Any News/Updates on Campaign reform?

Pomegranate23
Sergeant Major
Posts: 279
Joined: Sun 30 Jun 2013 11:49
Contact:

Re: Any News/Updates on Campaign reform?

Postby Pomegranate23 » Wed 10 Jul 2013 01:04

All this waiting is killing me! Cmon Eugen!

CplSnail
Private
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue 9 Jul 2013 23:29
Contact:

Re: Any News/Updates on Campaign reform?

Postby CplSnail » Wed 10 Jul 2013 09:16

TheFunnyOne1125 wrote:It does feel like its taking a while.


That's why this was very likely the last time I bought a game on release date. From my point of view (mainly SP player) the campaign is too frustrating and poorly thought out to be entertaining. I don't mind the high difficulty and the AI massively cheating. But having no chance to save ingame (and I mean custom save not "We save automatically for you and overwrite that single savegame every time") to try out different tactics and so on is a no go for me. I'm sorry, but I think the player should decide how difficult he wants the game to be. Other games do this via the difficulty, e.g. on higher difficulties you have limited or no savegames etc. But what I really don't like is if someone tells me "Oh it was intended that the game was that difficult, so take it or leave it".

So next time I'll just let time pass and after a year, when the main issues are fixed, I'll consider buying the game for half the price.

User avatar
Jinzor
Specialist
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu 30 May 2013 23:04
Contact:

Re: Any News/Updates on Campaign reform?

Postby Jinzor » Wed 10 Jul 2013 11:19

CplSnail wrote:
TheFunnyOne1125 wrote:It does feel like its taking a while.


That's why this was very likely the last time I bought a game on release date. From my point of view (mainly SP player) the campaign is too frustrating and poorly thought out to be entertaining. I don't mind the high difficulty and the AI massively cheating. But having no chance to save ingame (and I mean custom save not "We save automatically for you and overwrite that single savegame every time") to try out different tactics and so on is a no go for me. I'm sorry, but I think the player should decide how difficult he wants the game to be. Other games do this via the difficulty, e.g. on higher difficulties you have limited or no savegames etc. But what I really don't like is if someone tells me "Oh it was intended that the game was that difficult, so take it or leave it".

So next time I'll just let time pass and after a year, when the main issues are fixed, I'll consider buying the game for half the price.


Who knows whether or not Eugen will do this same sort of thing with their next game; there's a problem that seems minor, yet seriously affects the experience (not everyone, but I suppose for a large portion of the playerbase) and they don't fix it for months. I'm going to initiate a policy of "Wait-And-See" next time, because I relied on the campaign for the pre-order purchase (I thought "hey, how can you up a dynamic campaign?"), which was my fault... but I don't want a refund or any stupid like that.
Last edited by OpusTheFowl on Wed 10 Jul 2013 13:10, edited 2 times in total.
Reason: Language

User avatar
diana olympos
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2357
Joined: Sat 14 Jan 2012 23:34
Contact:

Re: Any News/Updates on Campaign reform?

Postby diana olympos » Wed 10 Jul 2013 11:31

The problem is that YOU see the problem as minor.


But if the game was not THINK to be modified quickly and easily about those number, it's REALLY hard and long to change it and ensure there is no bug.

Last time we (Marshall) heard about it, R&R your goup on certain timing was totally crashing the game and deleting saves...
Image

User avatar
Jinzor
Specialist
Posts: 16
Joined: Thu 30 May 2013 23:04
Contact:

Re: Any News/Updates on Campaign reform?

Postby Jinzor » Wed 10 Jul 2013 11:33

diana olympos wrote:The problem is that YOU see the problem as minor.


But if the game was not THINK to be modified quickly and easily about those number, it's REALLY hard and long to change it and ensure there is no bug.

Last time we (Marshall) heard about it, R&R your goup on certain timing was totally crashing the game and deleting saves...


Hence why I said "seems minor", i.e. I don't know if it is minor, because I'm not a developer and I have no knowledge on the game's engine (I never said it most definitely "is minor", so calm down). However, I would imagine that it should be minor because values are just being changed (or should be, I don't know if the campaign is being completely redesigned in this patch and it's not just about changing values). If the game really is suffering from a tremendous number of bugs/crashes from the result of value changes for the campaign, then that says a lot about how the campaign was implemented...

