Hey Folk!
Feel my hype waves and join me in my fanatical fanboyism!
I never really gave a hoot about the original boardgame but an RTS in the style of Kohan II: Kings of War set in WW2 is just too cool for school (for some unknown reason to me).
While the historical campaigns do nothing for me (I don't want to re-live epic real life battles, I want experience something, while realistic to the time and place, is all my own to explore as it were), the game's promised WW2 mode does sound kind of fun. Much like the Total War and Rise of Nations games have already done, plan out your grand strategies on a Risk like board in a turn-based game while the battles themselves are resolved via an RTS battle (with your available troops and starting resources based on the pieces you've moved into the region to battle).
So there!
Axis & Allies the RTS is a'comin'!
Moderators: LawBeefaroni, Arcanis, $iljanus
-
Arnold Yim
- Posts: 452
- Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 3:05 pm
- Location: Seoul
Sorry LordGek,
Tried the demo when it came out, deleted it after playing a couple times. It is a shame that they slapped on the name of a great boardgame just in order to push units, especially when the game really has nothing to do with the title, other than the setting of WW2. Of course, since you seem to like Kohan and dislike the original boardgame, I can see why you like it so much. . .it IS a good game, just not what I wanted.
As for myself, I'll just keep playing the original A&A or Iron Blitz edition when I feel the urge for an A&A experience. . . maybe even Combat Mission for a "real time" feel. . . but not this game.
Tried the demo when it came out, deleted it after playing a couple times. It is a shame that they slapped on the name of a great boardgame just in order to push units, especially when the game really has nothing to do with the title, other than the setting of WW2. Of course, since you seem to like Kohan and dislike the original boardgame, I can see why you like it so much. . .it IS a good game, just not what I wanted.
As for myself, I'll just keep playing the original A&A or Iron Blitz edition when I feel the urge for an A&A experience. . . maybe even Combat Mission for a "real time" feel. . . but not this game.
-
LordGek
- Posts: 628
- Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 6:18 pm
Yeah...I hear ya
Hey Arnold,
I too kinda resent the "bait and switch" going on with the title and am sure they'll get a lot of flack for it (they already are on the Atari forums with folk demanding there at least be some turn-based alternatives to the RTS battles in the game).
Its a neat game but, yeah, its not really true to the REAL Axis & Allies and a lot of hardcore WW2 RTS fans will resent many of the game's intentional abstratcions...but its all about sales and name recognition. I'll bet there are a LOT of people that, if they'd ever even heard of Axis & Allies before, just think its "Risk with WW2 units".
I too kinda resent the "bait and switch" going on with the title and am sure they'll get a lot of flack for it (they already are on the Atari forums with folk demanding there at least be some turn-based alternatives to the RTS battles in the game).
Its a neat game but, yeah, its not really true to the REAL Axis & Allies and a lot of hardcore WW2 RTS fans will resent many of the game's intentional abstratcions...but its all about sales and name recognition. I'll bet there are a LOT of people that, if they'd ever even heard of Axis & Allies before, just think its "Risk with WW2 units".
-
Lassr
- Posts: 16873
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 10:51 am
- Location: Rocket City (AL)
- Contact:
I'm also lukewarm to this title. The original Axis & Allies PC game was true to the board game but the AI sucked. I must have played it 20+ times and never lost a game. I was hoping that with the newest Axis & Alles thye might fix the AI but then I learned it was an RTS and that instantly turned me off to it. So I'll wait for the reviews and maybe a price drop or 2 before I consider it.
Being an Axis & Allies fan boy I'm non too happy about them slapping the Axis & Allies name on a RTS. To me that pretty much is the death nail for any attempt in the future to make a legitimate Axis & Allies PC game that is true to the board game with a decent AI.
Being an Axis & Allies fan boy I'm non too happy about them slapping the Axis & Allies name on a RTS. To me that pretty much is the death nail for any attempt in the future to make a legitimate Axis & Allies PC game that is true to the board game with a decent AI.
-
raydude
- Posts: 3894
- Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 9:22 am
Wow, I'm kind of amazed at all the negative vibes here. I guess its to balance out the "fanboyism" but my goodness! I guess gamers don't like innovation after all.
First off, saying its not really true to the "REAL" Axis and Allies game indicates how much people need to know about the innovations to the board game itself.
As of right now, there are actually 4 iterations of the Axis and Allies board game franchise: A&A:Europe,A&A:Pacific,A&A : D-Day, and A&A:Revised Edition.
Each one of the iterations has introduced new rules and concepts to the A&A series, and each one has developed its own following and been generally received favorably by board game fans of the original A&A.
