List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Commander - Europe at War Gold



Message

Veldor -> List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (10/30/2007 2:25:52 AM)

Nothing, so far as I know now, because I haven't bought it yet.
.
But there are too many threads here to read and understand the status of for someone still considering purchase.
And In this case I especially haven't found any usefull AAR (Haven't even found one that contains screenshots). A link anyone?
No demo either.
So I'm left with little more than opinions and such.
.
So what I'd like to know, given this is no longer a brand new release, is what is still wrong with the game? And how likely is it whatever those things are they might still get fixed?
.
Did they ever address the complaints about repairing ships in port, or the transport movement speed?
.
What is wrong with this game still?
.
I will say that I find it to be a beautiful looking game graphically which lends me to believe the interface won't be nearly as archaic as some of them, which is something I'm quite fond of (A bad interface turns me off faster than any single other aspect of a game) - Something diffucult to gauge without a demo.

Thanks much.



Vypuero -> RE: List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (10/30/2007 2:36:22 AM)

The game is excellent - I would say nothing is wrong at all - just played a fantastic game where Axis took UK because the British were too committed to the Med - then Russia was still a bear - a few tweaks I would like, and always people including me want more features - but remember every new feature can add bugs, so for now - very stable runs well - no real bugs - no crash bugs - perfect!



Bossy573 -> RE: List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (10/30/2007 3:03:50 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Vypuero

just played a fantastic game where Axis took UK because the British were too committed to the Med



Was that PBEM?

The lack of any Allied commitment on the periphery (Africa, Italy, Mediterranean, Norway, etc. (against the AI) is the one great flaw in this game. The AI is very good in the main theater.

As to how likely that is to be fixed, you'll have to ask the developers about that.



YohanTM2 -> RE: List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (10/30/2007 5:45:35 AM)

Sheesh - what a homer <g>

quote:

ORIGINAL: Vypuero

The game is excellent - I would say nothing is wrong at all - just played a fantastic game where Axis took UK because the British were too committed to the Med - then Russia was still a bear - a few tweaks I would like, and always people including me want more features - but remember every new feature can add bugs, so for now - very stable runs well - no real bugs - no crash bugs - perfect!




Veldor -> RE: List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (10/30/2007 8:45:39 AM)

Why does this guy hate the interface so? Whats wrong with it?

http://wroteontheground.blogspot.com/search/label/Two%20stars



Tordenskiold -> RE: List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (10/30/2007 10:54:37 AM)

This game as it few shorcomings as you will find in any other game. If you like to play WW2 in Europe from a high level, in an easy and exiting way, this is the game you are looking for. The units are nicely illustrated, and the map and game it self is crisp an clear. The game is easy to play, hard to master. It is absolutely no reason to NOT buy it if you like WW2 games.



Spechtmeise -> RE: List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (10/30/2007 11:41:12 AM)

Veldor, I agree it is hard to gauge the value of a game without a demo. I am playing CEAW as well as SCWaW, and occasionally HoI Doomsday. On the whole I believe that CEAW is the most accessable game. The interface is great, don't know what the reviewer means. Gameplay is smooth. You just have to accept that is is abstracted and not really meant to reproduce WW II in detail. The AI does an OK job, PBEM is where CEAW really shines. Bottom line: I am glad I eventually bought CEAW as it is fun to play.



IainMcNeil -> RE: List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (10/30/2007 12:37:52 PM)

I understand people have likes and dislikes about CEAW's and that's fine, everyone is entitled to an opinion and you're never going to create a game that everyone likes. This kind of thing is very subjective.

The interface however is not subjective and CEAW has one of the best UI's in this type of game, if not the best. If this guy says otherwise it means he doesn't really know what he's talking about and is wrong! The only complaint he mentioned was that the text over the anchors was not very readable. He played in high spec with a low spec PC and complains the sound was choppy....sigh. This kind of statement really annoys me!

FYI Here is a screenshot from his game

[image]http://www.mikekreuzer.com/springform/sneak1.png[/image]

I guess this makes him an expert ;)



Vypuero -> RE: List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (10/30/2007 3:00:13 PM)

It was TCP/IP live game.  Best way to play - exceptionally challenging and it really brings out the best in the game.  Look, it has been a long time since I have been able to play any live internet games that were any good - strategic - games, let alone WW II.  I played this hours on end with no bugs, no crashes.  It occasionally can happen, but I am not convinced it is not just the occasional burp from my own ISP.  I have yet to see any other strategic games (not realtime - I hate realtime) that are this good in live play.



Erik Rutins -> RE: List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (10/30/2007 3:41:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Veldor
Why does this guy hate the interface so? Whats wrong with it?
http://wroteontheground.blogspot.com/search/label/Two%20stars


You'd have to ask Mike. [;)] I find the interface very easy personally, but Mike can be a bit idiosyncratic in his reviews (in my opinion). For example, he HATES Forge of Freedom, which is one of my favorite releases in the last year and one of the main problem he has with it is also the interface, which I find slightly challenging but far from bad. From my read of his review, he wanted the interface in CEAW to be more "slick" but I'm not sure what that really means. The whole game seems pretty "slick" to me.



kondor -> RE: List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (10/30/2007 3:51:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Vypuero

It was TCP/IP live game.


Can TCP/IP games be saved? Is there an autosave maybe (In case that game crashes)? And how long does one match lasts?



Vypuero -> RE: List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (10/30/2007 4:07:21 PM)

TCP/IP can be saved
it autosaves at the end of every turn
a match can take awhile :) maybe 8 to 10 hours?



Bossy573 -> RE: List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (11/1/2007 3:37:18 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Iain McNeil

He played in high spec with a low spec PC and complains the sound was choppy....sigh. This kind of statement really annoys me!



LOL, I turn the sound off. It is fine but who really needs it in this type of game?

Guys, CEAW is an outstanding game. HOWEVER, I was playing SC2-WAW last night and the AI in that game is much more active in Norway and Africa and it REALLY opens up the game. Is it possible some more work might be done to have the Allies take action in those 2 areas?



zhu_kov -> RE: List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (11/1/2007 1:17:16 PM)

Well if you want a deep micromanagement game and strictly historical , game that require you to read the whole 200++ pages of manual before you able to complete a turn then STOP reading . this is
not your type of game

But if you are looking for a " Panzer General with a lot of depth , retaining the same addictive , great gameplay , "easy to get into and hard to master " then dont wait any longer .... do yourself a favor and grab this game ...

What wrong with the game ? I think by the time you wait for everything to be fix , you have lost a great amount of the most enjoyable gaming session for you this year

The game now is very stable and maybe 1-2 small flaw but overall it is an excellent game

CEAW and together with Advance Tactics are going to be my GAME OF thE YEAR for 2007

[:D][:D]




Fred98 -> RE: List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (11/2/2007 3:20:00 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Veldor

Why does this guy hate the interface so? Whats wrong with it?

http://wroteontheground.blogspot.com/search/label/Two%20stars



Veldor, the interface excellent!

In the game you have an optin to use "Panzer General" counters or more traditional 2D counters. I use ther latter.

My only issue with the interface it is that in the purchase screen, the graphics resemble toy soldiers. I would prefer they look like wargaming counters.

As with all games, PBEM is the best type of play


-











Fred98 -> RE: List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (11/2/2007 3:23:28 AM)

Suggested enhancements:

Italy and Russia be able to move troops before they enter the war.

