Yeah, even if the gameplay is sometimes not as “fun” as WW2 it’s still interesting. Although I think Battlefield 1 did a great job at mixing the vibe of WW1 with faster gameplay like in other war games. Totally not realistic in the slightest but definitely a fun game.
@@sharppixels0885 verdun 1914-1918 is probably the kost realistic ww1 experience anyone could get because the lines barley move in the game and when they do they get pushed right back meaning the devs captured ww1 fighting pretty well
I still remember the pain in that Captain's eyes when The Doctor says World War 1 instead of _"The Great War"_ and the Captain said "World War one?..." you knew in that moment hes hopes of a wars end will never truly come.
Just a note, at about 24:30 when you're talking about units getting stuck in the trenches, you can only ever have two units in a trench. This includes movement and attacks, so if you order 3 units to assault one trench, you'll have one unit that chills outside it and gets killed quickly. The bit that took me longer to figure out is that if you have to units in a trench, other units can't move past that trench and stay in the trenches. They'll get to that trench and then pop out and usually get killed. The controls are definitely finicky and it's way too easy to misclick and people will leave a trench and get shot until I can tell them to get back in it, but I've had fewer issues with troops dying due to misbehaving once I started either keeping just one unit in a trench so units can get past or keeping two units but moving the whole line so the first trench goes and the other trenches take the vacated trench (so the whole mass of troops sort of caterpillars down the trench line without every trying to pass each other).
I haven't even played the game yet, first video watching about it, and even I caught on to how that works. There's a physical limit to how many bodies you can jam into one trench line
I have to say, the stagnant aspect of WW1 makes it a really tricky game to make “fun” for the average player. It helps if you have an understanding or interest of the topic for sure. I’m definitely going to keep this one on my radar.
Look anywhere but the western front in 1916 and you’ll see that the war was very multifaceted. Even trench warfare wasn’t as stagnant as it’s represented in film
@@ewangrainger2898 dude has no idea about the sturmtruppen with flamethrowers and grenades storming trenches and the italians fighting austria hungary in the mountains with bayonets lol ww1 was not all stagnant
This is why most games are not trying to get that much more realistic. I like realism, but I'm not that good at those games. That's why I watch you. Praise Pravus
And neither does this game, really. The tactical gameplay isn't particularly realistic, and while the strategic layer does try to show a hint of the problem, it hides too much away to make it obvious to someone who isn't already very familiar with how the Western Front worked. The point is to capture the rather depressing experience of the commanders in the horrid stalemate. Games are a lot about control, and the loss of control. Mainstream games rarely risk removing that control from the player, which is certainly unrealistic, but it's definitely not the only unrealistic thing about games. More realistic games tend to be about removing options - you want to do something that would win you the battle, but you can't, because that's just not how command in battles really works. Which of course in turn means that most so-called strategy games are actually about micro-management of units _in battle_ , something that is almost impossible in reality (especially before radios). Unsurprisingly, real-life horse archers were _not_ actually able to kite their enemies with no risk to themselves, and an untrained peasant mob wouldn't heedlessly charge into enemy elite troops or stand their ground against a charge. Of course, we're still seeing just the very early points of the war (though already after the earliest mobile phase is over). But I don't expect the game will change to show the _massive_ imbalance between infantry and artillery that developed in the war, for example. The game still keeps a ridiculously unrealistic amount of control in the player's hand - not that I'm saying that's bad design, mind, just don't overplay the "realism" card - it doesn't even seem like there's a morale system in the game. It's still designed for a fun battling experience, just with the extra layer of showing some of the dread of how little your victories mean in the big picture. It would be nice if they included more of the costs of those victories, too - even very early on, many of the commanders realized this is going to be a horrible war of attrition with no decisive battles, just waiting out for who runs out of supplies, morale and reinforcements first. And yet, there was nothing anyone could really do about it, militarily. Heck, plenty of the commanders were sacked for proposing (and executing) the strategies that ultimately won the war - just... a few years later, which noöne wanted to admit is the only real choice.
