![]() I HIGHLY recommend doing defensive missions first to get a feel for the game's flow and the player's lingo. And the tutorial explains tactical matters adequately. Fortunately the community that this game filters usually ends up being very helpful. One can spawn in and not know what in blazes is going on, walking for 1000 metres when they could've used a mobile field spawn, getting killed by enemy town AI defences, or (like me) walking right into a panzer's hull machine gun and becoming swiss cheese without knowing the tactical situation. The game mechanics, and how much a new player needs to know to play, are not very well explained.The main thing to consider for most players, though, is that the developers now in control seem to be ironing alot of this out. The long list of devs with different personal goals and control/competence over the games code means that it shows evidence of their many varied tenures: some weapon types or classes are significantly better than others, and until recently the allies were commonly favoured in terms of same-tier equipment (I would know, I played them).Many of the players are helpful, patient, and while many regulars get whiney from time to time it's certainly not the toxicity expected from most game communities today. Though the community can be butthurt sometimes, and there is a sense of segregation amongst some of them in which some allied players think dedicated axis players are neonazis and some axis players think dedicated allies get developer favour, the community overall is quite pleasant.I think it does have promise and it's certainly worth their free account if you think it's worth checking out. They appear to have actual targets for development, including implementation of such features as in-game area based voice chat. ![]() When you can do that and not lose your veteran players- some of them there from the beginning- it does show no small degree of competence. From adding those new weapons and cities to auditing the very difficult file structure of this nearly 20 year old behemoth, there clearly appears to be a push to improve it without losing its appeal. This term of developers is trying hard and they too are current/previous customers of the game.It totally wrecks the newer game Heroes and Generals, at last check. Whatever your feelings about the game balance or the relative strength of equipment (tanks are a bit too vulnerable IMO), the game's tactical/strategic depth are greater than most any game. Infantry combat can vary but is usually within 200 metres, but someone like myself can push this distance out if he's patient- the skill ceiling is pretty high for this game! Capturing depots (which leads to the capture of a city with an attack objective on it from High Command) or defending them so that more allies can spawn in, and establishing an effective counterattack to rid the area of opposing forces, is quite an experience. It's not grognard level but far more realistic than most games. The tactical depth to the game is significant.Some campaign have lasted months, and others just around two weeks. Cities and towns vary in size and there is strategic flow as High Command players try to direct offensives in one or more areas. The US arrive later into the game, if the Campaign gets that far (it often does). The French and British attempt to stop the Germans from eating France or even attempting a makeshift invasion of the islands. The campaign map, with a persistent world, is a massive (low-resolution) 1/2 scale of NW Europe, with multiple levels of equipment which increase for all countries as time goes on.Though I don't know of Windows 10's operation with it (I heard there were hiccups in the past but they should be resolved by now), the game is so stable at that veterans run two copies of it can be run at the same time.Vehicles have been added and towns and cities have been added for the first time in years, and they appear to be willing to make somewhat radical changes to improve playability without further compromising on the game's realisticish feel. The developers seem to be really trying to improve this already great dated game.There is improvement in this area but it has a ways to go before it's seamless for the prospective customer. Links are dead, site details missing or inaccurate, and there are definitely shoddy areas. The very old age of the game and the long list of the present and past devs it has had has left a few features unexplained on the website (and sometimes in-game).They might've made the steam version more stable but I this game can be played without it and it's not difficult to try. Do not try the game on Steam based other's reports.The main points about the game I might made are: Ugly There are some critical things that this article does not cover.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |