So who has majority say on Steel Division? Eugen or Paradox

[Stevenside]

Why i'm asking this is because i'd like to know who to ask questions related to the game development.

I've read at the article that this game will let you choose between many different divisions that existed in real life. There's plenty of issues around this kind of choice and i'd like to simplify my reasonings below as following:

1. DLC hell. There wont be a single piece of FLC for the community, and those who dont buy them will probably be less likely to win. Why you ask?
2. Pay 2 Win. A thing new to Paradox maybe but not to Eugen, seeing as their 2 last DLC's, Israel, and Yugo & Finland are outright pay 2 win.
3. Historically accurate? I'm surprised you can even dare say that considering that Eugen doesnt really do historical games at all under any circumstances.
4. Making a game historical means also making stats historical. Another massive blunder that Eugen likes to implode.

What other issues could there possibly be?

Well lets see... Act of Aggression. It was supposed to be a strategy title surpassing C&C Generals, and died out being reviewed as a less than mediocre game. Which is probably why they've decided to co-develop this title. On game development, i dont trust Eugen at all, yet have plenty of good experience with Paradox Interactive, which has given great titles like Hearts of Iron and Stellaris.

Sorry for the negativity, but everyone who starts praising eujesus and paradox like they're saints for making this happen is just wrong. There are massive issues that linger in older titles that they have figured are "acceptable". And its absolutely ridiculous. I sure as hell hope not everyone here is naive to the level of blindly following "a certain person" into the russian tundra. I wish i believe in this title, but i am not going to fund another pay 2 win rollercoaster. Even with the promised "limited modding tools", that isnt enough.

Personally this just looks like Eugen is drowning, and is trying to drag a co-sailor with him down into the abyss. Not a joyride i will be signing up for. But i wish the rest of you a really big good luck.

 

[TheMonk]

I personally hope that they made a "more fun" Deck System than RD has. ALB was much better in that regard.
Also Artillery is too strong in RD as in ALB was just right.
I have some worrys about off map artillery as there is no way to counter it as I see it.

 

[Soyaman]

I personally hope that they made a "more fun" Deck System than RD has. ALB was much better in that regard.
Also Artillery is too strong in RD as in ALB was just right.
I have some worrys about off map artillery as there is no way to counter it as I see it.

Company of Heroes sorts this out very well if you ask me

Also in terms of stats.. I honestly prefer a more fun game than outright historical. If that means nerfing the Tiger so it can't kill 10 shermans on its own... Go ahead.

 

[Graphic]

Company of Heroes sorts this out very well if you ask me

Also in terms of stats.. I honestly prefer a more fun game than outright historical. If that means nerfing the Tiger so it can't kill 10 shermans on its own... Go ahead.

There are only two documented encounters with Tiger I's on the entire western front. Using history it's already balanced by its extreme rarity.

 

[Destraex]

I was surprised when I saw that Paradox were the publishers for this game. I am curious to know why. Were Eugen not doing well already on their own? Did they even have a previous publisher? I am a big fan of the Wargame series in general (own every one/every DLC and love playing coop vs AI with friends) but now paradox is involved I cannot imagine how much more wonderful this could be. My only disappointment with paradox was War of the Roses shutting down, but alas that was an understandable decision.

I hope that Eugen stick with wargames scale even though this has infantry in it. I don't really want to play another company of heroes or men of war clone. But I would like a larger scale close combat style game!

 

[Graphic]

I am curious to know why. Were Eugen not doing well already on their own? Did they even have a previous publisher?

Their previous publisher was Focus Home Interactive. The "why" of their breakup is between them.

 

[EUG_MadMat]

There are only two documented encounters with Tiger I's on the entire western front. Using history it's already balanced by its extreme rarity.

Damn, you bit me to it ...

 

[Karlburg]

I think it's fine- going back to Wargame to make a better game than an ill-fated attempt to remake Art of War.

Most of the ideas mentioned in the press release seem very good and are a good response to the problems Wargame had in general.

 

[MarcoRossolini]

I do hope Normandy is modelled accurately so you do in fact see the average of engagement (which was 300m) in that theatre. Then we can have done with this wehraboo 2km nonsense. Hopefully that tripe can be nipped in the bud.

 

[lukesilveira]

I guess you meant DLC HEAVEN (as long as PDS don't charge for something stupid as blitz-move, like they did with HoI4. Or portraits).

 

[Guggy]

Achievement unlocked: Actually saw a Tiger!

 

[D-M]

There are only two documented encounters with Tiger I's on the entire western front. Using history it's already balanced by its extreme rarity.

Including one heroically destroyed by Brad Pitt. :v

 

[Killertomato]

I'm very interested in the zone stuff.

As for units... We're probably going to go all the way through Normandy, maybe to the end of the breakout, and I doubt the Germans will actually have their (miserably tiny) number of operational AFVs. For fun reasons.

We're definitely going as far as Op Goodwood, since Tiger IIs are in. Those are going to be the deadliest tanks by a lot. I think the only deployed allied ATG that could kill one at range from the front in Summer 1944 was the 17-pounder firing APDS.

 

[nAssailant]

There are only two documented encounters with Tiger I's on the entire western front. Using history it's already balanced by its extreme rarity.

I looked this up out of curiosity, and found this reddit thread about it: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistori...w_many_tiger_i_tanks_did_us_tanker_encounter/.

So, not only is 2 total encounters possibly inaccurate, but 3 individual Tigers may be wrong as well. And, of course, this is limited to just tank v. tank encounters.

At any rate, I'd be fine with Tiger's being very rare and situational but also very powerful (like the M1A2 Abrams or MIM-104 Patriot in Wargame: Red Dragon). Just so long as I don't see entire platoons of the things rolling through a town.

 

[Killertomato]

At any rate, I'd be fine with Tiger's being very rare and situational but also very powerful (like the M1A2 Abrams or MIM-104 Patriot in Wargame: Red Dragon). Just so long as I don't see entire platoons of the things rolling through a town.

Tiger 1s shouldn't be such a big problem to deal with, as long as you're packing 76mm Shermans or Fireflies. They could kill a Tiger from as far away as a Tiger could kill them.

 

[Guggy]

Curious about how effective aviation strikes will be, given their poor effect in actually killing armor in the time frame. Still may end up being your best bet versus King Tigers etc.

 

[nAssailant]

Tiger 1s shouldn't be such a big problem to deal with, as long as you're packing 76mm Shermans or Fireflies. They could kill a Tiger from as far away as a Tiger could kill them.

Right. I just hope they balance the availability of certain vehicles to prevent weaker vehicles from being useless. So I'd like the Firefly and Tiger's to be fewer, but also have them be more important (i.e. the player wants to take care of them) than a regular 75mm M4. They kinda dropped the ball on this in Wargame: Red Dragon, where a lot of powerful units were too widely available for the player to care too much about losing one.

 

[Killertomato]

Right. I just hope they balance the availability of certain vehicles to prevent weaker vehicles from being useless. So I'd like the Firefly and Tiger's to be fewer, but also have them be more important (i.e. the player wants to take care of them) than a regular 75mm M4. They kinda dropped the ball on this in Wargame: Red Dragon, where a lot of powerful units were too widely available for the player to care too much about losing one.

I think they actually kinda went the other way at the very top. You had 2 M1A2s, or 2 T-72BUs, or 2 Leopard 2A5s, and if you lost those you were in deep trouble.

Fortunately, things should be a little closer together than they were in WRD, just by the nature of the systems. The closest we'll get to an old-style superheavy is the Tiger II, and even that can't do delightful WRD superheavy things like killing your tanks while driving backwards at 50 KPH.

Curious about how effective aviation strikes will be, given their poor effect in actually killing armor in the time frame. Still may end up being your best bet versus King Tigers etc.

I bet they'll be pretty good. Especially rocket planes and dive bombers like the Stuka we have a picture of.

 

[mitchverr]

Tiger 1s shouldn't be such a big problem to deal with, as long as you're packing 76mm Shermans or Fireflies. They could kill a Tiger from as far away as a Tiger could kill them.

Or an AVRE hue hue hue

 

[Graphic]

It'll be interesting to see if certain German AFVs suffer mobility crits while moving more often than allied equipment.