User avatar
Kraxis
Major-General
Posts: 3909
Joined: Wed 10 Jul 2013 11:56
Contact:

Re: Any News/Updates on Campaign reform?

Postby Kraxis » Wed 10 Jul 2013 12:53

All right, we can't get definitive information about the changes (I guess it makes sense in case they have to pull some/all of them) nor can we get any date per se.

I don't want to be negative, but honestly, after having tried my luck with all four campaigns I have been 'forced' (by myself obviously) to self the game. I knew the game would most likely be focused on MP, at least that was the impression I got in EE, so that part isn't too bad for me. But while the EE campaigns were quite bareboned, they gave me my fix of variety in battle. I could play the micro-micro-micro battles and there were also the intense huge battles with dozens of tanks, IFVs and helos all over the place. The dynamic campaign tends to fall into a middle of this every single time. It feels that if the battles just start to get really good (when I have been able to build up a fairly significant income and not yet defeated the enemy) they end. Or in the case of some maps, once I get into contact with the enemy I run out of fuel because the zones are so far apart (is it Stavanger? It is some map over there where if you run the battle to the 500 point starts you are lucky if you ever meet an enemy). Yeah I should bring along some trucks, I know. But there is also the aspect of time, as if you lose a fight you might as well just dig in back 'home' as your income can't really get built into a strong enough force in time with the traveltime required.

I certainly know that the game is more than massive battles, and it should, in fact I'm one of those that love to micro a small force (and get utterly crazy when I lose them due to some idiocy on my part), but it seems in the campaigns it is not really worth it to have the high quality armoured brigades as you can field perhaps a platoon of quality tanks, and if you want to have infantry you have to pay massively due to them coming in Bradleys or BMP3s or something like that. I would love to play with those forces, but it really seems the income potential of the maps favour the medium decks the most (the light decks can burn themselves out with horrid speed), as then you can take losses from surprise encounter and not be set back 500 points before you can respond properly.

I don't find the grinding slugfests to be much fun once the points get low (I don't mind multiday battles as they give a sense of struggle). Nor do I like to face an enemy who is at that level, mostly the AI just charges with infantry or cheap recon and cheap tanks (if it has them). It is not fun to watch +10 and +15 every 2 seconds because that is all the enemy has.
Nor is it much fun to have what is essentially an infantry force (only the SU-85 and MiG21s as real alternatives) and the enemy show up with M1s and Bradleys, but never try to attack leaving me in a pickle as to how to deal with them. Attacking such a force with infantry or 'tank destroyers' over open ground is not really going to work in my favour as it would just be a reverse of what I described before (sad to report that I actually did that once... I won but at the expense of the entire deck save the commands and some infantry).

The 'find the command vehicle' game gets tiring once you have played a few battles to a draw because of it. Especially if they have been 500 points vs 500 points on a big map. I have had battles where my forces were everywhere but the actually zones looking for one measly jeep, which I got a glimpse of running into a forest at the very edge of the map 1 minute fore the time was up. This has been a timehonoured way to make people get out of their minds in RTS games in MP. Hide a unit somewhere. I remember all the way back in Red Alert 1 that Soviet players sometimes hid a submarine and refused to surrender to the great frustration of the actual winner. At least this seems to be changed for the campaign once we get the changes. But it needs to be mentioned as it is part of why I'm not terribly happy right now.

The most simple problem for me is that every battle feels the same. Push to get some zones, preferably 3 pointers, run into enemy, have firefight and then either fall back or advance according to losses suffered. And they are generally of the same size. Maybe I then win, maybe I lose or maybe it becomes a draw... If a draw it can get really bad, like the mentioned 'find the CV'.
There are no desperate defenses with a small force against a swarm of enemies, like say the battle '1914 again' in EE. Or the opposite for that matter... In general it just feels like the game is missing a spread of battle variety that EE had in SP.
I mean, who in their right mind wouldn't love to have battles where you have access to all the great stuff, tanks, planes choppers and what not, and also have the income to get them in numbers that matter? Yet not have that mean that the battle is essentially over before those toys get used (if you can buy the good stuff in meaningful numbers, chances are you occupy the entire map). Or lead a small force that is all you are going to get, in ambushes, retreats and what not?

So while I can easily appreciate the value of the dynamic campaign it has bored me out rather fast. It has the advantage that if you face a battle you can't win it doesn't stop you from advancing in the game (well not always), and that is something I like a lot as I hate to come face to face with a battle that I really struggle with, but I need to defeat in order to get further along. And in EE you could sometimes face those if you had suffered some crucial losses in earlier battles, forcing you to refight the earlier ones to get the losses sort of 'unlost'. But honestly that is the main advantage of it. I don't view the strategic map or the movement upon it as an advantage, as I mentioned the battles feel much the same. It could potentially be something great (which was why I wasn't worried about the dynamic campaign when I learned about it), but isn't for me as it is.
[EUG]MadMat wrote:MadMat says so many things ... :twisted:

User avatar
DeuZerre
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 11125
Joined: Mon 27 Feb 2012 23:17
Location: Universe, Galaxy, Solar System, Earth, Ground, Eurasian Continent, Main Landmass.
Contact:

Re: Any News/Updates on Campaign reform?

Postby DeuZerre » Wed 10 Jul 2013 14:23

I'm very sorry to rad all this and if I could, I'd really kick some dev' butts for it to go faster... But it seems like they've had issues...

Well, keep the game on your computer, and hopefully the next update will fix the campaign.
Image
Marshal honoris causa
FLX wrote:Removing the weaknesses from the divisions leads to all divisions being the same in the long run. We won't proceed like that.

Laminator
Private
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue 9 Jul 2013 10:48
Contact:

Re: Any News/Updates on Campaign reform?

Postby Laminator » Wed 10 Jul 2013 15:10

Comeon people, be patient and let them do their work.

After release, people start moaning about the campaign - that´s all nice and dandy, ´cos imho the AI-Campaign seems really not to work as intended. It´s boring and somewhat frustrating to fight on the same map over and over again, even though you captured zones and thus get new deployment areas, but don´t have the points to setup a nice defense perimeter at battle launch. So the captured zones are somewhat pointless.

Eugen listens to the community and reworks the campaign. People should be happy that the devs listen to them and rework the system. But what happens? People start to cry even more, because it´s not going fast enough for them.
Instead we should be happy because they seem to dig somewhat deeper into this topic - so on the long run we will get a MUCH better system, at least that is what this longer wait implies.

So stop moaning and let them deliver. Then, and only then the time for the next feedback - rework iteration step has come, not now ,)

@DZ:
thx for your constant feedback all over the board, sometimes it must be very frustrating & demanding to keep calm ;)
& thx for the Exel-sheet for the Armoury :)

User avatar
Kraxis
Major-General
Posts: 3909
Joined: Wed 10 Jul 2013 11:56
Contact:

Re: Any News/Updates on Campaign reform?

Postby Kraxis » Wed 10 Jul 2013 15:35

DeuZerre wrote:I'm very sorry to rad all this and if I could, I'd really kick some dev' butts for it to go faster... But it seems like they've had issues...

Well, keep the game on your computer, and hopefully the next update will fix the campaign.

That is what I hope as the Wargames are so clearly in a league of their own. Battles are just so tasty, and that is why it is frustrating at this time, teasing us with what could potentially happen I guess.
[EUG]MadMat wrote:MadMat says so many things ... :twisted:

User avatar
TheFunnyOne1125
First Sergeant
Posts: 241
Joined: Thu 30 May 2013 15:38
Location: Austin, Texas
Contact:

Re: Any News/Updates on Campaign reform?

Postby TheFunnyOne1125 » Wed 10 Jul 2013 17:25

Laminator wrote: so on the long run we will get a MUCH better system, at least that is what this longer wait implies.

You said it yourself "IMPLIES".

We are all just really HOPING we get a much better system.

And another thing I have to say. I feel like the longer this takes the more steam Eugen loses. There 10+ New Topics a day about Balance or Nerfs. But campaign doesn't get any love or discussion. Other than "20 minute timer" and "all battles feel like skirmishes".

And another thing is lets say a reviewer tries to review this game. They might give negative feedback about the campaign, and there not gonna take an excuse of "we are working on it". Id just like to see the game rise on popularity.

No, im not gonna rage on Eugen for them taking this long. I just waited a long to for ALB, and hell yeah the beta was awesome, and in the back of my mind im thinking, how awesome is campaign gonna be?!?!

And, its been a months time, and everyday ive checked Steam and the Forums.

Looking for an update.

Im starting to lose my drive.....
I open the forum for'em. They're waiting for me to chime in
And say what I said Simon, I'm debating if I should sign in.

Return to “Wargame : AirLand Battle”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests