame: RD player, the problem with destruction was that with precision artillery and bombing and ATGMs it was much easier to simply throw up a defense and sitzkreig and slowly get points by sniping expensive units and not actually taking territory. In fact an unfortunate number of games ended with the team holding less ground actually winning simply because they managed to kill more point value of units than the other team.

Let me try and answer this, to why people despise Destruction:
> It greatly promotes passive, defensive play.
> There is simply no objective other than destroying units for arbitrary points, making each victory feel Pyrrhic because there are no goals.
> This is all people had in previous titles until Eugen added Conquest late-ALB. RD was the first title that shipped with Conquest.

So when you factor in the history of Wargame players being subjected to grindy, passive gameplay, with no other game modes to encourage aggressive action, a lot of veteran Wargame players shun the thought of Destruction.

Thanks for your replies, both of you . I'm an old-time PDX player, but new to WG, so I feel like a fish out of water in most of the discussions here .

 

[Tank Girl]

Slightly off-topic: as a newbie who's "only" played 40-ish hours of European Escalation and Red Dragon, why do so many of you seem to dislike Destruction so much?

Two worlds simply.

There is the conquest 1vs1 crowd that gets all the support from EUGEN. Toxic at best, I find no other words for those guys. They are labelling themselves already, no need for me to do it really.

Conquest Team games (3vs3/4vs4):
more enjoyable, nice people there, too. But very tense games and somehow they never seem to be really decided once they are over. I played that for a while and also successful, but it never was my favourite mode because it didnt really feel like war.
in 10vs10 conquest just does not work really.

Timed Destruction:
The abyss of wargame and most certainly even worse than 1vs1 conquest.
Usually pubstompers with Atacms just waiting for some fools to step into the trap.
30-40 mins to achieve a certain amount of points.
The games resort to arty camping and a lot of plane spam, while the ground battle evolves into the "sitzkrieg".

10vs10 Destruction:
People who just like to have a good brawl. Usually people who like to fullfill certain roles like artillery, air support or frontline brawler.
Very dense battles with a lot of fighting going on nonstop. Really fun for teams and the only mode where even the "losing" side can have real fun by making the winners bleed dearly.
Sadly, due to the bad design of maps and the too big 10vs10 maps, this mode is now only possible on 4vs4 mapsize really.

The rest is just minor modes, like Total Destruction/No Time Limit, my prefered mode because it rewards resource oriented play and punishes spammers.

As for your question:
People dislike destruction primarily because of "Timed Destruction" or because they consider themselves to be an eSports Elite (toxic etc.)

EDIT: as if it was a claim for the legitimacy of posts: I have a combined 4000 hours in 3 Wargame titles lol (and still a life, surprise!)

 

[FatRefrigerator]

Thanks for your replies, both of you . I'm an old-time PDX player, but new to WG, so I feel like a fish out of water in most of the discussions here .

Don't sweat it. If we're lucky SD will end up being a fun WW2 alternative to Wargame with mechanics and tactics that suit the time period.

 

[FatRefrigerator]

There is the conquest 1vs1 crowd that gets all the support from EUGEN. Toxic at best, I find no other words for those guys. They are labelling themselves already, no need for me to do it really.

I must say I have to agree with you here. The ranked 1v1 players (looking at you Razzman and Co.) that think the game should have perfect mirror balance and no flavor have way too much influence on what Eugen does.

 

[Steeperman]

Two worlds simply.

There is the conquest 1vs1 crowd that gets all the support from EUGEN. Toxic at best, I find no other words for those guys. They are labelling themselves already, no need for me to do it really.

Conquest Team games (3vs3/4vs4):
more enjoyable, nice people there, too. But very tense games and somehow they never seem to be really decided once they are over. I played that for a while and also successful, but it never was my favourite mode because it didnt really feel like war.
in 10vs10 conquest just does not work really.

Timed Destruction:
The abyss of wargame and most certainly even worse than 1vs1 conquest.
Usually pubstompers with Atacms just waiting for some fools to step into the trap.
30-40 mins to achieve a certain amount of points.
The games resort to arty camping and a lot of plane spam, while the ground battle evolves into the "sitzkrieg".

10vs10 Destruction:
People who just like to have a good brawl. Usually people who like to fullfill certain roles like artillery, air support or frontline brawler.
Very dense battles with a lot of fighting going on nonstop. Really fun for teams and the only mode where even the "losing" side can have real fun by making the winners bleed dearly.
Sadly, due to the bad design of maps and the too big 10vs10 maps, this mode is now only possible on 4vs4 mapsize really.

The rest is just minor modes, like Total Destruction/No Time Limit, my prefered mode because it rewards resource oriented play and punishes spammers.

As for your question:
People dislike destruction primarily because of "Timed Destruction" or because they consider themselves to be an eSports Elite (toxic etc.)

EDIT: as if it was a claim for the legitimacy of posts: I have a combined 4000 hours in 3 Wargame titles lol (and still a life, surprise!)

I think, destruction game mode simply doesn't fit the gameplay mechanics of SD well. In the conquest mode, you have to attack, to gain more Control of area beehind your frontline. In destruction, you only get a slight Point Advantage, by having more ground, but other than that it only encourages, to build a massive defensive line and as the 12th SS buy as much Panthers, as you can get and try to sneak on Shermans.

I am one of thoise 4v4 Players by the way, and i think, that conquest is simply the better game mode in SD.

 

[LKHERO]

I must say I have to agree with you here. The ranked 1v1 players (looking at you Razzman and Co.) that think the game should have perfect mirror balance and no flavor have way too much influence on what Eugen does.

I can hint confidently in the direction that for SD44 at least, this will not be the case

 

[DuroSVK]

Dont listen to Duro either, all he says is only viable when you do like 1000 clicks per minute (which suggests you might better try starcraft lol).

Ofc you can play any division you like, but if you want to be active in the game and take initiative (which is important in both defense and offense) you need to be able to control your tanks efficiently.
Something especially conquest players just dont have to do, since tanks do not decide those games (or at least very rarely).

In conquest, just listen to what the other people say but be prepared to be dissapointed by Steel Divsion then

I never said you need to do 1000 clicks per minute, you are lying. If not, just quote me you lying bitch
I wonder where you get the idea that tanks dont decide conquest games.... this is utterly stupid (like you and everything you posted on this forums yet so far ;-) )
Why are you talking about conquest when you dont play it and you clearly have no idea how to play it.
I advise you to learn and understand first the thing you are refereing to, only then talk about it ;-)

 

[safe-keeper]

I must say I have to agree with you here. The ranked 1v1 players (looking at you Razzman and Co.) that think the game should have perfect mirror balance and no flavor have way too much influence on what Eugen does.

Ugh, no. That was one of the things I disliked about World in Conflict, two mirror teams (NATO and Warsaw) with the same units and a nearly complete lack of flavour. If you're going to have only two sides, make them distinct. Generic units are for games like Age of Empires with a dozen nations or more.

Thought of course, Red Dragon has lots of nations and still lots of flavour, which I like about that game even though it may have slightly too many units, an issue it shares with the Dominions series of 4X games .

 

[Tank Girl]

I think, destruction game mode simply doesn't fit the gameplay mechanics of SD well. In the conquest mode, you have to attack, to gain more Control of area beehind your frontline. In destruction, you only get a slight Point Advantage, by having more ground, but other than that it only encourages, to build a massive defensive line and as the 12th SS buy as much Panthers, as you can get and try to sneak on Shermans.

I am one of thoise 4v4 Players by the way, and i think, that conquest is simply the better game mode in SD.

I am always attacking, no matter the game mode. Its just in Destruction if find it more rewarding, because I have to hunt down my prey.
In Conquest the incentive to attack further after initial gains just vanishes and often I just risk my victory when I keep pushing. And since I hate NOT pushing...

And then usually the enemy just pushes where I am not, so I am busy running here and there, while the actual fighting is happening a lot less often...
Destruction, especially 10vs10, is just way better there and 10vs10 on 4vs4 maps is my absolute favourite at the moment.

As for Conquest and Steel Divsion:
I disagree: Destruction fits the gameplay same as good. Its just most players think that spamming artillery and plane is enough or that they dont have to do anything else but setting up a good stationary defense.
I like those players, they are the easiest prey in destruction...

SK18? let them troll with them, I keep moving anyway.

 

[Alpha2518]

Hello all,

Any help would be tremendously helpful.

I am finding this game EXTREMELY frustrating. When it comes to strategy games, I take to them like a duck in water. However with that said, I am STILL (after 10+ games) unable to beat the game 1v1 on medium difficulty.

I am being outclassed in speed deployment, 1v1 fights between similar units, and blitzkrieged by allied forces on foot.

The last game I played, I had a better tank (more armor, bigger gun, long sight/shot) go up against a lighter tank, sneaking up to it's left flank while it was looking the other way. I clicked for it to attack and when it did the enemy tank turned around instantly and fired a shot to kill my tank before my crew finished "aiming". This is tremendously frustrating and extremely unrealistic IMO.

I am using scouting parties to sit in great vantage points to look for enemy units, but they never find anything until the enemy is right on them (which the computer always knows exactly where to find them). In the previous game I had a tank walk straight up to the most remote and random place where I was hiding a unit deep in the forest and it moved in and annihilated them. No scouts, no infantry, nothing just knew exactly where to find them and kill them.

SUPER SUPER SUPER frustrating. Any help or resources I can view to learn would be much appreciated. Also I understand knowledge of units is important in this game, so any resource that shows strengths/weaknesses would also be appreciated.

Thank you in advance.

What division are you using? And can you export your deck to us so we can see what you have. We might be able to help you build a better deck. Also I would suggest two other actions. Watch replays or try a lower difficulty. Or both. Also do note the game isn't balanced on a 1 v 1. But you should be able to still win on a 1 v 1.

 

[Elder Forest]

Patgarret77 said
taking on medium AI using 12ss or luftlande is way more difficult than using, for example, the Scots.

very much so

 

[DuroSVK]

I am always attacking, no matter the game mode. Its just in Destruction if find it more rewarding, because I have to hunt down my prey.
In Conquest the incentive to attack further after initial gains just vanishes and often I just risk my victory when I keep pushing. And since I hate NOT pushing...

And then usually the enemy just pushes where I am not, so I am busy running here and there, while the actual fighting is happening a lot less often...
Destruction, especially 10vs10, is just way better there and 10vs10 on 4vs4 maps is my absolute favourite at the moment.

As for Conquest and Steel Divsion:
I disagree: Destruction fits the gameplay same as good. Its just most players think that spamming artillery and plane is enough or that they dont have to do anything else but setting up a good stationary defense.
I like those players, they are the easiest prey in destruction...

SK18? let them troll with them, I keep moving anyway.

So you are just playing the clown games, case solved

 

[Fussel]

I got to applaud Tank Girl for keeping me uncertain if he is a troll or being dead serious.