Subs be able to "hit and run".  But that deserves it's own thread.



jbunnelle -> RE: List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (11/6/2007 12:45:10 AM)

Air units should be able to stack over land units.  



darthsmaul -> RE: List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (11/8/2007 9:42:46 PM)

only thing I dont like is no replay in PBEM like SC2 just arrows and dots where battles are, you dont even get to see the geramsn attack many of the minors cuzs it over when you get the file

other than that I dont have any complaints other than I suck vs my one PBEM game so far :)

Steve



Rocko911 -> RE: List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (11/9/2007 4:12:09 AM)

Alright , let me settle this topic once and for all (LOL)[:D]. I have SC2 , SC2WAW, Grigsbys WAW and CEAW. I find them all good games and fun. They have similarities yet, nuances that make them different enough to keep both on your computer and play. I think both games are good choices because they have a good following, good support, and attempts to make them better games with patches. They are above beer and pretzel games (axis & Allies) but well below , pull your hair out (Uncommon Valor, war in the pacific) these are for the people who want the tedium and headaches(actual ones) that go with fighting a war. They are easier to understand and follow the strategy than Grigsbys WAW. I would use this test to decide to buy it or not:
1) Did you like Panzer General? Yes keep going to next question. No , stop and do not buy.
2) Do you like games that have that one more turn appeal? Yes, keep going to next question .  No , stop do not buy
3) Do you like resource management to be a big part of the game? Yes, stop and do not buy.  No, go to next question.
4) Do you like the ability to feel like you have a grasp of your war fronts?  Yes , go to next question. No, stop and do not buy.
5) Congrats you have made it and you will be happy, go click and buy this game CEAW!

  I hope that this does not offend anyones point of views, but I tried to make it simple. Any more questions and this game would be too simple for you! LOL [;)]



SMK-at-work -> RE: List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (11/9/2007 5:36:54 AM)

You forgot "do you like your game to be believable alternate history?"  Yes - stop - do not buy.  No/don't care - carry on.



Syagrius -> RE: List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (11/9/2007 7:04:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LRRP

Alright , let me settle this topic once and for all (LOL)[:D]. I have SC2 , SC2WAW, Grigsbys WAW and CEAW. I find them all good games and fun. They have similarities yet, nuances that make them different enough to keep both on your computer and play. I think both games are good choices because they have a good following, good support, and attempts to make them better games with patches. They are above beer and pretzel games (axis & Allies) but well below , pull your hair out (Uncommon Valor, war in the pacific) these are for the people who want the tedium and headaches(actual ones) that go with fighting a war. They are easier to understand and follow the strategy than Grigsbys WAW. I would use this test to decide to buy it or not:
1) Did you like Panzer General? Yes keep going to next question. No , stop and do not buy.
2) Do you like games that have that one more turn appeal? Yes, keep going to next question .  No , stop do not buy
3) Do you like resource management to be a big part of the game? Yes, stop and do not buy.  No, go to next question.
4) Do you like the ability to feel like you have a grasp of your war fronts?  Yes , go to next question. No, stop and do not buy.
5) Congrats you have made it and you will be happy, go click and buy this game CEAW!

  I hope that this does not offend anyones point of views, but I tried to make it simple. Any more questions and this game would be too simple for you! LOL [;)]

Good quiz! I agree 100% [:D]



Marc von Martial -> RE: List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (11/10/2007 2:32:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Iain McNeil

I understand people have likes and dislikes about CEAW's and that's fine, everyone is entitled to an opinion and you're never going to create a game that everyone likes. This kind of thing is very subjective.
....complains the sound was choppy....sigh. This kind of statement really annoys me!

FYI Here is a screenshot from his game

[image]http://www.mikekreuzer.com/springform/sneak1.png[/image]

I guess this makes him an expert ;)



Now that's what I call a "slick" and "polished" interface with all the "Bells and whistles"[:D]

Honestly, the CEAW interface is so easy and intuitive, we had people on the Spiel game convention in Essen (Germany) learning, playing and enjoying it in seconds. What else can you ask for???



