My Opinion on ATG

[DakaSha]

[Looooong post ]

I'm writing this for multiple reasons. One of them being that I always feel the need of saying something nice about the game after complaining about X 'feature'. I'm not going to do that anymore. Anybody that wants to cry about my opinions in different threads (not that anybody has yet) should refer to this thread
Maybe people wanting to buy the game can also use this thread as a way of deciding, whatever my opinion is worth. I think I'm being pretty objective about the games current state and most if not all of my criticism is constructive.
Maybe the thread is a bit presumptuous but meh.. I paid 50$ bucks so i think my opinion should be heard.

So let me get it out of the way:
ATG is a great war game. Already one of my favorite. I feel more like commander then in any other game. there may be other great operational level games but most are scenario based which i despise. I like sandbox/random stuff. ATG wins.
I am not going to list all the good features.. The list would be very long and its out of the scope of this thread. But here are some things I find great just to explain why i even care:

Some of the positive:
1) AI
There are some issues (explained below) but the AI is great. If you crave for ai that might even be able to beat you on its lowest setting then ATG is a good purchase. After you get the hang you will prob beat it more often then not but it is just AI.. For that it does an amazing job. and there are of course higher 'cheat' settings

2) Mechanics
ATG has great operational level mechanics. As said you 'feel' like a commander and you almost gain some sort of understanding of what it must be like (well.. Thats exaggerating but i think most new people would get what im saying)

3) Strategic depth
This is the best seller. In ATG i get all the tools of a commander and they actually seem to work seamlessly. Being able to plot out something like a naval invasion in such detail is awesome. Not to mention the diplomacy meta game (although only with humans!)

Thats just a few reason i really like this.
However I'm not so sure I'm happy about paying 50$ for it..

Negative:
1) Lack of polish.
The game is great fun but lacks polish. there are so many details that could have been made better with just a bit more work. I am aware that time = money but as a customer do I care about your internal issues? No of course not. I want a polished game. ATG is NOT that.

Good does not = polish. Even great does not = polish. I'd like to say that anybody who understands the concept of polish would have to agree no matter how much they love the game.. But... that won't happen

2) Bugs
Not a huge issue since Vic will sort them out. Some of them shouldn't be there at release but software dev is tough work and its understandable for a (more or less) single man outfit.

3) The half a$$ed way the new random games are handled
Mentioned this in another thread. Unless I'm missing something you can not create a random Gold game with all of the features of the classic setup... Of course you also cant use all gold features using classic setup.. so what we get is a full priced expansion that doesnt even expand.. but somehow forks from the original letting you feel gypped either way.

You cant even use mods with the new setup (without renaming files..)

Bottom line: Gold should be an upgrade meaning you get ALL (good) setup options form the first with added content from the Gold release. Not 50/50

the new random screen is much easier to use but it just takes away control. There should be a simple 'quick' setup option and a more in detail one that allows you to change everything.

Please correct me if im just missing something!

edit: I have finally learned that mods may well be played with the new random setup. However they must be made compatible by the modder. This doesnt mean the new random isnt still lacking features from the first but that may be the most important issue

4) Lack of leaders
I dont really care about leaders but i remember it being mentioned.. in fact IIRC it was gonna be for the original in form of a patch.. instead we got an expansion.. that doesnt even have them!

5) The feeling that ATG is just an expensive official mod
ATG feels like a (good) mod. It seems like (almost) everything we got in this was possible in the original. I know this isnt 100% true but that is how it feels to me personally. I feel like i paid for something that should have been free

6) Random maps not *that* improved on
They have been improved (and they used to SUCK) so thats nice, but some different map scripts would be nice.. Being able to set continent number and things like that.

The new random maps ARE playable and fun though dont get me wrong. Some improvement was made here

7) No improvements on AI
I said its great.. but it was just as great in ATWW2.. I cant believe nothing was done in this area.
Ai can not use carriers, Ai can not use paratroopers, AI can not deliver air supply crates, AI can not build factories (but gets them for free), AI does not build things like ports and air fields (i think)
Ai gets free factories but does not get free ship factories... these are the ones it needs most when it doesnt have cities on water.. something the map generator should also be able to handle

8) Paying 35$-60$ for the next game that will (hopefully) be what this one was supposed to be
And thats what all this boils down to. This gold version to me feels like a quick way to make some money before the real game is released (next year?). Yes yes i know im making an assumption but my assumption is based on the evidence at hand.

