Scenario preference in mp

[Vissarion]

Having played HoI mp for almost 2 years now, I have found that most players prefer the 36 scenario. The reasons most people use is that they want to build their own army and so on. I also only played 36 back in the days when I played singleplayer, and also the first part of my multiplaying career . While ultimately the 36 scenario is best under the ultimate conditions, the truth (at least after my experience) is that a 36 so often collapses before there have been any action, or takes totally crazy turns (which is OK if you like that sort of thing). The main difference between single- and multiplayer is of course your opponents intelligence, and I think this is best shown in fighting. Therefore I think that the instant action you get in '39 scenario is more appealing than the build-up with '36.

My impression (also from own experience ) is that people want a perfect game, and a perfect game would indeed be a 36 game. However, a '36 game takes very long time and requires strict devotion from all participants. As most people also prefer 4-5 (often more) player this can be quite a task to accomplish. I'd say a '36 v.net game with players gathered from the channel in 1 hour is doomed to fail.

What do you think? Especially interested in 36-fans' opinions, and if there are anyone who often play the 41/44 scenarios.

 

[alpinit]

I prefer to play in the 1944 but no wants too
so i playes in the 1936 secnario......

 

[Mr.G 24]

If I play a game where I log into vnet, then I play 39' much easier to control and I have no patience to sit and build my army and tech in the 36 scenario. If I get the rare LAN game with 4 of my friends we play 36' with no rules except no military acess. So we wipe out the world in 36' and fight each other. Except we never finish a game. Once the first 2 or 3 players are wiped out by 44' people turn on the TV and load up Halo. 36' games are a hassle and no fun with alot of rules. 39' scenarios are my second fave. My favorite of course being my Total War scenario

 

[tuuttu]

Well I’m old school.....that’s probably why I still stick to the 36 scenario. Yepp I confess, I like to build my own forces and at least have some influence in how/when the war should be fought.

With a good group we usually play 36-39 in 3 hours, that’s above normal speed, with the exception of Japanese-China war that we usually run on normal or below. I find these 3 hours well worth spent for players to build, tech and plan their strategies.

But I have to agree that a 36 scenario on valknet probably is wasted time.

 

[unmerged(31954)]

I much prefer 36. I think 39 is even more unbalanced in favor of Allies/Soviets than 36. And I don't like that it starts in the war. I would like it a lot more if it started on Jan 1 1939.

 

[Kyril]

I like '36, for the reason stated: it allows you to have much more influence on the strategy of your nation, especially when playing other countries then France, Germany or Russia (who in my experience, have less flexibility in focussing their efforts. If you don't devote massive resources to your Army, your screwed).

Then again, having played dozens of '36 games in the last weeks, and never gotten to the point of total war (or beyond '38 for that matter), I'm shifting more to the '39 scenario. It still gives you some influence as a player (when Russia, Japan and US will be in the war), and is a much better garantee to actually see some action.

 

[Citizen_X]

1936 for the reasons that have been comented here :rofl:

 

[Orthank]

I like 1944 as US or USSR but it's hard to find an Axis player :rofl: .

 

[tuuttu]

I like 1944 as US or USSR but it's hard to find an Axis player :rofl: .

Bring it on punk.....

 

[jgbaxter]

I love 1938, failing that 36 then 39.

 

[gzav]

Pollified.

 

[unmerged(8319)]

Bring it on punk.....

Same here. Make my day

 

[boromir]

1938 would be nice Voted for 1939 ... 1936 with hyperteching is a bit too SF for me.

 

[Orthank]

1938 scenario - is something that Paradox do not belive HoI really needs!

 

[unmerged(5892)]

36. Always & without fail.

 

[Lord Ederon]

Voted '39 and '41. 36 scenario results in imbalance if going with natural alliances. But it might be successful with group of dedicated players with some reasonable rules (not many though). One thing I dislike on that is hyperteching. That's why I find '39 scenario best for MP.

In '39 you are at war, but you have still lot of freedom how to develop it. Considering research, troops build up and strategy. What is crucial here (as in any other scenario) is to have good balance between sides (aka Allies+Comintern/Axis or Allies/Axis/Comintern). There should be same number of players on each side.

 

[unmerged(14284)]

41 is the best for 2-player MP - just a really interesting mega-battle on the East Front from the word go. For larger games I think 39 is probably best if you want to simulate something like WW2, while 36 is better if you want freedom to experiment. 44 is strictly for masochists as Axis or sadists as Allies...

Nick