Rocko911 -> RE: List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (11/10/2007 4:19:54 PM)

SMK, the question I have for all the people who complain about the War Games following history, why play if you cannot change it in some way? I mean you already know what is going to happen. I have always said games that focus on particular battles are the best for people like you. The variables are more controllable. Now do not infer my response as an attack on your point of view. I mean their could be scripts created that make certain things happen via the ww2 timeline, (pearl harbor but then people would complain about it being to restrictive). Perhaps their is a nitch of a wargame market out their for people to make one that follows general ww2 timelines and battle strategies of the opposing force and you can be scored how well in defeat or victory you do versus the actual participants.



Irish Guards -> RE: List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (11/10/2007 5:34:58 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LRRP

SMK, the question I have for all the people who complain about the War Games following history, why play if you cannot change it in some way? I mean you already know what is going to happen. I have always said games that focus on particular battles are the best for people like you. The variables are more controllable. Now do not infer my response as an attack on your point of view. I mean their could be scripts created that make certain things happen via the ww2 timeline, (pearl harbor but then people would complain about it being to restrictive). Perhaps their is a nitch of a wargame market out their for people to make one that follows general ww2 timelines and battle strategies of the opposing force and you can be scored how well in defeat or victory you do versus the actual participants.



Really .... Thats the load .... [:-]
If you think that there are no variables to alter the game way beyond what is actually historically possible in this game then you have nay played too many games ..

Even as far as Labs and builds go in this game I have seen and am seeing way more of this kind of play ....
All human vs human ....[X(]

Armor and Air labs to the max for germany ... This means King Tigers like crazy by 1942 .. 15/15 ... [&o]
Bmrs and Ftrs that knock anything out of the sky and then as a bonus the Axis receives control of the most important sea areas by default ...

A naval war that will never repeat even remotely WW2 .. because of lack of sub production by the Germans ... Allied naval builds .. besides Superdreadnought Cv's .. never .. All Allied early prod can then go to Air labs ..
By Barbarosa Uk has a huge Air fleet w labs galore ... And limited invasions when Russia is involved in the game in 1941 ..

Mid -East campaign .. why bother .. [8|] Now that UK gets 2 shiny corps in Iraq ..

And exactly what does it mean by you allready know whats going to happen ... [&:]

A simple solution to most of the problems related to these situations is ...
A force pool of units and labs you can actually produce and repair with availability the major issue ..
Not a great solution .. but .. It is difficult to introduce major changes effecting playability after the game has been produced and consideration has not been given to
Balance of Power ... [&o]
IDG



targul -> RE: List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (11/10/2007 11:52:53 PM)

Well, I know you all hate to hear me voice an opinion and I havent in awhile but I just feel the need so I shall. 

This is a good game but then I liked Chutes and Ladders when I was small.  I think this game has almost as much to do with WWII and Chutes and Ladders.  So it meets all the requirements of LRRP except for Panzer General.  So I suggest since you wish to ignore history in your WWII game just play Chutes and Ladders you will receive the same thrill.

Seriously though this game is not horrible as a game.  If you are new to WWII genre games I can highly recommend it.  If you are a history buff and wish to simulate WWII this game is not one which does that.  It will give you a nice feel of a war game and the game engine is strong.  Compared to the majority of what is available in War Games this is one of the best around.

Okay you can now all in unison complain that if I dont like the game I should go away and not comment.




Harvey Birdman -> RE: List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (11/11/2007 3:58:28 AM)

I agree that air&armour superiority for the axis works great. [:D] Then max out air&armour research, sell those labs and get half your money back for research in the other area's is great research problem optimization.

Simple solution: Max 2 labs ahead of the other research areas. So air&armour at 2 labs, the other areas at zero; before air&armour go from 2 to 3 labs, the other areas all have to be at 1; before air&armour go from 3 to 4 labs. the other areas all have to be at 2.

Rommel's pet peeve about this game: Tanks and motorized infantry corps have no operational tempo. Guderian's pet peeve about this game: Tanks and motorized infantry corps have no operational velocity and momentum. Von Manstein's pet peeve about this game: There's no long operational armoured thrusts in this game. [:D]

In human vs human play as axis do you ever manage to encircle or send armoured thrusts to the coast to cut russians off from supply&lower effectiveness during operation Barbarossa?

