Roadmap / feature completion?

[SgtArrmyGuy]

I'm supposed to be writing a review for AB2 for Pelit-magazine, but I'm struggling with comprehending whether the game at its current state is intended as a full realease or an early access one.

Do the developers of AB2 consider the game at it's current state "feature complete" or "early access"? Knowing that, I could put what I'm seeing to its proper context.

I mean, there has been talk about revamping the campaign engine etc. Is there a "roadmap for release" for missing features or a "roadmap post-release" for upcoming content? These things critically affect when the game should be reviewed.

Currently all the scenarios and campaigns included seem to be the same as in the first game, if I'm not mistaken? I'm especially curious on how extensive are your plans to extend this "game" side of the game, since the current upgrades seem to be more concerned with the engine and UI.

[nikolas93TS]

Both statements are true: AB2 is a full release, but it also represents what we refer to as a "soft launch." The game is feature-complete and fully playable, with significant upgrades to the engine, features, and AI.

This approach was chosen for several reasons. First, as this is our first foray into 3D, we wanted to proceed cautiously to mitigate risks. The wargaming industry has seen several botched transitions, and we felt it was important to test the waters with a broader audience than just our beta testers. Fortunately, the reception has been positive, though it was not guaranteed. It also turned out to be highly beneficial in terms of gathering feedback, including some direct technical suggestions.

Second, as a small team, we still have a lot to learn, and we are continuing to improve the game as we go. For example, the next patch will introduce anti-aliasing, which, while not a deal-breaker, will improve the overall visual quality.

Third, the game might benefit from some polishing before it reaches a wider audience on platforms like Steam. For instance, while the Finnish faction is fully playable, some placeholder models are still in use. Similarly, we are actively testing new content, such as the second linear campaign and additional scenarios, which now benefit from the scripting system implemented this summer.

We’re planning post-release updates, including a revamp of the dynamic campaign system, new features (some of which will be available in the next patch, plus Finnish models), and expanded content. The focus so far has been on building a solid foundation, with more “game” content to come as part of our roadmap. You can review AB2 as a complete product, but please note that it will continue to evolve, particularly in 2025.

[SgtArrmyGuy]

Thank you for your clear answer, this will help a lot!

My short feedback as a gamer, not a reviewer, is that the engine, UI and friendly unit AI is at a very good state (I really can't think of anything that needs improving; AB1 was a really smooth gameplay experience to begin with, and the new 3D engine makes observing the terrain a lot easier). However, as a purely single-player game with no multiplayer features, the game lives and dies with its enemy AI and scenario/campaign content, and those aspects still require a lot of work.

I'm not sure exactly what you have done under the hood, but having played through the first dynamic campaign (the Over the Hills continuation campaign) the experience was exactly like it was in the first game: the enemy forces just zerg-rush the objectives one-by-one with no regard to any tactics or friendly casualties when attacking, and sit completely still in their starting positions when defending. You never forget that you're playing against a computer since this behavior is so predictable and static. I'm curious whether the linear campaigns/scripting system can improve on this, however, linear campaigns do not have the same player forces carrying over from one mission to the other, which is kinda central to at least my campaign involvement and thus enjoyment.

tl;dr you have a 5/5 game engine and UI mixed with 2/5 playable content; if you can fix the AI/campaigns/scenarios, you already have the perfect wargame at your hands!

[Veitikka]

It's not realistic to expect that we "fix" the AI to be like a human opponent. The biggest improvement in the AB2 AI so far is that the paths evolve as the enemy takes casualties, so it's better at avoiding kill zones. For example, in one of the included "scripting showcases" I noticed that when I had scripted the AI to travel through an ambush it modified its plan on its own and took a detour to avoid further casualties.

Many have asked for scripting features, and that's what they've got now. This is the first iteration, and even in its current form it makes a massive difference in scenario design, and I believe that some don't quite understand its potential yet. It's one of the main features we want to keep improving over time.