(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thelordzgamesstudio.com%2Fsite%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F11%2FSLIT_WH40KA_MKTG_Backgkround_Hive.jpg&hash=26ab9bfc6a619fa488f9c2bb078cb085107aba68) (http://www.thelordzgamesstudio.com/site/2014/11/warhammer-40000-release-date-announced/slit_wh40ka_mktg_backgkround_hive/)
After a period of waiting, we are finally ready to share with you that the highly anticipated Warhammer 40,000: Armageddon is releasing on the 26th of this month!
With the beta well underway, we are currently making the final changes to the game based on community feedback. Developed by Flashback Studio and the Lordz Games Studio, Warhammer 40,000: Armageddon is designed to bring the Warhammer 40,0000 universe to life in a deep and rewarding strategy gaming experience.
In "Armageddon", you will be able to take part in the brutal second war for the planet in a fully narrated campaign, or one of the many multiplayer skirmish challenges. Fans will finally be able to lead the Imperial forces of the Armageddon Steel Legion and Space Marines from a variety of Chapters against the Ork invasion through over 30 scenarios, on the hostile terrain of the planet and its gigantic Hive Cities.
Click here (http://bit.ly/1jTFZZo) to find out more on Warhammer: 40,000: Armageddon.
Cool. Just a couple more weeks.
So is this pretty much a reskinned Panzer Corps?
It seems so and I am underwhelmed by the gfx...these little men look like...I dunno...not like SM or brutish Orcs. There might still be a good game in there, but the pics don't make me grab my CC. ???
That is some seriously awesome artwork. It alone almost makes me want to get this game.
So for those of us who've not played Panzer Corps, and/or have an at least-mild interest in the 40k lore, will I likely want to pick this up?
Quote from: Martok on November 06, 2014, 05:02:57 PM
So for those of us who've not played Panzer Corps, and/or have an at least-mild interest in the 40k lore, will I likely want to pick this up?
Probably.
Panzer Corps is a good game. Very light, but it has sufficient unit diversity that you'll probably like it with a WH40K skin. It won't play like the minis game, but that's probably a huge positive.
Quote from: Martok on November 06, 2014, 05:02:57 PM
That is some seriously awesome artwork. ..[snip]...
It just looks a gothic version of Minas Tirith to me. It could almost be a still from LOTR:ROTK..
I must say, I'm feeling pretty underwhelmed about this game, a reskinned Panzer Corps doesn't tickle my fancy at all. They should plonk all those lovely 3-d models they made for the 2-d counters into the Battle Academy engine as I think that would be the better fit. A 3-d Final Liberation would be really cool..
This throws my autumn gaming plans into Chaos.
It is extremely painful to admit this, but I have a bad feeling that this game is going to be a disappointment. The screenshots just do not look very enticing. The scale is extremely off. Giant infantry models with tiny tanks and everything looks awkward with the backdrop of the terrain, which is also off scale. It does little to capture the vast scale of the Armageddon wars. The screenshots should conjure images of epic proportions. They don't.
I feel like Cassandra on this one.
I said it at the time it was announced and I'll say it now: a PC re-skin is a disappointment and a poor use of one of my favorite nom-historical IPs.
I suppose WH40K might make sense at something other than the tactical level, but I've never been able to figure out why you'd bother. The glory has always been the toys an the mythos.
Lost opportunity, I think me.
Best,
Jim
"Cyrano"
8/7)
Quote from: Cyrano on November 06, 2014, 11:47:36 PM
I feel like Cassandra on this one.
You got licked by snakes in a temple while sleeping and now have the power of prophesy?
We still wantss a new Chaos Gate. X-Com style. Yesss.
Lord Zimoa , i am missing a whole bunch of teasing gameplay videos to already get released dropje voor dropje to show the kwaliteit of the new game to the public so close to the relase date ?
(PS: to sad you didn't made it to the Spiel14. would have liked to chat about this game)
Such negativity in this thread.
Quote from: jomni on November 07, 2014, 03:21:31 AM
Such negativity in this thread.
i think there was a lot of hope it would conjur up the lore and the universe and its not going to with that backdrop and those units
months ago on the first headline drop i couldnt wait, since then my expectations have gone down and down
Quote from: undercovergeek on November 07, 2014, 08:05:44 AM
Quote from: jomni on November 07, 2014, 03:21:31 AM
Such negativity in this thread.
i think there was a lot of hope it would conjur up the lore and the universe and its not going to with that backdrop and those units
months ago on the first headline drop i couldnt wait, since then my expectations have gone down and down
+1. This WAS my most anticipated game of e year. Now, I'm contemplating whether I will even buy it.
In fairness, so far all we have to judge this by is a few screenshots.
Visuals.
Let's see how the gameplay goes.
Sure, but what is it they say about a picture? It's worth 1,000 words.
I'm with LongBlade. I mean, sure, granted, a Chaos Gate remake (or that other game from SSI at about the same time -- which didn't at least one of those use a variant of the 5-star engine?? Which is what Panzer Corps effectively also is as a blatantly direct remake/expansion of Panzer General??) with X-Com blinginess would be nice. But the property lends itself to lots of different interpretation possibilities.
I like Panzer Generalish games. I like WH40K. I'm willing to consider it, despite the necessarily abstracted graphics.
(Heck, I routinely praise the Fantasy Wars / Elven Legacy games, which are a direct port of upgraded 5-star engine originally meant to be a direct remake of "Fantasy General", and those games are almost Warhammer fantasy IP already. Not many practical steps from that to WH40K Panzer General.)
The main problem with me is that the screen shots make the game look like more like a mod than a full release. And they lack atmosphere.
Quote from: Pinetree on November 07, 2014, 01:06:17 PM
The main problem with me is that the screen shots make the game look like more like a mod than a full release. And they lack atmosphere.
I agree.
I guess what I meant to say was: as wargamers, we can overlook graphics if the gameplay is good.
That said, iffy graphics do not guarantee good gameplay.
My guess - and it's only a guess - is that for guys like Martok who never played Panzer Corps, they'll find the gameplay fine.
For those of us who are used to seeing panzers and Messerschmidts streaking across the map with this engine, the experience may be less satisfying.
But, let's not get ahead of ourselves. No one (here) has played the game yet. (How Slitherine failed to get preview code to Grogheads is a different question)
Let's see what gets delivered to us in a couple more weeks.
Maybe they have used wrong game world and or people are just abit bored either way it may be they have taken the cash cow thats Panzer Corps a step to far.
I reckon we don't need to see how it plays as we all know how PC and PG play and I doubt it's changed that much it feels like a whole new game.
As I've said many times, Battle Academy was a more suited game engine.
I agree about the scale issues with the graphics, just doesn't look right, also the Generic number each unit is supposed to represent seems flawed. Does 5 mean there are supposed to be five of that type for instance and if so I wonder if those sorts of units went into battle in groups of 5 and even if there where 5 of them on the battlefield in the first place. This is where the PC engine loses its appeal for me..way to generic in what a unit represents.
Mmmm...licked by snakes...
Zzzzz...
Best,
Jim
"Cyrano"
8/7)
Quote from: Bison on November 06, 2014, 11:50:55 PM
Quote from: Cyrano on November 06, 2014, 11:47:36 PM
I feel like Cassandra on this one.
You got licked by snakes in a temple while sleeping and now have the power of prophesy?
How do you think he paid for college?
I'm still hoping, but I've not been optimistic from the start about trying to do 40K using the PC engine. But then, I hate the PC engine, so there's pretty much no way I'm going to be a fan of this.
Quote from: MikeGER on November 07, 2014, 02:47:49 AM
dropje voor dropje
Dropje = small piece of licorice (usually salted)
Druppeltje = small drop of liquid
;)
Quote from: panzerde on November 08, 2014, 01:03:37 PM
I'm still hoping, but I've not been optimistic from the start about trying to do 40K using the PC engine. But then, I hate the PC engine, so there's pretty much no way I'm going to be a fan of this.
Well, yes, duh. ::)
Quote from: JasonPratt on November 09, 2014, 11:16:16 AM
Quote from: panzerde on November 08, 2014, 01:03:37 PM
I'm still hoping, but I've not been optimistic from the start about trying to do 40K using the PC engine. But then, I hate the PC engine, so there's pretty much no way I'm going to be a fan of this.
Well, yes, duh. ::)
Get bent.
Is this thread going to turn into a TW-ish thread like those of olde?
Quote from: Gusington on November 09, 2014, 03:24:12 PM
Is this thread going to turn into a TW-ish thread like those of olde?
.. from the days of yore.
...sung of by ancient bards...
Best,
Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)
...at the foot of the Misty Mountains...
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg2.wikia.nocookie.net%2F__cb20130114160524%2Fcreepypasta%2Fimages%2F4%2F41%2FI-like-where-this-thread-is-going-20886067270.jpeg&hash=1ddacfd03b878aa3018869f208d79a25bc96e5eb)
Warhammer 40,000: Armageddon Steam page is up and websites are updated...
(https://scontent-a-lga.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xaf1/t31.0-8/1524507_1050909658268625_1560727219945560516_o.jpg)
http://store.steampowered.com/app/312370
http://slitherine.com/games/warhammer_PC
http://www.matrixgames.com/products/540/details/Warhammer.40,000:.Armageddon
http://www.thelordzgamesstudio.com/site/game/warhammer-40000-armageddon/
Kind regards,
Tim aka LZ
Warhammer 40,000: Armageddon trailer revealed!
Get ready to fight for the planet of Armageddon. Follow closely the words of the Imperial Inquisitor Horst. In his transmission, he introduces you to the Warhammer 40,000 universe and the mineral-rich planet of Armageddon. This is indeed a well protected planet, but how will the Steel Legion fare against a massive Ork invasion?
Warhammer 40,000: Armageddon is releasing next week on the 26th of November.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-xdpyoYT7I&list=UU-ersowRelLzi6fSRfXodyQ
Here's that video again embedded.
Warhammer 40,000: Armageddon is Gold! Releasing in 5 days...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntG50eXbBtc
First Warhammer 40,000: Armageddon Preview (Beta build):
http://www.wargamer.com/article/3731/pc-game-preview-armageddon-awaits
The trailer says nothing actually about the game, just a few images and some narrative, no ingame stuff, not very convincing...
And the 'preview' is not much better, description how the most basic features of any Panzer Corps game work...I dunno, nothing so far really makes me want to buy this game although I'm a huge W40k fan...
Because the gameplay trailer will include the gameplay. Coming soon!
We had to get the final impact explosions in to record that and we only integrated them a couple of days ago
End not everybody does know PzC or hexbased turnbased wargames, so in this regard I think it is an informative article, if you are a WH 40K fan and you liked PzC... well than this is a no-brainer.
Many aspects are different and changed, a lot of new game features introduced, in fact it is a whole new game engine underneath compared to good old PzC, but whatever I say: Grognards will keep on grumbling, so I let the game speak for itself... we worked on this with love and zeal the last two years and I hope it will show.
That... voiceover explaining the game premise could have been better. A lot better. Ow.
Sounded like Terence Howard trying to play Rhodes (pre-War Machine) in the first Iron Man movie, but worse.
Keeping in mind, I'm hoping for good things for the game. (Not all Grogs grumble against a PG engine; though some who like PG mechanics don't think it will work well with the property. I'm reserving judgment on that until I see more of it or play a demo.)
I'm glad it has gone gold, and I'm looking forward to the gameplay trailer. I sincerely hope
that voice won't be giving mission briefings, though.
Here's LZ's next posted trailer, converted to embedding code:
Uh.
Zimoa? Did you mean to link to THAT video as the gold release promo??? ??? ???
Check with me next time fellahs.
This is a pretty huge disappointment.
Best,
Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)
beside all the marktings department count down to release with meaningless promotion mumbo jumbo videos :tickedoff:
zher is no hurry! no need to preorder, no need for a release day impulse buy ...sooner or later they have to let the (Schrödinger)Cat out of the bag --- finally!, and we all see if its alive or dead
AARs, playthrough videos and real reviews will surface at YT.
and if its only medicore on personal rating ?
well, its on Steam, so there will be huge discounts n sales every now and then in the future
When I think of Armageddon. I think of huge hive cities and jungles. I've seen neither in any of the screenshots. I hope the terrain in game will feature more than the bland wastelands we've seen so far.
Jungles, Outer Hives, Inner Hives.... all in there I promise.
Quote from: Lord Zimoa on November 22, 2014, 07:31:37 AM
Jungles, Outer Hives, Inner Hives.... all in there I promise.
Excellent! Does terrain have an effect on movement, sighting, defense, etc.? That would be great.
Do buildings and fortifications get reduced to rubble when bombarded?
I would be highly surprised if terrain didn't have effects at least similar to what the PG system has always implemented.
On the other hand, I would be pleasantly surprised if structures became ruins -- I don't recall any Panzer Generalish games which changed terrain tile statuses mid-mission.
Hi guys,
Here are some teaser videos about the different weapon systems we have in the game Warhammer 40,000: Armageddon.
Units can have a maximum of three different weapons systems in this game, each with their own combat statistics and characteristics.
We have given each weapon it`s own unique visual, sound and impact effect. And this has all been done with approval and guidance by Games Workshop.
So the weapon systems should sound, fire and explode as intended within the fantastic lore of Warhammer 40,000 created by Games Workshop.
Chosing to use the right weapon system against your foe is a big part of gameplay, especially as we have ranged weapons, mastering the game will require to study this more closely.
Not everybody may have a big knowledge of all the main weapon sytems used within the Warhmmer 40,000 fantasy lore, so also for them these videos might be useful.
Underneath two weapon system video`s:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rI4WOzy_r5E&list=UU-ersowRelLzi6fSRfXodyQ
and
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewyjKtcunJw&list=UU-ersowRelLzi6fSRfXodyQ
Next we are working on some cool ingame gameplay video`s and some more stuff is coming prior to release upcoming November the 26th 2014!
Have fun watching,
Tim aka LZ
P.S. Yes, of course the game has terrain combat modifiers!
The Warhammer 40,000: Armageddon PC game manual can already consulted on Steam here:
http://cdn.akamai.steamstatic.com/steam/apps/312370/manuals/Armageddon_manual_EBOOK.pdf?t=1416839211
Or hit the link direct from the Warhammer 40,000: Armageddon Steam store page:
http://store.steampowered.com/app/312370
Have fun reading,
Tim aka LZ
Nice ....and thanks for the effort (well, written as an act of courtesy ;))
but why get the most unimportant stuff
(look mom, I got the fictive sound of a fictive weapon in a fictive universe right, didn't I? can i have a candy now ) communicated before the single most important stuff all possible customers aged above maybe 12 year olds all want to know. ::)
how it actually plays
No, you (marketing department) don't build up tension, its just unnerving
- edit -
OK i see the manual :)
Now that is some real information to work with ! O0
I noticed there are no aircraft in the unit category listings in the manual. Are aircraft not represented in the game? How about orbital weapons and drop pods, is any of that modeled in the game?
Thanks!
Surface aircraft and drop-pods are in the game.
Hoping these aren't sketchy music videos this time... ::)
and
I appreciate the cooperative work with GW on how weapons should sound etc. -- 40K fans can get picky about the fluff. :)
Here some more comments on that this is just PzC with a Warhammer 40,000 re-skin. Of course it share some similarities and is also a hex-base turn based game, but there are some big differences:
Armageddon has some high level similarities with Panzer Corps (in particular branching campaign and unit carry-over) and UI organization is similar too. However, battlefield tactics is indeed different. Here are just some things which drive combat in Armageddon, but which were not present (or played a very minor role) in Panzer Corps:
- most units have ranged attacks
- cover
- line of sight
- accuracy
- rate of fire
- several weapons per unit
- morale
- assaults
- units with multiple hit points, stacks of widely different size
Oh, and graphics engine has been rewritten from scratch too. New DirectX-based implementation gives some nice advantages, like smooth zooming in a very wide range. Also, the units have 6 orientations now, as opposed to 2 in Panzer Corps, and fire multiple weapons when attacking, so combat looks much better than in PzC.
Quote from: JasonPratt on November 24, 2014, 12:04:00 PM
Hoping these aren't sketchy music videos this time... ::)
and
I appreciate the cooperative work with GW on how weapons should sound etc. -- 40K fans can get picky about the fluff. :)
Rarely use "LOL" but blow me. If dev is slow to reveal gameplay I usually start suspecting there's a reason for it.
The vids so far, hmmm.... :2funny:
Blow you? I hope that came from your phone's autocorrect.
Instructions confirm, a bit oddly, that the Ork side is playable in multiplayer but not in skirmish.
(Also, a space hulk is drifting toward the planet -- does that mean tyrannids eventually? As DLC/expansion? The instructions only mention the orks as enemies vs the Imperium.)
Killed units are tracked. (From mission to mission?)
"Each unit as a maximum strength between 1 and 50, where stronger units have less base strength (for example, a Baneblade has 2 strength points, while most basic infantry have around 20) but more power per strength point." -- can't say I understand this concept yet. I
suspect it refers to divisible power of a single unit: 2 super-strong Baneblades in a unit but around 20 much weaker infantry in a unit; the baneblade unit could be reduced in strength by 1 and then fight at half-strength, but it's hard to do that. It's relatively easy to reduce an infantry unit by discreet amounts, on the other hand, which reduces its combat power in a smoother descending curve (or replenishes it during reinforce.)
If so, this would be another (though subtle) difference from PGish game mechanics.
QuoteThe landscape varies greatly across Armageddon, and has the
possibility to destroy an offensive before you even get to the enemy
lines. Different units have their own unique way of reacting to the
land, so be sure to consider how to use it to your advantage before
deploying your troops in order to get the best outcome possible.
4.1. CLEAR TERRAIN
Clear terrain is land that is reasonably flat and as a
result can be crossed by all types of units at the average
speed. This type of land is represented as wasteland,
ash and grass. In addition, the bases of Hive Cities are
treated as clear land for the purposes of army movement.
4.2. SEAS AND LAVA
Seas and Lava terrains are present in regions where there is a lot of
water or molten rock. Only aircraft and hovercraft are capable of
crossing either region. In addition, large walkers can cross water,
but do so at half speed. These regions are shown as Deep, Shallow,
Toxic and Thermal Water, as well as Lava Rivers and Lava itself.
4.3. MOUNTAINS
Mountain terrain is the representation of tall mountain ranges. These
are great obstacles in the path of any offensive, and are very good at
blocking line of sight (making the fog of war cover all of the regions
behind them). Only aircraft have the capability to cross mountains
– all other units will have to find some way around them. Mountain,
Volcano, Rock and Wall hexes are all considered mountains.
Not sure why there would be water differences if those differences make no difference? Large walkers maybe cannot go into deep water? What about toxic and thermal? None of those should affect aircraft, should they?
I like mountainous terrain affecting line of sight, though I question a total inability for land units to cross such terrain. Is that a rule importation from the tabletop? (I've never played tt.)
Quote4.4. SLOPES, CRATERS AND HILLS
Slopes, Craters and Hills are major problems for any machine, and
as a result most units will be significantly slowed while crossing
them, including hovercraft. Gentle Slopes cannot be crossed by
any heavy equipment while lighter equipment is slowed somewhat.
Hills and Slopes are also difficult to see over, and will block your
unit's line of sight.
So... in this game a baneblade or titan (as examples of heavy equipment) cannot cross "gentle" slopes, much less hills? I don't think I'm understanding that rule correctly!!?
