FPCRS x Armored Brigade

[DeletedUser1676996457]

Sorry if this has been already asked before or if this is not the right forum for that. I would just like to have an opinion from Red Storm players.

I just love Red Storm game mechanics. Not only the asynchronimous wego aspect, but as well as how the battle unfolds one event at a time, in sequence, with the respective firing lines so to speak showing up during the battle. Easy for me to follow all the events in a war. Thats one of the reasons a cant play real time games. Get lost really fast, . There is also no need to micromanage each unit. For example, move a particular tank unit behind some specific building at a specific spot...

I did watch several Armored Brigade videos but I still haven't made my mind if I should go for this one as well.It is Cold War gone hot, which is my favorite timeframe. I also find Red Storm maps much more easy to see elevations, rivers and the geography in general...at Armored Brigade units are also hard for me to grasp even with bigger units icons (my poor eyes). I know we can also pause the game, but the real time aspect is keeping me away...

I dont know, maybe I am just used to Red Storm too much...

For the ones here that also have Armored Brigade, do you guys feel the same? Whats your feelings about the difference in games mechanics and visuals?

Just wondering your thoughts and impressions about it. Thanks for any inputs you guys think are relevant.

Cheers,

[budd]

I like them both, but what you say about Armored Brigade is true. Seems like the basic fundamentals of the game might get in the way of your enjoyment.

My biggest gripe is reading elevation on the maps. The last update improved the shadows, so that helps. The iso and height maps help a lot but reading elevation at a glance is challenging.

I'm not much of a real time player myself, but i can manage Armored Brigade just fine. You can set the game to play in rounds of 30, 60, 90, 180, 360 seconds, so thats kind of a wego mechanic. You can give orders during the rounds but can't pause. There is also an orders delay, so keeping your HQ in range is important. I usually give orders to platoons and sections, and avoid giving orders to single units whenever possible. One feature i use a lot is delayed waypoints, you set waypoints to activate later but pay the command delay upfront.

I have the whole Armored Brigade package and there is just a crap load of content. Single scenarios, campaigns, generated scenarios/campaigns. A lot of options for setting up battles.

I don't know if your a Steam customer, but you could buy it on Steam, play for up 2 hours[make sure its under] and refund if its not your thing.

The game doesn't feel like one of those clickfest RTS games to me, i really enjoy it.

[DeletedUser1676996457]

Interesting. Thanks budd for your kindly inputs.

[CapnDarwin]

I go with similar time and place, but both games look at different levels. AB is a tactical real time with some WEGO mechanics and RS is grand tactical scale and uses the asynchronous WEGO turns. AB places you both in command of the force and also in charge of each platform and squad. That lower level interaction is both fun to utilize, but can get frantic at times as you need to be on top of all of your units as the fight goes. Pausing or short time chunks helps to alleviate the load at times. RS is more about the planning as your units do the fighting. Once you issue orders your forces will do their best to follow what you want.

Both are good games. They just look at different levels and place you as the player in different roles. [8D]

[Searry]

AB does not have multiplayer so I cannot even give an opinion. They really made a mistake there.

[DeletedUser1676996457]

Capn and Searry...thanks for your inputs! Very helpful!

[Laits]

The main difference is the scale. AB deals with small units (mainly company ans regiment size), FCRS focus on larger units. It makes the tactic very different.
In AB the WEGO system is like in a turn based game. I think it allows you to manage a lot of unit. It's like combat mission.
An another important difference is the multiplayer. AB doesn't have the possibility to play with an other human. It's a real weakness. However the game is highly moddable.

[Phoenix100]

I have both and have been waiting and waiting and waiting for SS. AB can be fun if you keep the unit count very low, otherwise it's just a kind of out of control shoot 'em up, I think, with the added bonus of virtually unreadable LOS situations because elevation is extremely unclear at the detailed level you need, unless you really take the time to scout every inch of relevant map space with the los tool, in which case you're going to have to use the pause button a lot, I mean a lot. As a kind of fast-paced shoot 'em up is certainly the careless way it looks to be played in most of the youtube videos promoting it, imho. I don't understand the map concept in AB, nor do I understand how we 'read' what is meant to be going on. FCRS is really simple to understand - it's a map. You plan your actions as commander on a map. It's not a 'picture' of the real world. The fighting between units 'represents', as it were, reports you might get updating the map. In AB you get instead this chunky grid-bound map with stylised houses and angular roads and angular natural features which nevertheless poses as a kind of satellite image of the real world, when it's clearly not. It's a very confused concept, I think. I have difficulty seeing it as a top-down representation of the real world. I'd prefer a simple map. There is a 'map' option instead, I should say, but everything is even less clear on that, it's so basic in terms of features (for a sim that deals with individual vehicles and units). Plus, as I said, how to read the action? Units start shooting at each other and you see graphics suggesting many, many rounds being fired, but with mostly no damage for long periods, as if something tactical were going on to prevent hits, but the unit graphics (little animated models) just stay still. So I'm not sure what's going on when five 50 cals pour fire into a thin-skinned APC and nothing happens for minutes on end. Am I meant to think it's moving to avoid hits, or hiding hull down? If this was just counters, as in FCRS, then I imagine all sorts of tactical detailed things are going on and the fire graphics simply 'represent' engagements which are much more detailed at a level I don't need to see. So, AB confuses me. That's my late-to-this-query somewhat disappointed opinion, fwiw.

[DannyJim_slith]

I agree. I have a real problem reading the maps in AB.

I want to play more but the experience is so frustrating

[altipueri]

I have both but only play occasionally.

I only play against the AI so lack of multiplayer doesn't worry me.

The almost infinite generation of new scenarios is what I like about Armored Brigade.

I've lost count of the number of pixel troops I've lost with recon by death.(Both games).


Incidentally, I have tried varying some of the Flashpoint scenarios by changing the location and point value of victory points so that I can lead troops up a garden path.

[Darren_H_slith]

I agree very much in the sentiment of Phoenix100. I really have some fantastic moments playing Armored Brigade, but it often feels very frantic and messy and I feel like a lot of times I'm missing out on some of the best moments to watch on the map happening somewhere other than where I have my attention. You learn to use pause a lot, and click on the messages as they appear to then let you track and see what's happening. That's when AB really gives fantastic "wow" moments.

Both games do have some very cool similar features with realistic weather, the inability to have instantaneous orders carried out, the nightmarish difficulty of getting combined arms to work together. When you do get artillery, air support and your orders set up correctly for firing ranges and rules of engagement - both games really shine.

I absolutely love Flashpoint Campaigns. The genius of it's basic design is, is that it's able to convey this slow creeping dread with sound effects and messages so well. I think the UI on FPCRS is a little more streamlined without the need to hunt too much for information.

In a dream world, where coding didn't take thousands of hours for people smarter than me to do... I would love the top down zoomed in look of AB in a window, watch the shots go out, and then see another window pop up with the result of the combat. Seeing rounds fall short or miss would be very cool, and would allow the game to be a bit more accessible on streaming or tutorial videos.

I really have learned to enjoy both, but I do find myself sucked in to Flashpoint for absolutely hours at a time.

I WILL be getting the new version day one.