impressions anyone?

impressions anyone? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Valor & Victory

Message

wodin -> impressions anyone? (6/18/2021 10:48:43 AM)
ANyone willing to share their first impressions?

ClaudeJ -> RE: impressions anyone? (6/18/2021 11:07:59 AM)
Hey Wodin, here's the translation of my opinion, as posted on Steam : quote: Valor & Victory gives me the feeling of a tabletop wargame on PC! The AI is convincing and the dice rolls make each game unique, with its share of joy and frustration unique to the genre. Inspired by ASL's mechanics, V&V has a solid foundation and offers a fluid gameplay. The French version is decent, the interface and the in-game help make it easy to understand, I quickly found a clear answer to the questions I had. For me, it is the most accomplished game of the year in this category and price range. I feel like the down votes I saw are based on flawed assumptions. It seems to me that there are many frustrated desires that are not in synch with what the game is described to offer. Also, I mention the price tag because that segment is filled with far less polished games. In terms of ambiance and UI, what V&V offers at this stage honestly have to be acknowledged.

ClaudeJ -> RE: impressions anyone? (6/18/2021 11:17:05 AM)
Double post. Say hi to my ISP ;)

eddieballgame -> RE: impressions anyone? (6/18/2021 4:25:17 PM)
Just getting into this & I like what I see. Hoping for a little/a lot more on the creating scenario side, (map creation & unit editing, atm) Of course, I get that the developer is looking at dlcs for further income, which is perfectly fine. I plan to support this game as much as I can.

JonJonJon -> RE: impressions anyone? (6/18/2021 5:25:09 PM)
It's good. And hard to win, which is what I like. AI performance is a pleasant surprise, bar the occasional anomaly.

overkill01 -> RE: impressions anyone? (6/18/2021 6:31:16 PM)
Imo this is a very good implementation of a boardgame to PC. I haven't played the boardgame, but I have played boardgames like lock'nload and conflict of heroes. It is not the most complex game out there but it doesn't have to be, i'd say it's quite similar to lnl. It's got good looking maps, clean interface and gameplay is smooth, so far I find the AI quite good. If you like tactical warboardgames, I think this is a nobrainer. But if you don't like dicerolls, stay away.

jwarrenw13 -> RE: impressions anyone? (6/18/2021 6:48:13 PM)
I was a beta tester, and from the start it gave me that original Squad Leader board game feel, more than any other computer game I've played, and I've played a lot, really since the beginning, since Pong. It is not overly complex, but the basics of fire and maneuver apply to the game, just like SL. The scenarios are small compared to many games, and they are short. You can play from either side and the AI does a good job. Depending on how fast you play, 30-60 minutes for a scenario would be my guess. There was great improvement in the AI during the beta period. Yobowargames was very responsive during beta testing and worked extremely hard on honing the AI. As with all such games, the AI plays better on defense, but it now can give you a challenge on offense. The AI can now, for example take Pegagus Bridge as the British in that scenario, something it could not do when I became a tester. If you want the elegant Squad Leader feeling without layers of complexity, you will like this game. Edit. To address some criticisms: 1. Lack of a zoom. I've lobbied for the full board zoom from the start, along with other testers. I think it is coming. 2. Music and sound effects. There are varied opinions on the music and game sound effects. I don't like them, but then I play nearly all games with the sound off anyway. 3. Undo button. In this game I think an undo button gives the player an unfair advantage. I became a more careful player after getting bitten by the lack of an undo button, but I think it serves a good purpose not having one. 4. Cheating AI dice. I've also noted a complaint that the AI gets better dice rolls. I've played dozens of games. It evens out. The AI does not cheat on the dice as far as I can tell. I've lost when I thought I should have won and won when I thought I should have lost. 5. Fixed starting positions. I have no problem with that. You as the leader find yourself with a mission and troops on the ground, sometimes in contact, sometimes not. You have your mission and a time limit. If on the defensive, your setup is probably already near optimum. If on the offensive, your "setup" is the time it takes you to move your troops to their jumping off point. I often take 1-2 turns when on the offense just to set up my attack.

