Page 1 of 1

Feedback and thoughts after attack on Cherbourg

Posted: Sun Aug 03, 2025 4:58 pm
by Joyreaper
Personal Experience: 1,500 hours across HOI3 and 4. Just over 1,000 hours across all the combat mission games available on steam. Every total war game up to Warhammer 3, 780 hours across all their title combined. Every wargame made by Eugen, 400 hours across them. Not sure their is a strategy or top down game published by Slitherine that I don't own.

As a foreword, I played some of the tutorial but couldn't figure out if I was doing something wrong with enemy units taking days to collapse or something with the tutorial objective checks not working so I got enough of the concept from it and the Youtube video and skipped to the second mission to really get my teeth into it and learn it for myself.



Things I liked after completing the second mission.

Wonderful concept, had loads of fun just replaying the second mission a number of times and learning the different game mechanics.

Loads of replayability, especially I would think on bigger maps and if you lean into more sandbox type scenarios of giving the players a far away objective with a number of different avenues of attack.

I really enjoy the historic photos and looking through them all while waiting for a day to complete or attack to finish. As someone who enjoys learning and reading about history and WW2, I was impressed by how many of the images were novel to me.

It is really fun to zoom in and watch your individual troops advance and attack and take ground. I'm an avid map painter enjoyer so I spend 5 minutes giving orders and 40 just watching them carry it all out and seeing the different ways each battalion type responses to each order type.

Tanks and infantry feel like they perform well at tasks they realistically should be good at. Tanks are good at breaking frontline units to then push to the backline and dismantle artillery and HQ units. Not the greatest at clearing out large areas of map from leftover enemy units. Infantry don't really make much progress when frontline assaulting into prepared positions but are great at clearing out areas after the tanks have moved through and surrendering any units that are left.



Thoughts I had during the second mission. Not necessarily bad or good.

You always have to have dedicated units to attack versus defending. Have to leave enough infantry units to defend the existing line and then set aside atleast one infantry and tank battalion for taking new ground and holding it effectively. Any less than that results in the enemy pushing through the gaps in your lines and cutting off supply to the attacking and/or defending units. Can see that being an issue, for example I feel if you attacked Cherbourg with one less infantry battalion than what you are historically given, you wouldn't have enough units to defend the starting frontline and to take new ground without the enemy pushing through gaps and cutting supply lines.

I find it hard to understand why some enemy units break right away and some stay fighting against a 10 to 1 fight for hours before breaking, bit of an exaggeration but it gets the point across. It makes sense when engineers get caught in front of a breakthrough attack that they break easily and usually most infantry units will do the same but then some single units will take hours to break when being attacked from 4+ units from all sides. Not necessarily bad, just hard to understand.
I assume it could be from some getting hit harder by artillery and air strikes beforehand but still hard to comprehend in the moment.

Supply stockpiling was difficult to grasp at first. More important to have a few supply depots close to the front line then a lot of fully stocked ones further back. Really, ones further back just hog supply and should be destroyed to send more supplies to the front. Not sure that that's the best/most realistic system. I think a system of having a main supply dump at your point where supplies are added hourly and then a line of supply to a depot at your front line areas could work just a well. And maybe a system of the more time two supply depots are connected the more supply moves between them to simulate roads being repaired over time.
As well as bigger roads being able to send more supply per hour versus small roads having a low max cap of supply that can be transferred per hour over them. Would influence players to focus on main roads as objectives of high importance to seize and defend. As well as keeping units that need a-lot of supply like tanks close to main roads to keep them from quickly running out of supply and being cutoff and destroyed.
To go along with this, a mechanic to select what depot a "frontline" depot is pulling it's supply from and what roads it is taking to get there. Adds an element of needing to manage supply lines and figuring out what routes to take to get the most supply to the front without risking the connection being cut.
This gives the player the ability to control where their supplies line run through instead of the automatic system now that seems prone to arbitrarily getting supply lines to whole battalions cut and getting 20 to 30 messages about it.
And I'm sure we all know the saying "Amateurs talk tactics, professionals study logistics," Adding a way to give the player control of the supply lines feels in line with that idea.

Complex attack needs some work but gives a good idea of what a good attack plan would look like when doing each step yourself.
Similar thoughts for complex defense but with less issues that need addressing. Likely just because an "as good as it can be defensive line" is easier to setup then a good attack order chain.



Issues I had pop up during the 10 or so attempts I had before completing the mission.

Occasional bad stutter when clicking friendly units or hovering over active orders.

Would really like a way to not have any units or battalions selected to clear space on the screen to be able to just watch the action.

Rest and refit does not wait till they are fully resupplied to finish. Mainly in relation to plane units. I would like to put them on close air support for say for 4 hours, then R&R till they have full supply then another 4 hour close air support so they can fight the next 4 hours without needing resupply. Right now the R&R instantly completes when they land back at base while having no supply left. Not how I would have expected that order to work. Have not tried that order with land units.