Quote4.5. ROUGH GROUND
Rocky landscapes are shown in this game as 'Rough' tiles. Rough
tiles provide some cover to your units, but also slow your units
down substantially. All units are able to cross rough terrain, but
lighter units with tracks will do the best job in the region.
4.6. JUNGLES
In the game you will encounter three
types of jungle – sparse, normal and
dense. Sparse jungle slows your heavier
units down, but doesn't completely stop
anything from passing. Normal jungle is
harder to move through and blocks line
of sight better than sparse jungle. Some
heavy equipment will not be able to pass through Normal jungles.
Dense jungle is almost impossible to cross – only light infantry
and aircraft can do it. However dense jungle provides great cover
and blocks all line of sight.
Jungle terrain rules seem to make sense. Rough ground rules... ??? For something on the scale of a titan or baneblade, that should be like rolling over gravel.
Also, I can understand swamps giving mechanical units of any kind severe trouble, but "Swamps provide no cover, and as a result are useless in a defensive line." I understand what those words mean separately, but when put together like that their meaning becomes gibberish. Maybe I'm not thinking of the right kind of swamps...
Quote4.8. SETTLEMENTS AND FORTIFICATIONS
These terrains include settlements, ork camps, fortifications,
strongpoints, trenches, factories and ore mines. With the exception
of trenches, these terrains are unique in that only infantry can enter
them (not even aircraft can). They also provide excellent cover (but
block your line of sight). Fortification, Strongpoint and Trench
hexes also provide a defensive bonus for any units stationed there.
NOTE: Settlements, Fortifications and Trenches are the only
terrain types in the game that provide any specific defensive
bonus (other than cover). All other types provide either no
difference or a penalty.
So, mechanical units (including aircraft?) can enter trenches but not settlements or ork camps. And they can provide cover bonuses but maybe a defensive penalty.
"Toxic and Thermal rivers work the same way as their standard counterparts."
They have no toxic or thermal effects, like their standard counterparts?? (The manual has so far not explained at all what makes toxic or thermal water special.)
The Grope Weed, Shifting Sand, and Helsreach Monster terrains are nifty. :smitten: Seems like the heavies ought to be able to neutralize the Monster terrains though (not simply ignore their nearby effects).
Some units can spend movement points on special abilities, like recon units (apparently) being able to move one, recon farther, then retreat, all on the same turn.
Let me clarify that although I'm confused and somewhat incredulous about some of the terrain rules, I still have reasonably good hopes for the game. I got a legitimate thrill out of seeing Iron Legion kit in the upgrade/purchase screen. :smitten: :smitten: :smitten:
Also there's a mission editor, and I for one look forward to someone lightly hacking the PzC / Arma files to bring us an alternate history where some Ork Roks fall on Europe during the rise of Hitler and Stalin.
Quote from: Gusington on November 24, 2014, 02:28:00 PM
Blow you? I hope that came from your phone's autocorrect.
Please considerate it an exclamation of exasperation rather than a personal or open invitation.
Incidentally, while aircraft are not mentioned in the unit categories (for some unfathomable reason :idiot2: ), they are mentioned with some frequency in the terrain explanations.
For that matter, submarines seem to be briefly mentioned in the terrain explanations, though whether that's referring to 'proper' submarine or submersible land units I can't figure out yet.
It occurs to me that the differences in water types would make a big difference in how marine units are affected, but since the manual is mostly written with land units in view (and an occasional nod to aircraft like fairies over in the corner of the yard who disappear when you look in their direction) that would explain why the author(s) don't bother to talk about water terrain effects much.
Ok fabius...I'll hazard a guess that English isn't your first language.
Unsure of fabius' origins but its a well known saying over here and no it has nothing to do with what mrs g does for me, err you, us?!
Quote from: undercovergeek on November 24, 2014, 07:29:33 PM
Unsure of fabius' origins but its a well known saying over here and no it has nothing to do with what mrs g does for me, err you, us?!
I believe it originated with that noted early 20th century explorer and navigator, P.T. Sailor, who was heard to exclaim "Well blow me down!" by several members of his crew.
I thinks yer right.
Sailor was an interesting guy. He was said to be extremely fond of rum, and when he had too much he would entertain other patrons at the bar by stuffing his ever-present corncob pipe full of spinach, and then suck the spinach whole through the stem. This usually caused his face to turn red until steam came out of his ears.
One rumor was that he did this one night at a formal dinner for an admiral and his wife, and because it stayed on his record, he was never commissioned a ship of his own.
I like rum too.
Sailor's career was further derailed when we ran afoul of the notorious Oyl crime family, run by brother & sister Olive & Castor. The Oyls controlled the waterfront, and ran several illegal operations there, including bootlegging, loan sharking, and prostitution. Finding himself heavily in debt to the Oyls, and with no means to pay the debt off, Sailor was forced to work it off by regularly taking part in illegal, bare-knuckle, boxing matches, often facing off against Oyl muscle and hit man, Boris "Bluto" Ivanovich.
Due to this problem he started living under an alias "Captain Strong" while investigating where his alien seaweed 'spinach' wa0s coming from. Being a goodhearted sort, he just wanted it cultivated and sold at minimum cost to help bring all humanity to good health.
But problems ensued. Sure the seaweed gave him the strength to literally swim through the air by flapping his arms properly, but it was also as addictive as heroin.
That was around the time Superman got involved.
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwac.450f.edgecastcdn.net%2F80450F%2Fcomicsalliance.com%2Ffiles%2F2014%2F11%2FStrong01.jpg&hash=023bc17c5acd0bb0d1775d8eca8c08b98a8b2419)
...wait, y'all didn't know I was serious? This legitimately happened. In pre-Crisis continuity.
Towards the end of his life, Sailor finally came out of the closet as a gay man with the publication of his autobiography "I Yam What I Yam". In it, he revealed that his long-time roommate and companion, Aaron "Poopdeck Pappy" Grossman was not his biological father as he had been telling people, but more of a sugar daddy, and that he was called "Poopdeck" for a reason.
(https://scontent-a-lga.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xap1/v/t1.0-9/q82/p261x260/10414496_819259224801470_3384362769423988952_n.jpg?oh=80c840f4d6c19950871eabc4858356b3&oe=550E5816)
Join us for the Warhammer live stream!
On the 26th of November, the day of its release, we will be playing Warhammer 40,000: Armageddon live during our weekly Twitch streaming session! Our very own Iain McNeil, will guide you through the game, playing one of the over 30 nail biting scenarios as he tries to save Armageddon from the Ork invasion. This will be the first time we are showing live gameplay of the game, so be sure to drop by on the 26th at 20:00 CET / 14:00 EST!
The stream will be live here:
http://bit.ly/RqB5FT
Quote from: tgb on November 24, 2014, 07:43:46 PM
Quote from: undercovergeek on November 24, 2014, 07:29:33 PM
Unsure of fabius' origins but its a well known saying over here and no it has nothing to do with what mrs g does for me, err you, us?!
I believe it originated with that noted early 20th century explorer and navigator, P.T. Sailor, who was heard to exclaim "Well blow me down!" by several members of his crew.
Yes, and maybe he did want to be blown some days.
In UK "well blow me" can be as intended
Or, with a tone " yo Grogs, blow me." Or you last day of a job to the manager.... can mean something else, usually an offensive or playful expletive bringing forth the image of fellatio.
Just to be clear, I was not asking for the fellatio here, however good anybody claims to be.
I am not really sure...but I get the impression...we are getting off topic here...so...
can I expect a demo of the game?
can I expect to play the game if my notebook can play PC?
Until we get actual gameplay footage and/or demo code is released, we've pretty much exhausted the topic, yep. :buck2:
Since the 26th is tomorrow, I sense we won't be getting gameplay footage until the release date. At 10 o'clock at night Central Standard Time. Which is more like after midnight on the 27th in Europe. The day after release.
To be fair, that may be because they've had to push development up to the final day of release (essentially Thanksgiving week/end in the US, i.e. Black Friday) and, given how notorious 40K fans are about even the presentation of 40K material, they didn't want to show incomplete gameplay footage.
I still have some good hope for the release. If it works out well, or can even be upgraded in gameplay later, consider the campaigns Games Workshop could release for this system much as Panzer Corps expanded on the base Panzer General campaign to ludicrous detail. :smitten:
The gameplay trailer is now live! We didn't have as much time to polish it as we'd like but it gives you the basics! Check the store page
http://store.steampowered.com/app/312370
For more details watch Iain`s Live Twitch stream today at 7pm GMT / 2pm EST.
http://www.twitch.tv/slitherinegroup
-edit -
QuoteOn the 26th of November, the day of its release, we will be playing Warhammer 40,000: Armageddon live during our weekly Twitch streaming session! Our very own Iain McNeil, will guide you through the game, playing one of the over 30 nail biting scenarios as he tries to save Armageddon from the Ork invasion. This will be the first time we are showing live gameplay of the game, so be sure to drop by on the 26th at 20:00 CET / 14:00 ES
7pm GMT = 20:00 CET :) ...it got me confused a little first ;)
Yeah, CET is 20.00h
Warhammer 40,000 Armageddon is out now!
http://www.slitherine.com/games/warhammer_PC
So, no demo then?? ???
$30. Unless I hear something today that completely blows me away, I think I'll wait for a sale.
Yeah, without a demo and the still extremely PC gameplay feel from the trailer and the fact it's 30€ over here...I'll pass
...to get into the mood
(well, this is 2009 graphics from Dawn of War ;-) )
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slitherine.com%2Fimg%2FLogo_WH40KAS2.png&hash=fb360767bb0ae07404a728a3b3081a1c4ca68399)
"Humies is all weak scum that deserve ta get stomped." (Ghazghkull Mag Uruk Thraka – Prophet of the Waaagh!)
A massive Space Hulk is drifting towards Armageddon with a fearsome Ork army on board. Led by the infamous and megalomaniacal Ork Warlord of Waaagh! Ghazghkull, the Orks are prepared to land on the planet and invade this precious Imperial Hive World. This colossal conflict for dominance of the planet is known as the Second War for Armageddon! In Warhammer 40,000: Armageddon, you have the opportunity to relive this epic fight between the Orks and Imperial forces including the troops of the Armageddon Steel Legion and three chapters of Spaces Marines: the Salamanders, Blood Angels and Ultramarines.
Today we are overjoyed to announce that the game is finally released and available on both our sites and Steam! In this hex-based, turn-based strategy game developed by Flashback Games and The Lordz Games Studio, players will fight alongside iconic characters such as Commander Yarrick and Lord Dante to repel the Ork invasion, protect the hives, and eventually liberate the planet from this perfidious alien attack. But the Orks are well equipped and hard-boiled soldiers, therefore only those commanders able to expertly combine their units, take advantage of their special traits and abilities, and understand the assets and dangers of their environment will have a chance to save Armageddon!
Thanks to its epic story-driven campaign with more than 30 scenarios, over 300 unit types, a multiplayer mode in which players can command both Ork and Imperial forces, and a powerful map editor, fans of Warhammer 40,000 should prepare themselves for a long and heroic journey across the surface of Armageddon!
We are offering a $10 discount to the early adopters during the week of the launch! We are also going to offer a free Steam key to anyone who bought a copy of the game from the Matrix Games or Slitherine store. You can grab your steam key by registering your copy here (http://"http://bit.ly/1lXs7Ys") (Slitherine account required).
Get more information on Warhammer 40,000: Armageddon from the official website (http://"http://bit.ly/1tsNGUd").
Very early impressions after playing the first two tutorials. POSITIVE!
Art work is fantastic. The map is surprisingly beautiful (much better than depicted in screenshots). Voice over work is extremely well done. Unit diversity is impressive. Has that Panzer Corps, just one more turn, addictive quality. Really looking forward to digging in to the campaign over the long weekend! I think if you're a WH40K nut like I am, you will appreciate and enjoy this game.
Thank you JH! As I know you are a critical gamer, means a lot to us.
Armageddon is top 5 in all games on Steam now! Time to open the champagne and celebrate!
And you get people complaining about the game being turn-based. :2funny:
Quote from: jomni on November 26, 2014, 08:22:32 AM
And you get people complaining about the game being turn-based. :2funny:
Yeah. This is the downside of selling on steam. You get all these little animals criticizing that which they do not understand. I suspect the game will be treated pretty harshly in the steam forums.
I for one welcome our new orkylords.
With baneblades.
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wargamer.com%2Fforums%2Fsmiley%2FTakecover.gif&hash=9e0f9e63bbb3884905aff2bf0b4c414a58bb0a31)
(Unfortunately I can't mess with for another nine hours at least.)
I'll be following this one, so hope for some good impressions....I know I am in the minority, never have played a Warhammer game before so not sure if this is an appropriate one to jump in or whether you have to really understand that universe to enjoy.
Does peek my interest to try something unique like this....
Forgot to ask one question I have and sorry if answered before....does this only have a campaign or does it also have some kind of random quick battle generator as well? Trying to understand replayability.
Campaign story, skirmish scenarios to be played at random in any order you prefer, a-synchronic server based PBEM++ multiplayer and an editor is provided to create player custom content.
Dammit JH...ok so in the queue for purchasing is Armageddon, Mordheim, some Rome 2 DLC, the new WOFF expansion, and BOMB. And I'm home today, off from work...with access to purchase all of these.
I need strength.
so you can play it like a traditional TB PBEM?
It sounds like it...need confirmation from LZ or JH. That will push me closer to purchase. And my wallet to suicide.
me too - then ill unleash my green shit on you
I...I don't have a response to that.
well its WH40K, so i would have got it sooner or later anyway ... so why not NOW ;)
i second JH evaluation O0
( i am in Tutorial 3 atm and play with hexes 'on')
there is also a clear strategic map to find your units, which show what unit was not in uses yet , see below
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi61.tinypic.com%2F20uqqt2.png&hash=58b295d931b604cee7830463b1e4802a0e80a176)
No its surly not a Panzer Corps 'full conversion mod' its an evolution into a new game 8)
and has a nice table top feel in conjunction with what made PC addictive in the past :)
Now i have to learn what all those stats are ...to make best tactical use of it >:D
lmao, if its traditional turn based, turn by turn sending im happy to challenge and smite thee
Fondling the purchase button now.
Guys the MP is Slith`s PBEM++ asynchronic server based MP, just like we have in BA, Panzer Corps, Commander, Pike and Shot, etc... and it is cross-platform, so over time you can play with and against anyone on whatever device we will port it to in your own pace.
And this is the first game release of a whole planned series, we plan to build this out, support and polish for some years to come, so a lot more content will be coming in the future.
Anyone knows how to play Hotseat?
It's in the game's feature list, but there's no such option at scenarios/campaigns/main-menu.
And trying to trick the system by accepting your own challenge doesn't work. :P
Alex will know best, but as far as I know Hotseat and Paired games will be added soon... we have build the UI assets for it already...
Hmm.. I was really sceptical.. latest screens look good for a bit of 40k fun.
Off to check youtube before I reach for the trigger.
Graphics look good and crisp and the zooming is now done via mouse scroll wheel. This means it is not like Panzer Corps with just two pre-fixed levels and the graphics files have more pixels in them.
But it lacks animation when unit moves. The unit icons are static and sounds and effects are a bit cheesy for me. Would be better if the engine was enhanced to make the unit icons animated.
Quote from: undercovergeek on November 26, 2014, 12:20:24 PM
lmao, if its traditional turn based, turn by turn sending im happy to challenge and smite thee
The info page mentioned having PBEM++ so you guys should be fine.
>Would be better if the engine was enhanced to make the unit icons animated.
That's why I never understood why they didn't use the Battle Academy engine for this...it would have been just perfect but no, the PC engine it had to be. >:( And even if the game has new features it's still looking like a PC mod to me, just with new units and new features. But the game can't deny who it's daddy is...and for a mod like game like this, it's too expensive.
Quote from: Grimnirsson on November 26, 2014, 05:45:23 PM
>Would be better if the engine was enhanced to make the unit icons animated.
That's why I never understood why they didn't use the Battle Academy engine for this...it would have been just perfect but no, the PC engine it had to be. >:( And even if the game has new features it's still looking like a PC mod to me, just with new units and new features. But the game can't deny who it's daddy is...and for a mod like game like this, it's too expansive.
Exactly - everytime I see it I think Panzer Corps in space :(
Quote from: JudgeDredd on November 26, 2014, 05:48:04 PM
Quote from: Grimnirsson on November 26, 2014, 05:45:23 PM
>Would be better if the engine was enhanced to make the unit icons animated.
That's why I never understood why they didn't use the Battle Academy engine for this...it would have been just perfect but no, the PC engine it had to be. >:( And even if the game has new features it's still looking like a PC mod to me, just with new units and new features. But the game can't deny who it's daddy is...and for a mod like game like this, it's too expansive.
Exactly - everytime I see it I think Panzer Corps in space :(
But if it used the Battle Academy engine, wouldn't it just be Battle Academy in space as well:)
I should've been clear my "exactly" comment was only specifically relating to the poster alluding to the fact the game was a mod for an existing game...I suggest it's Panzer Corps.
I'm sure there are other things going on that make it "not" Panzer Corps - but it does look like PC in space to me.
I didn't mean it would be better using the BA engine...I'm not interested in it regardless of the engine...but I'm especially not interested in a PC clone/mod
I would've perhaps been interested in it if it was along the lines of the original series of games
Quote from: JudgeDredd on November 26, 2014, 06:07:44 PM
I should've been clear my "exactly" comment was only specifically relating to the poster alluding to the fact the game was a mod for an existing game...I suggest it's Panzer Corps.
I'm sure there are other things going on that make it "not" Panzer Corps - but it does look like PC in space to me.
I didn't mean it would be better using the BA engine...I'm not interested in it regardless of the engine...but I'm especially not interested in a PC clone/mod
I would've perhaps been interested in it if it was along the lines of the original series of games
Gotcha...no biggie, was just kidding around.....personally, still on the fence for this one.....even though might be a clone, still something that I haven't really played before....we'll see how it goes.
Repeting a previous posts:
Here some more comments on that this is just PzC with a Warhammer 40,000 re-skin. Of course it share some similarities and is also a hex-base turn based game, but there are some big differences:
Armageddon has some high level similarities with Panzer Corps (in particular branching campaign and unit carry-over) and UI organization is similar too. However, battlefield tactics is indeed different. Here are just some things which drive combat in Armageddon, but which were not present (or played a very minor role) in Panzer Corps:
- most units have ranged attacks
- cover
- line of sight
- accuracy
- rate of fire
- several weapons per unit
- morale
- assaults
- units with multiple hit points, stacks of widely different size
Oh, and graphics engine has been rewritten from scratch too. New DirectX-based implementation gives some nice advantages, like smooth zooming in a very wide range. Also, the units have 6 orientations now, as opposed to 2 in Panzer Corps, and fire multiple weapons when attacking, so combat looks much better than in PzC.
The engine can also perfectly handle any animations, we had some very good reasons not to implement them at this stage or not implementing them at all. Who knows what the future brings though...
As this is just a first release of a whole game series, there is plenty we will upgrade, add and improve the coming weeks, months and years...
I like the several weapons systems which I guess borrows from the table top game that I am not familiar about.
Tactics is certainly very different as all of the units have range attacks based on the weapon they carry.
Regarding graphics, I'm doing beta for Order of Battle Pacific. Though that one looks like Panzer Corps (but is a different engine?), the graphics engine is 3D, animated, leaves wrecks. etc... Would be nice if this title shows similar graphical polish as Order of Battle Pacific. But of course this is just eye candy.
Just finished dlding.