The suppression artillery you're probably facing is a possible upgrade that the A.I. took at the beginning of the game allowing for complete suppression as oppose to partial suppression.
This reminds me of Shogun: Total War. It's a little clunky in some places, but the core gameplay looks fun. This is what a lot of people have wanted CA to do for awhile
@MesterWilliam at first, I was annoyed with the Warhammer series, but with Warhammer 3 I've loved how they've pushed a lot of mechanics that would make for a great WW1 or even W2 game. There are tanks, helicopters, bombers, artillery, gatling guns, nukes, flamethrower, small elite units. All they need are easy trench deployables or a unit that can build them and it's WW1 lol
17:26 Melchett: Field Marshal Haig has formulated a brilliant new tactical plan to ensure final victory in the field. Blackadder: Ah. Would this brilliant plan involve us climbing out of our trenches and walking very slowly towards the enemy? Captain Darling: How could you possibly know that, Blackadder? It’s classified information! Blackadder: It’s the same plan that we used last time and the seventeen times before that. Melchett: Exactly! And that is what is so brilliant about it! It will catch the watchful Hun totally off guard! Doing precisely what we’ve done eighteen times before is exactly the last thing they’ll expect us to do this time! There is, however, one small problem. Blackadder: That everyone always gets slaughtered in the first ten seconds. Melchett: That’s right. And Field Marshal Haig is worried this may be depressing the men a tad. So he’s looking for a way to cheer them up. Blackadder: Well, his resignation and suicide seems the obvious choice. Melchett: Hmm, interesting thought. Make a note of it, Darling.
I think this game helps capture the slow pace of older style warfare that people aren't used to. Whenever I've seen a medieval war game, it gets romanticised and dramatised so it is almost all big field battles, and only sometimes sieges that are over in a day or two. People don't realise that sieges were often the norm. Why charge the enemy in the field when you have a lovely wall to stand behind while you rain down arrows? Many sieges lasted the better part of a year or longer. Real war was a slow, gruelling, brutal process. Like you said, It was the constant trench stalemate of WWI that really started to force countries to find new and innovative ways of fighting. The old methods were just not cutting it anymore.
He is correct WW1 was a war counted in inches as the game says in its opening. This war was truly like no other as the price of a mile was around 6,000 lives. It was truly dark.
Well, the western front was just a Major loss of life over a few metres of ground. The North Sea, the Eastern front, Africa and the Middle East was not trench warfare. It was completely different.
i have heard there is a minor moral dip for having the brits and french in the same trench. not because they hate each other but its cos of the language barrier.
Note it's best to use troops of the same nationality using mixed units of different countries will only cause confusion on the battlefield this is a game mechanic if you didn't know,good gameplay btw.
Call me sadistic….but this game really needs an option to keep dead bodies from not disappearing. And they should also carry over from next battles on same hex. WW1 was all about the wastelands of no man’s lands with bodies all over the place not being able to be removed. This is what the game really needs to drive home the WW1 feel
Yeah, the lack of having almost everything WWI was known for killed my interest. No persistent destruction, no persistent bodies, artillery craters look to be painted on and disappear after a while, pretty small unit cap. Just overall disappointing.
It's good to see ww1 get some more visibility in games. Ww2 was the top thing for a long timez then future hypothetical wars became the thing, now ww1 is becoming a big thing. We have verdun, tannenburg, isonzo and battlefield 1 so far
so after watching the gameplay, the conclusion i can come up with for the light arty suppression thing is that the trench outline (or whatever you wanna call it) is barely inside of the targeting reticule for the arty. It makes the most sense during the part of the video with that "throw away shot" as i was actually watching just how close the reticule was to the trench to the left of the MG nest and i could see like the corner of the enemy trench inside of the reticule. the only other (and definitely not as strong theory) is that perhaps one trench being bombarded causes other to become suppressed as well. The only reason i say not as strong as its not confirmed by the devs if thats a mechanic in the game. regardless though, loved the video bro. just bought the game after watchin it (and reading the reviews lol)
hearing your closing thoughts the only conclusion i can come to is that people are just used to AI thats so braindead that the only way they can offer a challenge to have extra benifits that the player dosent get. so when they encounter an AI that...actually seems to know how to play the average player is going to assume that they're cheating in some way
Note that the AI does seems to cheat when it comes to visual/fog of war, the fact that the AI often fire an arty barrage on a MG before it's troop enters it's cone's fire even without previously scouting or without a balloon is a recuring situation. They also seem to know when an unit is in the forest, they might not see it per say but they will know there's an unit there and send units to clear it up.