I find myself using tanks the way the french used tanks: as an infantry support weapon in attrition warfare. [:(]




Bossy573 -> RE: List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (11/11/2007 8:12:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: targul


Okay you can now all in unison complain that if I dont like the game I should go away and not comment.





I absolutely love CEAW but the AI in SC2-WAW absolutely blows away the AI in this game ESPECIALLY outside of the main theatre of operations.



SMK-at-work -> RE: List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (11/12/2007 1:36:14 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LRRP

SMK, the question I have for all the people who complain about the War Games following history, why play if you cannot change it in some way?


I never said anythign about following history.

It really annoysme when people bring that one up - it's old and tired, and a result of laziness by people who dont' want to read what I actually wrote.

I said the game doesn't provide believable ALTERNATE history.

All games provide alternate history. If a game is going to be a good simulation then, IMO, it's version of alternate history needs to be believable.

For example is there a scenario where Germany ever invades Spain, or spain joins het Axis? Pretty much only if Germany captures some serious oilfields first.....- all of spain's oil was imported, most of it from the USA...if Germany invaded Spain they'd have had to provide that much more oil...and they didn't have it!

so it's not out of the question for Spain to join WW2 on one side or the other...there are scenarios where it becomes possible.

Sweden joining? not impossible - the Brits had a plan for "helping" Finland vs the USSR that mainly involved occupying the Swedish iron mines!! Not sure what that would do to help finland, but it'd certainly put Sweden in the war!!

Or invading the UK.....anyone who's done any vaguely serious reading about Sealion understands why it would ahve been a disaster for the German war machine.......but games always make it nice and easy relative to what it was goign to be like in real life.

So there are actual scenarios that were contemplated in real life using real considerations.....most games don't bother with such real considerations tho.

but kingtigers "like crazy" in WW2? Never goign to happen unless you refor the entire German state starting about 1925 - they simply completely lacked the ability to mass produce heavy tanks - their heavy tank production was handled by the big industrial combines that made limited humbers of large engineering pieces.....in hte US and USSR and UK tanks were built by automotive firms and factories that were used to turning out 10's of thousands.....Germany's tank producers went into it producing a few hundred products as a large production run (eg cranes, locomotives, heavy guns).......such fundamental considerations are simply not covered in simplistic games like CEAW and SC2

there's nothing wrong with them as games with a military background, but they are not historical simulations IMO.



Veldor -> RE: List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (11/13/2007 4:20:44 AM)

Thanks for all the input guys. A few things..

1. To those that didn't like the game: Is that all you've got? I've never seen a less convincing argument for not purchasing a game. Make up something if you have to! :)
2. I'm a self-proclaimed interface design expert :) and what worried me about that review was that I initially got a VERY strong feeling the interface for this game was far above average for wargames just by the screenshots (Yes I thought it well apparant in this case from the screenshots). As its well known that any reviewer by definition is an expert in all things I was a bit shocked to read the exact opposite from what I was thinking. But I'm gonna go with my gut and ignore the reviewer... however this worries me because.
3. It seems all reviewers of matrix games either find every game a 5/8 or better or basically (Somewhat like this guy) like nearly none of them. So no demo, no useful reviews, no real AAR's in this case, might make it a bit tougher a choice. A few of us should really get together and start the ultimate fair review site (with a far more complex scoring system that ends up without every game ending up as a "Must Buy". Better for Matrix anyway as its not believable every game they make is great no matter how bad they wish that were true!
4. Thanks to whoever pointed out TCP/IP play. Missed it somehow and that makes it an instant buy for me. It's a nice change to be able to play some wargames that way.




SMK-at-work -> RE: List of Whats Wrong With This Game! (11/13/2007 5:10:09 AM)

For those of us who don't like the game it's enough [:'(]



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.5917969