Now to diddle around. >:D
Quote from: Gusington on November 26, 2014, 11:59:47 AM
Dammit JH...ok so in the queue for purchasing is Armageddon, Mordheim, some Rome 2 DLC, the new WOFF expansion, and BOMB. And I'm home today, off from work...with access to purchase all of these.
I need strength.
Gus, if it helps, I recommended holding off purchasing
Mordehim, as aside from some random skirmish missions between two of the factions (and some not-entirely-well-designed tutorials) there's nothing in the game yet.
^That does help me - I'd forgotten. But still...WANT! That said...so far, I've curbed any spending at all, thankfully.
This is not going to help. Sorry. >:D
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimagizer.imageshack.us%2Fv2%2F800x600q90%2F673%2Fa5mrOz.png&hash=5925dbdb90469039e476e94eb956e68f8caa9e67)
As Jomni has said, the promotional screenies so far haven't been able to do justice to the graphics. This is early in the first tutorial mission at a training area.
Guys. It's a legitimate port of the tabletop system to a Panzer General engine. (Well, "port" may be too strong; it's an adaptation on par with adapting the system to RTS for Dawn of War, and that is not a comparison I make lightly.) I am not even slightly disappointed yet (well, the opening narration film is still terribly voice acted but I can skip that. Other VAing so far is okay.) It is not a PzC mod. It plays significantly different to most PGish games I've played -- though I'm not going to lie it's obviously PG based.
People who can't stand PG, or don't want to play (a version of) that system, I wouldn't say it's different enough to change your minds on it. I don't think I can say it's as heavily modified as, for example, Fantasy Wars/Elven Legacy (not counting the obvious graphical differences, I mean in gameplay), much less that Barbarossa game (and its remake/update) at Matrix. But it is different enough not to count as a mere "mod" of Panzer Corps. Call it a high-quality total conversion mod if you want; I'd say it's a step or three beyond even that.
If you love or even like PGish systems, like I do, I think you'll be happy with this even if you're ambivalent with 40K (though obviously if you don't like WH40K this isn't going to change your mind I expect.) If you like both, you may still want to wait until a few months for inevitable teething issues (I haven't run into anything yet but I haven't played more than 20 minutes either).
Speaking from that only 20 minutes of experience, though: if you like both, or like one but are only meh about the other, this is a definite buy.
Quote from: JasonPratt on November 26, 2014, 11:13:32 PM
This is not going to help. Sorry. >:D
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimagizer.imageshack.us%2Fv2%2F800x600q90%2F673%2Fa5mrOz.png&hash=5925dbdb90469039e476e94eb956e68f8caa9e67)
As Jomni has said, the promotional screenies so far haven't been able to do justice to the graphics. This is early in the first tutorial mission at a training area.
Guys. It's a legitimate port of the tabletop system to a Panzer General engine. (Well, "port" may be too strong; it's an adaptation on par with adapting the system to RTS for Dawn of War, and that is not a comparison I make lightly.) I am not even slightly disappointed yet (well, the opening narration film is still terribly voice acted but I can skip that. Other VAing so far is okay.) It is not a PzC mod. It plays significantly different to most PGish games I've played -- though I'm not going to lie it's obviously PG based.
People who can't stand PG, or don't want to play (a version of) that system, I wouldn't say it's different enough to change your minds on it. I don't think I can say it's as heavily modified as, for example, Fantasy Wars/Elven Legacy (not counting the obvious graphical differences, I mean in gameplay), much less that Barbarossa game (and its remake/update) at Matrix. But it is different enough not to count as a mere "mod" of Panzer Corps. Call it a high-quality total conversion mod if you want; I'd say it's a step or three beyond even that.
If you love or even like PGish systems, like I do, I think you'll be happy with this even if you're ambivalent with 40K (though obviously if you don't like WH40K this isn't going to change your mind I expect.) If you like both, you may still want to wait until a few months for inevitable teething issues (I haven't run into anything yet but I haven't played more than 20 minutes either).
Speaking from that only 20 minutes of experience, though: if you like both, or like one but are only meh about the other, this is a definite buy.
Thanks for the insight.
I am in the insight and impressions. I'm always a bit torn when I read peoples enthusiastic posts about a game because I want to be part of the enjoyment - but unfortunately (and thanks for your honesty) I think I fall into the
bold section of your statement.
I loved Panzer General and Allied General back in the day. I was all over Panzer Corps when it came out because it brought back my early PC gaming days - but that really did soon wear off and I tired of the simplicity and isometric 2d/pseudo 3D view.
But glad your purchase looks like paying dividends for you.
Quote from: Lord Zimoa on November 26, 2014, 06:20:55 PM
Repeting a previous posts:
Here some more comments on that this is just PzC with a Warhammer 40,000 re-skin. Of course it share some similarities and is also a hex-base turn based game, but there are some big differences:
Armageddon has some high level similarities with Panzer Corps (in particular branching campaign and unit carry-over) and UI organization is similar too. However, battlefield tactics is indeed different. Here are just some things which drive combat in Armageddon, but which were not present (or played a very minor role) in Panzer Corps:
- most units have ranged attacks
- cover
- line of sight
- accuracy
- rate of fire
- several weapons per unit
- morale
- assaults
- units with multiple hit points, stacks of widely different size
Oh, and graphics engine has been rewritten from scratch too. New DirectX-based implementation gives some nice advantages, like smooth zooming in a very wide range. Also, the units have 6 orientations now, as opposed to 2 in Panzer Corps, and fire multiple weapons when attacking, so combat looks much better than in PzC.
The engine can also perfectly handle any animations, we had some very good reasons not to implement them at this stage or not implementing them at all. Who knows what the future brings though...
As this is just a first release of a whole game series, there is plenty we will upgrade, add and improve the coming weeks, months and years...
Thanks LZ
Unfortunately it's not my cup of tea - but good luck. It sounds like it's being received well (by people in this wee bubble at least).
So for those who are playing this, do you think you'd recommend it for someone who:
1.) Has never played the Panzer General/Corps games before?
2.) Has only a surface familiarity with the 40k universe?
3.) Is a strategy game nut?
My finger itches ever closer to pulling the trigger on getting this one, but I still hesitate.
If you never played PC before it's a new experience then for you, so I suppose you might be happy with the game. Personally I love PC for what it is and have all the games here on my HDD but as a W40k fan I was simply expecting something more fresh than that.
My only concern with picking up is that it seems a number of people are indicating a lack of information and detail being easily displayed to the player which makes it harder to understand the mechanics. For someone like me who is not familiar with this subject, concerned might be hard to understand. But generally speaking, seems like overall getting mostly positive feedback.
Quote from: Grim.Reaper on November 27, 2014, 05:57:36 AM
My only concern with picking up is that it seems a number of people are indicating a lack of information and detail being easily displayed to the player which makes it harder to understand the mechanics. For someone like me who is not familiar with this subject, concerned might be hard to understand. But generally speaking, seems like overall getting mostly positive feedback.
Yeah I'm not familiar with the 40k lore so I won't know which vehicles and weapons systems are actually better. You get some stats but still different from world war 2 or modern where I have a basic sense of the capabilities of each unit.
I saw this streaming video captured from Slitherine....if your interested in the game, not a bad view...the real action of the game starts around the 46 minute mark....
http://www.twitch.tv/slitherinegroup/b/593002015
Quote from: Martok on November 27, 2014, 05:07:33 AM
So for those who are playing this, do you think you'd recommend it for someone who:
1.) Has never played the Panzer General/Corps games before?
2.) Has only a surface familiarity with the 40k universe?
3.) Is a strategy game nut?
My finger itches ever closer to pulling the trigger on getting this one, but I still hesitate.
As someone who very much likes the game so far, I'm going to be brutally honest: there are much less expensive ways to try a PGish system and see if you like the basic concept.
I would say the biggest bang for the buck, aside from PG itself in some freeware download somewhere (Panzer General Forever? -- I can't recall if that comes with the game code itself or is installed over it), would be
Fantasy Wars, since it's not only an advanced version of the engine and super-colorful with two meaty campaigns (plus a third epilogue campaign leading into the nine campaigns of
Elven Legacy), but it's also on sale at Steam right now for less than $4. (And the EL collection doesn't cost much if any more. I rebought them both on Steam yesterday just on general principle. ;) )
Granted, that isn't WW2. But then neither is this game.
Come to think of it, some highly creative/insane people having been modding
People's General, the final version of the original game system in the "5-Star Series", with all kinds of historical campaigns, which are sometimes announced here on the forum in a thread. PeepG may be dl'd free with that, don't know.
Quote from: jomni on November 27, 2014, 07:04:14 AM
Quote from: Grim.Reaper on November 27, 2014, 05:57:36 AM
My only concern with picking up is that it seems a number of people are indicating a lack of information and detail being easily displayed to the player which makes it harder to understand the mechanics. For someone like me who is not familiar with this subject, concerned might be hard to understand. But generally speaking, seems like overall getting mostly positive feedback.
Yeah I'm not familiar with the 40k lore so I won't know which vehicles and weapons systems are actually better. You get some stats but still different from world war 2 or modern where I have a basic sense of the capabilities of each unit.
I have to admit this is true; they could do a LOT better giving players an idea what the weapon system capabilities are.
To be fair, that's usually true of most PGish games (including Panzer Corps), but usually it isn't a problem because the attack and defense systems are more abstracted anyway. Here the detail built into the game makes for a problem in understanding and using the detail.
Also, I noticed while finishing the first tutorial mission that I had no idea from the tutorial, and couldn't remember confirming it from the manual, whether "artillery" weapons in this game function like they usually do for PG engines, where they can shoot over intervening terrain, especially nearby friendlies, and most especially as a defensive reaction when nearby friendlies are attacked. I should have saved the game and tested that when I ran into a standard infantry-backed-with-arty situation, but I kept waiting to see if the tutorial would indicate it.
I will say if that's missing from the game, it's a big strike against the game: it's one of the key PG mechanics. But it may be there, I don't know.
If it's there, then this system offers a nice refinement by including multiple weapon systems on the same platform. So I had to choose between zooming up close to the arty to attack (having flanked it already with speedy light armor) exposing myself to return fire next turn from nearby infantry it was protecting but getting in "under" its minimum arty range and so only having to deal with its heavy bolter fire; or standing off out of infantry support range where its arty weapon could also shoot back at me. (Our weapon systems were both comparable to range, so I couldn't stand off completely and shoot with impunity, though that's a big factor in this particular game.)
Okay, I just confirmed that counterfire support does exist, and more units have it than just obvious "arty" platforms: infantry heavy weapon teams for example.
Also, left-clicking on most stat figures will bring up an explanation/reminder of what that stat means. (I say "most" because there are still some missing texts, such as for health.)
Here's a zoomed-in closeup of some jungle terrain near the outskirts of a base.
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimagizer.imageshack.us%2Fv2%2F800x600q90%2F538%2F692T72.png&hash=445a9b3b079fe28ddcc424091e989bc6c2dac8a3)
Notice that the major river continues under the foliage!
Here's the same shot not resized to 800x600.
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimageshack.com%2Fa%2Fimg538%2F6788%2F692T72.png&hash=6ea7d7da87a8c27da933f7a9501b9b640bfcee7c)
The tutorial, by the way, is an integral part of the game's storyline, and apparently (I haven't confirmed this yet) that includes being able to build up your initial core units the way you want -- which is a hugely important aspect of any PGish campaign.
So you can skip the tutuorial campaign if you want, but if you do you'll be missing out on being able to grow your first company from scratch. I haven't even started the 2nd tutorial mission yet (where I expect the enemy will shoot back unlike the first mission ;) ), because I'm busy doing one of my favorite PGish things: planning how best to spend my req points on upgrades and new units.
Thanks for all the details....you are really making it hard for me to resist this game:)
Must step away from computer before I hit that purchase button....
Didn't see this widely made known, but there was a day one patch for the game...guessing you can download directly from the game or from this link....
http://www.matrixgames.com/products/540/downloads/
Quote from: Grim.Reaper on November 27, 2014, 07:48:50 AM
I saw this streaming video captured from Slitherine....if your interested in the game, not a bad view...the real action of the game starts around the 46 minute mark....
http://www.twitch.tv/slitherinegroup/b/593002015
Well after sitting on the sidelines for this one - wanting neither to get overly excited or disappointed - that gameplay video has pretty much nixed any further interest for me. I can completely see why someone would say this is simply PanzerCorps reskinned. No expert, but there appears to be none of the sophistication of the WH40K mechanics, in fact I get no sense of the tactical scale or movement/firing at all. The mechanics are straight PanzerCorps: move to first blob, Rock/Paper/Scissors, move to the next blob, Rock/Paper/Scissors rinse and repeat until the puzzle is finished. Perhaps I am wrong but would have to hear more from someone familiar with WH40K on how this actually plays.
Quote from: Zonso on November 27, 2014, 11:30:14 AM
Quote from: Grim.Reaper on November 27, 2014, 07:48:50 AM
I saw this streaming video captured from Slitherine....if your interested in the game, not a bad view...the real action of the game starts around the 46 minute mark....
http://www.twitch.tv/slitherinegroup/b/593002015
Well after sitting on the sidelines for this one - wanting neither to get overly excited or disappointed - that gameplay video has pretty much nixed any further interest for me. I can completely see why someone would say this is simply PanzerCorps reskinned. No expert, but there appears to be none of the sophistication of the WH40K mechanics, in fact I get no sense of the tactical scale or movement/firing at all. The mechanics are straight PanzerCorps: move to first blob, Rock/Paper/Scissors, move to the next blob, Rock/Paper/Scissors rinse and repeat until the puzzle is finished. Perhaps I am wrong but would have to hear more from someone familiar with WH40K on how this actually plays.
The scale is there and so is the tactics as mentioned earlier. Range and LOS is implemented as well as varying weapons systems. Rocks paper scissors will be more complicated because each platform can have different weapons systems. Tanks is just not a tank, infantry is not just infantry. They vary by the weapons modules that they carry.
You will only find out when you actually play the game (not just watch a video) and take time to look at the details.
Based on the tutorials, the downside is that you can actually play it like Panzer Corps and get away with it... the wonderful details won't be noticed. ???
As I haven't read the manual, there is an option for "rest and refit" and "replacements".
When are these different actions used? I think fatigue is in the game am I not mistaken.
Of course, the only reason one can get away with it in the tutorials is that (so far for me anyway) the training guards don't initiate shootbacks or maneuver!
First, you've got to decide what range to move your unit into because different platforms have different ranges or composite ranges depending on the weapon system and a main part of this game is trying to shoot at the other people from standoff distance if possible. But picking good cover to fire from is important, too. But that cover could screw with your line of sight -- but that might be a defensive bonus for you as well. (In some ways the game plays like everyone has Panzer General Arty capabilities! -- though that's still not true, only true arty can shoot over blocking terrain, though some units other than arty can support nearby units defensively. Other units will charge in for a melee attack after the ranged shooting, and possibly only have a melee attack -- this is rather abstracted in the game but it's similar to FantasyWars/ElvenLegacy mechanics.)
Then moving the unit there might not be entirely safe because there are two somewhat subtle terrains which will damage most units crossing them.
Once you've figured out the range you want to fight at, your unit may fail a morale check and not attack at all. (Or possibly not move either, I haven't been able to determine that or not.) That's rare and tends to happen only under certain situations, but if the game follows codex enough that's just about the only purpose for flamer units for example since they only have a zero-range (melee) attack. (The game isn't clear about whether they specially eat enemy morale. But the game mechanic is there. One mode of rest which uses no requisition points recovers morale a bit.)
Is the target in LOS? If blocked nothing happens. Otherwise any shot has a percentage chance of hitting the blockage instead.
Is the target in a fortification? Then that increase the chance the shot bounces off the fort armor. (I don't know if there's any way of reducing fort armor per se in the game.)
Is the target in cover? That increases the chance of a miss.
Your unit's intrinsic aim (ranged and melee for appropriate weapons on your unit) affects chances to miss, too.
So does the specific aim percentages of each weapon.
Some weapons negate some percentage of the target's armor resistance. Otherwise the armor may absorb any hit on target by any weapon. (Again, armor doesn't seem to be destroyable per se; maybe in a future game.)
How many individuals are in the unit? I think they all take a shot, which means large groups of infantry with mere lasguns can be important.
Oh, and then that particular weapon may shoot multiple times. So those 20 weak troops with lasguns are hitting their target 60 times!
Each shot that punches through all that to land a damaging hit damages health of a unit first; so a group of 20 orcs with 3 health are going to be a lot harder to knock out than a group of 20 humies with 1 health, even assuming parity of weapon, environmental factors, skill, etc.
Does your unit have two or three different weapon types? They get to attack, too.
Wait -- does your target have higher initiative? He may get to shoot first on the defensive! And however many of your unit this kills, won't be contributing to your attack after all! Congratulations, you were just murdered by the eldar. (Not in this game, but I expect that's how that would work.)
Then factor in the usual PGish defensive support shooters, including whether they have initiative enough to hit you first.
So, it's a lot more complicated than most PG variant games.
One thing I haven't seen in the game yet is resupply for fuel and ammo, which is a major tactical factor for most PGish games.
Jomni,
replacements is the usual PG command. I notice that "elite replacements" doesn't seem to be an option; I don't know if that's automatic or just not included as an option. My guess at the moment is that it just isn't included; but this kind of setting tends to be very meat grindery anyway.
Rest and refit brings morale back up a bit and {checking} also replenishes ammo. Huh. So ammo is a consideration. This could stand to be A LOT more obvious: running out of ammo is dangerous, and so for most PGish games being clear on your ammo reserves and managing resupply is utterly crucial.
So I'm enjoying the game, BUT it is not without its faults. i believe the fact that it is a WH40K game is a significant part of what is keeping it afloat, and what is also dragging it down. On the one hand, I like seeing the 40K units. The models are really well done and the OOB is impressive. It will make any 40K fan smile. However, on the other hand, the battles do not feel like 40K. The campaign is pretty weak. Your actions in the field have no impact on the path of the campaign. I'm victorious in every mission, yet hive after hive still falls and the situation continues to deteriorate rapidly. WH40K battles are epic, and this game fails to convey that. i have three tanks, 4 or 5 infantry units, some artillery, assorted vehicles and an airplane. Hardly an epic fighting force. Combat just washes across the relatively small maps without conveying any sense of battle on a massive scale. If we were talking about small units and tactical battles, this wouldn't be such an issue, but there are cities depicted on the map and the story is talking about thousands and thousands of units battling for hives which house untold millions. Perhaps even worse, the AI seems to be pretty brain dead. I'm on the 4th or 5th mission of the main campaign and I'm yet to be challenged. In fact, I haven't even lost a unit. According to the story, Imperial units are being wiped out, yet my battalion is yet to lose a single squad. If this situation doesn't change, this issue will haunt this game and prevent non-40K fans from finding any enjoyment here.
So far, it just doesn't feel very strategic. There is really only one tactic that is necessary to win...concentration of firepower. Keep your units in fair sized groups and they can wear the enemy down every time. Sure, its nice to take positions on the map that appear to strengthen your defense, but its hard to tell how much of a difference this is really making. Find the enemy, group your units, concentrate firepower, etc. This will get old for those who don't care to follow the story or who do not have any strong feelings toward the 40K universe.
The game is not bad...its the first turn based wargame set in the 40K universe that we have had in a very long time. For that, I'm thankful, but this game could have been so much more than it is.