100%. AI is cheating and will often pre fire and pre barrage when I’m about to charge. I’ve noticed this multiple time after clearing OBS balloons. When I send a horde the AI will pre fire the staging ground despite having 0 reason to see it
@@ahuman7199 Don't you do that? It's quite an obvious time for a counterstrike. Heck, that was what people did in the actual war too - being blinded and suppressed by the enemy is a dead giveaway of an impending attack. Of course, in real life, there was also a preceding massive artillery bombardment, which got shorter and shorter as the war progressed to give the defender less time to bring in reinforcements and prepare the counter-attack. Somewhat counter-intuitively, attacks on the western front had _very favourable_ casualty ratios _until_ the counter-attack hits. That was the stalemate - the idea of people breaking apart against a barrage of machine gun fire is _way_ overrepresented in popular consciousness and media. You attacked, you achieved your objectives... and then got kicked out because of the massive defence in depth and the support lines. Over time, this developed into a strategy where you did your massed attack and retreated _before_ the counter-attack came - no longer hoping to actually hold territory, just having an attrition advantage. And that of course meant that you didn't actually want to have much strength in the forward positions, since they were too exposed... That said, I'm pretty sure the AI doesn't see the _same_ way the player does. That's actually quite hard to do. Fog of war is unsurprisingly complicated, and you want to avoid exposing the AI to too much cheesing (like teasing it to start the barrage too early etc.).
About 24:50 , no, it's not cheesy, the game SHOULD let you do just that because that's exactly what German did in 1918! It's called infiltration tactic. Small groups of units bypassing defenses altogether and wreak havoc from the enemy's rear, creating chaos on the frontline. It's so useful that Germany gains more ground in a few months than 4 years of trench warfare combined.
A big, big note about trench layout, having so many random flanking trenches and disconnected pieces is very, very counter productive. It's much better to set up a main trenchline, flanking trenches when needed, and connect it to a rear line position that's much softer.
Great video, looks fun! Also, WW1 was highly mobile, global and dynamic...just not on the Western front. The game is thus appropriately named and accurate, but not representative of the conflict as a whole. That's just the area that has received the most media attention for a hundred years.
It is intended light arty be powerful in early war. trenches and MGs will be upgraded as the war goes on. The light arty will become less power as the war marches on.
Put on the Hard Core History podcast, "Blueprint for Armageddon." Then experience some of humanity's worst moments from a bird's eye view. This game is exactly what it's supposed to be. Brutal, and I like it. Note: It could use some named units that progress as they fight battles. The sturmtruppen on the German side and Pal's Brigade on the allied side, for example. Add some mechanics where they can be lost if you are careless, and I would be happy.
Ai Machine gun is working when under fire cause you have it at the 3rd highest difficulty. AI usually gets to cheat in these games. From what I've played so far you can only have 2 troops assault a trench at a time. That's why your 3rd guys are just hanging outside getting shot the hell up.
32:56 I haven't played this game, but I'd say the reason the A.I seems like it's cheating is because the A.I can pay better attention to what it already knows. People tend to focus one one or two places at a time, but the A.I can focus on everywhere it has visibility
Looks like you should use heavy artillery to destroy machinegun nests and use bombers to destroy enemy artillery? Because cost of calling down even 4 heavy artillery barrages is much lower than calling a bomber (36 versus 90).
This might be worth checking out after I'm done with RE4 It definitely is different from what we are used to, and looks realistic And might as well improve the micro by playing it
Around 35:50 (and in a couple earlier spots, too) there is an explosion effect shown happening all along a trench line in front of it. It doesn't seem to be artillery because it is quite linear looking in its effect. But, what exactly is it? Some sort of mine field effect?
