My feedback on game (Beta)

Posts: 1071
Joined: Sat 19 Jan 2013 22:16

My feedback on game (Beta)

Postby duro909 » Tue 23 Apr 2019 20:54

Dear Eugens, dear Forum members,

let me summarize several points from the previous days I played:

Game design)
This game is gorgeous, even though I dont have the best computer, I love the graphics, the scale, the art - loading screen art is perfect - and the soundtrack music as well. Regarding music itself, I would probably add some themes fitting more into eastern front, but no problem if there is not. Design of the game was very well done and in my opinion its how the standard modern strategy game should look like.
Cant wait to see the grand campaing!

Game modes)
I like how you changed the conquest, the capture points are very welcomed by me and many players I spoke to. I havent got chance to try breakthrough, hopefully when game got released there would be plenty of players to do it with.
It was also good to revise a victory conditions, depleting "tickets" of oponent instead of acumulating own is fine. However, I am quite concerned about your decision to not include a time limit. On the other hand, in previoius title - SD44 - the A phase was very decisive, not favouring divisions that gained strenght over time. Most of the time 40 minutes were not enough to turn the tide.
I would propose a compromise - 60 minutes time limit. Or add some victory conditions that would make phase A and B more than just a "warm up".
Also, is it correct that 750 starting pts became a new standard? Isnt this too much?

Its great you turned to symetric maps. It is favouring for a better balance. However, I haven´t find out if the same maps would have different variants: 1v1/2v2&3v3/4v4. I noticed those just had a different sizes but seemed to be too large for a 1v1 game and too small for 4v4. What are the plans for this?

Game balance)
I know its beta, but I would rather like to focus on unit´s functions, rather that how much should those cost.
First of all, flamers, yes, those pesky 15 pts 2-man squads are ruling. I dont want those to be useless, but they are too cheap for how easilly they can put to "dance" an smg squad. But thanks to having a difference between dense and scarce forests, maybe it is not problem at all and could stay as it is, I dont know.
Tanks are just too numerous and too cheap, I would expect their slight cost increase. Also, the number of AT-guns in divisions do not reflect this very well. Please give infantry divisions more AT-guns as well. But keep their price as it seems well now.
Planes seems to be okay, but AA is too strong. However, I like it now actually shot down planes. What would I propose is the following: decrease the AA lethality (only slightly decrease suppression), decrease AA cost (or keep as it is) and increase the AA avaibility by a large margin! The reason I ask for this is many times I saw there were more planes on battlefield than actual AA´s. Thats just plain dumb. We need more AA pieces.
Artillery seems to be too deadly but it does not bother me in small games, only in larger 3v3 and more.

Improvements over SD44)
Besides what I already mentioned there is a lot of stuff that very clearly an improvement. Obviously Dev´s learn over time but unfortunately work very slow :)
Quick hunt is very handy, this is something I was missing in previous title.
Chain of command is simple but also interesting improvement.
What I like the most is the fact that infantry has to do all the job again. In SD44 you could just send a transport vehicle with mounted MG and it would quickly pin down and eliminate. Now, it is only a support asset, as it was in wargame.

Sometimes the arty stucks at aiming.
Infantry after being pinned down still slowly moves towards target.
Deployment menu shortcut is not working, tried to bind another key but did not worked either.

This games looks very promising, looking forward for release! :)
... and Malware-free banner too!

Return to “Steel Division 2”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest