What went wrong with this game?

User avatar
chykka
Brigadier
Posts: 3387
Joined: Wed 28 Nov 2012 14:55
Location: Canada, Alberta
Contact:

Re: What did went wrong by this game ? And will that be fixed ? Act of Aggression does cost my Loyalty to this developer

Postby chykka » Sun 14 Feb 2016 08:12

You really lost me when you called a Video Game Autistic.

Thing I notice with this game is a diversity of unit combinations. Infantry in most RTS becomes Obsolete with high tier units. In this game it still very useful. Every faction is quite enjoyable, only thing is.. There are not enough factions! More factions would be lots of work but generals did have play off Specializations. with unit changes and take aways for the spin offs of the original factions. With of course a flavour and bonus.

Btw I still have lots too learn in this game. I may be getting good at base building but I not the best at managing my units. If I send blobs in without any thought or little micro my losses will be huge. This game is Very demanding and has a very high skill cap Imho.
Image

torinus
Lieutenant
Posts: 1239
Joined: Fri 15 May 2015 22:39
Contact:

Re: What did went wrong by this game ? And will that be fixed ? Act of Aggression does cost my Loyalty to this developer

Postby torinus » Wed 17 Feb 2016 15:14

I tried to play it again recently on a more normal map, early aggression was useless and since I didn't cheese one of the enemies spammed planes and that was the end of the game.

pabloXXX
Sergeant
Posts: 69
Joined: Sat 18 Jul 2015 18:20
Contact:

Re: What did went wrong by this game ? And will that be fixed ? Act of Aggression does cost my Loyalty to this developer

Postby pabloXXX » Thu 18 Feb 2016 21:46

Just recently i played a 3v3 game, and it was really enjoyable...and a game without spamming airplanes, pretty balanced teams though and just fun.

pablo ;)

User avatar
McNash
Lieutenant
Posts: 1216
Joined: Sun 15 Apr 2012 18:06
Contact:

Re: What did went wrong by this game ? And will that be fixed ? Act of Aggression does cost my Loyalty to this developer

Postby McNash » Fri 19 Feb 2016 05:57

Meh, it went wrong when they decided to depend on previous games reputation to get people in, for someone totally new to RTS this game may have look interesting, for an old bitter RTS fan with insane expectations this was a hard disappointment, that's it.
Image

User avatar
D-M
Posts: 8794
Joined: Sat 23 Jul 2011 11:10
Contact:

Re: What did went wrong by this game ? And will that be fixed ? Act of Aggression does cost my Loyalty to this developer

Postby D-M » Fri 19 Feb 2016 17:32

What went wrong ? Simple, I think : the economic shift (which was deplorable but understandable) during closed beta which wasn't followed by a ressource management overhaul.

When when having multiple bases with separate ressource pools, having the whole maps filled with a lot of ressources made sense and fasten what 'd have been a slow game otherwhise. But now that the game got a classic one-pool paradigm, having a lot of ressources everywhere means you either don't need to have map control or can tech up lightning fast or both (depends on the map). So in the end you don't really have any interesting mid game (there was during the beta despite many other problems) since you quickly reach the high end tech very fast and still have the ressources to build a lot of generators.

And since the most interesting part in a RTS is the mid game...

I really think the maps should have been filled with a few very rich ressource points instead.
Image

pabloXXX
Sergeant
Posts: 69
Joined: Sat 18 Jul 2015 18:20
Contact:

Re: What did went wrong by this game ? And will that be fixed ? Act of Aggression does cost my Loyalty to this developer

Postby pabloXXX » Fri 19 Feb 2016 18:52

And since the most interesting part in a RTS is the mid game...

I really think the maps should have been filled with a few very rich ressource points instead.



You are right Mate! ;)

User avatar
Gnougnou
Sergeant Major
Posts: 291
Joined: Tue 26 May 2015 23:27
Contact:

Re: What did went wrong by this game ? And will that be fixed ? Act of Aggression does cost my Loyalty to this developer

Postby Gnougnou » Sat 20 Feb 2016 13:43

I don't know what to think.

To me, the only problem with the ressources is that maps are forced to be huge just for that reason, which is nice in term of strategy but not really for the good reasons. Except for that, I like being able to harass my enemy by destroying outbased ref that are poorly defended, removing part of his ressources and map control.

With only based ressources, it would be impossible just like in AoW, where map control was much more about posting a few sniper/rocket/tanks in streets. Those are different concepts, both are good, but I appreciate AoA for that, even being a huge fan of AoW.


EDIT : I'm not sure about why they locked the other thread about the patch ?


User avatar
AndreB
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 601
Joined: Sun 17 May 2015 18:49
Location: Mars Republic
Contact:

Re: What did went wrong by this game ? And will that be fixed ? Act of Aggression does cost my Loyalty to this developer

Postby AndreB » Sat 20 Feb 2016 20:34

D-M wrote:What went wrong ? Simple, I think : the economic shift (which was deplorable but understandable) during closed beta which wasn't followed by a ressource management overhaul.

When when having multiple bases with separate ressource pools, having the whole maps filled with a lot of ressources made sense and fasten what 'd have been a slow game otherwhise. But now that the game got a classic one-pool paradigm, having a lot of ressources everywhere means you either don't need to have map control or can tech up lightning fast or both (depends on the map). So in the end you don't really have any interesting mid game (there was during the beta despite many other problems) since you quickly reach the high end tech very fast and still have the ressources to build a lot of generators.

And since the most interesting part in a RTS is the mid game...

I really think the maps should have been filled with a few very rich ressource points instead.


Im not sure what to think about this.

I have a feeling that i agree that the game has no mid game, but then i would say it has no early as well, because everything is focused on making refs after refs, everything is so expensive that most of the times the payoff for agression has always been bad early. And since properly killing buildings is a no go in the game and agressions was for the longest of times based around capturing, that was your mid game.

Capturing stuff, together with bank taking.

I honestly have no idea how you solve this without completly reworking how the game works from the inside, granted a lot of the feedback you guys received was around the game being very slow, and i still recall the endless threads about lack of agression in the game.

So i dont know, is lack of agression and the game being slow a by product of a lack of mid game? maybe? maybe its tied 100% to how the early game economy works?

I dont know, but it sure isnt an easy thing to solve thats for sure.

torinus
Lieutenant
Posts: 1239
Joined: Fri 15 May 2015 22:39
Contact:

Re: What did went wrong by this game ? And will that be fixed ? Act of Aggression does cost my Loyalty to this developer

Postby torinus » Sat 20 Feb 2016 23:05

1. Cut cost of non tier 3 units by half and build time by half.
2. Remove one resource and make all resource spots last 3x longer.
3. Limit infinite resource buildings to one per player. Extra HQ don't give resources until other HQ are destroyed and only that one HQ is left.
4. Remove AoE attack from machine guns so infantry can do more. Speed of infantry is limit enough in their usefulness (nerf exosoldiers a bit because of this change if needed).
5. Give all units supply value (air to ground planes should have a high supply cost), leave unlimited supply in the game but make is like in Warcraft 3 where going over supply values makes income come slower. So people that like to mass end game units will have harder time replacing them compared to people being aggressive with smaller numbers.
6. Add ability for all factions that lets you use 1 POW for a short timed reveal of area of the map based on chosen enemy building. Something like Scan for Terrans in sc2 but can only target enemy building as center of effect instead of anywhere on map.

Now balance other unit stats and costs based on this.

7. Improve replay and observer system
8. Fix ladder systems and UI (like being able to see the map and opponent name and faction during loading screen)
9. Support competitive community more
10. Add Coop maps for less competitive community similar to what Sc2 has.
Last edited by torinus on Sat 20 Feb 2016 23:42, edited 1 time in total.

Return to “Act of Aggression”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests