yeaah this guy has a way to explain an easy sounding bout the game, i too may Buy it, i just asked if it was like Hearts Of Iron 4, cuz i do not like that game i tried it when it was free and i did not know what needed be done when i started up, i was stuck, and players should not have to be guessing or get stuck on what to do,in my opinion hearts of iron 4 was just a NoNo
Nice video! And great game! 10:46 The game is pretty demanding for a strategy game. I'd recomend you an upgrade if you love the animations, they look great at 60fps. Gtx1060 6gb, i7-4790, 8gb ram, Never drops 60fps but I get an average 80% GPU usage with max settings 1080p. That's higher than the average I get in battlefield 1 1080p high settings. I have played a few hours and I have not tested it yet, but there's something in this game that's very GPU hungry.
Ah ok. I wonder what it is... im thinking it’s the unit models cause when I load up the big screen it lags there badly. I think it’s loading a MASSIVE 3D rendered image every time, instead of reduced quality
My game runs at solid 60 fps 1080p, everything on high GTX1060 card and 8 year old AMD FX8350 cpu. I am limiting the fps at 60 in the options and have v-sync on.
The Developer added a patch or two since launch. When it did release It required alot of GPU horsepower to run. We had the developer, Alexander Shargin on our Single Malt Strategy podcast not too long ago, he mentioned that since launch he made it more compatible with mid range and low range GPU's.
That's because OOB was a clone of PC. Except that in my opinion OOB did it better. I was hoping that PC2 was gonna raise the bar even further but so far I'm very disappointed. The graphics are only a minor upgrade. The mechanics are actually more simplistic and the multiplayer vastly inferior to OOB. I don't like some of the design decisions they made. for example in OOB your aircraft could take off, head out and stay on the field until they ran out of fuel. you had to get it back to the airfield before they fall out of the sky. Makes more sense to me that way vs the way they did it on PC2, where they go back and forth from the airfield.
I mean it looks like alright game but I feel like blitzkrieg 1-2 in the early 2000s were much better looking and engaging games. And it's kinda sad for the 2020 game.
Too many inconsistencies plague this game. Allied Fortresses are inpregnable under 20 turns. Char B tanks (white) are impossible to knock out, surrounded with tanks attacking and fired at with multiple artillery units and JU 87. Computer side of this "game" cheats widely. When the computer plays with the German units, half of the units just move back and forth the whole game going nowhere. And why can Allied units climb on top of a fortress unit and attack and Germans can't?
I have 22 hours in... the AI will go after whatever it has an advantage in destroying is my take... At leasts that's what the AI has been doing. Fighters will target Tac Fighters and Strategic bombers first... Tanks will target soft vehicles, arty, and Infantry first unless it has numerical superiority or is on par with armor... Just got my ass kicked in N. Africa. However this being said, I have been looking at the numbers the AI does compared to human player... the AI does way more damage.. even with updated vehicles such as tanks.. the AI just does more damage or has crazy ass rolls.. N., Africa seems difficult as after Gazala you are outnumbered big time.. and the AI just keeps it coming.. massive amount of Air, tanks arty and AAA.... I was thinking the designers do not want to let the player alter history at all... LOL
s this game the same like Hearts Of Iron 4 ? the extensive learning curve ? Hearts of Iron 4 just has too much unnecessary BS, example you need a ton of metal to make 5 Rifles, that's the example gameplay and all that is not necessary for a game just want to go to War not the overall political affairs yadda yadda, Also Hearts of Iron IV has no Manual, but i would not want to sit there and read, and read Just to play a "Game" i checked and Paner corps 2 does include a Manual. Also you mentioned Performance on the game, think it just has to do with all the Unit, and Ai units, moving about, forgot what that called? i to experience that on many games, as such Men of war AS2 - Theater Of War, and such, and i have an ok PC enough to play games in ultra but prefer to set them in custom, not all need be set on Ultra not necessary for shadows for example. "TY for Ur Video"
Dude, your audio bites...
I bought this after listening to your words
thanks man, your review convinced me to buy this game.
yeaah this guy has a way to explain an easy sounding bout the game, i too may Buy it, i just asked if it was like Hearts Of Iron 4, cuz i do not like that game i tried it when it was free and i did not know what needed be done when i started up, i was stuck, and players should not have to be guessing or get stuck on what to do,in my opinion hearts of iron 4 was just a NoNo
@@ThisOLmaan completely different game in almost every way shape and form
Ditto; appreciate your enthusiasm and detailed overview of the game. I have two buddys who are also recommending it so I guess I'm in!
It’s a awesome, even better if you have a great graphics card, the game is absolutely beautiful
Wow nice explanation. Subscribed 👍
Nice video! And great game!
10:46
The game is pretty demanding for a strategy game. I'd recomend you an upgrade if you love the animations, they look great at 60fps.
Gtx1060 6gb, i7-4790, 8gb ram,
Never drops 60fps but I get an average 80% GPU usage with max settings 1080p. That's higher than the average I get in battlefield 1 1080p high settings. I have played a few hours and I have not tested it yet, but there's something in this game that's very GPU hungry.
Ah ok. I wonder what it is... im thinking it’s the unit models cause when I load up the big screen it lags there badly. I think it’s loading a MASSIVE 3D rendered image every time, instead of reduced quality
@Two Can Van Damme I can´t really tell you since I quit playing the game a few days after realeased.
Not a bad game, just lost my interest.
It would not hurt to get a better Mic, also, maybe a bit less fanboy and more straight facts, since the video is a review.
Just bought one last night
get better headphones
@@otownslinky I do not use Headphones watching Videos, of course you could not know that at all, which makes your comment even more pointless.
@@1Ashram yes u do U LIE
My game runs at solid 60 fps 1080p, everything on high GTX1060 card and 8 year old AMD FX8350 cpu. I am limiting the fps at 60 in the options and have v-sync on.
The Developer added a patch or two since launch. When it did release It required alot of GPU horsepower to run. We had the developer, Alexander Shargin on our Single Malt Strategy podcast not too long ago, he mentioned that since launch he made it more compatible with mid range and low range GPU's.
Man your mic tho :)
"Slomensk" :D
Should I get the base game, general, or field marshall edition? Thoughts?
Depends on how much you think you’ll play the game. If your projecting hundreds / thousands of hours go all in with Field Marshall
@@TheStrategyWargamer Thanks...
This or order of battle what’s the difference
I'm a bit disappointed that they've put in a lot of effort in the presentation but fell short with optimization. Might be too much for IGPUs.
I stick with Strategic Mind Blitzkrieg it is much better in many ways
That game looks good I’m gonna try it out
what I dont like is the sound of the engines, they are all the same sound
For some reason reminds me a bit of Order of Battle.
That's because OOB was a clone of PC. Except that in my opinion OOB did it better. I was hoping that PC2 was gonna raise the bar even further but so far I'm very disappointed. The graphics are only a minor upgrade. The mechanics are actually more simplistic and the multiplayer vastly inferior to OOB. I don't like some of the design decisions they made. for example in OOB your aircraft could take off, head out and stay on the field until they ran out of fuel. you had to get it back to the airfield before they fall out of the sky. Makes more sense to me that way vs the way they did it on PC2, where they go back and forth from the airfield.
I mean it looks like alright game but I feel like blitzkrieg 1-2 in the early 2000s were much better looking and engaging games. And it's kinda sad for the 2020 game.
You are comparing a RTS to a TBS.
I think I remember that one, geez I feel old lol
Too many inconsistencies plague this game. Allied Fortresses are inpregnable under 20 turns. Char B tanks (white) are impossible to knock out, surrounded with tanks attacking and fired at with multiple artillery units and JU 87.
Computer side of this "game" cheats widely. When the computer plays with the German units, half of the units just move back and forth the whole game going nowhere. And why can Allied units climb on top of a fortress unit and attack and Germans can't?
Good vid though
Glad you enjoyed it
The vast number of units is what turns me off these realistic games. Gives me analysis paralysis.
Are you eating your mic?
Dude, just a bit of advice... You need a better mic
I know I uploaded a upgraded audio version it’s linked in the description
Pity that you don't mention AI's competence. Nothing else is important if game don't have good AI.
Been playing human players more than AI, but the few times I did single player it was ok
I have 22 hours in... the AI will go after whatever it has an advantage in destroying is my take... At leasts that's what the AI has been doing. Fighters will target Tac Fighters and Strategic bombers first... Tanks will target soft vehicles, arty, and Infantry first unless it has numerical superiority or is on par with armor... Just got my ass kicked in N. Africa. However this being said, I have been looking at the numbers the AI does compared to human player... the AI does way more damage.. even with updated vehicles such as tanks.. the AI just does more damage or has crazy ass rolls.. N., Africa seems difficult as after Gazala you are outnumbered big time.. and the AI just keeps it coming.. massive amount of Air, tanks arty and AAA.... I was thinking the designers do not want to let the player alter history at all... LOL
nice mic
There’s a link in the description for better audio
s this game the same like Hearts Of Iron 4 ? the extensive learning curve ? Hearts of Iron 4 just has too much unnecessary BS, example you need a ton of metal to make 5 Rifles, that's the example gameplay and all that is not necessary for a game just want to go to War not the overall political affairs yadda yadda, Also Hearts of Iron IV has no Manual, but i would not want to sit there and read, and read Just to play a "Game" i checked and Paner corps 2 does include a Manual. Also you mentioned Performance on the game, think it just has to do with all the Unit, and Ai units, moving about, forgot what that called? i to experience that on many games, as such Men of war AS2 - Theater Of War, and such, and i have an ok PC enough to play games in ultra but prefer to set them in custom, not all need be set on Ultra not necessary for shadows for example. "TY for Ur Video"
Thanks for the feedback. It’s a great game, the patches they added since launch fixed the performance and multiplayer issues.
You should reupload a better version. My ears hurt.
Uploaded I linked it in the description
Unlistenable.
There’s another video with upgraded audio link in description
@@TheStrategyWargamer Oh, that only shows up if you scroll down, easy to miss. You don't want to remove this one and publish the fixed one?
your mic is horrible, your review is biased