If this had cost.. well maybe 20$ (Tops!) then I'd be giving much praise (well some of the above things would need to be fixed) but the fact of the matter is that it is fairly expensive. And I dont see the value being there (This is my personal opinion of course and should be taken with a grain of salt when deciding on whether to purchase. You may really really like it )

Summery:
I am having fun with the game (or rather i will when some of the bugs are ironed out. Cant play with the Recon bug for instance. ) and recommend it to anybody who has the money to spare (or wants to help out vic who has done a great job none the less).
If you dont have money to spare (like me) then id think twice about it if you own the first. That isnt to say you shouldn't get it. It is an improvement. Your mileage may just vary
If you dont own the first id say: Get it!.. the only thing is that your gonna have to be prepared to pay the same amount next year for the 'better version'

-------

Anyways i spent way to much time on this post.. But i needed to get it out of the way. If i sound like im just being a jerk and negative in other threads please keep in mind that Im just offering my view on what could be a better product (despite it already being good). Most of the things that get to me are small things.. which is why i think they shouldnt be there in the first place

Feel free to discuss.

[Tac2i]

Fair and balanced evaluation. We all have our own perspectives.

+1 I like sandbox/random stuff. ATG wins. - For me this is best feature of ATG: random games that provide near endless enjoyment. I'm not much into historical scenarios though I know a lot are and ATG has a few included and more to come as the community of modders gets to work with the ATG game editor.

re "If this had cost.. well maybe 20$ (Tops!)" : If you own the original AT:WWII, you only have to pay $25. That is a fair price. If you never owned the original, at least in the US, the game cost $40. That is a fair price for a new game.

See this post by Vic, the game designer, about the first patch: What's Up.

[henri51]

About the missing features in random games: random games have oil and mines, but not the pre-production stuff where one has to plan in advance what one is going to produce in 6 months, and steel and pilots. Fuel and mines add a great deal of strategic depth to the game, but in my case, I don't miss the other features at all, because it feels too much like work and mental exhaustion (you can play HOI3 for that). I like my games streamlined, and that is why I buy games like WiTP, WiTE,HoI3 and EU3 and don't play them much, but that is just me...[:'(]

ATG scenarios (except the huge ones like FITE) generally have a relatively low unit count and play smoothly, which is what I like.

In addition, it can be useful for potential buyers to know that ATG is as much a wargame construction set as it is a wargame, and that the number of scenarios using the new features will not be numerous, at least until modders get to work.

Personally I feel I am getting my money's worth.

Henri

[DakaSha]

Im not speaking about missing features that are in the scenarios or other things that make it more complex.
Im talking about the simple fact that the ATG Random doesnt incorporate all the functionality of its predecessor and you cant get 100% functionality using either random type (Classic or gold) Freaking ridiculous xD

Basically Gold Random games should alos allow you to do everything you can in classic. But no. you have to choose.. Well if i wanted ATWW2 i wouldnt have bought this and if I want Gold I want all the functionality of WW2.

Its just sloppy design (If im not missing something here)
I have never seen an expansion do that

[DakaSha]

ORIGINAL: Webizen

Fair and balanced evaluation. We all have our own perspectives.

+1 I like sandbox/random stuff. ATG wins. - For me this is best feature of ATG: random games that provide near endless enjoyment. I'm not much into historical scenarios though I know a lot are and ATG has a few included and more to come as the community of modders gets to work with the ATG game editor.

re "If this had cost.. well maybe 20$ (Tops!)" : If you own the original AT:WWII, you only have to pay $25. That is a fair price. If you never owned the original, at least in the US, the game cost $40. That is a fair price for a new game.

See this post by Vic, the game designer, about the first patch: What's Up.

Eh.. I buy many indie games and 40$ is steep.. also thats 40$ bucks without the actual cd.. its 50 with the cd (No manual and a cheap ass gold bottomed cd if its anything like my last matrix purchase )
One can argue forever about the subjective topic of value but based on other games of the same caliber its quite expensive. That could very well be a publisher issue though and out of vics hands.. again why would i care as a consumer? 50 bucks is 50 bucks whoever made the rules

In terms of money spent per hour fun im def getting more out of this then a single night out getting wasted though so it isnt that bad of a buy when viewed that way

And i beat you to the other thread
Looking forward to the next couple months of patching

[phatkarp]

They should definitely release a demo.  $40 is quite a leap of faith for an indie game.  The leap is well worth it, of course.

[Bamilus]

The problem I have with potentially buying the game right now is that I don't play random games. Therefore, it feels like 80% of the improvements to ATG will be wasted on me because I only want to play historical scenarios (which only a few ATG versions exist of....many of which are still for AT which I own).

