The Uber Warhammer 40,000: Armageddon Thread!

[Zonso]

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.

[JasonPratt]

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).

[jomni]

Hmm. Matrix even has to write a post about the re-skin issue

http://matrixgames.com/news/1570/Orks.and.chocolate.pies

[MikeGER]

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 ;-)

[JasonPratt]

It certainly isn't only a re-skin; although even if it was, it would be an admirably thorough re-skin. :)

[PipFromSlitherine]

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

[JasonPratt]

^^ 2nd best dev comment this season so far.   

(But give him only a few stripes; he meant well.  O0 )

[Jarhead0331]

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.

[JasonPratt]

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.  )

[MikeGER]

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  ;)

[MikeGER]

..double post - delete

[JasonPratt]

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).

[JasonPratt]

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.

[jomni]

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.

[Jarhead0331]

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.