Bought it, not real happy with it

[Steely Glint]

The AI can't use some of the units, and the editor is really arcane and difficult to use. The bad news just keep coming.

IMO the game is not state of the art, is incomplete (units the AI can't use, really?), has a substandard UI (in the case of the editor, a confusing, arcane and difficult one), and, despite offering good combat, just doesn't make the overall grade. I expected far better from a Gold edition.

Note: I am a long-time war gamer (I was an S&T subscriber) and own and play a lot of Matrix, Shrapnel, and Battleground titles. This one, IMO, does not deliver what it should.

[Steely Glint]

And would someone at Matrix PLEASE start requiring that NATO counters be included in all games, at least as an option, whenever appropriate? It is the international standard, after all.

[Lunaticus_matrixforum]

ORIGINAL: Steely Glint
... and the editor is really arcane and difficult to use...

Of course everybody is entitled to their own opinion. But I have used the editor for some time now and find it is a dream come true. Even though sometime some things take some manual effort the breadth and depth of options and potential far make up for it. I think that most settings and games (speaking about real, i.e. turn-based, strategy games here [:)]) imaginable can be brought to life with the editor. Also the new editor has a lot of added functions (stringlists and editor events just to name two) which can greatly speed up the setup.
Would be interested to find out what you consider arcane and difficult to use?

[Emx77]

ORIGINAL: Steely Glint

The AI can't use some of the units, and the editor is really arcane and difficult to use. The bad news just keep coming.

I'm considering to buy this title but I'm not sure any more. What do you mean that AI can't use some of the units? What about scenarios? How many of them in retail version and did they pass some quality check? I wouldn't like to get another TOAW with tons of scenarios of very low quality.


And it is really shame that nato counters are not included by default.

[Grymme]

Emir Agic. I wouldnt go by Steely Gints opinion solely.

[Krafty]

The ai appears to use all the units in my games. And the editor is insanely powerful, I have no idea what the heck Steely Giant is talking about. You can literally make an entirely new game with it. As powerful if not more powerful than Civilization 4. Im already considering mods...cavemen to laser infantry, a 10,000 year mod, more like civilization, and a fantasy mod. Troll and skeleton divisions have meh mouth watering. Its certainly not arcane. Steely is crazy

[Krafty]

And seriously, you buy this game not because its a realistic wargame...if you want that go find War In The East or Warplan Orange or something. You buy this because its the best 4x game to come out since Civ2 call to power. If youre not going to use the random map features, yeah id say pass this game by. This game shines in multiplayer when played as a 4x...I really couldnt see playing a world war two scenario in this...whats the point? Its so abstracted itd be pointless. If I cant differentiate between Ju86s, Ju87s, Ju88s and Ju52s, why am I playing a ww2 game? If there arent leaders, with traits, real production locations, and a 10mile hex...why bother? Seriously?

[Krafty]

And lastly (no one notice the padding going on here) whats the NATO counter for mortars...or infantry guns. If youll notice, whatever the division contains that has the most power points is whats shown on the division label. With dynamic divisions and a self made OOB, how do you propose the game "knows" what a division should be labelled eh? And what do you do when you put 12 mortars in a division by themselves...should the developer "invent" nato symbols for things that dont exist in reality? Seriously, if youre looking for a realistic ww2 game...War in the East...its 70 dollars but there isnt a more realistic hex based war game out there, besides Warplan Pacific or Warplan orange...but who seriously wants to choose the texture of toilet paper in each and every regiment in the PTO...

[Emx77]

Kraftwerk, thank you for explanation. I already have WITE and TOAW so, if I understand you correctly, ATG is not intended to model ultra detail and realistic representation of historical operations (as WITE, WITP or TOAW), right?

ATG strenght lies in:

1. Very powerful scenario editor which provide you tool to make various hipotetical games.
2. Random scenario generator which enable you to make some interesting games pretty quickly.
3. 4x element (as in Civilization, which cannot be found in WITE or TOAW)

This is ok for me, as this setting can provide a lot of fun, unless you expect very realistic /or historicly accurate) modeling of wars/battles.

I have other questions:

- What about hex scale? Which is minimal hex size in meters (TOAW has min 2,5 km, and max 50 km hex)? Does the movements points for units are automaticly scaled depending of TOE and hex size or it must be manualy set in editor?

- What is most appropriate unit size to use with ATG (section, platoon, battalion...?)

Thanks in advance for answers.

[SSFSX17]

ORIGINAL: Kraftwerk
If I cant differentiate between Ju86s, Ju87s, Ju88s and Ju52s, why am I playing a ww2 game? If there arent leaders, with traits, real production locations, and a 10mile hex...why bother? Seriously?

Some people did try to model the differences between all the various types of hardware, in the original AT.
Here's one example: http://www.advancedtactics.org/scenario.php?nr=41
The Bombur mod is particularly famous: http://www.advancedtactics.org/scenario.php?nr=67

People have also modelled leaders, albeit as basically super-staff units. The quickest example would be the Romans vs. Barbarians scenario. And, by using the scenario editor, you can have different kinds of production, have a difference between various kinds of factories, implement manpower as a strategic resource, and many other things.

[sabre1]

Bought it, and once again the tutorials are abysmal in my opinion, and that ain't worth much. I will play with it for awhile, like I did with AT.[:(][8|]

[DakaSha]

ORIGINAL: Kraftwerk

The ai appears to use all the units in my games. And the editor is insanely powerful, I have no idea what the heck Steely Giant is talking about. You can literally make an entirely new game with it. As powerful if not more powerful than Civilization 4. Im already considering mods...cavemen to laser infantry, a 10,000 year mod, more like civilization, and a fantasy mod. Troll and skeleton divisions have meh mouth watering. Its certainly not arcane. Steely is crazy

No steely has a perfectly valid and non-biased opinion.
And its funny because the handbook itself says the AI cant use all units.