I think it would be cool if this game let you send a rush while in the field commander mode and then you become a soldier in an fps style mode wher you are trying to get across no man’s land
Ew, imagine playing as the Allies. The German Empire was the righteous party in that war. The Allies were the bad guys in both wars. Especially in WW2, we did way more heinous shit than any one except Japan and Russia (excluding them from Allies because they only ever serve themselves).
I watched some dude play on elite and he just made 2 doom stacks and owned every battle. there needs to be some type of restriction on how many units you can have in one hex. Too many and you get a penalty.
Its like an old browser games where you play with trenches and using artillery and stuff so the enemy loses morale. Forgot the name though. If someone remembers it please do tell.
People just arent used to the IA haveing the same capabilitys as the Player himself, mostly they are somehow weakend. Thats why ppl think a Fair AI is cheating cauzed they not used to it
What? there is a lot of people complaining about losing against an IA in a new game? I'm shocked! The audacity of some... especially those who stream. They are under pressure of their viewer to succeed and so instead of doing the right thing and say i'm new to this game i need to learn they blame the IA. Stupid!
just so yoou know in french "TH" is pronounced just like "T" so you pronounce it chateau Tierry also you dont pronounce le last "e" in a word unless it looks like "é"
After so many years of WW2 being dominant in video games, it's really good to see its predecessor getting its time in the sun 😊
100% agree
Yeah, even if the gameplay is sometimes not as “fun” as WW2 it’s still interesting. Although I think Battlefield 1 did a great job at mixing the vibe of WW1 with faster gameplay like in other war games. Totally not realistic in the slightest but definitely a fun game.
@@sharppixels0885 verdun 1914-1918 is probably the kost realistic ww1 experience anyone could get because the lines barley move in the game and when they do they get pushed right back meaning the devs captured ww1 fighting pretty well
It's easier to sell WW2 than WW1, that's why it's so overused
I still remember the pain in that Captain's eyes when The Doctor says World War 1 instead of _"The Great War"_ and the Captain said "World War one?..." you knew in that moment hes hopes of a wars end will never truly come.
Just a note, at about 24:30 when you're talking about units getting stuck in the trenches, you can only ever have two units in a trench. This includes movement and attacks, so if you order 3 units to assault one trench, you'll have one unit that chills outside it and gets killed quickly. The bit that took me longer to figure out is that if you have to units in a trench, other units can't move past that trench and stay in the trenches. They'll get to that trench and then pop out and usually get killed.
The controls are definitely finicky and it's way too easy to misclick and people will leave a trench and get shot until I can tell them to get back in it, but I've had fewer issues with troops dying due to misbehaving once I started either keeping just one unit in a trench so units can get past or keeping two units but moving the whole line so the first trench goes and the other trenches take the vacated trench (so the whole mass of troops sort of caterpillars down the trench line without every trying to pass each other).
Makes sense there would be a max since in real world it would also be limited how many soldiers could fit in a trench.
I haven't even played the game yet, first video watching about it, and even I caught on to how that works. There's a physical limit to how many bodies you can jam into one trench line
When Pravus complains that his units “forgets” to enter a trench when the trench clear shows it already has two of his units in it already
I have to say, the stagnant aspect of WW1 makes it a really tricky game to make “fun” for the average player. It helps if you have an understanding or interest of the topic for sure. I’m definitely going to keep this one on my radar.
Look anywhere but the western front in 1916 and you’ll see that the war was very multifaceted. Even trench warfare wasn’t as stagnant as it’s represented in film
@@ewangrainger2898 Its represented in the game, tanks are insanely good at taking ground.
@@ewangrainger2898 dude has no idea about the sturmtruppen with flamethrowers and grenades storming trenches and the italians fighting austria hungary in the mountains with bayonets lol ww1 was not all stagnant
Please do a series on this. It is such an interesting game that shows the brutality of war
This is why most games are not trying to get that much more realistic. I like realism, but I'm not that good at those games. That's why I watch you. Praise Pravus
And neither does this game, really. The tactical gameplay isn't particularly realistic, and while the strategic layer does try to show a hint of the problem, it hides too much away to make it obvious to someone who isn't already very familiar with how the Western Front worked.
The point is to capture the rather depressing experience of the commanders in the horrid stalemate. Games are a lot about control, and the loss of control. Mainstream games rarely risk removing that control from the player, which is certainly unrealistic, but it's definitely not the only unrealistic thing about games. More realistic games tend to be about removing options - you want to do something that would win you the battle, but you can't, because that's just not how command in battles really works. Which of course in turn means that most so-called strategy games are actually about micro-management of units _in battle_ , something that is almost impossible in reality (especially before radios). Unsurprisingly, real-life horse archers were _not_ actually able to kite their enemies with no risk to themselves, and an untrained peasant mob wouldn't heedlessly charge into enemy elite troops or stand their ground against a charge.
Of course, we're still seeing just the very early points of the war (though already after the earliest mobile phase is over). But I don't expect the game will change to show the _massive_ imbalance between infantry and artillery that developed in the war, for example. The game still keeps a ridiculously unrealistic amount of control in the player's hand - not that I'm saying that's bad design, mind, just don't overplay the "realism" card - it doesn't even seem like there's a morale system in the game. It's still designed for a fun battling experience, just with the extra layer of showing some of the dread of how little your victories mean in the big picture. It would be nice if they included more of the costs of those victories, too - even very early on, many of the commanders realized this is going to be a horrible war of attrition with no decisive battles, just waiting out for who runs out of supplies, morale and reinforcements first. And yet, there was nothing anyone could really do about it, militarily. Heck, plenty of the commanders were sacked for proposing (and executing) the strategies that ultimately won the war - just... a few years later, which noöne wanted to admit is the only real choice.
Yeah you need to take some realism away because in the end your objective is to have fun, but also find a balance so it doesn't get ridiculous
Like number 69 lol
Praise pravus! Everyone reading this comment have a nice day :)
Praise pravus! And you too
Have a nice Easter
The suppression artillery you're probably facing is a possible upgrade that the A.I. took at the beginning of the game allowing for complete suppression as oppose to partial suppression.
Trenches: The game.
The ultimate grind.
This might be grindy for this channel but I would love to see a full campaign, or at least Pravus play through the challenge missions
I am so happy you're starting a series with this game. I hope to see more in the future :D
This reminds me of Shogun: Total War. It's a little clunky in some places, but the core gameplay looks fun. This is what a lot of people have wanted CA to do for awhile
i hope the next tw emodies the core of this game you see battle fields and thechnology progress witch i rarely get that sense from tw
@MesterWilliam at first, I was annoyed with the Warhammer series, but with Warhammer 3 I've loved how they've pushed a lot of mechanics that would make for a great WW1 or even W2 game. There are tanks, helicopters, bombers, artillery, gatling guns, nukes, flamethrower, small elite units. All they need are easy trench deployables or a unit that can build them and it's WW1 lol
@@MrAdamArce i have always loved warhammer since i am into to the lore and painting figures but i do miss the historical games now
Personally I'd like to see a TW in the 1830-1899 Europe era not quite up to WW1 but close
@@MrAdamArce they may or may not make a great war game but they really help to create mods for it huh?
This sounds perfect, since I tend to play most RTS games like they're WWI anyways: flatten everything that moves with arty, mop up whatever I missed
@@cubefreak123 no because I actually win, and your average RTS isn't going to model civilian casualties
we need a series on this
17:26
Melchett: Field Marshal Haig has formulated a brilliant new tactical plan to ensure final victory in the field.
Blackadder: Ah. Would this brilliant plan involve us climbing out of our trenches and walking very slowly towards the enemy?
Captain Darling: How could you possibly know that, Blackadder? It’s classified information!
Blackadder: It’s the same plan that we used last time and the seventeen times before that.
Melchett: Exactly! And that is what is so brilliant about it! It will catch the watchful Hun totally off guard! Doing precisely what we’ve done eighteen times before is exactly the last thing they’ll expect us to do this time! There is, however, one small problem.
Blackadder: That everyone always gets slaughtered in the first ten seconds.
Melchett: That’s right. And Field Marshal Haig is worried this may be depressing the men a tad. So he’s looking for a way to cheer them up.
Blackadder: Well, his resignation and suicide seems the obvious choice.
Melchett: Hmm, interesting thought. Make a note of it, Darling.
I’d enjoy a lot more of this. Maybe even a whole series of Lord Commander Pravus changing history and completely crushing the enemy!
This makes me think of WW1: Verdun. A little unpolished, but an absolutely brutal game.
I think the reason WW1 isn’t as represented in gaming is because it’s really just depressing. Mud and death, with no real point or purpose.
this is the coolest strategy game i've seen in a while! awesome coverage
I think this game helps capture the slow pace of older style warfare that people aren't used to. Whenever I've seen a medieval war game, it gets romanticised and dramatised so it is almost all big field battles, and only sometimes sieges that are over in a day or two. People don't realise that sieges were often the norm. Why charge the enemy in the field when you have a lovely wall to stand behind while you rain down arrows? Many sieges lasted the better part of a year or longer. Real war was a slow, gruelling, brutal process. Like you said, It was the constant trench stalemate of WWI that really started to force countries to find new and innovative ways of fighting. The old methods were just not cutting it anymore.
He is correct WW1 was a war counted in inches as the game says in its opening. This war was truly like no other as the price of a mile was around 6,000 lives. It was truly dark.
Well, the western front was just a Major loss of life over a few metres of ground.
The North Sea, the Eastern front, Africa and the Middle East was not trench warfare. It was completely different.
Lol 8 million lives? No.
Such a good succinct and informative overview/display of the basic mechanics and game. Top notch mate, very informatiove
i have heard there is a minor moral dip for having the brits and french in the same trench. not because they hate each other but its cos of the language barrier.
It applies to all nations... if you have troops of difference nationalities you will get the penalty.
Note it's best to use troops of the same nationality using mixed units of different countries will only cause confusion on the battlefield this is a game mechanic if you didn't know,good gameplay btw.
When they stabilize Western Front game, I hope they release DLCs for the other fronts
A series on this would be wonderful
I’d love you to make this a series
Yes, I was really hoping Pravus would play this
The review at the end makes this game sound like the dark souls of strategy games
Call me sadistic….but this game really needs an option to keep dead bodies from not disappearing. And they should also carry over from next battles on same hex. WW1 was all about the wastelands of no man’s lands with bodies all over the place not being able to be removed. This is what the game really needs to drive home the WW1 feel
Yeah, the lack of having almost everything WWI was known for killed my interest. No persistent destruction, no persistent bodies, artillery craters look to be painted on and disappear after a while, pretty small unit cap. Just overall disappointing.
It's good to see ww1 get some more visibility in games. Ww2 was the top thing for a long timez then future hypothetical wars became the thing, now ww1 is becoming a big thing. We have verdun, tannenburg, isonzo and battlefield 1 so far
New series? Yes please.
Great video! I'm loving this game so far and your breakdown is solid 😎
so after watching the gameplay, the conclusion i can come up with for the light arty suppression thing is that the trench outline (or whatever you wanna call it) is barely inside of the targeting reticule for the arty. It makes the most sense during the part of the video with that "throw away shot" as i was actually watching just how close the reticule was to the trench to the left of the MG nest and i could see like the corner of the enemy trench inside of the reticule. the only other (and definitely not as strong theory) is that perhaps one trench being bombarded causes other to become suppressed as well. The only reason i say not as strong as its not confirmed by the devs if thats a mechanic in the game. regardless though, loved the video bro. just bought the game after watchin it (and reading the reviews lol)
could you do a series of this game? I like how you expressed your thoughts on the game and would like to see you do a playthrough!
Wohooo . Content galore. Thank you !!!
hearing your closing thoughts the only conclusion i can come to is that people are just used to AI thats so braindead that the only way they can offer a challenge to have extra benifits that the player dosent get. so when they encounter an AI that...actually seems to know how to play the average player is going to assume that they're cheating in some way
Note that the AI does seems to cheat when it comes to visual/fog of war, the fact that the AI often fire an arty barrage on a MG before it's troop enters it's cone's fire even without previously scouting or without a balloon is a recuring situation. They also seem to know when an unit is in the forest, they might not see it per say but they will know there's an unit there and send units to clear it up.
100%. AI is cheating and will often pre fire and pre barrage when I’m about to charge. I’ve noticed this multiple time after clearing OBS balloons. When I send a horde the AI will pre fire the staging ground despite having 0 reason to see it
@@ahuman7199 Don't you do that? It's quite an obvious time for a counterstrike. Heck, that was what people did in the actual war too - being blinded and suppressed by the enemy is a dead giveaway of an impending attack. Of course, in real life, there was also a preceding massive artillery bombardment, which got shorter and shorter as the war progressed to give the defender less time to bring in reinforcements and prepare the counter-attack.
Somewhat counter-intuitively, attacks on the western front had _very favourable_ casualty ratios _until_ the counter-attack hits. That was the stalemate - the idea of people breaking apart against a barrage of machine gun fire is _way_ overrepresented in popular consciousness and media. You attacked, you achieved your objectives... and then got kicked out because of the massive defence in depth and the support lines. Over time, this developed into a strategy where you did your massed attack and retreated _before_ the counter-attack came - no longer hoping to actually hold territory, just having an attrition advantage. And that of course meant that you didn't actually want to have much strength in the forward positions, since they were too exposed...
That said, I'm pretty sure the AI doesn't see the _same_ way the player does. That's actually quite hard to do. Fog of war is unsurprisingly complicated, and you want to avoid exposing the AI to too much cheesing (like teasing it to start the barrage too early etc.).
About 24:50 , no, it's not cheesy, the game SHOULD let you do just that because that's exactly what German did in 1918!
It's called infiltration tactic. Small groups of units bypassing defenses altogether and wreak havoc from the enemy's rear, creating chaos on the frontline. It's so useful that Germany gains more ground in a few months than 4 years of trench warfare combined.
Ah the somme, where Sir Douglas Haig channelled his inner Zap Branigan, sending wave after wave of his own men.
A big, big note about trench layout, having so many random flanking trenches and disconnected pieces is very, very counter productive. It's much better to set up a main trenchline, flanking trenches when needed, and connect it to a rear line position that's much softer.
Please make this a proper series!
Great video, looks fun!
Also, WW1 was highly mobile, global and dynamic...just not on the Western front. The game is thus appropriately named and accurate, but not representative of the conflict as a whole. That's just the area that has received the most media attention for a hundred years.
Now I want to see some crazy TH-camr cheese the game and win the game without using trenches
Thats the most scooby do "BRUTAL" i have ever heard 🤣🤙31:51
I’d love to see a let’s play
It is intended light arty be powerful in early war. trenches and MGs will be upgraded as the war goes on. The light arty will become less power as the war marches on.
This was a really cool game. Id love to see more of it
Put on the Hard Core History podcast, "Blueprint for Armageddon." Then experience some of humanity's worst moments from a bird's eye view. This game is exactly what it's supposed to be. Brutal, and I like it.
Note: It could use some named units that progress as they fight battles. The sturmtruppen on the German side and Pal's Brigade on the allied side, for example. Add some mechanics where they can be lost if you are careless, and I would be happy.
Very interesting concept. Would love to see a series on this to fully see the game.
Ai Machine gun is working when under fire cause you have it at the 3rd highest difficulty. AI usually gets to cheat in these games. From what I've played so far you can only have 2 troops assault a trench at a time. That's why your 3rd guys are just hanging outside getting shot the hell up.
32:56
I haven't played this game, but I'd say the reason the A.I seems like it's cheating is because the A.I can pay better attention to what it already knows.
People tend to focus one one or two places at a time, but the A.I can focus on everywhere it has visibility
Pravus should play more democracy 4. i would love to see a hardest difficulty america run. day 158
there are not many ww1 strategy games, since my last ww 1 rts games, the entente. but this one looks potential and promising,
This game looks really awesome! Nice gameplay hoping to see more!
a survival ww1 game would be pretty fire
about the artillery having more range than it shows its probably an intended feature since ww1 artillery were inaccurate
Was expecting this to be more like total war
SERIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ah yes a game where ptsd is an actual mechanic I need this game
16:20 all quiet on the western front
First, the movie and then this game. WW1 is getting more attention. Sabaton is proud.
this is why WW2 games is more prevalent than WW1.
Hey, i really liked this episode and was sondering if You are foing to make more about ww1
?
looks like a great WW1 game that depicts WW1 well
Thanks for the video.
Just FYI. For Lille it’s “leel” not “lillay”.
Looks like you should use heavy artillery to destroy machinegun nests and use bombers to destroy enemy artillery? Because cost of calling down even 4 heavy artillery barrages is much lower than calling a bomber (36 versus 90).
This might be worth checking out after I'm done with RE4
It definitely is different from what we are used to, and looks realistic
And might as well improve the micro by playing it
Around 35:50 (and in a couple earlier spots, too) there is an explosion effect shown happening all along a trench line in front of it. It doesn't seem to be artillery because it is quite linear looking in its effect. But, what exactly is it? Some sort of mine field effect?
I think it’s really cool how it goes from grand strategy to rts based on your troop movement, are there any other games like this?
Total War
Pls make more of this
Awesome game, it would be nice for more parts
The Dlc whill be on the Eastern Front :D
Oh exciting. Been looking for a good WW1 game.
oooo, I look forward to the long play of this
I really like this game because I prefer drawn out battles of attrition
So are we going to see more or not?
I think it would be cool if this game let you send a rush while in the field commander mode and then you become a soldier in an fps style mode wher you are trying to get across no man’s land
No
The AI artillery needs to be heavily nerfed.
Ew, imagine playing as the Allies. The German Empire was the righteous party in that war. The Allies were the bad guys in both wars. Especially in WW2, we did way more heinous shit than any one except Japan and Russia (excluding them from Allies because they only ever serve themselves).
I watched some dude play on elite and he just made 2 doom stacks and owned every battle. there needs to be some type of restriction on how many units you can have in one hex. Too many and you get a penalty.
Huh, game actually looks a bit better than i thought and calculated
I love being wrong about games being bad
Can you play the campaign in Multiplayer? Would love to play this campaign with my friends.
The only thing that keeps me from playing is the price tag of the game...
Would love to see you play some Millennium Dawn mod for HOI4! Pravus takes on the modern age! Lol.
Praise Pravus!
There are ww1 rst games on mobile and flash when it was around
great game but way too expensive imo... Probably will still pick it up but hope for a 50% sale
looking good
Do you think we will get a series out of this?
also may i ask please if you put down a basic trench, Will it only cost 8 to make it an upgraded trench? or is it just 10
Dark souls RTS version 😅
Its like an old browser games where you play with trenches and using artillery and stuff so the enemy loses morale. Forgot the name though. If someone remembers it please do tell.
Warfare 1917 & Warfare 1944 are the two I can think of. Some of my favorite browser games. Though Mud & Blood is good, too.
I can't be the only one annoyed by the fact they used "Allies" instead of "Entente".
People just arent used to the IA haveing the same capabilitys as the Player himself, mostly they are somehow weakend. Thats why ppl think a Fair AI is cheating cauzed they not used to it
Hey bro when will you return to old world blues mod for hearts of iron know your busy with life stuff but really wanna see another Playthrough of it
How do you change the position of the trenches I can only seem to get them in one line and nothing else
What? there is a lot of people complaining about losing against an IA in a new game? I'm shocked! The audacity of some... especially those who stream. They are under pressure of their viewer to succeed and so instead of doing the right thing and say i'm new to this game i need to learn they blame the IA. Stupid!
I think it’s all come down to difficulty on expert AI cheats on every game but in normal or easy mode I think it’s work the way game intended to work
just so yoou know in french "TH" is pronounced just like "T" so you pronounce it chateau Tierry also you dont pronounce le last "e" in a word unless it looks like "é"