Mixed bag
There is a lot to enjoy in the depth of the game, however i have run into similar issues with the ai forces becoming overpowered/play balance. It is almost like the allies did not really win in western europe based on some of the scenarios. I know you mentioned points generated based on tiles held in another response, but that negates the actual industrial capacity of the allies, which is not based on how much territory is gained in the short term of an invasion. In Overlord, the germans keep rolling new, powerful units into the battle even as cities are gained by the allies. Every time i think i have turned the corner, 6-8 new armor units appear and there are not enough points to heal allied units. It needs adjustments.
Show more
Looking forward to more WWII units
Will you add Lockheed P-80 Shooting Star and PB4Y-2 Privateer to the game please? Really looking forward to this…
some suggestion
During my playthrough, I found that at the strategic level, encirclement is basically unnecessary. As long as you can directly destroy the enemy’s forces through head-on combat, there is little reason to attempt a pincer movement or surround them.
I think the fundamental issue is that the importance of supply is not emphasized enough. If supply only affects recovery, there is no real incentive to encircle enemy units — because when movement is already restricted by ZOC, they cannot escape anyway, so you can simply eliminate them through direct attacks.
I would suggest adding an optional rule: when a unit’s supply falls below 50%, its attack strength should decrease proportionally. The threshold could be adjusted based on unit size — larger formations would suffer from supply shortages earlier. For example, a division-level unit might only lose combat effectiveness below 50% supply, while an army-level unit might start suffering penalties below 70% supply.
This would encourage players to use encirclement and cutting off supply lines more often, rather than relying on constant frontal assaults.
Another possible reason is that retreating damaged units may simply be too difficult. A damaged unit often has a hard time leaving the frontline, so unless it is an elite unit, there is usually little incentive to withdraw it, move it deep into the rear, replenish its strength, and then return it to combat. As a result, players may prefer to keep damaged units fighting until the end rather than preserving them for future battles.
Of course, it is also possible that my understanding of the game is not deep enough. This is only based on my own experience playing Europe 1939. At least in my games, I rarely found it necessary to deliberately encircle and destroy enemy forces at the strategic level. Most of the time, direct confrontations seemed to be enough to achieve the same result.
I think the fundamental issue is that the importance of supply is not emphasized enough. If supply only affects recovery, there is no real incentive to encircle enemy units — because when movement is already restricted by ZOC, they cannot escape anyway, so you can simply eliminate them through direct attacks.
I would suggest adding an optional rule: when a unit’s supply falls below 50%, its attack strength should decrease proportionally. The threshold could be adjusted based on unit size — larger formations would suffer from supply shortages earlier. For example, a division-level unit might only lose combat effectiveness below 50% supply, while an army-level unit might start suffering penalties below 70% supply.
This would encourage players to use encirclement and cutting off supply lines more often, rather than relying on constant frontal assaults.
Another possible reason is that retreating damaged units may simply be too difficult. A damaged unit often has a hard time leaving the frontline, so unless it is an elite unit, there is usually little incentive to withdraw it, move it deep into the rear, replenish its strength, and then return it to combat. As a result, players may prefer to keep damaged units fighting until the end rather than preserving them for future battles.
Of course, it is also possible that my understanding of the game is not deep enough. This is only based on my own experience playing Europe 1939. At least in my games, I rarely found it necessary to deliberately encircle and destroy enemy forces at the strategic level. Most of the time, direct confrontations seemed to be enough to achieve the same result.
Show more
Extremely clever AI
You will need all of your wits to not get steamrolled - that”s demanding, sometimes frustrating but also highly satisfying.
Part of the menu is covered by the camera
Hi, the game looks really good. But I did not even start, because part of the menu is covered by the camera. The scale option is not able to fix this. It would be nice if you would not use the full display size with round corners and camera, but render instead into the good visible sub area.
Response from developer
Hello, It is unfortunately not something I can fix in any easy way, otherwise, it would have been done years ago. The only solution to this issue requires to remake the entire UI from scratch, which is sadly not going to happen. Turn your phone to the other side, works fine on my iPhone 15. Game is best played on a tablet regardless, UI is designed for PC which requires a big screen in the first place (this is not a mobile game, this is a PC game ported to mobile/tablet). Feel free to request a refund if you’d like, that’s fine as well.