Thanks for the detailed impressions JH, that helps a lot, along with everyone else's thoughts. I have been following along in the official forums and it seems like the discussions sway back and forth about it. Stepping on my soapbox for a moment......I said "forums", which continues to drive me crazy that Matrix and Slitherine continue to operate multiple forums to discuss their games! Now with them releasing on Steam, it adds a third forum for game discussions. I know they can't do anything about the Steam forum, but it is about time they figure out how to consolidate their forums and web sites...can't figure out for the life of me why it needs to be separate....believe they mentioned it would be hard to do, but come on they are not the first company to have a merger that requires their technology assets to be combined.
Back to the game....the other thing I have noticed (granted it is me just observing what other people say) is it seems the game was released without the normal polish....not sure if these are all true, but seems people discussing things like.....
- Hotseat mode is advertised as included, but as of right now I believe they took it out from the release to fix it....if that is the case, probably a good idea to remove it from the product description until truly available.
- People seem to mention that ammo management was discussed as part of the game, but was not included in the release because of issues...not sure if true or not
- When people are creating their own scenarios, appears to be an issue where there is no way to load them in the game....I am sure can be taken care of in a patch but I saw a post by the publisher that basically acknowledged they likely didn't spend enough time testing it because they were focused on other things.
- In the published user manual, it says the game is compatible with Windows XP, but on the product pages it isn't listed and the game won't work. Not a big deal for me since nobody should use XP anymore since unsupported, but still shows a little slippage on quality control.
- Seems like folks are largely put off by the lack of information included in the game and manual on the mechanics and such...especially harder for non-warhammer experts
The developer/publisher has acknowledged these issues and basically said this is just the start and they will continue updating for years to come...I am sure the issues/bugs will be worked out. In the end these things are not game killers by any means, especially for me, so still a good chance I'll jump in at some point since looking for something a little different to play.
QuoteThe game is not bad
Well Jar, first you start listing some severe issues (brain dead AI, no epic battles, no thrill because you haven't lost anyone, narrative vs actual gameplay, one winning tactic, repetitive battles etc.) which count double for someone loving the W40k lore...and then your bottom line is...it's not a bad game? Actually it sounds like a pretty bad game to me based on the negative points you made... ???
Quote from: Grimnirsson on November 28, 2014, 04:43:55 AM
QuoteThe game is not bad
Well Jar, first you start listing some severe issues (brain dead AI, no epic battles, no thrill because you haven't lost anyone, narrative vs actual gameplay, one winning tactic, repetitive battles etc.) which count double for someone loving the W40k lore...and then your bottom line is...it's not a bad game? Actually it sounds like a pretty bad game to me based on the negative points you made... ???
You are only reading what you want to and selectively quoting. You started off talking trash about the game before it was even released. So I'm not surprised you are looking for reasons to hate on it. In truth, what I said, if you read it again, is I'm enjoying the game, I like the 40k units and I am impressed with the OOB. I love wh40k and being able to play with the units brings me enjoyment. I also enjoy moving through the campaign to see what new units get unlocked. Therefore, for me, it's not a bad game.
But don't quote me selectively and then insinuate that I'm not being honest in my assessment, that is not fair to me or the game.
in the editor under the unit editor menu is a Combat Simulator where you can test one units against another with a given set of parameters
here i let 7 Walkers attack 7 Walkers in a crater
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi57.tinypic.com%2F1zlx10l.png&hash=25e3577389ad853a9da52270fcbfd83cd751020c)
it does 100 fights and the you can check each of the rolls for the result in detail with the Combat Log
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi62.tinypic.com%2Fsxdh7b.png&hash=4d65273bde2fc58e2e096db78a2551f16d19e58b)
there is a tremendous detail hidden under hood.... :)
For my immersion i see the units shown on the map as Miniatures with a plexi-baseplate, so the map shines through.
A Miniature can be up to 30 squads/firegroups/or individuals soldiers if you like to immagine in case of a footunit-Miniature
or just a maybe 7 Walkers, or just a few small tanks, or one big tank or Titan
Now those components in a unit-group (represented by the miniature) has different number of hitpoints to get degraded to kill the unit ...a single walker has two hit points.
Well, I am rather confused about your aggressive reply and I don't understand it, it was not my intention to rain on your parade here, but ok, here we go.
QuoteYou are only reading what you want to and selectively quoting. You started off talking trash about the game before it was even released. So I'm not surprised you are looking for reasons to hate on it. In truth, what I said, if you read it again, is I'm enjoying the game, I like the 40k units and I am impressed with the OOB. I love wh40k and being able to play with the units brings me enjoyment. I also enjoy moving through the campaign to see what new units get unlocked. Therefore, for me, it's not a bad game.
Excuse me?? Talking trash about the game? Which means if I understand this correctly, to talk nonsense, to utter complete fabrications, especially when one knows them to be untrue. Where did I do that? I'm not reading what I want to read and I don't quote selectively, I read what you wrote and quoted the issues you pointed out which in your text make up 90% of what was written. I see more red (negative) than green (positive) comments here, so who is selective?
QuoteSo I'm enjoying the game, BUT it is not without its faults. i believe the fact that it is a WH40K game is a significant part of what is keeping it afloat, and what is also dragging it down. On the one hand, I like seeing the 40K units. The models are really well done and the OOB is impressive. It will make any 40K fan smile. However, on the other hand, the battles do not feel like 40K. The campaign is pretty weak. Your actions in the field have no impact on the path of the campaign. I'm victorious in every mission, yet hive after hive still falls and the situation continues to deteriorate rapidly. WH40K battles are epic, and this game fails to convey that. i have three tanks, 4 or 5 infantry units, some artillery, assorted vehicles and an airplane. Hardly an epic fighting force. Combat just washes across the relatively small maps without conveying any sense of battle on a massive scale. If we were talking about small units and tactical battles, this wouldn't be such an issue, but there are cities depicted on the map and the story is talking about thousands and thousands of units battling for hives which house untold millions. Perhaps even worse, the AI seems to be pretty brain dead. I'm on the 4th or 5th mission of the main campaign and I'm yet to be challenged. In fact, I haven't even lost a unit. According to the story, Imperial units are being wiped out, yet my battalion is yet to lose a single squad. If this situation doesn't change, this issue will haunt this game and prevent non-40K fans from finding any enjoyment here.
So far, it just doesn't feel very strategic. There is really only one tactic that is necessary to win...concentration of firepower. Keep your units in fair sized groups and they can wear the enemy down every time. Sure, its nice to take positions on the map that appear to strengthen your defense, but its hard to tell how much of a difference this is really making. Find the enemy, group your units, concentrate firepower, etc. This will get old for those who don't care to follow the story or who do not have any strong feelings toward the 40K universe.
The game is not bad...its the first turn based wargame set in the 40K universe that we have had in a very long time. For that, I'm thankful, but this game could have been so much more than it is.
So in total you are talking about rather severe issues that in my book count as negative points and then you say, "but I think it's a good game" because you like the theme and are happy with the OOB? I'm not insinuating you are dishonest, I was only mightily confused about this conclusion after reading what you don't like about the game. In a review that would come across a bit strange...
And what about this nonsense that I need reasons to hate this game? Who is insinuating something here? I don't hate the game, I am disappointed that they used this way to represent the W40k universe for us wargamers, that's what I was saying even before release and have I not the right to do so? That's trash talking for you? I see... I don't look for reasons to hate games, what do you think how old I am? I just might have an opinion on a game just like everybody else and yes, that can include games that I didn't play but of which I know enough to build an opinion on. And if someone writes a text with more negative than positive points mentioned I am confused if the résumé is a positive one, it's simple as that.
so theyve got the OOB and the GW 'figures' right? its very, nearly almost enough to purchase but if the underlying game as everyone suspected, doesnt represent a GW universe i dont think its a buy
putting space marines in a game isnt enough reason to make me buy it
almost but not enough
Quote from: Grimnirsson on November 28, 2014, 09:05:20 AM
Well, I am rather confused about your aggressive reply and I don't understand it, it was not my intention to rain on your parade here, but ok, here we go.
My reply wasn't aggressive. But the nature of your heated and completely unnecessary response proves the very point I was trying to make. You are looking for excuses to hate this game.
Quote from: Grimnirsson on November 28, 2014, 09:05:20 AM
Excuse me?? Talking trash about the game? Which means if I understand this correctly, to talk nonsense, to utter complete fabrications, especially when one knows them to be untrue. Where did I do that? I'm not reading what I want to read and I don't quote selectively, I read what you wrote and quoted the issues you pointed out which in your text make up 90% of what was written. I see more red (negative) than green (positive) comments here, so who is selective?
You're excused. Yes, you've been trash talking the game...no, it does not mean "nonsense" or "utter complete fabrications..." It means simply being negative. Where did you do that? How about here:
Quote from: Grimnirsson on November 06, 2014, 02:37:53 PM
It seems so and I am underwhelmed by the gfx...these little men look like...I dunno...not like SM or brutish Orcs. There might still be a good game in there, but the pics don't make me grab my CC. ???
How about here?
Quote from: Grimnirsson on November 21, 2014, 12:32:23 PM
The trailer says nothing actually about the game, just a few images and some narrative, no ingame stuff, not very convincing...
And the 'preview' is not much better, description how the most basic features of any Panzer Corps game work...I dunno, nothing so far really makes me want to buy this game although I'm a huge W40k fan...
Want more? Here:
Quote from: Grimnirsson on November 26, 2014, 07:26:59 AM
Yeah, without a demo and the still extremely PC gameplay feel from the trailer and the fact it's 30€ over here...I'll pass
Still not convinced? Here:
Quote from: Grimnirsson on November 26, 2014, 05:45:23 PM
>Would be better if the engine was enhanced to make the unit icons animated.
That's why I never understood why they didn't use the Battle Academy engine for this...it would have been just perfect but no, the PC engine it had to be. >:( And even if the game has new features it's still looking like a PC mod to me, just with new units and new features. But the game can't deny who it's daddy is...and for a mod like game like this, it's too expensive.
Jury still out? Here:
Quote from: Grimnirsson on November 27, 2014, 05:23:37 AM
If you never played PC before it's a new experience then for you, so I suppose you might be happy with the game. Personally I love PC for what it is and have all the games here on my HDD but as a W40k fan I was simply expecting something more fresh than that.
Sure...you've been entirely impartial...and I'm the Pope.
Quote from: Grimnirsson on November 28, 2014, 09:05:20 AM
So in total you are talking about rather severe issues that in my book count as negative points and then you say, "but I think it's a good game" because you like the theme and are happy with the OOB? I'm not insinuating you are dishonest, I was only mightily confused about this conclusion after reading what you don't like about the game. In a review that would come across a bit strange...
I don't need to argue with you about MY feelings on the game. I'm sorry you can't handle the fact that simply because I point out faults, its not ok for me to still enjoy myself in a game I already have close to 5 hours invested in. This only points to the fact that you want this game to fail and do not want anything positive posted about this. Are you trying to convince yourself not to buy it? Either way, too God damn bad. Yes, the game has problems, but yes, I'm still enjoying it. Get over it.
Quote from: Grimnirsson on November 28, 2014, 09:05:20 AM
And what about this nonsense that I need reasons to hate this game? Who is insinuating something here? I don't hate the game, I am disappointed that they used this way to represent the W40k universe for us wargamers, that's what I was saying even before release and have I not the right to do so? That's trash talking for you? I see... I don't look for reasons to hate games, what do you think how old I am? I just might have an opinion on a game just like everybody else and yes, that can include games that I didn't play but of which I know enough to build an opinion on. And if someone writes a text with more negative than positive points mentioned I am confused if the résumé is a positive one, it's simple as that.
Based on your response, I'd guess you're about 12 years old. Am I close?
Looks I will be waiting a bit for a price drop.
JH in all fairness, your quotes don't really support your claim towards him trash talking about the game. His comments were just sceptical and he is free to do so. If being sceptical is regarded as trash talk then there is a lot of trash talking going around here. :)
I am a neutral party here, but I also got the feeling you came down on him a bit agressively.
I have no idea if you two had a beef before, but he doesn't particularly come across as looking for a reason to hate on the game no matter what.
Perhaps its a lost in translation thing or something, but you two should grab a virtual cold one and drink together.
I really dont think there is ill wished intent here from either of you.
Quote from: Yskonyn on November 28, 2014, 11:02:11 AM
JH in all fairness, your quotes don't really support your claim towards him trash talking about the game. His comments were just sceptical and he is free to do so. If being sceptical is regarded as trash talk then there is a lot of trash talking going around here. :)
I am a neutral party here, but I also got the feeling you came down on him a bit agressively.
I have no idea if you two had a beef before, but he doesn't particularly come across as looking for a reason to hate on the game no matter what.
Perhaps its a lost in translation thing or something, but you two should grab a virtual cold one and drink together.
I really dont think there is ill wished intent here from either of you.
Thanks for your opinion. There certainly isn't any ill intent on my part. But his response was a bit too off putting for me. I don't have to tolerate that on my own site.
Oh, and I would like to add that I am entitled to my opinion, as well. I do not appreciate the insinuation that I am being dishonest in my assessment of the game because I point out faults. I do not need to be told that I can't possibly enjoy the game because of the problems I have noted. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
My response wasn't 'heated' I simply explained why for me your conclusion is not in harmony with the description of your actual game experience, that's all. But I don't think I want to waste my time with your silly assumptions anymore what my motivations regarding this game are or might be and for the record you
are aggressive and insulting.
QuoteBut his response was a bit too off putting for me. I don't have to tolerate that on my own site.
Oh, the owner is speaking, admin mode on now...ok, you are of course right, you don't have to tolerate my opinion on your site.
Good bye.
Quote from: Grimnirsson on November 28, 2014, 11:12:32 AM
My response wasn't 'heated' I simply explained why for me your conclusion is not in harmony with the description of your actual game experience, that's all. But I don't think I want to waste my time with your silly assumptions anymore what my motivations regarding this game are or might be and for the record you are aggressive and insulting.
QuoteBut his response was a bit too off putting for me. I don't have to tolerate that on my own site.
Oh, the owner is speaking, admin mode on now...ok, you are of course right, you don't have to tolerate my opinion on your site.
Good bye.
Don't let the door bump you in the ass on the way out.
Grim and I have squashed this privately. Let's all move on and get back to discussing the game! That means ALL sides, pro and con!
One thing worth debating is Slitherines continued use of the Panzer Corps and Battle Academy game engines.
I enjoy both games, but this seems a little....recycled.
The developers have said that it's not a panzer corps mod, but reviews say otherwise.
:o :-\
Right, so, back to game mechanic discussion. After playing longer I can correct some of my misimpressions about morale and ammo usage:
1.) Morale and ammo seem to be conflated together currently in a highly abstract mechanic illustrated by a unit's remaining group numbers degrading from white down through yellow and orange to red, based on how much combat they've been in recently (and maybe some other factors, maybe also with respect to an inherent morale and/or ammo base of the unit so that some units don't degrade as easily). As the color drops the unit changes from a few bonuses to no bonuses to increasing debuffs. I don't think a unit simply fails to attack or defend per se, but the debuffs may represent that in a way.
2.) The only way to gain this unit cohesion or morale or resupply (or all this together) is to "Rest and refit", which can only be ordered if the unit has not moved or fought already this turn. Unlike most PGish games, THIS IS NOT ALL RECOUPED IN ONE TURN! For a PGish game, this is utterly crucial, because a unit might take four or five turns before being back to full supply (or whatever) -- and like all such games most maps expect units to move with quick progression. A red-ed unit might as well be completely out of the game, unless the maps are small. (In related news, the maps are reportedly small; I've only been playing tutorial so those are the only maps I've seen like early in a standard Panzer General game.)
3.) Unlike every other PGish game I can recall ever playing, reinforcements do not seem to help the "supply" mechanic in the slightest. In other words if I retreat a red-numbered unit which has taken high damage, at the start of the next turn I can reinforce or resupply but not both, which adds at least one more turn to recovering unit cohesion. This, I believe to be a design miss-step in a game based on PG mechanics demanding the player manage a blitzkrieg rate of advance (which of course the original game was simulating by means of its design rules). At the very least the game should be reprogammed, if possible, so that a reinforce will improve morale by one step. Personally I would recode it to improve morale proportionate to the fraction of units restored by the reinforcement and/or in proportion to clear distance to cities or victory points or whatever. (The original Panzer General used similar coding to affect just how much resupply or resupply-and-reinforcement would be obtained on a request; and subsequent variations have typically followed suit, including the FantasyWars/ElvenLegacy game.) There is certainly no "fluff" reason why reinforcements shouldn't be bringing their own ammo resupplies and at least some morale improvement!
4.) Pursuant to something mentioned by Jarhead: while the PanzGen style might work well for Space Marine chapters and maybe some other combat groups (like the eldar) who carefully nurse and minimize losses while moving quickly, thus leveling up core units relatively consistently between missions; the Imperial Guard (and the Orks for that matter) naturally involve high casualty rates for most of their unit types, which they offset through numbers including rapid reinforcement. It feels weird to be moving three squads of infantry around the map between missions and trying hard not to lose any of them and mostly succeeding. If I were playing World War 2 Germans, or Space Marines, this wouldn't seem so odd.
(That being said, once the tutorial opponents started shooting back, I started losing whole units, though not any infantry yet, only a scout walker and an upgraded leman russ platoon.)
Quote from: Apocalypse 31 on November 28, 2014, 12:50:06 PM
The developers have said that it's not a panzer corps mod, but reviews say otherwise.
I think accurately it's a very extensive total conversion mod, in effect.
What they're trying to say is that it isn't a simple reskin of the Panzer Corps engine.
This made me smile this morning.
Thank you guys was great to watch this, as you understand the game, love, research and work we all put into it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MmsTt-EXEL4
Quote from: JasonPratt on November 28, 2014, 01:09:09 PM
4.) Pursuant to something mentioned by Jarhead: while the PanzGen style might work well for Space Marine chapters and maybe some other combat groups (like the eldar) who carefully nurse and minimize losses while moving quickly, thus leveling up core units relatively consistently between missions; the Imperial Guard (and the Orks for that matter) naturally involve high casualty rates for most of their unit types, which they offset through numbers including rapid reinforcement. It feels weird to be moving three squads of infantry around the map between missions and trying hard not to lose any of them and mostly succeeding. If I were playing World War 2 Germans, or Space Marines, this wouldn't seem so odd.
(That being said, once the tutorial opponents started shooting back, I started losing whole units, though not any infantry yet, only a scout walker and an upgraded leman russ platoon.)
It does get harder. I'm pretty deep into the First Act and I've run into a pretty severe wall. I'm trying to take a number of bridges and the Orks are doing quite well at holding me back. I've already sustained several painful losses of units that have been with me since the very beginning.
Here's LordZ's recent video link embedded for convenience.
This is a (p)review by British internet reviewers Unit Lost, and they love the Tabletop game, so it's interesting to see them compare this favorably to tt. They definitely geek heavily over the fluffiness of the utterly massive unit roster. ("And now we've got tanks..." "JESUS CHRIST!" :D )
I've now started the campaign, and I definitely recommend doing the tutorial campaign first in order to build up core company first according to one's playstyle.
Here as a writer I'll complain a bit that the story development to this point could have been a lot better. The orks apparently landed during the tutorial but suddenly the characters are talking about them maybe even doing flybys and yet I'm still fighting a fellow newb commander for training who is executed offscreen but replaced with apparently no character at all so... why bother with that in-story??
Hello,
i have just purchased the game and let me say for me ist one of the best i ever had.
Here's TotalBiscuit's review -- he's a 40K fanboi, too, and likes the game, but is more restrained and critical.
I purchased too...liking so far,play more this weekend...
