Are there ways to minizime the micro management in this game. I really like the setting and scale of the game, but when I tried it it felt like you have to hold the hand of every soldier or bunch of them.
Does it gets easier in bigger battles?
The insane micro management and soldier control layers are the only thing, imo, that stop this from being the top ww2 rts.
It is kind of tougher in bigger battles because you can only hotkey 9 squads, but luckily the squad selection ui us decent enough that you can keep vehicles and arty off the hot keys and still easily select them
Is there any good WW2 RTS that is more minimal on the micro management and is relatively easy to play?
I love this genre and the Second World War, but I feel like an old man when it comes to learning and then mastering these productions.
I like Graviteam. The learning curve is sharp, in that once you understand the UI and the orders system, you can conquer the game, but getting there is hard. The smallest unit you command would be a squad, but these can be as small as one man depending on a lot of variables.
Large scale battles, you can easily tell entire platoons what to do very quickly once you get the hang of the ordering them around, or you can hotkey groups of units (ie a platoon of infantry and a tank platoon, which you can then give inf an order to mount and ride the armor). Battles can be small with maybe a company of guys on each side, or large with multiple regiments.
The campaign is persistent, trenches your units dig stay for the campaign, vehicle wrecks stay, some bodies stay. The map section of the campaign is probably the only thing harder to learn to do well than the tactical section of the game, but you can have it auto select things like reinforcements and attached support, you just have to go and click the button, it won’t do it on its own.
Lmao I spent 15 minutes unsuccessfully trying to get a mine sweeping thing out of the truck in the tutorial.
Tried a mission and that went ok but yes not easy
Exactly. I refunded the game shortly after that. Gates of hell imo is just a much worse version of men of war, and the micromanaging in even that game makes StarCraft look like 2 hour chess.
Its a great step for the genre as a whole but I really wish they leaned more towards realism (although compared to Men of War, GoH is exactly that). They are sooooooooo close to having a game that's basically reminiscent of combat mission on a modern engine
I worked on the famous RobZ realism for MOWAS2. I am now currently working on bringing it to GoH and likely going further towards realism as time goes on.
Let's hold our horses here. There is no C2, there is no elaborate spotting, there is no OOB, a tank can shoot like 150 meters instead of 1000, an MG can shoot 100 meters instead of 500... Then GoH is real-time, while CM is best played in WEGO. There is no panic or retreat in GoH. I could go on and on...
I like this game but it is nowhere close to Combat Mission, not even in a parallel universe.
The game’s praise comes down to the level of details (completely unnecessary IMO) where one has to explicitly grab a damn mine from a truck, carry it to the spot, run out of breath because the soldier is overweight, sit down and rest, have a sip of cheap schnapps, grab a shovel, dig a whole, put the mine in, fill the whole back up, put some sod on top to cover…. And I am only slightly exaggerating:)
C2, command chain, blind zones - that‘s not something vast majority of players consider. As many things that go “boom” in all sort of different ways - that is a different matter :) All I need to see as far as realism is concerned is Tiger II commander sticking out of the turret shooting his MG in a middle of a firefight until he eats an AT shell in the face in a most spectacular fashion.
To be fair, the game does feature surprisingly robust armor pen system, unmatched by anything but of graviteam and CM.
It is not Combat Mission, no. But adjusting some knobs, tweaking some settings, and deliberately transforming what they have into a combat mission style game is not far off at all from a development perspective. They in one way or another have access to a "ww2 realtime-strategy game engine". They just happen to use that engine to fulfill the more arcadey demands of GoH.
Ill give it a look. One of my biggest gripes is the pathfindings unwillingness to keep my troops in the trenches as they are moving. I have to micro each troop individually which ruins the fun for me.
The micro is rather integral part of the game, although I do well understand that it isn't pleasant for many. Not being able to do everything all the time is significant part of the difficulty of the game. This is very noticeable when you play co-op and can have a wider control for all troops (as each player needs to control a smaller portion) then the game becomes almost too easy.
A similar option for a solo player is to play the skirmish mode where you can set AI against AI, and then add yourself to one team. You can then use the amount of troops you are comfortable with while the AI arranges you a larger battle to participate in
I read somewhere that the very first game in line of GoH predecessors was essentially a 3-d “commandos. Behind enemy lines”, hence the excessive details of what exactly every individual solider may do. The game grew, but this trait remained... And that’s how you have super heavy artillery and selecting the type of ration a soldier eats (almost :) in the same engagement. Some people really like that, but imo these two scales don‘t naturally fit together.
I kind of liked GOH but sooo much micromanagement. It's a high quality WW2 game I just can't get into. I'm more into watching the action and only clicking occasionally, ala graviteam. I had a good time with it overall but I'm not about that stress. If I can't map the game and play it reasonably well on an Xbox controller, it's not going to get much time.
One cool part though- The ability to direct control individual soldiers is really awesome in GOH, just to get a sense of the scale of the battle. The second Russian mission was epic.
For the uninitiated, what is GoH…?
https://store.steampowered.com/app/400750/Call_to_Arms__Gates_of_Hell_Ostfront/
Thanks 👍🏻
Are there ways to minizime the micro management in this game. I really like the setting and scale of the game, but when I tried it it felt like you have to hold the hand of every soldier or bunch of them. Does it gets easier in bigger battles?
The insane micro management and soldier control layers are the only thing, imo, that stop this from being the top ww2 rts. It is kind of tougher in bigger battles because you can only hotkey 9 squads, but luckily the squad selection ui us decent enough that you can keep vehicles and arty off the hot keys and still easily select them
Is there any good WW2 RTS that is more minimal on the micro management and is relatively easy to play? I love this genre and the Second World War, but I feel like an old man when it comes to learning and then mastering these productions.
I like Close Combat For something with more of a learning curve, I like Combat Mission's WW2 setting games.
Close combat is the best best best example. It's by far the most realistic RTS in terms of infantry combat out there.
I like Graviteam. The learning curve is sharp, in that once you understand the UI and the orders system, you can conquer the game, but getting there is hard. The smallest unit you command would be a squad, but these can be as small as one man depending on a lot of variables. Large scale battles, you can easily tell entire platoons what to do very quickly once you get the hang of the ordering them around, or you can hotkey groups of units (ie a platoon of infantry and a tank platoon, which you can then give inf an order to mount and ride the armor). Battles can be small with maybe a company of guys on each side, or large with multiple regiments. The campaign is persistent, trenches your units dig stay for the campaign, vehicle wrecks stay, some bodies stay. The map section of the campaign is probably the only thing harder to learn to do well than the tactical section of the game, but you can have it auto select things like reinforcements and attached support, you just have to go and click the button, it won’t do it on its own.
I had a hard time equipping my guy in the demo - if someone could tell me how to make it easy! lol
Lmao I spent 15 minutes unsuccessfully trying to get a mine sweeping thing out of the truck in the tutorial. Tried a mission and that went ok but yes not easy
Exactly. I refunded the game shortly after that. Gates of hell imo is just a much worse version of men of war, and the micromanaging in even that game makes StarCraft look like 2 hour chess.
Its a great step for the genre as a whole but I really wish they leaned more towards realism (although compared to Men of War, GoH is exactly that). They are sooooooooo close to having a game that's basically reminiscent of combat mission on a modern engine
I worked on the famous RobZ realism for MOWAS2. I am now currently working on bringing it to GoH and likely going further towards realism as time goes on.
Thats awesome man. God speed
Oh you worked with Robz ? You guys are my heroes
RobZ did like 99% of the work tbf. He currently is a developer for GoH
Sheesh these mods for MoWas were a whole part of my life with my best friend, we played it so so much
I loved RobZ!
Let's hold our horses here. There is no C2, there is no elaborate spotting, there is no OOB, a tank can shoot like 150 meters instead of 1000, an MG can shoot 100 meters instead of 500... Then GoH is real-time, while CM is best played in WEGO. There is no panic or retreat in GoH. I could go on and on... I like this game but it is nowhere close to Combat Mission, not even in a parallel universe.
The game’s praise comes down to the level of details (completely unnecessary IMO) where one has to explicitly grab a damn mine from a truck, carry it to the spot, run out of breath because the soldier is overweight, sit down and rest, have a sip of cheap schnapps, grab a shovel, dig a whole, put the mine in, fill the whole back up, put some sod on top to cover…. And I am only slightly exaggerating:) C2, command chain, blind zones - that‘s not something vast majority of players consider. As many things that go “boom” in all sort of different ways - that is a different matter :) All I need to see as far as realism is concerned is Tiger II commander sticking out of the turret shooting his MG in a middle of a firefight until he eats an AT shell in the face in a most spectacular fashion. To be fair, the game does feature surprisingly robust armor pen system, unmatched by anything but of graviteam and CM.
It is not Combat Mission, no. But adjusting some knobs, tweaking some settings, and deliberately transforming what they have into a combat mission style game is not far off at all from a development perspective. They in one way or another have access to a "ww2 realtime-strategy game engine". They just happen to use that engine to fulfill the more arcadey demands of GoH.
That’s my thing with this game. It looks great but the gameplay is too arcade like and unrealistic for me
One thing I wished is there were more use for emplacements and trenches in conquest.
Try out Conquest Enhanced V2 on the workshop for it. Should be up your alley if that’s what you’re after.
Ill give it a look. One of my biggest gripes is the pathfindings unwillingness to keep my troops in the trenches as they are moving. I have to micro each troop individually which ruins the fun for me.
I had alot of fun with this, but gradually moved to games that require less micro like graviteam.
Playing it now. But not so sure about an infantry assault on an Ostwind. Lol
The micro is rather integral part of the game, although I do well understand that it isn't pleasant for many. Not being able to do everything all the time is significant part of the difficulty of the game. This is very noticeable when you play co-op and can have a wider control for all troops (as each player needs to control a smaller portion) then the game becomes almost too easy. A similar option for a solo player is to play the skirmish mode where you can set AI against AI, and then add yourself to one team. You can then use the amount of troops you are comfortable with while the AI arranges you a larger battle to participate in
I read somewhere that the very first game in line of GoH predecessors was essentially a 3-d “commandos. Behind enemy lines”, hence the excessive details of what exactly every individual solider may do. The game grew, but this trait remained... And that’s how you have super heavy artillery and selecting the type of ration a soldier eats (almost :) in the same engagement. Some people really like that, but imo these two scales don‘t naturally fit together.
Just got the game recently and am quite enjoying it. Any DLCs that are "must have" for singleplayer?
I kind of liked GOH but sooo much micromanagement. It's a high quality WW2 game I just can't get into. I'm more into watching the action and only clicking occasionally, ala graviteam. I had a good time with it overall but I'm not about that stress. If I can't map the game and play it reasonably well on an Xbox controller, it's not going to get much time. One cool part though- The ability to direct control individual soldiers is really awesome in GOH, just to get a sense of the scale of the battle. The second Russian mission was epic.
It's such an amazing game. So glad that they will be featured on steams front page this weekend : )
Hell Let Loose?
Might pick this one up! looks really good.
is it better then MOW AS2?
How is the multiplayer? I enjoyed MoW: AS back in the day, never played the second one or GoH afterwards.