Battles don't currently feel very cohesive. Units slipping past each other, either enemies slipping past your defensive line or your units doing the same on offense, generally just feels bad. Units should have some form of cohesion or glue to the units next to them when advancing or defending and wrap around enemy units they come up against, not some of your units slip past all alone and keep marching past the main battle. So that way the main body of the force stays together and fights as a more unified front until a large hole at the center of the breakthrough line is made and then the main body of the battalion pushes forward together and not piecemeal.

Splitting a Corp I accidently made crashed the game.

1 or 2 enemy units slipping past your fully intact defensive lines and wrecking supply lines is beyond annoying. Back to the unit cohesion thing.

Don't need 20 alerts for supply being cut off.

Capturing enemy supply depots that are still being built pauses the construction but they also can't be deleted.

What's the point of mines? A single battalion sitting in a city for days on end should not be able to stop 5 battalions assaulting them all at once just because they were given the whole scenario of time to lay mines. I think they should be AT mines only as there is no way to clear mines while advancing or some sort of order to advance slowly and clear mines before advancing. They seem to have devastating effects on infantry and tanks making them the single most effective form of defense against large assaults with no way of countering or avoiding them till after the frontline has been pushed back. Can be seen as realistic but there is no way to counter it currently besides wasting a large number of lives to push through and then come back and clear them out for follow on forces. If mines only affected tanks then you could have infantry push forward through the mined area while giving a clear mine order that only affects the engineer unit to where it stops and searches for mines and clears them while the frontline infantry keeps advancing. Or something along those lines.



Even with the gripes I have, it's a beta and I kept coming back to try and beat the mission because for even a closed beta, it's still really fun and I have a strong desire to like it and help improve it because I enjoy it so much and want to keep playing even in it's current early state and especially while it keeps growing.

I will probably skip the third mission as I don't have much patience for defense only missions when the enemy tanks can just slip past even the most condensed defense lines. I will probably try the fourth mission next for as many times as it takes to get good at it and post another breakdown of my thoughts afterwards.

Thank you all for reading and for your collective effort in making such a fun and unique game!

Re: Feedback and thoughts after attack on Cherbourg

Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2025 6:39 pm
by LiamR
Thanks for the feedback. We just had a new update and would be very happy for any additional feedback you can offer.

We are definitely aware of some of the issues you already mentioned (like the alerts for supply cutoff) and are working to fix them as we get closer and closer to releasing.

Re: Feedback and thoughts after attack on Cherbourg

Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2025 6:55 pm
by FoolishMortals
Joyreaper wrote: Sun Aug 03, 2025 4:58 pm Personal Experience: 1,500 hours across HOI3 and 4. Just over 1,000 hours across all the combat mission games available on steam. Every total war game up to Warhammer 3, 780 hours across all their title combined. Every wargame made by Eugen, 400 hours across them. Not sure their is a strategy or top down game published by Slitherine that I don't own.

As a foreword, I played some of the tutorial but couldn't figure out if I was doing something wrong with enemy units taking days to collapse or something with the tutorial objective checks not working so I got enough of the concept from it and the Youtube video and skipped to the second mission to really get my teeth into it and learn it for myself.



Things I liked after completing the second mission.

Wonderful concept, had loads of fun just replaying the second mission a number of times and learning the different game mechanics.

Loads of replayability, especially I would think on bigger maps and if you lean into more sandbox type scenarios of giving the players a far away objective with a number of different avenues of attack.

I really enjoy the historic photos and looking through them all while waiting for a day to complete or attack to finish. As someone who enjoys learning and reading about history and WW2, I was impressed by how many of the images were novel to me.

It is really fun to zoom in and watch your individual troops advance and attack and take ground. I'm an avid map painter enjoyer so I spend 5 minutes giving orders and 40 just watching them carry it all out and seeing the different ways each battalion type responses to each order type.

Tanks and infantry feel like they perform well at tasks they realistically should be good at. Tanks are good at breaking frontline units to then push to the backline and dismantle artillery and HQ units. Not the greatest at clearing out large areas of map from leftover enemy units. Infantry don't really make much progress when frontline assaulting into prepared positions but are great at clearing out areas after the tanks have moved through and surrendering any units that are left.



Thoughts I had during the second mission. Not necessarily bad or good.

You always have to have dedicated units to attack versus defending. Have to leave enough infantry units to defend the existing line and then set aside atleast one infantry and tank battalion for taking new ground and holding it effectively. Any less than that results in the enemy pushing through the gaps in your lines and cutting off supply to the attacking and/or defending units. Can see that being an issue, for example I feel if you attacked Cherbourg with one less infantry battalion than what you are historically given, you wouldn't have enough units to defend the starting frontline and to take new ground without the enemy pushing through gaps and cutting supply lines.

I find it hard to understand why some enemy units break right away and some stay fighting against a 10 to 1 fight for hours before breaking, bit of an exaggeration but it gets the point across. It makes sense when engineers get caught in front of a breakthrough attack that they break easily and usually most infantry units will do the same but then some single units will take hours to break when being attacked from 4+ units from all sides. Not necessarily bad, just hard to understand.
I assume it could be from some getting hit harder by artillery and air strikes beforehand but still hard to comprehend in the moment.

Supply stockpiling was difficult to grasp at first. More important to have a few supply depots close to the front line then a lot of fully stocked ones further back. Really, ones further back just hog supply and should be destroyed to send more supplies to the front. Not sure that that's the best/most realistic system. I think a system of having a main supply dump at your point where supplies are added hourly and then a line of supply to a depot at your front line areas could work just a well. And maybe a system of the more time two supply depots are connected the more supply moves between them to simulate roads being repaired over time.
As well as bigger roads being able to send more supply per hour versus small roads having a low max cap of supply that can be transferred per hour over them. Would influence players to focus on main roads as objectives of high importance to seize and defend. As well as keeping units that need a-lot of supply like tanks close to main roads to keep them from quickly running out of supply and being cutoff and destroyed.
To go along with this, a mechanic to select what depot a "frontline" depot is pulling it's supply from and what roads it is taking to get there. Adds an element of needing to manage supply lines and figuring out what routes to take to get the most supply to the front without risking the connection being cut.
This gives the player the ability to control where their supplies line run through instead of the automatic system now that seems prone to arbitrarily getting supply lines to whole battalions cut and getting 20 to 30 messages about it.
And I'm sure we all know the saying "Amateurs talk tactics, professionals study logistics," Adding a way to give the player control of the supply lines feels in line with that idea.

Complex attack needs some work but gives a good idea of what a good attack plan would look like when doing each step yourself.
Similar thoughts for complex defense but with less issues that need addressing. Likely just because an "as good as it can be defensive line" is easier to setup then a good attack order chain.



Issues I had pop up during the 10 or so attempts I had before completing the mission.

Occasional bad stutter when clicking friendly units or hovering over active orders.

Would really like a way to not have any units or battalions selected to clear space on the screen to be able to just watch the action.

Rest and refit does not wait till they are fully resupplied to finish. Mainly in relation to plane units. I would like to put them on close air support for say for 4 hours, then R&R till they have full supply then another 4 hour close air support so they can fight the next 4 hours without needing resupply. Right now the R&R instantly completes when they land back at base while having no supply left. Not how I would have expected that order to work. Have not tried that order with land units.

Battles don't currently feel very cohesive. Units slipping past each other, either enemies slipping past your defensive line or your units doing the same on offense, generally just feels bad. Units should have some form of cohesion or glue to the units next to them when advancing or defending and wrap around enemy units they come up against, not some of your units slip past all alone and keep marching past the main battle. So that way the main body of the force stays together and fights as a more unified front until a large hole at the center of the breakthrough line is made and then the main body of the battalion pushes forward together and not piecemeal.

Splitting a Corp I accidently made crashed the game.

1 or 2 enemy units slipping past your fully intact defensive lines and wrecking supply lines is beyond annoying. Back to the unit cohesion thing.

Don't need 20 alerts for supply being cut off.

Capturing enemy supply depots that are still being built pauses the construction but they also can't be deleted.

What's the point of mines? A single battalion sitting in a city for days on end should not be able to stop 5 battalions assaulting them all at once just because they were given the whole scenario of time to lay mines. I think they should be AT mines only as there is no way to clear mines while advancing or some sort of order to advance slowly and clear mines before advancing. They seem to have devastating effects on infantry and tanks making them the single most effective form of defense against large assaults with no way of countering or avoiding them till after the frontline has been pushed back. Can be seen as realistic but there is no way to counter it currently besides wasting a large number of lives to push through and then come back and clear them out for follow on forces. If mines only affected tanks then you could have infantry push forward through the mined area while giving a clear mine order that only affects the engineer unit to where it stops and searches for mines and clears them while the frontline infantry keeps advancing. Or something along those lines.



Even with the gripes I have, it's a beta and I kept coming back to try and beat the mission because for even a closed beta, it's still really fun and I have a strong desire to like it and help improve it because I enjoy it so much and want to keep playing even in it's current early state and especially while it keeps growing.

I will probably skip the third mission as I don't have much patience for defense only missions when the enemy tanks can just slip past even the most condensed defense lines. I will probably try the fourth mission next for as many times as it takes to get good at it and post another breakdown of my thoughts afterwards.

Thank you all for reading and for your collective effort in making such a fun and unique game!
Thanks for the very detailed feedback!

Which mission were you playing? Cherbourg?

Supply: Definitely a bit tricky, we need to do a better job explaining it. Depots only fill with supply if they are supplying a unit. Units are supplied from the nearest depot, with rate determined by need (rate of consumption).

Mines: Theoretically minefields are meant to be powerful area denial, but they take time and supply to plant. If the enemy never ends up moving through them, they're a waste of time. Engineers can clear minefields without casualties, and while clearing other units can move through safely. We'll be adding an explicit 'clear mines' order so engineers can try to clear mines before an assault.

Unit cohesion is a tricky thing. We still want breakthroughs to be possible, but we also want large cohesive battles, but it looks stupid when 6+ units are all shooting the same target. They need to stick close to allies, but not too close. We're definitely still working on that.

Looking forward to your future feedback!