Very good and detailed review!

[DakaSha]

as wb above me said: over time new scenarios will show up. maybe just wait awhile

[Casus_Belli]

There's a pretty small market for these games, that require a huge amount of time overheads and work to create, so I doubt Vic's getting rich real quick. With the discount, this game cost me $AU25, which is incredibly cheap for a first-realease game.

I would really love to see some system of leaders with different characteristics, who can gain experience of different kinds. I have no idea how hard this would be to code, but it would really be a great enhancement to a great game. I think this is what Daka means about polish, with which I'm inclined to agree.

It would be good to have more control over randomg game maps, even to be able to modify them, rathr than throw them out and try again. i know you can do this with the editor, but, as I've said elsewhare, many of us are not interested in or proficient with the editor. It would be good to have more control within the game itself.

Again, these are suggestions for polish, the substance of the game is nonpereil.

[DakaSha]

With polish I mean *A lot* of things
Coding leaders is easy (depending on how the game is written anyways).
The actual game design/mechanics part is prob the biggest issue. Strangely the series first (free) game Peoples Tactics had leaders.

Thats actually an important point. PT is free for anybody who wants to see what the games like. Just keep in mind that both ATG and ATww2 are muuuuuuuuch better.

The overall game design is super similar though

[SlickWilhelm]

That was a very helpful and well-balanced review, DakaSha.  [&o]

As a newcomer to the AT world, I bought the game based mostly on my positive experience with Vic's "Decisive Campaigns" game. 

I agree that not having options available in ATG that were available in AT(and vice-versa) sounds crazy on the surface....but this may only affect old owners of the original. Since I never played AT, I probably won't know what I'm missing.

I've only played through the tutorials so far, and I'm looking forward to diving in much deeper soon. It sounds like there's a lot of game awaiting me. I enjoy both sandbox games and historical games, so I'm interested in seeing what the modders do with this title.

I'll come back and note how my perception of the game is after I get a few games under my belt.

[Strategiusz]

wrong topic, sorry, delete me

[roth]

For the most part, I prefer to play historically-based games.  That said, one of the appeals of ATG to me is the versatility of the non-historical -- including random and weird (SciFI?) scenarios.  Some of the AARs that involved such scenarios were the main reasons I bought ATWW2.

Based on what I'm reading on this forum about ATG, my inclination is not to purchase it, even though I would get the discount as an owner of ATWW2.  It sounds like it has many improvements over the earlier version, but it also appears to lack a lot of features that may make the game extraordinary.  I suspect that there will be yet another version which I may do well to hold out for, or a major set of mods or revisions that incorporate these features.  These may make the purchase of ATG more appealing down the road. 

I want to support Matrix and its game developers -- and, believe me, I've done so -- but at some point (with so many unplayed Matrix games still stacked up in the queue) -- I'm inclined to wait a while to see what happens with ATG. 

I loved the old Empire and it's later improvements (Deluxe, EDEE, etc.), so I expect that I would love ATG for its more nuanced or sophisticated improvements on the Empire games and ATG's predecessors.  On the other hand, I'm getting weary of purchasing what many seem to see as intermediate (though perhaps excellent intermediate) games.  In ATG's case, I regret that a decision like this falls on Vic, for whom I have great respect.  But I've had an apple or two out of this barrel with things like Gary Grigsby's WWII games, the Crowns of Glory, and the Wars in the Pacific.  At some point, a purchaser -- however willing he may be to support Matrix's efforts -- is entitled to draw the line and wait for next year's version.

I'd be happy to be persuaded to change my mind, so anyone who feels strongly enough to do so, persuade away.  It probably won't take much to make me cave.  For now, though, I'm likely to save my money for other games, like Time of Fury -- which I gather (and am hoping) may be a more or less finished version of what its two predecessors  intended to be.

Welcome any comments.

[lancer]

G'day,

I'm another person who bought ATG primarily for the single player random games who also found the removal of previous random set-up features frustrating.

Big bonus points for the oil and raw resources system though.

However I've read comments from Vic (designer) elsewhere (The Wargamer?) where he talked about the AI. Mentioned that the AI - as built - performs a lot better with particular map configurations and options.

From what I understand the random game set-up has been tweaked primarily to optimise the AI's ability to perform.

Makes sense and I'm willing to live with a few trade-offs if it means a more effective AI. Given this I've revised my initial opinion and would give a big thumbs up to the ATG implementation of random games.

Kind of hoped that leaders would have made the cut though.

Cheers,
Lancer