Protracted game developers who for years fed the players with promises and hopes, in the end are usually quite good games, strong and sturdy. However, no "shock the foundations or the fantastic gameplay, which they attributed in absentia, they usually do not show. That is what happened with the "Second World". Five campaigns: in the USSR, Germany, USA / Britain, France and even Poland! The battlefields 2x2 kilometers in size! Modified engine "IL-2"! Fair ballistics! These TTX! Impressive? Yes, but it is not the whole list.
 | |  | Mode allows the placement of the troops carefully designed system of fire even before the battle begins | | If today was a Russian winter, they would not run out away from the burning tank |
Thoroughness worthy of respect "Second World" was originally marketed as a very serious project, where a high degree of reliability, played the key elements of battle: line of sight, ballistics, tactics and morale of the troops. Looking ahead, we can say that we are not deceived in some way it's all here to eat. And that's why the game still turned out not quite so, what kind of "dream and dreams", we now discuss in detail.
Given the highly realistic gameplay may at first glance seem difficult, but in reality it is quite simple: after a few training command and control forces will be simple and natural, which greatly helps thoughtful interface. I must say that combat units are often not needed in a particular administration - they are quite sensibly carry fire from one target to another, usually correctly choose the type of munition and not worth the columns under fire. Sometimes it seems that the defensive battle can successfully go at all without any responsive government, but this impression is certainly wrong. A player must show his skill before the collision, in the mode of arrangement of the troops. Since the Second World War "with great care calculates visibility, could easily be that combat units will not be able to fire on the advancing enemy from the fact that it is fully or partially cover the uneven terrain, bushes or trees - the redeployment of the same gun during a the battle is very problematic. In the initial placement of the offensive battle of the troops does not matter much - there has to actively maneuver combat units already in combat. Fortunately, doing so is quite easy and convenient by virtue of interface flexibility, and because of the possibility to decide the game on pause.
At the same time management is not free from some annoying features: for example, you can not change the density of the order of battle, because of what often choose the wrong formation, which is really needed, or specify the destination for each unit manually.
 | |  | Three "sorokapyatki with trained calculations can work wonders | | Relax under the tank is bad for health |
Combat units carry out orders issued bad - to tear my hair out and screaming "Where are you Presov, you idiot!" Has only seldom. Importantly - to remember that the ability of the crew managed with the technique depends on his experience. However, the major battles (for example, in the reconstruction of Prokhorovka) pathfinding and other internal mechanisms that control the movement of armored vehicles, starting pretty much "rebate" regardless of the qualifications of the crews. Even in conventional small battle tanks no-no and even substituted for some reason the board under fire from the enemy that, given the thoroughness of ballistics and armor penetration play in the game, could have serious consequences.
Incidentally, the ballistics. The difference between the armor-piercing high explosive (APHE), armor-piercing subcaliber (APCR and APDS) and cumulative (HEAT) rounds really is, it feels good in the game, not to mention the fundamental difference between the armor piercing and high explosive fragmentation shells. Nevertheless, sometimes there are strange cases when an armor-piercing projectile can not penetrate the board or the stern armor from a distance of several meters, although the corresponding indicator in the interface shows that the destruction of the armor is inevitable.
Despite this, the damage model technology and its parts in the game is implemented, for the most part convincingly - it is clear that the developers have approached the issue with utmost seriousness, as well as to the reproduction of the tactical and technical characteristics of military hardware.
 | Tank melee |
There are two questions to the developers of the Nazis: why these SU-85 went for us "in the melee, and why we have not yet turned them into a colander?
 | |  | In the calculations, antitank guns observed a large turnover of staff. | | Before the fight can be refined composition of forces entrusted to you. |
The main part of any weapons - the head of its owner But the basic element of military equipment and in life and in the "Second World" is of course the crew.It is noteworthy that the crew can be knocked out, even if the fighting machine remains in relative order. Over all, it concerns anti-tank guns, protected only the front and actively under fire high explosive shells from the attacking tanks - sometimes during the fleeting battlefield completely replaced by three calculation. But the tank crews who sometimes die, while the tank is still able to shoot, ride or even do both at once. While crews are composed of two to five people, with technology and can handle alone, but he will need additional time to move from one place to another battle by changing the function. At the same time expand the carriage guns one person can not. To change the arc of fire, or roll back the instrument to a new position, one pair of hands is not enough. This logical system does not work with weapons, which has no wheels and is tolerated in the life calculation of several people. Thus, in the game there are machine guns on tripods, but to dismantle and move them to a new location can not. But it's not so bad - there are, after all, the guns on wheeled machines. Worst of all, for the same reason there are no small-caliber mortars - a very common, simple and effective weapon of infantry, which allowed during the war fabricate various interesting things.
 | |  | At the Kursk Bulge | | Why do you persecute "Tiger"? |
Repeatedly criticized the idea of the possibility of capturing enemy technology has, in fact, both positive and negative sides. The downside is that the landing of a simple foot soldier for the levers of a tank or gun sight (especially if the technique trophy) really puts an end to any realism. The positive side is that it is not always a complicated technique planted it "Sivolap infantry. In the "Second World" is frequently encountered situations when the tank is seriously damaged (say, a caterpillar has jammed or tower), and the entire crew, or at least partially survived. Sometimes it's the opposite - defective tank and killed or fled the carriage. In these cases, it can be formed from multiple lost combat effectiveness of units one battle-worthy. Particularly heated battles often end up in captured enemy technology.
This is a remarkable and quite realistic feature of the "Second World", but it spoils the weird and tricky mezhmissiony management system throughput. Technique trophy at the end of the battle for some reason taken away, although active and prolonged use of the captured tanks, armored cars and guns - a common practice since the war. However, this is minor compared with the headache that gets a player's attempt to use the "second world" role-playing elements of the system. The idea of pumping fighters during the battle would be quite attractive and appropriate, if these men do not Murley like flies, but the mission campaign is not shared by some for many months - it is unclear what department deals with all this time.Even less clear what its status: a platoon, company, battalion? And why is its commander throughout the war does not receive a raise, still directing approximately the same number of people and technology? And why the tanks and guns are relatively many, but the infantry is so little?
 | |  | It's a miracle invulnerable enemy equipment must hit the heel, that is in the lead "star" | | And here is the control shot to the stern, unfortunately - to no effect: strong stuff - "Ferdinand" |
This, of course, rhetorical questions - it is clear that all these absurdities are due to hardware and budgetary constraints that the creators of the game were surrounded on all sides. However, there are questions directly to the developers: for example, why, when the crew or the calculation is a tank, armored vehicle or a cannon, the soldiers did not sit automatically in accordance with the level of their skills? Developers write that it is necessary to train fighters unusual for them to occupations. Not everyone will like the need to teach in the heat of battle chauffeur craft some of Vasily Pupkin, never before is not sitting behind the wheel - especially if it is Basil in half a minute, is likely to be killed. But the fuss and hassle of this "feature" adds fairly. Very surprised as to why among the men who come in as reinforcements, no qualified gunners, while trucks, where they go, pulling a trailer guns. Given the extremely high mortality rate among artillery calculations, this is not a small niggle.
 | |  | The level of detail is impressive technology, but why is it so neat? | | Undermining of ammunition - an unpleasant event in the life of any tank |
But the model of morale is implemented well. "Morality" can both facilitate the game and make it more difficult. Difficulties arise due to the fact that under the onslaught of the enemy or being in the minority individual soldiers and the crews quickly lose their courage and try to leave the battlefield - this, incidentally, greatly hinders doing depth coverage, zasylaya to the rear of the enemy surprise teams. Plus the player is that under our onslaught of the enemy, too, can run. Often the destruction of the enemy is not a prerequisite for the completion of the mission - just to make him run. Therefore, the correct approach to business "morality" rather helps to play than a hindrance.
If you cast a mind's eye what has already been discussed, it is seen that the described advantages of the "Second World" outweigh the disadvantages described. So why is the game still caused widespread disillusion? This stems from two main reasons: an overly high expectations of players and overly meticulous simulation of various elements of gameplay. "Second World" demonstrates that the power of modern machines is still not enough for accurate simulation of this battle: for even small skirmishes on small cards the size of 2x2 km require at least one gigabyte of storage and a serious CPU power - to say nothing about the collision of at least two of these battalions . Therefore, no battalions, or even your mouth, not to mention the shelves, cabinets and armies in the game there.Modest size cards and poorly controlled player in the process of commissioning new power seriously limits the ability of command of the troops, turning control of the fight almost to the solution of a series of tactical puzzles.
 | |  | "Miracles" scripting: we took one line of trenches and the Germans fled from the neighboring | | Games Prokhorovka not as large as the real one, but still - it was cool! |
|