I am really enjoying the game but it is not the improvement i had hoped for over the original.

As for people wondering if they should get the game:

If you have money to blow get it no matter what. It's great despite some flaws
If you own the first one then think about it and be ready to buy the next installment next year

[Steely Glint]

ORIGINAL: Grymme

Emir Agic. I wouldnt go by Steely Gints opinion solely.

And you shouldn't disregard it, either. Grymne is something of an AT cheerleader. Ask him how the AI handles aircraft carriers anyway.

[Steely Glint]

ORIGINAL: Kraftwerk

The ai appears to use all the units in my games. And the editor is insanely powerful, I have no idea what the heck Steely Giant is talking about. You can literally make an entirely new game with it. As powerful if not more powerful than Civilization 4. Im already considering mods...cavemen to laser infantry, a 10,000 year mod, more like civilization, and a fantasy mod. Troll and skeleton divisions have meh mouth watering. Its certainly not arcane. Steely is crazy

The AI does NOT use all units, and I never said that the editor wasn't powerful. Arcane, confusing, difficult to use, yes, but it is quite powerful, no argument there.

[Steely Glint]

ORIGINAL: Kraftwerk

And lastly (no one notice the padding going on here) whats the NATO counter for mortars...or infantry guns. If youll notice, whatever the division contains that has the most power points is whats shown on the division label. With dynamic divisions and a self made OOB, how do you propose the game "knows" what a division should be labelled eh? And what do you do when you put 12 mortars in a division by themselves...should the developer "invent" nato symbols for things that dont exist in reality? Seriously, if youre looking for a realistic ww2 game...War in the East...its 70 dollars but there isnt a more realistic hex based war game out there, besides Warplan Pacific or Warplan orange...but who seriously wants to choose the texture of toilet paper in each and every regiment in the PTO...

The NATO symbol for mortars is an upright arrow on a small open circle. Infantry guns use the artillery symbol.

[borsook79]

ORIGINAL: Steely Glint

And would someone at Matrix PLEASE start requiring that NATO counters be included in all games, at least as an option, whenever appropriate? It is the international standard, after all.

I have nothing against NATO symbols included as an option, but I'd like to say that some of us hate them with all our heart, and it's refreshing to see game that do not consider them "a standard". Esp. after disappointments like the war in the east having only NATO symbols.

[Keunert]

the biggest improvements on this as i understand it were made to make the editor more powerfull, to enable more options in future scenarios. so we will see a lot of the good stuff kust coming when people start doing new scenarios. the ai is ok and a lot of scenarios do without naval and carrier campaigns.

but as it is with any computer game: the real fun is playing against humans. go and read WITE and witp aar's: they are all humans vs humans. but if you 're sticking with solo play i can assure you that the ai is as smart or dumb as in most other games.

so it's a great engine that got expanded in the field where it's unique: the scenario making. this was clearly communicated and i think that was the right decision.

[Magpius]

What Blows:

• I'd forgotten how much of a click-fest the mechanics of the game are, ...were it not for the keyboard shortcuts. But attack selections, production decisions.. there are a lot of screens to wade through. Some screens could have been redesigned/ and combined.
• Screen scrolling speeds. Okay I don't have a new computer, but watching the map pan 1 hex grid at a time is rather off-putting. Anyone with current systems experiencing this? or is it just me?
• As also stated, no wheel mouse map zoom...
• A.I. turn play. Disappointed a little here as automating A.T.s history screen, seems a little like a short-cut solution. Watching the replay, doesnt feel the same as seeing the A.I respond right after turn's end. (I know that sounds real dumb, but somehow it's different).
• Agree about the NATO symbols, but mods aplenty both graphic and scenario will follow in the weeks and months ahead. Be patient! (I for one miss GJK's old-school map mod).

The Good

• Graphics have improved it.
• The level of information you can wade through and pick apart borders on the obsessive (could be good or bad)
• The price, for owners of A.T. worth the upgrade. For newcomers, the game is worth the price.

Ultimately I bought this, as A.T. is a classic game with high replay value. How many current games even have a random game generator? It has an active supportive community that will develop and further polish this release, and a developer that listens to improve the product.

I also bought this as 'insurance' because as much as I like A.T., I thought it unlikely that improvements in ATG would ever filter down to its predecessor. (Which seems to be a bit of a trend recently, ie Distant Worlds, Harpoon, Time of Wrath etc. How many games are becoming a 'series')

My 2 cents.

[Tac2i]

I have three PCs: WinXP SP3 2.8GHz Intel single core/4GB RAM/512MB GeForce Videocard / Win7 SP1 laptop 1.67GHz Intel duo core/2GB RAM/Integrated Graphics / Win7 SP1 PC AMD quad core/4GB RAM/ATI 1GB Videocard. I haven't experienced any screen scrolling issues on any of them. The two desktops were ran on a Dell 22 inch flat panel monitor at 1920 by 1080 screen resolution.

ORIGINAL: Agent S

Screen scrolling speeds. Okay I don't have a new computer, but watching the map pan 1 hex grid at a time is rather off-putting. Anyone with current systems experiencing this? or is it just me?

[Steely Glint]

NATO symbols are the international military standard and have been so for decades. They are also the international historical standard, and the international wargaming standard. I resent the intrusion into my hobby of those who don't include them in their wargames. Pictograms are for children and simple.