The Unit Lost review is enthusiastic enough to make me consider plunking down the $30. I'm encouraged that JH is finding the going more challenging.
Thanks for posting the TotalBiscuit review Jason. Going to watch that now.
Yes thank you all who have provided more detailed insights into the game and it's mechanics. I have to admit watching these videos is making it increasingly difficult not to take the plunge so I can join in and push around some WH40K goodies also. :)
Quote from: Apocalypse 31 on November 28, 2014, 12:50:06 PM
One thing worth debating is Slitherines continued use of the Panzer Corps and Battle Academy game engines.
I enjoy both games, but this seems a little....recycled.
The developers have said that it's not a panzer corps mod, but reviews say otherwise.
It doesn't even use the same codebase as Panzer Corps (to the point where it runs under DX9 rather than being a Windows application), just to provide information :)
The BA engine is something of an easy lay it must be said, but she's so darned flexible... >:D
Cheers
Pip
Is a PDF manual included? If I've played PC is it even necessary? Is there a unit encyclopedia to read up on the units?
Quote from: PipFromSlitherine on November 28, 2014, 04:45:51 PM
The BA engine is something of an easy lay it must be said, but she's so darned flexible... >:D
Best developer comment this season so far. :))
Gus, a pdf manual is included; actually it's available for free several ways, and there was a link upthread somewhere.
I kind of recommend it, even though it is highly lacking in some key areas: the game does not play entirely like PGen or PzCor for that matter. Fortunately the manual is overly short, so it won't take long. :P
There is no unit encyclopedia which is a crying shame since Games Workshop itself should have been able to provide something along that line even if the devs didn't have time. The unit count is ridiculously large, which is great but sometimes I have trouble guessing during gameplay what a unit will be able to do or not, especially on the orky side. I don't seem to recall right-mouse-clicking ever doing anything, so it would be REALLY REALLY NICE if that opened a detailed window on a unit with tooltips or something to remind about the icons.
Some of the game to be honest feels rushed for holiday/season release; not that the gameplay is broken in any way (that I've seen so far), but some polish is lacking. Other parts of the game drip strongly of long, hard work and wow that sentence sounded so different in my head before I typed it... :crazy2:
Looking at it as the first game in a series, helps for me. I know the devs keep saying or implying 'we'll do better next time', and I know that sounds weak, but I think our hope can be well-grounded that they'll keep making better and better sequels, and I am legitimately excited to see what can be done with this engine
because they have been able to do this much with the engine already! (My original emphasis in case anyone quotes it later. ;) )
Um, hey Jarhead (and/or some other admin/mods): could the thread be retitled to clarify current discussion going on, or perhaps split off posts into a new thread after we started being able to play the code (with a link in a final comment to the new thread)?
I will not buy this game, I will not buy this game, I will not buy this game...
The main example of what I mean about needing significantly more information, is spotting distances. A crucial tactic in this game is to hit the enemy from standoff (especially since the AI doesn't always use its units as threateningly as it should, so if they don't see you they don't go out probing and tend not to move around -- a recurrent problem with some though not all PGish games.)
But I have literally no idea how far any of the ork units can see. I've been having to make personal guesses and trying to remember what experimentally seems verified. I would have to look up information in my purchase screen for my own units, too, though from constant use it's easier to keep them in mind.
Some of the mission design is weird, in that it seems to assume AI strategies which don't happen. I'm playing normal, so maybe the AI has been crippled, but some clarity about that in choosing difficulty would have been nice. I just finished an escort mission where my path was flanked by some substantial enemies well outside their detection corridor for the most part, so they weren't collapsing in on me as I went (despite what the briefing suggested) and neither did they threaten to take my lone victory point although had I simply gone my way and not aggro'd the southwestern forces they could have easily done that. As it was I kept a decent force back since I didn't have to exit with all my troops, but if i hadn't accidentally triggered a bit of a surge by probing myself they would have never seen any action and could have supported my race down-road; and all I had to do to stop the surge was pull back out of their detection range (and/or kill the orks who could see me up there.)
I do think the AI was a little more sophisticated than that; a set south-central may or may not have been told to chase anything seen around the center of the map and so came up out of detection range, but still only so long as an enemy within a broad swatch elsewhere could see me. Once I got past that area new enemies didn't pull the enfilade shut. But I'm not sure: they may have simply seen an incautious scout of mine go by and followed it up until I killed enough of them that the group couldn't see me any more and then quit. My garrison sub-company eventually started sniping units for experience while the push continued, and the targets never moved at all even though they were being torn to pieces.
Again, this is admittedly a weakness of most PGish games. But not all of them.
(I hoped that helped, BBmike... >:D )
The movement rules for aircraft need to be rewritten. Why can't aircraft fly over mountains or hills that are impassible to land vehicles? Also, aircraft move slower over terrain that generally slows land movement. These penalties should not apply in the air.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on November 28, 2014, 07:50:37 PM
The movement rules for aircraft need to be rewritten. Why can't aircraft fly over mountains or hills that are impassible to land vehicles? Also, aircraft move slower over terrain that generally slows land movement. These penalties should not apply in the air.
Agree.
Christ -- I hadn't even picked up aircraft yet! :P
But if I may complain about something kinda aircraft related: there is no logical reason whatsoever that a Salamander with four autocannons should be worse at attacking ground targets than a Salamander with one clearly MUCH less mobile autocannon (plus a heavy bolter on either model). Nor should it be worse at scouting, since it was designed to see and shoot aircraft at similar distances, on a platform originally intended to scout land targets at a distance for forward arty spotting (and for sniping with its own original single autocannon).
Granted, I could see it having significantly reduced armor, at least as far as the external visual design indicates. But I get the impression it's a weaker version of the standard scout Salamander (except vs air targets) only because IT WOULD BE GODLY if its function followed its form, and so would break the game balance.
Seriously. I have a bunch of regular old scout Sals right now, more of them than any other single unit in my company, and they have by far the most xp already. I love them so much, and have never bothered to upgrade them because aside from the walker (which even upgraded doesn't fight as well and doesn't seem any more mobile) it's the only unit so far which can see four hexes. I'd lose that upgrading them to anything nominally 'tougher', and I'm dubious I'd pick up more actually helpful firepower.
By the way, different complaint, and I have literally no idea why this wasn't implemented: but the units cannot be renamed. Not only does this fly in the face of just about every other iteration of Panzer General back to the original (and in the face of being able to customize 40K figures), but it looks kind of like provision was made to do that only it wasn't activated. Or maybe it ran buggy somehow in testing...? ???
Didn't get a ton of time to play tonight, but completed the first few tutorial missions of the campaign....just a few comments.
1) I did not play Panzer Corps extensively in the past so no way an expert....but from what I do recall, this game does seem to have a "different feel" to it, even though you certainly can tell it uses PC as the foundation.....something just feels different to me, in a good way.
2) Really like the sounds and graphics....I think they do just fine for a game like this. Only thing that seems kind of strange to me is when the unit does fire, it really never fully faces its target, it just fires in the direction it is facing which sometimes makes it look awkward.
3) I am not a Warhammer expert so I can't really critique on how well it models that universe but what I can tell you is that I am really enjoying the units, especially since they all seem unique, especially since a fresh concept for me versus playing a WWII game.
4) The game certainly could do a better job in explaining the information in the game, although I'll be honest that I haven't read the manual fully so maybe some of it in there. One thing I couldn't understand is why are all the stats not available to be seen within the game screen? Seems like I have to go to the purchase screen to see full stats, unless I am missing an option to bring them all up.
5) One thing I have to get better at is determining what is best to purchase and upgrade between missions...I'll have to study that more since I think it is important to have the right units to be successful in the missions.
Overall, enjoying it and I can only imagine it will continue to improve over time....I think part of the reason I am liking it compared to the other war games is that I really don't have a clue about the Warhammer universe so I can't really be overly critical of it and I have no idea if things are right or not......I am simply just enjoying it for what it is. Even some of the tutorial missions stumped me the first time through so I believe the actual missions will certainly give me a challenge to maximize my enjoyment.
Hi guys,
Apparently some of you may have missed the day one patch 1.0.1 for Warhammer 40,000: Armageddon.
Steam users are all fine as the release version was already 1.0.1.
If you purchased from Slitherine or Matrix and you are playing the non-Steam version, please check on your main menu screen in the right bottom corner what the game version number is. It should say v1.0.1.
If NOT I advise you to hit "check for update" in the launch menu and follow the instructions or download and install the patch 1.0.1 manual and direct from here:
http://www.matrixgames.com/products/540/downloads/
1.00 to 1.01 Changelog:
Bugs Fixed:
- [BUG] Restarting scenario during AI turn can lead to some strange effects (like AI playing your units).
- [BUG] Purchase: select All factions, Artillery and Titan classes will be disabled, even though they are active when only Steel Legion is selected.
- [BUG] Under some unknown circumstances Upgrade button behaves odd
- [BUG] When choosing to upgrade a unit with transport, transport is not selected by default.
- [BUG] FoW and Undo check boxes do not work when starting a campaign (work fine in single scenario mode)
- [BUG] In MP first tab, click empty space where "Play" button normally appears. This will trigger scenario selection, and the program may get into bad state and crash.
- [BUG] Entering non-ASCII characters into edit boxes results in unpredictable behaviour, from garbage in edit box to crash. Need to filter non-ASCII characters.
- [BUG] It is possible to enter Tab symbol into login edit box. Login will succeed, but then MP flow will be broken.
- [BUG] Items in accept challenge list overlap list bounds. See "too many mp games up overwrites text.jpg" in root folder. Need to check other MP lists as well.
- [BUG] After surrendering a mission in MP, one can restart it via victory screen. This must not be possible,
- [CTD] During deployment phase, select any unit in the list, press P.
- [CTD] Start first scenario (Opening faults), open unit list, click transport icon of any non-selected unit
- A number of issues on 1280x1024 resolution.
New Functionality:
- Added version to starting screen
- Added caret to all edit boxes
- Added a number of new hotkeys
- Clicking stat and ability icons displays information about them
- Added tooltips to difficulty levels
- Added unit special ability icons to the UI sidepanel
- Improved presentation of AI moves
- Added custom strength plates to special units
- Added killed unit list
Unit Balance Changes:
Ork Kommandos have got their stickbombs back
Tankbustas gained Assault trait for their Tankbusta bombs
Skullhamma BattleFortress movement increased to 5 to better represent it's "supercharged triple-over-pressure turbo engine"
Deathrolla Battlefortress has had its Deathrolla weapon and Assault trait reinstalled
Price of many Ork Super Heavy tanks reduced slightly.
Traits 'notransport', 'titan', 'heavypull', and 'amphibious' have been added.
Notransport has been added to Rough Riders, Terminators, and Centurions
Amphibious has been added to Land Raiders
Land Raiders Hyperious and Helios have had their double quad Lascannons reduced to double doubles
Ork stormboyz have lost their ability to fly, but have gained increased movement speed to compensate
Titans can no longer enter Water hexes
Imperial Titans increased in cost
Stormsword and its 'upgrade' have been reversed for more logical unit progression.
Weapon file changes
All assault weapons now have a minimum Rate of Fire of 2. Some penetration weapons on assault weapons reduced to compensate.
Quake cannon gained indirect, bulky, and siege traits
Apocalypse Missile Launcher increased to rate of fire 6
Modified Bolter renamed to Combi Bolter
Gut buster Mega cannon increased to rate of fire 2
Volcano cannon range down to 4
Heavy Bolter Support and Shoota Support increased to Rate of Fire 4
2 Lascannons increased to Rate of Fire 2. Power, penetration, and weapon accuracy ratings all reduced
6 Lascannons increased to Rate of Fire 3
Demolisher cannon Rate of Fire increased to 4. Power reduced.
2 Flamers power reduced
Heavy Flamer power increased
Captain Tycho's Bloodsong now has proper ranged weapon stats
Grot Guided missile power and penetration increased
Scenario Changes:
CampScen4
Added river graphic
Campscen6B
Second AI Trigger now affects AI units on the entire map instead of just zone 2
Campscen7B
Fixed invisible settlement graphic
CampScen11
Named one Warboss unit
CampScen14
Added bridge graphics
CampScen15
Removed invalid unit
CampScen19
Changed Escort AI from 'Move To' to 'Attacker'
Added one enemy Titan and some escorts
CampScen24
Fixed invisible settlement graphics
Multiscen8
Scenario now displays proper objectives when objectives are called up
MultiScen9
Scenario now displays proper objectives when objectives are called up
Gargantuan Squiggoth has lost his wheels
Other Changes:
Fixed Land Raider Achilles primary attack animation
A quick strategic recommendation because I don't think this gets emphasized enough in-game or in-manual:
YOU SHOULD BRING AT LEAST TWO INFANTRY! -- better three. Some missions cannot be won without infantry, because some victory hexes are in buildings only infantry can enter.
Fortunately the game starts with two or three infantry (I forget which; I've got three right now). Don't lose them. Replace if you do.
Edited to add: attaching a transport to your infantry won't keep them from entering a building, unless you have to mech-up to get to the building. Then they can only enter next turn. This is a subtle point, which makes sense but can be easily overlooked. I haven't lost a mission that way yet, but I've been caught by surprise.
Also, thanks to whichever ad/mod retitled the thread. O0
(And to LordZ for posting the changelog for the day 1 patch. Yeek, that was a lot of brokenness! You've still got a few minor bugs to go, but nothing that horrible so far as I can tell...)
This first release is the start of a games series, over the coming three years there will be much more content/updates/expansions/ etc. coming, but limited to the Armageddon Wars.
I cannot comment on what still is coming at this point just that this is the end of the beginning not the beginning of the end for this game series. So there will be much more coming and this is not one game but a planned game series.
And we always try, listen and add anything the community desires for as extra, missing or lacking features and ideas, like we did in the Panzer Corps series. If we can and get enough time this series will become better and bettter, there is is much we still want to add, improve and do...
I hope fixing the flyer movement is on the list of things to do... ;)
Quote from: Lord Zimoa on November 29, 2014, 11:13:04 AM
This first release is the start of a games series, over the coming three years there will be much more content/updates/expansions/ etc. coming, but limited to the Armageddon Wars.
Oh. huh.
Well, okay, that makes sense initially anyway. After all, this particular game was based on a fairly traditional hex-and-counter boardgame which got a
Chaos Attack expansion for the 1st War, and a 3rd War game against the Orks again -- but this time it escalates into the beginning of the dreaded Great Waaagh which threatens to unit all orks under one cohesive leadership, thus finally putting to the test the common belief that if the orks would stop fighting each other they could destroy all civilization in the galaxy (and the Ork gods could achieve parity or supremacy with other Chaos demons.)
It would be nice to see factions other than the Imperium (though the Sisters of Battle get pulled into the 3rd War early as well as most or all of the SM chapters), Chaos SM, and Orks in the game, though.
Are the Orks Australians? I can't help but read these weapons with an Aussie accent.
Rockit Launcha
Slugga
Choppa
Big Shoota
Krusha Kannon
:2funny:
Kind of? They use a low-class British accent, so... yeah, there's kind of a connection. >:D
Quote from: jomni on November 30, 2014, 05:58:32 AM
Are the Orks Australians? I can't help but read these weapons with an Aussie accent.
Rockit Launcha
Slugga
Choppa
Big Shoota
Krusha Kannon
:2funny:
ROFL
Someone from the UK can confirm but I always thought the accents of the Orks were South-London or Cockney or somesuch, circa 1900. Where's Bawb or ucg?
Quote from: Gusington on November 30, 2014, 02:58:25 PM
...always thought the accents of the Orks were South-London or Cockney or somesuch, circa 1900.
I always thought the accents of the Orks were a (nowadays a strong political incorrect) exaggeration of Afro American pronunciation from the past or certain slang using districts even today?
I get that it's a British IP, but I never understand why in film and media people living in ancient and futuristic times tend to have British accents. I mean Romans and Greeks did not have English accents. It's just a hunch, but people living 41,000 years in the future probably won't have English accents either.
Oh, and I finally have space marines in the campaign. I knew they had to be coming because I was fighting a scenario that I could not win. Their entry was less than dramatic. It's not critical, but the game really could use some more animation. One turn they are not there on the map and e next ey are all over the place. It would be nice to actually see the drop pods crashing in.
Anyway, the Space marine OOB does not disappoint. it's just as thorough as e steel legion's gear list.
This should explain the accent ;D
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2842376/Want-child-s-attention-Speak-British-accent-Children-listen-harder-Queen-s-English-American-drawl.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2842376/Want-child-s-attention-Speak-British-accent-Children-listen-harder-Queen-s-English-American-drawl.html)
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on December 01, 2014, 06:32:05 AM
I get that it's a British IP, but I never understand why in film and media people living in ancient and futuristic times tend to have British accents. I mean Romans and Greeks did not have English accents. It's just a hunch, but people living 41,000 years in the future probably won't have English accents either.
Oh, and I finally have space marines in the campaign. I knew they had to be coming because I was fighting a scenario that I could not win. Their entry was less than dramatic. It's not critical, but the game really could use some more animation. One turn they are not there on the map and e next ey are all over the place. It would be nice to actually see the drop pods crashing in.
Anyway, the Space marine OOB does not disappoint. it's just as thorough as e steel legion's gear list.
because noone would understand ancient Greek in hollywood or Literature?
but nothing conveys sneaky underhanded skullduggery more than a cheeky cockney
I blame "I, Claudius".
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.bbcimg.co.uk%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2F74257000%2Fjpg%2F_74257985_iclaudius.jpg&hash=21e4f3bb09dbf58825f1e1596d0cf2eb229001dd)
And Star Wars.
Quote from: undercovergeek on December 01, 2014, 07:28:54 AM
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on December 01, 2014, 06:32:05 AM
I get that it's a British IP, but I never understand why in film and media people living in ancient and futuristic times tend to have British accents. I mean Romans and Greeks did not have English accents. It's just a hunch, but people living 41,000 years in the future probably won't have English accents either.
Oh, and I finally have space marines in the campaign. I knew they had to be coming because I was fighting a scenario that I could not win. Their entry was less than dramatic. It's not critical, but the game really could use some more animation. One turn they are not there on the map and e next ey are all over the place. It would be nice to actually see the drop pods crashing in.
Anyway, the Space marine OOB does not disappoint. it's just as thorough as e steel legion's gear list.
because noone would understand ancient Greek in hollywood or Literature?
but nothing conveys sneaky underhanded skullduggery more than a cheeky cockney
But why English accent? There is such a thing as a Greek accent.
Quote from: bbmike on December 01, 2014, 07:01:41 AM
This should explain the accent ;D
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2842376/Want-child-s-attention-Speak-British-accent-Children-listen-harder-Queen-s-English-American-drawl.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2842376/Want-child-s-attention-Speak-British-accent-Children-listen-harder-Queen-s-English-American-drawl.html)
Sounds quite scientific when it repeats the phrase "listens harder".
:2funny:
It's all Cockney...that's why Nobz is pronounced "nobes" instead of the American "knobs" and is an orkish take on "nobles". The others follow likewise...
Best single rendering of this I've ever heard was in the intro movie for the earlier PC implementation of Blood Bowl as they related the history of the "Nuffle Amorical League". I still regard my Packers as playing for the Nuffle...and the red-headed spokesape is its commisar.
We Americans LOVE, LOVE, LOVE hearing most iterations of British English (that Yorkshire mess notwithstanding) and there are whole comedy bits about how you can tell one of my fellow colonists just about any horrible thing you can imagine, but, if you relate it in a nice accent, we'll smile knowingly and assume it was a compliment.
Ages ago I was working at a Renaissance Faire -- don't judge me -- and was sent on a promotional gig to a local mall. My beloved and I were well bored and I, without her permission mind, decided to greet mall patrons with the following:
"Good give ye good den, m'lady (m'lord). I am Sir Edward Coke, Attorney General to Her Majesty the Queen, and this is my lady wife. I'm very pleased to announce that I'm turgid!"
Even allowing for the relatively limited vocabulary of the modern era, the fact that no one even flinched, and some smiled politely, has always gone a long way to explaining to my satisfaction why folks with British accents need not adopt another when they perform as Romans, Greeks, Persians, Medes, Jesus, &c., for American audiences.
Best,
Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)
Quote from: Cyrano on December 01, 2014, 07:49:45 PM
"Good give ye good den, m'lady (m'lord). I am Sir Edward Coke, Attorney General to Her Majesty the Queen, and this is my lady wife. I'm very pleased to announce that I'm turgid!"
I...I...I'm laughing so hard I have tears in my eyes!
Quote from: Cyrano on December 01, 2014, 07:49:45 PM
(that Yorkshire mess notwithstanding)
errrr, what? :knuppel2:
Quote from: Bardolph on December 01, 2014, 07:37:51 AM
I blame "I, Claudius".
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.bbcimg.co.uk%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2F74257000%2Fjpg%2F_74257985_iclaudius.jpg&hash=21e4f3bb09dbf58825f1e1596d0cf2eb229001dd)
And Star Wars.
However, the Praetorian Guards were a bunch of big Germans, IIRC.
OUR ANGLISH FOREFATHERS!
Someone should market a game along that line... ::) :P
UCG: The fault is entirely ours, I assure you. :-[.
My beloved asks, peering over my shoulder, why I'm dissing Daisy's father-in-law...this likely means something...
Best,
Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)
Quote from: Staggerwing on December 01, 2014, 08:36:14 PM
However, the Praetorian Guards were a bunch of big Germans, IIRC.
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F4.bp.blogspot.com%2F-BceMh7IYGrA%2FUIukUYwuOGI%2FAAAAAAAABNE%2FFGDzLxsu-uY%2Fs1600%2F1976_television_i_claudius_cast04.jpg&hash=090c424cb261337c30fa74a98644da06935e0966)
;)
What is that stuff on the top of Captain Picard's head?
A Tribble?
Quote from: Cyrano on December 01, 2014, 10:20:24 PM
UCG: The fault is entirely ours, I assure you. :-[.
My beloved asks, peering over my shoulder, why I'm dissing Daisy's father-in-law...this likely means something...
Best,
Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)
lol, more confusion - my daughter is called Daisy :D
Is she turgid? HAHAHA
dont make me come over there
You know I love you.
Getting back to the game...the rules for aircraft are in serious need of re-writing. As they are presently, aircraft and their use is completely pointless. They are hampered by most of the same movement penalties of land units. Moreover, they are unbalanced in combat. Although they sometimes field powerful weapons, they are easily shot from the sky by pretty much anything, so there is no purpose in acquiring dedicated air defense units in your OOB. This removes a serious strategic consideration when building your army.
Furthermore, aircraft play no transport role. Ground units cannot be transported over impassable terrain or further ranges than they could ordinarily travel on foot. Therefore, there is no option for vertical envelopment and one of the major tactical benefits to fielding aircraft is completely ignored by the game system.
For that matter, I think transport units should be handled entirely differently. Presently, you can upgrade units to have mechanized transportation capability. This simply gives your unit the option to travel longer distances. A far better system would be if transport units were represented as separate units on the field that can move and fire independent of the actual unit being transported. I guess this is a feature that I should not hold my breath for, but the absence of it really hurts the immersion factor of the game.
I'm holding off continuing precisely to see if aircraft gets fixed. I'm willing to continue without trying to invest in them, but I want to know that situation one way or another first.
I will say that it's accurately fluffy for aircraft to have a short lifespan in this milieu, but their far-reaching movement over impassable objects ought to offset this.
Re: integral transport, that's a normal Panzer General game mechanic. I'm a little surprised they figured out a way to let aircraft transport troops at all. (I realize this isn't a modified Panzer Corps engine but a rewritten one in DX9 for multiple platform operation, so if they rewrote one thing they could rewrite others; however, transports at this scale shouldn't take up their own hex, which is offset by a second level for flying units which is standard PGeneral practice.)
So I'm okay with the transport mechanic, which I even find to be a little superior to the usual implementation in a PG engine.
To be more specific, I loved my Chimeras, and love my Goliaths more, so much so that the only reason I haven't switched my lone mortar team to something more fully infantry yet is because they do get a defensive support role and the mortars on the Goliath don't.
Do the transports pack more puch and more staying power than infantry? I think they do based on stats.
If that's the case, I should actually be mounting them up in the transport for most of the time and only dismount them to capture objectives.
Problem is that they auto-dismount during the enemy turn and that makes them more fragile.
As JH said, the transport units should be a separate unit so that they can contribute to combat when the infantry are dismounted.
A big flaw by using the PC engine.
Quote from: Bardolph on December 01, 2014, 11:17:53 PM
Quote from: Staggerwing on December 01, 2014, 08:36:14 PM
However, the Praetorian Guards were a bunch of big Germans, IIRC.
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F4.bp.blogspot.com%2F-BceMh7IYGrA%2FUIukUYwuOGI%2FAAAAAAAABNE%2FFGDzLxsu-uY%2Fs1600%2F1976_television_i_claudius_cast04.jpg&hash=090c424cb261337c30fa74a98644da06935e0966)
;)
Yea... I fixed that
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Flinesofcommand.com%2Fimages%2FP_R.jpg&hash=c993d76c383144a5209450e4d7ad6eab0b2d0a1b)
Quote from: jomni on December 02, 2014, 05:05:06 PM
Do the transports pack more puch and more staying power than infantry? I think they do based on stats.
If that's the case, I should actually be mounting them up in the transport for most of the time and only dismount them to capture objectives.
Problem is that they auto-dismount during the enemy turn and that makes them more fragile.
As JH said, the transport units should be a separate unit so that they can contribute to combat when the infantry are dismounted.
A big flaw by using the PC engine.
I'm pretty sure I recall them dismounting after the enemy turn? Haven't played in several days.
Presumably the infantry fight from within the APC, or in close support after movement, adding their firepower to its own limited capabilities, even though in-engine that's not how it works out (consequently a mortar team with a Goliath fights like a full infantry squad with a Goliath.)
What's actually unrealistic is having the APCs effectively disappear and add nothing to a fight when the infantry are 'dismounted'.
Of course, in most Panzer Generalish games the vehicles can enter towns, so on that scale presumably the vehicles are hidden somewhere nearby out of the fight under the circumstances of the territory. Here though vehicles cannot (usually) enter a building hex.
I followed temptation and picked this up last night, playing to the 4th Tutorial battle. First I am glad to say it isn't a re-skinned PanzerCorps though the apple has not strayed very far from the tree here.
I really like the unit selection and the usual PG type hooks to upgrade and unlock new equipment. However, as commented on previously the lack of animations, none for movement at all, really seems out of place from a big developer and leaves the nice looking maps and units 'flat'.
The manual? Well, it will not take very long to read. You are really better off just jumping into the game, there is nothing significant written there at all and the game is screaming for explanations of how things work. The onscreen UI is lacking also - Spotting? Probably the most important piece of info is not there. Going to the purchase screen for your own units is cumbersome. For the enemy - best guess ?? I do not know, but would like to.
I am putting the static AI down, even on Challenging, to it being the Tutorial. However, I sure hope once the 'campaign' starts that things start to improve on that front and the AI does 'stuff' and that triggers are included in the scenario design.
Which brings me to my biggest disappointment. I do like the units, maps, the cut scene dialogs for immersion, and so far the mechanics also seem different enough to keep me interested. However, it really seems like very little has been built upon from the likes of People's General, PG 3D or even OpenGeneral, instead it seems this game is trying to reinvent the wheel - again. (I can't rename units? Really?) Here's hoping LordZimoa keeps to his word and this gets fleshed out a lot more.
Not gonna lie, the other Panzer-General-with-orcs-game, from Russia back in 2010, is much more on the ball than this. And I don't say that to denigrate this game, which I already (if abashedly) love. But there's a lot of room for improvement.
I am in fact already at work on a PanzOrc Corpz Generals AAR. But not for this game (yet).
Hmm. Matrix even has to write a post about the re-skin issue
http://matrixgames.com/news/1570/Orks.and.chocolate.pies
Quote from: jomni on December 03, 2014, 05:39:29 AM
Hmm. Matrix even has to write a post about the re-skin issue
http://matrixgames.com/news/1570/Orks.and.chocolate.pies
when i ve read "here you go, such a tasty chocolate
cream pie you have" i had to chuckle and surely not thought about Orkcs ;-)
It certainly isn't only a re-skin; although even if it was, it would be an admirably thorough re-skin. :)
Quote from: jomni on December 03, 2014, 05:39:29 AM
Hmm. Matrix even has to write a post about the re-skin issue
http://matrixgames.com/news/1570/Orks.and.chocolate.pies
I shall have Marco beaten - the engine most definitely isn't the same either :)
Cheers
Pip
^^ 2nd best dev comment this season so far. :coolsmiley:
(But give him only a few stripes; he meant well. O0 )
I'd like to hear from the developers as to whether there are any plans to improve the rules with respect to aircraft, air defense and unit transportation.
Me, too, but if he read this far in the thread he knows we have concerns (and probably knows from other sources, too). So if he chose not to say anything about it anyway, I doubt asking will get a reply.
Still, Mom says I too often infer that asking is pointless. So...
...someone ask?
(I might have a psychological block against doing something I think is of no use, instead of testing to see if it's really of no use. :uglystupid2: )
Quote from: JasonPratt on December 03, 2014, 09:06:56 PM
Me, too, but if he read this far in the thread he knows we have concerns (and probably knows from other sources, too). So if he chose not to say anything about it anyway, I doubt asking will get a reply.
my fear is that the good sound constructive criticism of serious members of the general (war)gaming community like JH, et alii. is simple not heard in the roaring hurricane of all kind of personal WH40k-Nerdism wishes, demands, geeg-insights, item-balance barrack-lawyer attempts on the Slitherine forum.
In addition some overthere want it closer to original PC , other closer to 1:1 tabletop , other closer to a new wargame of its own (of course where
reallife tactics that work through times should still work in the fictive future and things should make sense in a tactical way of using assets, so iam with JH)
Well, and Slitherine? They want to sell a stream of DLC's (like in their other major brands ) so to make you pay 250€ in the end, if you must have it all at according release days
... i smell an standalone full price
Allied Ork Corps behind the horizon ;)
..double post - delete
Well, I certainly know what you're saying Mike. Though I'd say the goofy air movement issues are a bug or a design oversight, while the transport rules are a legitimate option for how to work such things in-game (going back to the original Panzer General).
Personally I think the ground transport rules (haven't played the air yet) work just fine even with their oddities. Adding separate APCs on the board would take up positional hexes and, more importantly, limited unit slots that would diffuse the game.
Even if separate APCs, like separate jeeps or trucks or tracked AFVs for hauling around unpowered artillery (in PG/PCorps, not in this game, all arty is self-powered here as they should be in this milieu), might make sense at the apparent 'unit scale' of the game (and wouldn't at larger scales where we're looking at battalions or regiments or at least companies or something like that where transport would naturally be intrinsic to the unit), adding unit slots to each mission to accommodate a few APCs will still break the game badly. Right now APCs are a function of having earned enough requisition, so in theory all such units can go mech. Adding only a few slots would leave most units unable to go mechanized and so unable to push forward simply from lack of organizational-slot room; or rather the player would invest in more outright AFVs independent of the infantry and so lose the game because the infantry couldn't walk forward fast enough to take buildings only infantry can enter. Adding more slots to allow all bought infantry the opportunity to get APCs, would open up tank/mech spam that much more.
The only way that might work is if the devs could code in subordinate unit slots that only open up as infantry are added and which can only be filled by APCs or IFVs, not by anything else. Then it would be a matter of whether the AI could be coded to use the transports properly on map (hard to say), and whether having extra vehicles always-on-map would gum up the hexes too much: the units already get in each other's way to some significant extent (also a PGish design tradition).
I'm trying to remember, how did Tiller's Campaign Series handle infantry (and related) ground transport? Those games were released more-or-less in response to the original Panzer General as a groggier alternative, and their scale was much more like War-mageddon than the more operational-level scale of PG (and Panzer Corps of course).
I seem to recall the transport vehicles were indeed handled on map, but my brother played that a lot more than I ever did, and my Matrix collection is at home not the office (and maybe not installed at the moment) so I can't check.
I think the problem is in Panzer Corps, infantry is better dismounted than mounted because they are more fragile and have negligible firepower in their half tracks...
In Armageddon, the vehicles pack a punch and are more survivable than infantry so all that "fire power disappears" when dismounted.
So I think I will keep my infantry in their transports unless occupying areas that are only accessible by infantry. Haven't played much yet so I haven't tried this tactic often enough.
There are no airborne transport rules because there are no aircraft that transport units. That is a MAJOR problem with the game in my opinion. It removes a significant tactical advantage and severely restricts the mobility of units in what is a futuristic setting. The fiction of Warhammer 40K is replete with instances of Space Marines flying into combat zones in Thunderhawks and dropping into battle from orbit. There is none of that in this game. The Stormravens are there, but they have no capability to transport infantry and, as such, really act like mediocre tanks, at best.
I still stand by my initial claim that the game would be far better if ground transports were individual units represented separately on the map. You could solve any hex problems by permitting infantry units and their transports to stack. But as is, forcing infantry to dismount and then removing the transport from play, once again, artificially removes strategic options from the game breaking immersion and reducing the effectiveness of your units. The more I play, the more these issues bother me.
Quote from: JasonPratt on December 03, 2014, 09:06:56 PM
Me, too, but if he read this far in the thread he knows we have concerns (and probably knows from other sources, too). So if he chose not to say anything about it anyway, I doubt asking will get a reply.
Still, Mom says I too often infer that asking is pointless. So...
...someone ask?
(I might have a psychological block against doing something I think is of no use, instead of testing to see if it's really of no use. :uglystupid2: )
I'm entirely clueless about the gameplay side of Armageddon - I just comment on the engine and other broader issues :) I think that the air unit stuff has been mentioned elsewhere too, but dropping a note on the Steam or Slitherine forums to be sure that it gets seen isn't a terrible idea.
Cheers
Pip
Jomni has a good observation about the key differences between mounted Wehrmacht and mounted Imperial Guards and how using identical mechanization rules (close enough to never mind) leads to radical differences in-game. I can say from experience, Jom, that I definitely keep my infantry buttoned up at the end of turns if possible.
JH,
I have a suspicion that, despite the engine having been rebuilt from the ground up in DX9 (for multi-platform usage?), the concepts you're recommending can't be implemented because this is still Panzer Corps architecture, which hews too closely (for this purpose) to Panzer General -- and those things couldn't be done in PG.
You're certainly right about airborne troop movement in the milieu, though. Maybe they could implement a command like in PG where certain troops (all troops?) can 'convert' into air transports at selected sites and fly to drop in areas selected by players? Without APC support of course (like in PG).
In order to make your APC/IFV fix work, I can see at least three recoding requirements:
1.) a special slot-opening code so that each valid infantry generates one new slot that cannot be filled except by a troop carrier.
2.) a second or rather third vertical level, in between 'ground' and 'air' for stacking units, which will somehow not hamper stacking air in that hex.
3.) this third level can only exist on top of infantry (and only selected infantry, not on Rough Riders or Termies for example), so that APCs aren't stacking with walkers or tanks etc.
I'm dubious the engine can be tweaked to accomplish this, but the devs keep saying it's a whole new engine that only superficially resembles PG PzCor, so hey... ;)
Quote from: JasonPratt on December 04, 2014, 01:14:25 PM
Jomni has a good observation about the key differences between mounted Wehrmacht and mounted Imperial Guards and how using identical mechanization rules (close enough to never mind) leads to radical differences in-game. I can say from experience, Jom, that I definitely keep my infantry buttoned up at the end of turns if possible.
Yup. I tried that tactic to great success. I keep my infantry in their vehicles unless they need to occupy a victory hex that is infantry-only. This definitely is the way to go.
They will be protected during the enemy turn (orcs are deadly at melee) and only dismount at the start of the player turn. And that heavy transport bristling with guns and mortars rocks! It's a shame not to use them by keeping your infantry dismounted.
My major beef is that while dismounted, the awesome weapons of the vehicles are lost. Why not just include them in the infantry's weapon list? Abstracted vehicle support.
The devs took time to make weapons modular anyway.
incoming :)
Quote1.01 to 1.02 Changelog
Bugs:
• [BUG] Some edit boxes miss caret.
• The description for Max Hit Points is missing.(IDS_HELP_MAX_HIT_POINTS)
• - On square monitors main menu background image is cropped correctly now, but in Loading screen it is still distorted
• Fixed Killed unit list
Features:
• Added hot seat mode via MP (accept your own challenge)
• Added chat screen (accessible via Enter key, also appears automatically at the end of the turn and at the beginning if there are new messages)
• Added FPS limitation (30 FPS max)
• Setting volume to zero disables sound completely, not just sets volume to zero
• Mouse cursor no longer depends on game frame rate – should move smooth on all systems
• Mouse cursor is confined to game's window (on multi monitor systems)
• Melee impact animations and audio effects have been integrated.
Unit Balance Changes:
Many infantry teams with only one range weapon have gained increased formation sizes for all factions.
Hive Militia units defense lowered.
Bomber units now have a new 'bomb' weapon to help them destroy Ork Siege weaponry.
Steel Legion support units no longer have 2 HP each, but have gained increased squad size.
Lasgun secondary weapon removed from all Steel Legion support teams.
Leman Russ Demolisher gained a heavy flamer weapon and a slight price increase
Sentinel units have had their base accuracy ratings raised.
All Titan units for all factions price raised again
Nobz are now 2 HP units, but squad size has been reduced
Gretchin returned to size 50 formation
Squiggoth and Gargantuan Squiggoths have had their HP values increased
Several Ork Mechanized units gained increased formation sizes
Ork Weirdboyz have gained a new weapon called Deff Wave
Added Deathrolla weapon and Assault Trait to BattleFortress with Supa Kannon
Space marine bike units now have more varied stats
Basic land raiders are now transport units for heavy space marine infantry
Centurion squad size reduced to 8 maximum.
Increased movement speed for all space marine transports
Weapon file changes:
Flamer Rate of Fire reduced from 4 to 3
Bomb weapon added for Bomber units
Deff Wave weapon added for Ork Weirdboyz
Shoota armor piercing rating reduced to 10
Scenario Changes:
Campscen2B.
Scenario can only be played from the Imperial side in single scenario mode.
Campscen3B.
Blood Angel flags no longer appear on this map.
Campscen4.
Scenario can only be played from the Imperial side in single scenario mode.
Campscen5.
Mannheim's Titan unit is now named Steel Hammer.
Message to retreat has extra text to help guide the player and now reads:
" Multiple Ork Gargants detected inbound, evacuate your forces from the area immediately! Mannheim's Steel Hammer Titan must continue towards the Victory Hex alone!"
Campscen11
Name of all units to destroy in this scenario set as 'Ork Siege Battery' to better match the briefing
Bomber units have transports and a new weapon to make them more useful when destroying Ork Siege Battery units
A pop up message now appears when you have destroyed the first Ork Siege battery
" First Ork Siege Battery Destroyed!"
A pop up message now appears when you have destroyed the second to last Ork Siege Battery
" Almost all Ork Siege Batteries have been destroyed! Find the last one take it out!"
Campscen12
Von Strab's Former Bodyguards AUX unit returned to scenario.
Triggers changed so that Von Strab's Former Bodyguards unit does not break the scenario.
CampScen17
Two auxiliary helper titans have been added to this scenario to compensate for the loss of player owned Titans
Tu'Shan and several Salamander Space Marine units added as auxiliaries to assist in this battle
Campscen19
Von Strab unit AI settings
changed Von Strab's Titan forces have abandoned him and have been replaced by extra Baneblade tank variants
Campscen24
Adjusted some terrain for better graphical appearances
CampScen25
Thraka's personal unit has been made bigger and stronger
Other Changes:
Fixed availability file issues so that units available during the tutorial are now also available at the start of Act 1
Imperial titan availability has been significantly pushed back. Scout titan only available from the middle of act2, reaver titan only available from the start of act3.
Sound files have been added for Assault Impacts
Attack file has been updated for Assault Impact graphics and audio
Leman russ Demolisher gained a flamer weapon
Hive wall turret has animation and sound
Bombers, Ork Weird Boyz, and kommandos had entries added for their new weapons
Stormeagles had entries added for their missing weapons
Changed deathstrike and grot launcher animations
Deathrolla battlefortress entry added for melee weapon
Well, those were all important changes (removing secondary lasguns from all Legion support teams? -- not sure I like that, but I guess I understand it. The bomber now has a bomb. All basic infantry group sizes increased, kewl.)
But I see a distinct lack of fixing the insane terrain movement restrictions for air units. Maybe next time....?
I'm not trying to say they're ignoring it, or can't fix it due to the engine somehow, btw. On the other hand, I did quip about the manual that in it aircraft are treated "like fairies over in the corner of the yard who disappear when you look in their direction". ::) And "not even aircraft" can enter hexes with infantry restrictions, which is... a troubling way to put that. I understand them not getting into the buildings of course, duh, but not being able to enter the hex at all would bespeak a serious engine design problem.
You've gotten a lot farther than I, JH: can aircraft hover over that kind of hex?
(Also, LordZ did confirm drop pods are supposed to be in the game, a few thread pages back. Did he mean cosmetically as part of the plot? I seem to recall you saying drop pods aren't part of what the player can do.)
Quote from: JasonPratt on December 05, 2014, 09:06:18 AM
You've gotten a lot farther than I, JH: can aircraft hover over that kind of hex?
(Also, LordZ did confirm drop pods are supposed to be in the game, a few thread pages back. Did he mean cosmetically as part of the plot? I seem to recall you saying drop pods aren't part of what the player can do.)
Aircraft cannot move over mountains, cliffs, etc. I'm not sure about buildings though. I would venture to say that they can't. They are so useless, I don't even buy them anymore.
As far as "drop pods being in the game", I think you have to use "in the game" loosely. When Space Marines first appear in the campaign, they "arrive" by drop pod. In reality, one turn there are no space marines on map and the next they are there. When they arrive, the drop pods do appear to take up a hex and they do have hit points, although I am not sure why, as they seem to serve no purpose. What I meant when I asked if drop pods were in the game was whether they are a means of deploying troops in any given scenario. I'm at the end of Act 2 and so far there has been no use of drop pods other than in that one scripted instance. This would have been another opportunity to add a strategic element to the game. For instance, players could use purchase points to buy strategic tactics cards. ie. insertion of troops by drop pod, insertion of terminators by teleportation, orbital bombardment, etc. There is none of this in the game and it is a missed opportunity. Its the little details like this that make an average game a great one. Although the game is enjoyable, I think it is rather uninspired. No risks, no great ideas, no effort to expand beyond a set established formula.
Another let down.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on December 05, 2014, 09:35:08 AM
Quote from: JasonPratt on December 05, 2014, 09:06:18 AM
You've gotten a lot farther than I, JH: can aircraft hover over that kind of hex?
(Also, LordZ did confirm drop pods are supposed to be in the game, a few thread pages back. Did he mean cosmetically as part of the plot? I seem to recall you saying drop pods aren't part of what the player can do.)
Aircraft cannot move over mountains, cliffs, etc. I'm not sure about buildings though. I would venture to say that they can't. They are so useless, I don't even buy them anymore.
Okay, that definitely has to be a bug -- even the manual thinks they can fly over any terrain, and the manual half pretends they don't exist.
Wow. What a lame end to a very long campaign. Seriously.
YOU ARE NOT ENCOURAGING ME TO STEP AWAY FROM MY TEN YEAR OLD RUSSIAN TACTICAL 3RD PERSON RPG, JARHEAD!! :buck2:
Incidentally, either my Steam version didn't auto-update, or they changed their mind at some point about the lasguns being removed from Legion support teams, because when I played the next mission... not last night, maybe the night before... I checked during deployment and my mortar team still had them; they were listed on other infantry support teams, too.
Does your copy still have lasguns for support teams, JH? ???
Quote from: JasonPratt on December 10, 2014, 09:26:39 AM
Does your copy still have lasguns for support teams, JH? ???
I have no idea. However, I do not recall any patches ever being applied through steam. Do you still have to run the updater from the game menu. Probably...
How was the campaign ending lame?
I'm hoping it's just a case of 'the journey is the thing'. Most PGish campaigns have endings that are either lame or practically non-existent narratively after all.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on December 10, 2014, 09:11:46 AM
Wow. What a lame end to a very long campaign. Seriously.
is it safe to say youve now come down on the 'its not that good' side of the fence?
Sigh...why am I am not surprised...? :(
Hi guys
we are pleased to announce v1.02 is now available. It contains a very long list of fixes. More than we though and were planning! The update is propagating so if your update button doesn't work now it should in 30-60 minutes!
I will be playing 1.02 in my Live Stream in 1 minute at http://www.twitch.tv/slitherinegroup/
Please note that some balance changes will only take effect when you start a new campaign. For example infantry unit size changes. If you want to continue an existing game you can work around this by upgrading your infantry to a different type and then back again and it will reset all your stats and you can continue with new fully sized squads.
You can see the full list below.
1.01 to 1.02 Changelog
Fixed bugs:
• Game screen sometimes goes black after Alt-Tabbing out of the game, changing desktop resolution or suspending the PC.
• Upon exiting and restarting the game, the voice volume slider resets to default.
• Some edit boxes miss caret.
• The description for Max Hit Points is missing.(IDS_HELP_MAX_HIT_POINTS)
• On square monitors main menu background image is cropped correctly now, but in Loading screen it is still distorted
• Killed unit list does not work
• The game now correctly displays custom scenarios from %My Documents%\My Games\ Warhammer 40,000 Armageddon\Scenario folder in scenario list. Both in single player and multiplayer mode.
New Features:
• Changes in unit panels in main UI:
o Added unit's faction icon
o Added tooltip to experience bar
o Added health bar (like in unit list)
o Improved name and type presentation: now, if unit name includes type (as in all auto-generated names), type is not shown and name occupies two lines, and so is never truncated.
o Range now always shown as Min-Max.
o Replaced strength and health stats with cover and morale
o Combat prediction is indicated with blinking red on attacker's and defender's health bars.
o Added per-weapon combat prediction (weapon status, firing accuracy and damage).
• Unit which will provide support fire is marked on the map with "support" symbol next to its strength plate.
• Melee impact animations and audio effects have been integrated.
• Added hot seat mode via MP interface (accept your own challenge)
• Added chat screen (accessible via Enter key, also appears automatically at the end of the turn and at the beginning if there are new messages)
• Added FPS limitation (50 FPS max)
• Setting volume to zero disables sound completely, not just sets volume to zero
• Mouse cursor no longer depends on game frame rate – should move smooth on all systems
• Mouse cursor is confined to game's window (on multi monitor systems)
• Mouse cursor turns to arrow with ? on icons which can be clicked for more info.
Editor changes:
• Added automated tile placement (Tools->Generate Tiles)
• Added firing effects editor (Edit->Efx Editor...)
• Fixed Tools->Validate Scenario command
• Fixed Tools->Show Statistics command
• The Editor should no longer display "invalid scenario" message when saving valid playable scenarios.
• Removed Tools->Options command as it is not used by the Editor.
Unit Balance Changes:
Many infantry teams with only one range weapon have gained increased formation sizes for all factions.
Hive Militia units defense lowered.
Bomber units now have a new 'bomb' weapon to help them destroy Ork Siege weaponry.
Steel Legion support units no longer have 2 HP each, but have gained increased squad size.
Lasgun secondary weapon removed from all Steel Legion support teams.
Leman Russ Demolisher gained a heavy flamer weapon and a slight price increase
Sentinel units have had their base accuracy ratings raised.
All Titan units for all factions price raised again
Nobz are now 2 HP units, but squad size has been reduced
Gretchin returned to size 50 formation
Squiggoth and Gargantuan Squiggoths have had their HP values increased
Several Ork Mechanized units gained increased formation sizes
Ork Weirdboyz have gained a new weapon called Deff Wave
Added Deathrolla weapon and Assault Trait to BattleFortress with Supa Kannon
Space marine bike units now have more varied stats
Basic land raiders are now transport units for heavy space marine infantry
Centurion squad size reduced to 8 maximum.
Increased movement speed for all space marine transports
Weapon file changes:
Flamer Rate of Fire reduced from 4 to 3
Bomb weapon added for Bomber units
Deff Wave weapon added for Ork Weirdboyz
Shoota armor piercing rating reduced to 10
Scenario Changes:
Campscen2B.
Scenario can only be played from the Imperial side in single scenario mode.
Campscen3B.
Blood Angel flags no longer appear on this map.
Campscen4.
Scenario can only be played from the Imperial side in single scenario mode.
Campscen5.
Mannheim's Titan unit is now named Steel Hammer.
Message to retreat has extra text to help guide the player and now reads:
" Multiple Ork Gargants detected inbound, evacuate your forces from the area immediately! Mannheim's Steel Hammer Titan must continue towards the Victory Hex alone!"
Campscen11
Name of all units to destroy in this scenario set as 'Ork Siege Battery' to better match the briefing
Bomber units have transports and a new weapon to make them more useful when destroying Ork Siege Battery units
A pop up message now appears when you have destroyed the first Ork Siege battery
" First Ork Siege Battery Destroyed!"
A pop up message now appears when you have destroyed the second to last Ork Siege Battery
" Almost all Ork Siege Batteries have been destroyed! Find the last one take it out!"
Campscen12
Von Strab's Former Bodyguards AUX unit returned to scenario.
Triggers changed so that Von Strab's Former Bodyguards unit does not break the scenario.
CampScen17
Two auxiliary helper titans have been added to this scenario to compensate for the loss of player owned Titans
Tu'Shan and several Salamander Space Marine units added as auxiliaries to assist in this battle
Campscen19
Von Strab unit AI settings
changed Von Strab's Titan forces have abandoned him and have been replaced by extra Baneblade tank variants
Campscen24
Adjusted some terrain for better graphical appearances
CampScen25
Thraka's personal unit has been made bigger and stronger
Other Changes:
Fixed availability file issues so that units available during the tutorial are now also available at the start of Act 1
Imperial titan availability has been significantly pushed back. Scout titan only available from the middle of act2, reaver titan only available from the start of act3.
Sound files have been added for Assault Impacts
Attack file has been updated for Assault Impact graphics and audio
Leman russ Demolisher gained a flamer weapon
Hive wall turret has animation and sound
Bombers, Ork Weird Boyz, and kommandos had entries added for their new weapons
Stormeagles had entries added for their missing weapons
Changed deathstrike and grot launcher animations
Deathrolla battlefortress entry added for melee weapon
That might explain why my infantry are still the same size and still have lasguns -- I haven't started a new campaign, and haven't spent money upgrading from one infantry to another and back again. NEITHER AM I GOING TO! ::) (Though that does bring up the question of what will happen if I buy new units from scratch.)
Which is okay: I prefer my mortar team with lasguns for a little defense. :) Though I'd like to have a larger basic infantry. But I'm happy with my command squad: fewer infantry but more hp per figure, and they have melee capability and grant a command bonus to any nearby units. Basic infantry ought to have more firepower, but I'm not entirely sure how weapon fire is connected to numbers of figures in a squad.
This is all assuming Steam updated the game with the new patch. Which may not have happened yet anyway.
I got an update on steam this morning. 1.02 I think.
Quote from: undercovergeek on December 10, 2014, 12:37:04 PM
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on December 10, 2014, 09:11:46 AM
Wow. What a lame end to a very long campaign. Seriously.
is it safe to say youve now come down on the 'its not that good' side of the fence?
Well, it held my attention through what, at times, felt like a never ending campaign. Although the in between mission narratives were mostly uninspired, they did foster a curiosity to see where the story leads.
Gameplay overall is, as I stated a few pages back, disappointing overall. There are just not enough tactical options and the maps are too small for any real maneuver. It all comes down to buying as many of the biggest guns as possible, massing your firepower and killing off the Ork units, which really utilize no cohesive strategy, as quickly as possible. This formula works in each scenario so it becomes a matter of play, rinse and repeat.
I stand by my earlier comments that it was still enjoyable at times and that any warhammer 40k fan will most likely not want to miss out on it. But, if you're just a strategy gamer looking for something new, you could totally pass this one by and not feel like you missed anything.
http://www.matrixgames.com/community/blog.asp (http://www.matrixgames.com/community/blog.asp)
Don't know about you, but I find this a rather embarrassing post on the Matrix Games site. Like all such postings when a publisher, a developer, a designer etc. of a game, be that boardgame or videogame or PC game, reacts to reviews they don't like. Some of these folks are going to silly extremes for example to tell the gamers not to read the reviews before playing the game themselves or even talking about threats of legal action (whatever that may mean in such a case, it happened to us once when we published a boardwargame review on our Homefront site). The comment on the calmdown.com site is obviously from the same guy, of course he posts there anonymously.
What's so embarrassing about it? He's just pointing out inaccuracies in a review. Comments like "turn-based RTS" make the reviewer sound like he's talking out of his arse
IMO any apologist piece is embarrassing. The bit about whether a reviewer should take into account the feelings of the people making the game especially so. But maybe that is the new paradigm in today's world? I find the linked review at Calm Down Tom to be fair and accurate, and pretty much sums up my feelings on the game also. I did not see the "turn-based RTS" reference so that may have been edited, but even so to throw the baby out with the bath water because of that one item smacks of a little bias methinks.
To add some more to the criticism of the article: Yes there are numerous 'units' modelled and on first blush you think 'awesome' but after playing you are left wondering why? You will never, ever use the majority of the units. There is absolutely no reason to. The UI post patch is still sorely lacking in useful information - they replaced the numerical value for strength points with a silly 'health bar' making it more difficult to determine at a glance not easier. They removed the number of hitpoints per strength so determining the toughness of a unit is more difficult, etc.
But the biggest problem I have with the game is the gameplay itself whether in the actual battles, which to be fair have a couple interesting moments, or in the overall strategic campaign. It just seems to fall flat, unfocused and seems really uninspired. It ends up being a slog and chore of the same old, same old. Even the tried and true design choice of carefully building up and nurturing your core force to 'stay motivated' is missing as you will end up chucking the majority and starting fresh with new units throughout the campaign, removing any sort of attachment you may have. I guess that is why there is no renaming of units, or special perks earned.
In the end, criticism is a tool for learning and in this case I think warranted. Instead of apologist pieces, the developers should be taking notes for improvement. Warhammer is such a rich stage and this game could clearly have been so much more.
QuoteWhat's so embarrassing about it? He's just pointing out inaccuracies in a review. Comments like "turn-based RTS" make the reviewer sound like he's talking out of his arse
Well, what I read is "turn based strategy game"...perhaps the author changed that after making a typo, mistake or whatever. You did read the whole review didn't you? What he actually is doing is pointing out aspects of the game he didn't like, what he considers flaws and it seems that pretty much points in the same direction of issues that were discussed here in this thread by those who played the game, even by those who like the game. What is embarrassing you ask? That a company seems to see the need to comment on these, like Bungie did with their "don't believe the reviews!" when Destiny came out. Reviews are one individuals opinion, everybody has the right to write one, everybody is entitled to their opinion. Several reviews, several opinions form a score others can possibly trust. There is no need for those who bring out the games to take countermeasures of any form, or to justify their game - a game speaks for itself, the design is done and the money is paid by those who play the games, so let the reviews come in. If you don't like a review think about the possibility it's perhaps not the big shot you want it to be but that there could be a few things that need some polish and that something can be learned by a negative review to make your product better. Nitpicking on one term "oh, see it's no RTS, you know nothing John Snow!" while ignoring the real points brought up in the review is downright ridiculous.
He does actually say this
Quote
It's a turn based strategy game...
Whether it's been changed by the author or not, I have no idea
In regard to the vastly huge unit options: I read that as allowing 40K fans to play the missions with the particular kit they want. Does it make a big difference in the end? No, but that's true for most Panzer General huge option lists. If you prefer one kind of tank over another, use it -- they all do have notable differences, and being a stat optimizer I can't imagine building a corps with anything other than X tank and Y scout and Z arty, but that's only one way to play the game. The flavor makes a difference but (maybe) not a game breaking difference.
I find it completely baffling that code wasn't activated to allow renaming units. The interface slot for doing so is clearly there, since the game actually names the units (a perfectly generic name). But I can accept there are three campaigns where you move from fighting type to fighting type rebuilding the core every time -- that's true in the FW/EL game, too. (And probably true in the boardgame on which this game is based, though I'm only guessing there. I still want to see evaluations from people familiar with the boardgame pro or con.) Admittedly, in FW/EL the switch in campaigns means more because of the radically different storylines available, and at least in the final missions your previous crew may come back for deployment.
On the other hand, I also understand the appeal of the original Panzer General (and Fantasy General) games which brought the core units along (following not-Rommel) through every change in campaign, even if that didn't make much historical sense.
I am going to regret this...I just know it...
It's been a really long day and it isn't over yet and there's this other thing that's not relevant here that's under my skin and because it is I should walk away and not do this.
That blog post, however, tears it.
I knew I shouldn't, but I bought the game. I've got time in now. Fair chunk I think. I could write it all down in paragraphs, but, frankly, JH et al. have enumerated many of the maddening features of this fracking PZ RE-SKIN...wait...I was yelling...that's not helpful...sorry...let me try something different...
Please watch this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJfV0Cpm0Dw
The above game was released 17 years ago. It is the better of the two games by a running distance.
Why do I care? Dunno, exactly...but I do. It may well be how much the developers protest, and this latest cry of the heart, posted above, doesn't make matters one whit better. It only makes me believe -- for believe them I truly do -- that they have labored mightily and brought forth a mediocrity. Many parents sit on the sidelines of soccer games (association football to some) and come to the same conclusion. It happens. And we move on.
Best,
Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)
SSI FTW
Again.
Well, to be fair the two games are adapting two quite different boardgame systems. War-mageddon isn't table top (Epic or otherwise); it's trying to take the hex-and-counter 40K:Armageddon boardgame and adapt it with a highly modified version of the Panzer General system; whereas FinalLib was trying to port the Epic tt rules directly (as far as I can tell, having only seen it and not played it).
The end result could still be that FinalLib plays better as a game overall; I only mean that the "it" they were trying to "do" wasn't an adaptation of one of the table-top figurine systems.
I feel like I'll get my money's worth of entertainment out of it eventually; it has several problems, but I'm not unhappy with it. But it admittedly helps a lot that I'm fond of both the properties (40K and PG), and I went in expecting what I got: an adaptation to (a new type of) PG rules with a lot of ticky 40K bling (at least on the ground).
Though people (especially paying customers) who aren't having as much fun with it certainly have a right to complain about that, too. :-\
Quote from: LongBlade on December 11, 2014, 09:10:04 PM
SSI FTW
Again.
Heh, notably SSI designed the original Panzer General system around the same time, too! So SSI was going to win that comparison either way. ;)
Quote from: JudgeDredd on December 11, 2014, 06:31:15 PM
He does actually say this
Quote
It's a turn based strategy game...
Whether it's been changed by the author or not, I have no idea
Without wanting to comment on the broader issues...
+ Yes - it has been changed since the original review.
+ Still states that the iPad version has been released, which is just wrong.
Cheers
Pip
Final Liberation is a really fantastic game, even by modern standards.
You know, even knowing old games are generally viewed with rose colored glasses, Final Liberation is a freaking masterpiece compared to the tepid mush of Armageddon. After watching that video, I'm reminded of the many things that were done to make it feel 'right'. And that guy recording is priceless! :) It is too bad the devs didn't spend more time learning from that game instead of insisting on minor points in a review article. :idiot2:
Bit of a rant this morning but I sat down to continue my campaign and after playing part way through I thought not for the first time 'is this it?'. I couldn't continue. This is so disappointing that this is what we have been given for a WH40K game today. There is no inspiration or passion here. Nothing Epic about the battles, not even any semblance of sophistication in the combat mechanics at all. Almost everything was done better 17 years ago, whether in Final Liberation or in the General series with People's General. No Scout move? No Air units in the same hex as land units? No destructible terrain? No partial spotting? The list could on and on...
Time to move on.
I can't look at any of the art and say with fairness there was NO inspiration or passion here. Obviously there was, and is.
And the combat mechanics are at least sophisticated compared to Panzer General (and direct remakes like Panzer Corps) and Fantasy General.
No question using a definitive 'no' or 'never' leaves one wide open...in a legal setting. However, we are talking casually about a game in a discussion forum so I think some latitude would be understood there, especially in light of being fed up with the game when I wrote it. Anyways, yes I agree the 2D sprites are nice to look at, but even in that regard the lack of any movement animation comes across as clunky and let's the art down.
For me, it does comes down to gameplay in the end and why Armageddon is so disappointing. For example, Panzer General was released 20 years ago and I would think the bar would be set higher than that. Even still, People's General was the end result of the PG/PGII series and had a lot of nifty features to make it more sophisticated than Armageddon imo, such as scouting movement(I still don't understand why this was not implemented in Armageddon - rape the already defunct AI??), specific unit attachments, airmobile ability and partial spotting to name a few. These games are still being played and modified extensively today for a reason.
Maybe there is more going on under the hood with Armageddon I can't say, but I can say it isn't apparent where it counts.
Warhammer 40,0000 Armageddon update 1.03 coming soon! With unit details and unit history! And much more details to be revealed soon.
See here:
http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=235&t=54943
Hello All!
Slitherine have not made an official announcement yet (I'm sure this is coming soon), but the 1.03 patch is available. Steam version will update automatically, and for non-Steam version you can use this link to download or use the check for update option within the game launcher:
ftp://ftp.matrixgames.com/pub/Warhammer40000Armageddon/WH-Armageddon-UpdateComp-v103.zip
Before all offices close for the holidays and patching becomes very difficult, please post in this topic any critical issues in the new patch (critical means "makes playing impossible"). Time is very short, but we may still have a chance to fix them.
PS. Change log for the new patch.
QuoteIssues fixed:
- Fixed zero range weapons showing 48 as their range.
- Fixed combo box in Options screen.
- Changed FPS limit to 60 fps
- Fixed wrong strength of unit if it ended previous scenario in transport.
- Fixed AI issue where AI units remained stationary and did not attack player's positions.
- Fixed handicap slider not working correctly in Multiplayer
- Added manual writer to Credits
New features:
- Added unit details screen. Right-click a unit on the map or in unit list to invoke.
- Map can be zoomed using +/- and PgUp/PgDown hotkeys. * restores 1:1 zoom level.
- WASD can be used to scroll the map in addition to arrow keys. Disband has been rebound to Del hotkey.
- Added Ctrl+S/L hotkeys for save/load
- Added quick save/quick load via F5/F8 hotkeys
- Each UI button tooltip now includes the corresponding keyboard combination.
- In confirmation popups it is now possible to use Enter for OK/Yes and Escape for Cancel/No.
- Added tooltip to Replacements showing replacements count, cost and experience change.
- Added tooltip to Rest and Refit button, showing hit points and morale effect.
- Added tooltip to health bars showing numbers for current/max strength and hit points.
- Added unit rename: select a unit and click its name.
- Added cheat interface (single player only). Press Alt+Ctrl+Shift+C to invoke cheat box.
- Added final credits screen.
Unit Balance Changes:
Imperial units:
Re-introduced Ogryn squads and Veteran Ogryn squads to help fill the gap in early game, Imperial assault troops with decent durability and staying power
Price of the Hive Militia Autopistol and Autogun squads reduced
Price of Leman Russ and Leman Russ (armor upgrade) reduced
Leman Russ Conqueror price lowered and speed reduced to better represent the Conqueror cannon with less firepower but more perks like increased speed and accuracy
Basic models of Imperial Super Heavy tanks made slightly cheaper (Macharius, Baneblade, Banehammer, Shadowsword, Stormsword, Stormblade, Bandesword)
Space Marine units:
Venerable Dreadnoughts have gained the Leadership trait, increased stats, and increased prices
Salamander Firedrakes now behave like Terminator units for transportation purposes.
Ultramarine Terminators in Act2 have access to proper Land Raider transports.
Damocles unit reduced in price considerably
Price of normal Land Speeders, armed only with 1 heavy bolter, reduced considerably
Price of all Ironclad Dreadnoughts reduced
With all the infantry team improvements, Space Marine Assault teams no longer need their 3 HP per strength point bonus so it has been reduced to 2 HP
Weapon file changes:
Added Ripper Weapon
Added Ripper Club
Vanquisher Cannons and Baneblade Cannons now have Rate of Fire of 2 up from 1
Medusa Siege gun minimum and maximum range both increased by 1 (2-3 now 3-4)
Medusa Siege gun rate of fire increased from 2 to 3
Medusa Siege gun gained the trait 'bulky'
Ork Zzap gun gained 20 penetration rating (up from 0)
2 Big Lobba increased from 3 to 5 rate of fire
Gargant Soopa gun redesigned for better artillery type stats: Range is now 2-4, power is 50, penetration is 0, rate of fire is 4
Scenario Changes:
Scen3B
Added a hint message to help explain this mission's mechanics.
"IDS_MESSAGE7 Scenario Hint: To determine if a location contains any survivors, move one of your units on top of the Victory Hex markers. Not all of these locations will contain survivors and generate an ownership marker, so be prepared to inspect more than one location!"
Removed some invisible cliffs.
Triggers have been changed to check at different intervals for survivor presence
Scen4:
"Scenario Objective: Control all three Victory Hexes while and wait for additional orders."
changed to read
"Scenario Objective: Control all 3 Victory Hexes until new orders arrive."
Scen6B:
Added a few Ork scout units to incite the advancing Orks to continue their assaults
Added a few Ork infantry to the attack waves
Changed an attack trigger from 'all map' to 'zone 2' to better control Ork behavior
Greatly expanded the size of zone 2
Scen12:
Objective text updated to match victory triggers:
" IDS_MESSAGE0 Scenario Objective: Control at least 5 Victory Hexes at the end of the scenario."
Fixed space marines drop pods which could switched using Mount button and get to zero strength when switched. This fix will only appear in new games, not saved old ones.
Scen13: Updated mission text to reflect 3 Victory Hexes present on the map, not 4
Other Changes:
Wyvern mortars no longer appear to aim horizontally. Attack graphic adjusted to match.
Updated tiles for Editor have been integrated.
!!!OGRYN!!! :smitten: :smitten: :smitten:
Also, unit descriptions.
Saw the update last night, but didn't know what the changelog was, and was busy on a different PanzerOrc campaign. ;) Will try to check on changes tonight, maybe play the next mission.
Sorry Jason,
Just heard they were pulled out again at the last moment... Ogryns will come though, but a bit later.
QuoteYes, we were in a bit of a hurry to get as much content and updates out to our players before the end of the Year break, and we had a little bit of a miscommunication there. Sorry for the inconvenience, Ogryns were found to not be ready for prime time just yet!
Our apologies for the confusion.
Argh! Oh well.
As much as I'd like to see Ogryn, the air mechanics still need fixing more anyway. ;)
Haven't heard of this site before, but GameWatcher has put up their review (http://www.gamewatcher.com/reviews/warhammer-40k-armageddon-review/12095) (6.0/10).
The TL;DR version:
Quote
WARHAMMER 40K: ARMAGEDDON VERDICT
Despite a general lack of flair and some frustrating issues with presentation, Armageddon does at least play out a compelling and competent brand of strategic warfare. There's something about playing a turn-based game that hits right at the core of 40K's signature mix of strategic planning and reckless aggression, and if you've ever played the tabletop game you'll find Slitherine's made a decent enough fist of recreating some of the same atmosphere. If you can find another armchair general with a fondness for grim darkness, you'll probably get a decent amount of value out of the multiplayer in particular. For a full-price game, though, Wahammer 40K: Armageddon feels lacklustre and slightly cheap, more of a re-skin of Panzer Corps than its own beast, and lacking the sense of grandeur that the setting requires. There's a great turn-based 40K out there somewhere, but this isn't it.
Good vs Bad
+ Competent, accessible wargame engine.
+ Lots of attention to 40K lore.
- Lacklustre presentation.
- Lack of adequate feedback.
I still think the re-skin charge is itself shallow, but otherwise I generally agree.
However, I also still want to hear from anyone who played the actual chit-and-hex wargame this is based on.
Quote from: JasonPratt on December 22, 2014, 03:19:44 PMHowever, I also still want to hear from anyone who played the actual chit-and-hex wargame this is based on.
The original was tabletop minis.
He can certainly speak for himself, but I had always assumed Jason was referring to this:
http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/3177/battle-armageddon
Played it what feels like 100 years ago, back in the days when GW could do no wrong in my eyes, particularly with respect to its boardgames, which remain some of the best, most collectible games out there...
Best,
Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)
^^ Yes, not the tabletop rules.
Ah didn't know that existed.
Quote from: JasonPratt on December 22, 2014, 03:19:44 PM
I still think the re-skin charge is itself shallow, but otherwise I generally agree.
However, I also still want to hear from anyone who played the actual chit-and-hex wargame this is based on.
You are of course entitled to that opinion - as are others.
But regardless - all I DO see is Panzer/Allied General/Corps in space. That's a simplistic view, granted - but it's what I see. There are of course things in there that make it "not so"...but the mechanics and graphics used appear close enough for me to come to that assumption. I've watched quite a few videos of the game...so I'm not just going on stills.
Other people have pointed out missing units, missing functionality, odd looking "attack" graphics. Panzer General and Allied General (unless my memory is letting me down - which is entirely possible!) had air units sharing hexes with ground units...and that was over 2 decades ago. The fact a new game is preventing that kind of mechanic either is a lack of enthusiasm/thought/
put your own here to put all the bells and whistles in or it's a gamey feature to prevent some sort of over-powering effect occurring (or something else).
If a game is lacking features that another game gave 20+ years ago, then that's probably where the charges of "lazy" and/or lack of "inspiration" or "passion" are given thought.
Quote from: JudgeDredd on December 23, 2014, 02:07:22 AM
... had air units sharing hexes with ground units...and that was over 2 decades ago. The fact a new game is preventing that kind of mechanic either is a lack of enthusiasm/thought/put your own here to put all the bells and whistles in or it's a gamey feature to prevent some sort of over-powering effect occurring (or something else).
I have read somewhere a statement: 'design decision to not confuse the user" ^-^ .... its either to much for the '
beer cacao 'n pretzel crowd Slitherine want to cater too ...or it just doesn't work on the Ipad when relying on a fat finger instead a sharp mousepointer i guess ::)
The only i can say is i love this game.
Never playd warhammer realtimegame before because realtime games makes my head Spinning.
Never will understand how People make it to manage a battle on hundred Points at the same time.
Great to see it now as a roundbased game and i absoulutly like it.
You can play it without reading a fat Manual as you had to do for PG games.
I love Peoples General but tooked me much time to understand the game, thats what the developer tryd to avoid.
And he was sucessful.
lol - who had to read a manual for a Panzer General game? :D
Quote from: Micha on December 23, 2014, 08:37:13 AM
The only i can say is i love this game.
Never playd warhammer realtimegame before because realtime games makes my head Spinning.
Never will understand how People make it to manage a battle on hundred Points at the same time.
search the web and find a copy of Homeworld or Homeworld 2. IMHO it has the best workup to a full battlespace of any game. once you can do that in a 3d every other game is simple.
Thanks for info.
Quote from: JudgeDredd on December 23, 2014, 02:07:22 AM
If a game is lacking features that another game gave 20+ years ago, then that's probably where the charges of "lazy" and/or lack of "inspiration" or "passion" are given thought.
No doubt; although that only (if legitimately) covers one side of the contention.
To be fair, this isn't the only game that lacks features created many years ago. The names escape me now, but there were more where I've thought "Why did they not include that?".
Oh well...where's Steam gone :)
The backstory to Warhammer Armageddon clearly comes from the boardgame Battle for Armageddon but the similarity ends there imo. The boardgame had interesting strategic aspects and decisions defending the hives/factories and planning future builds, whereas the computer game's strategic part is pretty much on rails and consists of telling a story.
I like the direction of some of the changes in the latest patch. I think some aspects will improve with time and continued patching (DLC), but others are simply mediocre design and will remain I'm afraid. See review from Eurogamer 6/10 (http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-12-08-warhammer-40-000-armageddon-review)
I'm surprised by the "design decision to not confuse the user" comment on air units. Forget the beer and pretzel crowd, they are clearly targeting the milk and cookie audience. I admit to wanting to like a turn based Warhammer game and am still hoping something special comes out of this.
"You like Warhammer40K right? And Panzer General I MEAN COUGH I MEAN CORPS, right? How about an upgraded version of the PG^HC engine with tons of fanboi 40K bling based on a battle famous among 40K fans?"
"!!!Hell to the yes!!!"
"Well, we also decided to write a counterintuitive and ignorantly simple air-war aspect into the game, as a design decision to not confuse the user!"
"...the ...the user?"
"Yes. The user."
"You mean the fans of 40K and Panzer General, upon whose basis you developed the game in the first place, and so who are demonstrably already well-familiar with at least their levels of air war?"
"No, no we mean the user. Of our 40K Panzer General game."
"..."
"For the same reason, we barely mention the air war in the manual, too."
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wargamer.com%2Fforums%2Fsmiley%2Fintrepidphasers.gif&hash=a90a53b7c8f2ab95c1324553ee2d8610168bc811)
Quote from: Zonso on December 24, 2014, 01:08:25 PM
The backstory to Warhammer Armageddon clearly comes from the boardgame Battle for Armageddon but the similarity ends there imo. The boardgame had interesting strategic aspects and decisions defending the hives/factories and planning future builds, whereas the computer game's strategic part is pretty much on rails and consists of telling a story.
I like the direction of some of the changes in the latest patch. I think some aspects will improve with time and continued patching (DLC), but others are simply mediocre design and will remain I'm afraid. See review from Eurogamer 6/10 (http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-12-08-warhammer-40-000-armageddon-review)
I'm surprised by the "design decision to not confuse the user" comment on air units. Forget the beer and pretzel crowd, they are clearly targeting the milk and cookie audience. I admit to wanting to like a turn based Warhammer game and am still hoping something special comes out of this.
But Armageddon PC feels more like a tactical skirmish similar to the tabletop minis game instead of that Armageddon boardgame.
Digitally Downloaded review of Warhammer 40,000: Armageddon gives it 4/5 stars!
http://www.digitallydownloaded.net/2014/12/review-warhammer-40000-armageddon-pc.html
!!Congrats!! :smitten:
Although the reviewer lost a lot of cred with me out of the gate when he started with "Under the "guidance" of THQ, the Warhammer franchise really lost its way in the world of videogames, becoming laboured with useless pew pew button masher action games that may have had "Warhammer" slapped on the box title, but really wanted to be Generic Action Game 101, 102, 103... and so on."
He may have had the Space Marine 3PShooter tacitly in mind, and its semi-prequel twin-stick shooter Kill Team explicitly in mind; but those games dripped 40K atmosphere at least, and (especially Kill Team) were at least competent examples of their genres. But to throw the whole Dawn of War franchise under the THQ bus in that grouping? Blasphemy.
Still, I understand and sympathize with the desire for a return to the tbs roots of the franchise. Which is why I bought this game, too. ;)
(Also, he called Shadow of the Horned Rat the glory days, so I forgive him a little for the THQ bashing.)
Kill Team is a nice little game, I never understood why some folks hate it so much -and it has coop!
I guess people who hate twin-stick shooters x people who hate WH40 x people who hate anything that 'dilutes' tabletop 40K = so many people hating Kill Team.
I loved every second of it. :smitten: And I'm far from being a twin-stick shooter fan. Don't hate them, just can never quite seem to get into them. The Tomb Raider one, the truly epic Alien Breed Trilogy, I should have adored those games, too, but the twin-stick mechanic made me meh all over them, despite the clear advantages of using that mechanic. I love 40K so much it overcame my ambivalence and helped me properly appreciate ts gameplay.
Armchair General gives Warhammer 40,000: Armageddon an 88/100 review:
http://www.armchairgeneral.com/warhammer-40000-armageddon-pc-game-review.htm
^^ Congrats again! O0
Quotenot as exciting as an RTS
:idiot2:
Armchair General review... :uglystupid2:
Man, Jim Cobb (of all people) must have been on some severe allergy medicine when he wrote that review. Dystopian =/= bizarre. ::) :P
"Defeat in a mission makes the player re-start the campaign from the beginning." -- not at all, just replay the mission like any other PG. Restarting the whole campaign would be indeed ironman hardcore but ridiculous.
The not as exciting quote: "No turn-based game can create the excitement of good RTS games like Relic's Warhammer 40,000 series." He still heavily recommends the game. But Jim of all people? Seriously, no one loves the Relic/THQ Dawn of War series more than I (except maybe hardcore modders), but even with the problems in the game (which he barely mentions) a Panzer General game, or any other TBS, is still exciting for those of us who like such things.
I feel like he must have been trying to say that obviously there's less stuff moving around on screen at any given moment. Excitement in a physics or chemistry sense. ;)
It doesn't matter who is writing a review for AG, or on what game, these snippets called reviews are never a good reason to buy a game...or to not buy a game. :crazy2:
I obviously disagree with Jim's review and regard for the game, but that's courses for horses...
This, however, is something different:
"No gamer can do much wrong by getting this game. In fact, they will be harming themselves if they don't get it."
The first sentence is merely on odd construction. That second sentence is so weird that it puts one in mind of the words given to hostages to read when made the subject of videos for their captors.
Best,
Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)
Armageddon Updated to v1.08!
http://www.thelordzgamesstudio.com/site/2015/06/armageddon-updated-to-v1-08/
Oh, new tutorials? Very nice.