Next, lets deal with some issues regarding the A&A RTS:
First off, IMHO there is no such thing as a hardcore WW2 RTS (yet). To date, none have satisfactorily dealt with issues of morale, command and control, supply, and formations. Combat Mission is NOT an RTS btw, so it is not used as an example of a "good" WW2 RTS. I take it back actually. There is a hardcore real-time WW2 game and it's called Highway to the Reich.
Then we have A&A. It deals w/ morale - the loss of it in combat, and the gradual rallying of troops that are withdrawn from the front. It deals w/ command and control in an innovative (IMHO) fashion: HQ's are buildings that build their subordinate units and provide a supply chain.
It deals w/ supply, supply stockpiles, and supply chains w/ HQ's, ammo dumps, and the supply bar indicator for HQ's that are cut off from the supply chain.
It deals w/ formations in that each formation affects combat and movement speed.
Yes it deals with some abstractions in terms of units, unit speed, armor, etc, but the fact that it actually tries to address the logistical and psychological aspects of war more than make up for it. For too long I've seen games where the realism emphasis is strictly on the "tactical" side of war: infantry can't kill tanks, front armor is better than rear armor, etc.
Yet, no one seems to pay attention to the logistical side of war, and its lack of presentation in almost all WW2 RTS games. But wasn't it Napoleon who said, "Good generals think tactics, great generals think logistics." ?
First off, saying its not really true to the "REAL" Axis and Allies game indicates how much people need to know about the innovations to the board game itself.
As of right now, there are actually 4 iterations of the Axis and Allies board game franchise: A&A:Europe,A&A:Pacific,A&A : D-Day, and A&A:Revised Edition.
Each one of the iterations has introduced new rules and concepts to the A&A series, and each one has developed its own following and been generally received favorably by board game fans of the original A&A.
Next, lets deal with some issues regarding the A&A RTS:
First off, IMHO there is no such thing as a hardcore WW2 RTS (yet). To date, none have satisfactorily dealt with issues of morale, command and control, supply, and formations. Combat Mission is NOT an RTS btw, so it is not used as an example of a "good" WW2 RTS. I take it back actually. There is a hardcore real-time WW2 game and it's called Highway to the Reich.
Then we have A&A. It deals w/ morale - the loss of it in combat, and the gradual rallying of troops that are withdrawn from the front. It deals w/ command and control in an innovative (IMHO) fashion: HQ's are buildings that build their subordinate units and provide a supply chain.
It deals w/ supply, supply stockpiles, and supply chains w/ HQ's, ammo dumps, and the supply bar indicator for HQ's that are cut off from the supply chain.
It deals w/ formations in that each formation affects combat and movement speed.
Yes it deals with some abstractions in terms of units, unit speed, armor, etc, but the fact that it actually tries to address the logistical and psychological aspects of war more than make up for it. For too long I've seen games where the realism emphasis is strictly on the "tactical" side of war: infantry can't kill tanks, front armor is better than rear armor, etc.
Yet, no one seems to pay attention to the logistical side of war, and its lack of presentation in almost all WW2 RTS games. But wasn't it Napoleon who said, "Good generals think tactics, great generals think logistics." ?
-
Sponge
- Posts: 828
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 5:35 pm
I tried the demo and was completely underwhelmed. I'm not an A&A fan in any way, shape, or form but I was looking forward to it because
a) it's Timegate and I'm a Kohan (original) fan
b) it's *not* fantasy!
but when I saw that my tanks couldn't kill a squad of infantry for "game balance reasons" I was sort of put off.
I'm sure I didn't give the demo a fair shake but I just didn't get the vibe I was hoping for.
a) it's Timegate and I'm a Kohan (original) fan
b) it's *not* fantasy!
but when I saw that my tanks couldn't kill a squad of infantry for "game balance reasons" I was sort of put off.
I'm sure I didn't give the demo a fair shake but I just didn't get the vibe I was hoping for.
-
LordGek
- Posts: 628
- Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 6:18 pm
I feel your pain...
Hey Sponge,
I too initially thought it was kind of annoying how wussy my tanks seemed vs. infantry but then I started figuring out the game mechanics a bit more. Basically, just like many other games, you really need to get the game's whole Rock-Paper-Scissors relationships in the game (which I still don't fully get with this game but am making progress...).
What I think I've figured out so far:
Infantry are your best pals for close in spaces! Basically both towns and forests give infantry all sorts of defensive bonuses!
Vehicles rule the open areas! Those tanks really shine when fighting out in the open, especially against other vehicles. Both towns and forests, not only DO NOT give them defensive bonuses but they get significant defensive penalties in these areas.
Tanks are powerful BUT very slow firing so for every shot they make to at best one or two infantrymen, several infantrymen can concentrate many shots on them (even if each individual shot does very little damage). The key to kicking infantry's ass, I think, is mixed formations of infantry and tanks (or at least some sort of vehicles). When your infantry engage the folk upfront with your tanks firing in from behind unhindered it goes a lot nicer (the infantry are great at finishing off the units the tanks have critically injured).
I too initially thought it was kind of annoying how wussy my tanks seemed vs. infantry but then I started figuring out the game mechanics a bit more. Basically, just like many other games, you really need to get the game's whole Rock-Paper-Scissors relationships in the game (which I still don't fully get with this game but am making progress...).
What I think I've figured out so far:
Infantry are your best pals for close in spaces! Basically both towns and forests give infantry all sorts of defensive bonuses!
Vehicles rule the open areas! Those tanks really shine when fighting out in the open, especially against other vehicles. Both towns and forests, not only DO NOT give them defensive bonuses but they get significant defensive penalties in these areas.
Tanks are powerful BUT very slow firing so for every shot they make to at best one or two infantrymen, several infantrymen can concentrate many shots on them (even if each individual shot does very little damage). The key to kicking infantry's ass, I think, is mixed formations of infantry and tanks (or at least some sort of vehicles). When your infantry engage the folk upfront with your tanks firing in from behind unhindered it goes a lot nicer (the infantry are great at finishing off the units the tanks have critically injured).
-
Terrified
- Posts: 1606
- Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 2:26 pm
- Location: Canada
-
raydude
- Posts: 3894
- Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 9:22 am
You mean like how Axis and Allies: D-Day the board game is using the Axis and Allies name but there is no production, no naval battles (except for bombardment), turns are handled using a card deck, and the game lasts 10 turns max?Terrified wrote: No, we love innovation. What we don't like is someone using an established name to sell a completely different product.
-
LordGek
- Posts: 628
- Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 6:18 pm
Are you with me?
Hey Gang,
It should be out tomorrow...anybody else giving a hoot?
It should be out tomorrow...anybody else giving a hoot?
-
Turtle
- Posts: 6310
- Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 2:09 am
- Location: Southern California
- Contact:
Just so you know, this game does have Axis & Allies in it, in a way.
There is a World War 2 mode where you have the A&A gameboard and units on the board. You move and produce these just like the boardgame, but where the battles are you fight in the RTS map.
A lot of previews keep forgetting this aspect, but it's featured in quite a few interviews.
There is a World War 2 mode where you have the A&A gameboard and units on the board. You move and produce these just like the boardgame, but where the battles are you fight in the RTS map.
A lot of previews keep forgetting this aspect, but it's featured in quite a few interviews.
-
rrmorton
- Posts: 8760
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:06 pm
- Location: Pleasantville NY
Gamespot gave it a 6.0.
The WW2 RTS game I've got my eye on (when the price comes down and the busy season subsides) is Codename: Panzers.
The WW2 RTS game I've got my eye on (when the price comes down and the busy season subsides) is Codename: Panzers.
-
LordGek
- Posts: 628
- Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 6:18 pm
Yep, but from what I hear it plays a lot closer to Rise of Nations Conquer the World Mode than the actual Axis & Allies boardgame (which is fine by me).Turtle wrote:Just so you know, this game does have Axis & Allies in it, in a way.
There is a World War 2 mode where you have the A&A gameboard and units on the board. You move and produce these just like the boardgame, but where the battles are you fight in the RTS map.
A lot of previews keep forgetting this aspect, but it's featured in quite a few interviews.
-
ioticus
- Posts: 293
- Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2004 11:43 pm
- Location: Lost in time and space . . . .
-
Lassr
- Posts: 16873
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 10:51 am
- Location: Rocket City (AL)
- Contact:
-
LordGek
- Posts: 628
- Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 6:18 pm
Truth be told...
Hey Gang,
Not that Gamespot reviews are GOLDEN TABLETS FROM ON HIGH, but yeah, it definitely cooled my jets toward this game. I don't think I'd have accepted the reviewer's "Its all about the infantry rush" statement that easily if it weren't for the fact that I'd already heard folk coming to that conclusion from the demo and figured, "Sure, but I'll bet you can't always pull that crap in the real game...". At least this does sound like something very patchable. I leave it to the developers to figure out how they can tone down the power of the infantry (perhaps give the mechanized infantry bonuses in dealing with infantry or would that really not make sense historically?).
Not that Gamespot reviews are GOLDEN TABLETS FROM ON HIGH, but yeah, it definitely cooled my jets toward this game. I don't think I'd have accepted the reviewer's "Its all about the infantry rush" statement that easily if it weren't for the fact that I'd already heard folk coming to that conclusion from the demo and figured, "Sure, but I'll bet you can't always pull that crap in the real game...". At least this does sound like something very patchable. I leave it to the developers to figure out how they can tone down the power of the infantry (perhaps give the mechanized infantry bonuses in dealing with infantry or would that really not make sense historically?).