DingBat -> RE: impressions anyone? (6/18/2021 8:19:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jwarrenw13 I was a beta tester, and from the start it gave me that original Squad Leader board game feel, more than any other computer game I've played, and I've played a lot, really since the beginning, since Pong. It is not overly complex, but the basics of fire and maneuver apply to the game, just like SL. The scenarios are small compared to many games, and they are short. You can play from either side and the AI does a good job. Depending on how fast you play, 30-60 minutes for a scenario would be my guess. There was great improvement in the AI during the beta period. Yobowargames was very responsive during beta testing and worked extremely hard on honing the AI. As with all such games, the AI plays better on defense, but it now can give you a challenge on offense. The AI can now, for example take Pegagus Bridge as the British in that scenario, something it could not do when I became a tester. If you want the elegant Squad Leader feeling without layers of complexity, you will like this game. Edit. To address some criticisms: 1. Lack of a zoom. I've lobbied for the full board zoom from the start, along with other testers. I think it is coming. 2. Music and sound effects. There are varied opinions on the music and game sound effects. I don't like them, but then I play nearly all games with the sound off anyway. 3. Undo button. In this game I think an undo button gives the player an unfair advantage. I became a more careful player after getting bitten by the lack of an undo button, but I think it serves a good purpose not having one. 4. Cheating AI dice. I've also noted a complaint that the AI gets better dice rolls. I've played dozens of games. It evens out. The AI does not cheat on the dice as far as I can tell. I've lost when I thought I should have won and won when I thought I should have lost. 5. Fixed starting positions. I have no problem with that. You as the leader find yourself with a mission and troops on the ground, sometimes in contact, sometimes not. You have your mission and a time limit. If on the defensive, your setup is probably already near optimum. If on the offensive, your "setup" is the time it takes you to move your troops to their jumping off point. I often take 1-2 turns when on the offense just to set up my attack. James was a fantastic help during playtesting. I think its safe to say that it would be extremely difficult for us NOT to have gotten the message wrt zoom. It's coming, it's just a matter of when. Cheers, /bruce

midgard30 -> RE: impressions anyone? (6/18/2021 9:58:50 PM)
Only played few scenarios, but for me this is yet another half-baked port to PC game 1- No FoW 2- No sniper 3- No Mortar 4- No off-board artillery or air support 5- No indirect fire Except for the fog of war, all of this is included in the BG. Apparently sniper and mortar units do exist, but are not in any scenario's OOB. Maybe it's available for custom scenarios. Not sure if mortar uses indirect fire.

jwarrenw13 -> RE: impressions anyone? (6/18/2021 10:06:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: midgard30 Only played few scenarios, but for me this is yet another half-baked port to PC game 1- No FoW 2- No sniper 3- No Mortar 4- No off-board artillery or air support 5- No indirect fire Except for the fog of war, all of this is included in the BG. Apparently sniper and mortar units do exist, but are not in any scenario's OOB. Maybe it's available for custom scenarios. Not sure if mortar uses indirect fire. I think it is a well done port to PC game for an initial offering from a very small studio. As it is, it plays very well with a generally good AI, better than a lot of games. And I found most of the scenarios, and I've played them all, well balanced. But you raise some good points. To discuss each one: 1. I am not concerned about FOW at this point. Once I started playing, I found that I didn't need FOW for the game to be interesting, challenging, and exciting. That is, I enjoyed the hell out of playing wihout FOW, which I initially thought I would miss. And I think the scenarios at present are well balanced w/o FOW. 2. I see no problem in mot having snipers. 3-5. The game should eventually included mortars and indirect fire, which would include air support.

DingBat -> RE: impressions anyone? (6/18/2021 10:32:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: midgard30 Only played few scenarios, but for me this is yet another half-baked port to PC game 1- No FoW 2- No sniper 3- No Mortar 4- No off-board artillery or air support 5- No indirect fire Except for the fog of war, all of this is included in the BG. Apparently sniper and mortar units do exist, but are not in any scenario's OOB. Maybe it's available for custom scenarios. Not sure if mortar uses indirect fire. As you noted, with the exception of fog of war, these are all features in the board game and they will be added to the computer version. What we really wanted at this point was feedback. We decided to release a game that presented a complete experience for the Normandy scenarios, adjust based on player feedback, and add the remaining features. Snipers, and artillery/air support will be added. We're still discussing fog of war.

dox44 -> RE: impressions anyone? (6/18/2021 11:34:25 PM)
well done. only played 4 scenarios. like it a lot. no issues at all. very easy to use. i have experience with the board game.

Big Ivan -> RE: impressions anyone? (6/19/2021 2:29:10 AM)
Once I got the game running the first thing I looked at is the interfaces, very nicely done! Then the graphics, excellent there too! Game play, takes getting use too since I never played the board game. Finally the game as a whole, very good! The interfaces, music, scenarios, editor and the manual all are good! Thanks you development team, testers and Matrix![;)]

darkmul -> RE: impressions anyone? (6/19/2021 3:21:53 AM)
The game mechanics and flow are very good. Wish List: Full Map making is very important for the replayability and longevity of the game. Even placable set maps in configurations would be good e.g. Squad leader boards. Fog of War would be great as it would help the AI, at this time the player always has the advantage in maneuver. Extra equipment would be nice but this is a good start. All tactical games like this are going to be compared with Squad Leader as it was the first game Like all RPG are judged to D&D. Great game lots of fun and great price.

z1812 -> RE: impressions anyone? (6/19/2021 2:51:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: midgard30 Only played few scenarios, but for me this is yet another half-baked port to PC game 1- No FoW 2- No sniper 3- No Mortar 4- No off-board artillery or air support 5- No indirect fire Except for the fog of war, all of this is included in the BG. Apparently sniper and mortar units do exist, but are not in any scenario's OOB. Maybe it's available for custom scenarios. Not sure if mortar uses indirect fire. From the store page. "Valor & Victory is a complete WWII wargaming system, covering infantry and armored combat, close assaults, armored overruns, fortifications, and much more." If you advertise the above, but do not have the items available as Midgard30m lists, then it cannot be called a "complete wargame system". However I bought the game and think it has great potential, but I am disappointed that so many essential features were left out upon release. I will wait for the release of the additional features to continue playing the game. I don't think there was any intention to mislead potential buyers. However the Marketing people could have provided a better explanation of what was available in the initial game. Explaining that additional features, would follow in updates.

z1812 -> RE: impressions anyone? (6/19/2021 2:54:34 PM)
Re Fog of War. This is a very important element. It cannot be considered a complete wargaming system without it.

eddieballgame -> RE: impressions anyone? (6/19/2021 2:56:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: z1812 "Valor & Victory is a complete WWII wargaming system, covering infantry and armored combat, close assaults, armored overruns, fortifications, and much more." If you advertise the above, but do not have the items available as Midgard30m lists, then it cannot be called a "complete wargame system". However I bought the game and think it has great potential, but I am disappointed that so many essential features were left out upon release. I will wait for the release of the additional features to continue playing the game. I don't think there was any intention to mislead potential buyers. However the Marketing people could have provided a better explanation of what was available in the initial game. Explaining that additional features, would follow in updates. Completely agree 'z1812' here is what I posted on Steam per feedback & suggestions. In this age of pc games being released on a daily basis & many appealing to specific genres it is important/imperative to 'hit the the ground running'. As they say, you only get one chance to make a first impression & in the pc gaming world...that is critical for sales. AND...the competition is fierce. Valor & Victory offers so much potential to be a classic & I am hoping the devs continue to improve this one. When I read that; "An extremely intuitive built-in scenario editor allows you to build and play your own scenarios either against the AI or against your friends." & "The scenario editor gives you ALL the tools to create custom, unlimited different challenges." I was quite pleased to say the least. When I discovered this game lacked a map editor & a unit editor I was very disappointed. Things you can do in any board game of this genre. These 2 features, alone, are a must to justify the above quotes. imho. As a consumer, these are the 'little things' I look for in a pc game that I am willing to spend my money on. I get that the price is more than generous for this product & it is a new release, but features that I find a necessity for these types of pc games double/triple the value of which I would gladly pay. Anyways, sorry for the long...rant & here is hoping for a bright future per more features &, of course, sales.

DaShox -> RE: impressions anyone? (6/19/2021 5:44:42 PM)
Among the thing everybody has pointed out, it need variable setup where each side can make decision of how they want to start the game. Along with FOW will allow replayability. I have played through 2 scenario and the maps seem very small. Maybe I have just lucky enough to choose the two smallest maps, but doesn't allow you to make many strategic decisions.

dox44 -> RE: impressions anyone? (6/19/2021 6:26:29 PM)
here you go play this until the full game gets online http://www.vassalengine.org/wiki/Module:Valor_and_Victory

MrsWargamer -> RE: impressions anyone? (6/19/2021 6:40:05 PM)
Everyone has something they want. I thought WitE2 was an incredible waste of 100 bucks for an overdone, excessively detailed, magnificent way to be confined to a game for months. But some like it. And some clearly don't. I wouldn't be playing it if you gave it to me for free. I haven't gotten around to playing the other ones yet. Maybe someday. But I'm 59. I'm likely going to run out of 'next days' sooner. I have been having a blast playing Valor and Victory. I'm amused I'm actually playing a game I bought. I frequently buy a game, then don't get around to playing it. Anyone want to buy my Gary collection? I have War in the East, War in the West and DLCs. I also have World in Flames plus the hard covers. Awesome creations. Just not a wise purchase for me. I have found Valor and Victory is so incredibly playable. The disdain for the lack of a map editor is nonsense. I don't expect it to matter. I'm sure the clever among us will generate plenty of creations from what exists. Maybe it will be added later. It's going to take me months to wear out what I have right now. And I'm sure more DLC will show up before I'm done. There isn't a gazillion types of units, so what, I never touched 95% of my ASL counter mix. No hills, I haven't noticed a need for them. The maps are not so vast. It's ok. The force pools are not so numerous. It's ok. The interface is twice as intuitive as anything it is competing with. There's almost no learning curve. I have Lock and Load Tactical Digital. I like it. Good game. Buy both and stop picking one over the other. If you have not played the board game versions of both games mentioned, you'll take longer figuring out how to play LvL Tactical Digital. I'm still trying to master it. I still think Tigers on the Hunt is closer to ASL than anything currently on sale. But Valor and Victory is faster to play, and as much fun. I intend to enjoy both though. It's not like you can only pick one game. Those pouting about a missing feature, are kinda odd when mentioning the price. The game is only 20 bucks. I was prepared for 40. I'd have paid 40. This game is a steal at 20 bucks. When I figure out how to get myself into multiplayer, I'll be out there waiting :) Just like I was with Battle Academy :)

Auggie_ssl -> RE: impressions anyone? (6/19/2021 7:34:29 PM)
I'm liking the game. The scenarios are quick to play and the rules are easy to understand. With the way dice rolls are you can have a lot of different outcomes.

eddieballgame -> RE: impressions anyone? (6/19/2021 8:01:14 PM)
@MrsWargamer; I concur on how playable this game is. I will add, the Scenario Creation system is also super easy. In short...I like it a lot. I do take umbrage with your...opinion that it is nonsense to suggest that a true map editor would be a good thing. I, also concur that the price is right for what we are getting now. To put it in the price range of Panzer Corps II, for example, seems a huge stretch to me...imho. I would, however, gladly pay double/triple if it offered similar features per creation/modding as does PzC II.

rickier65 -> RE: impressions anyone? (6/19/2021 9:19:59 PM)
Sorry, a little late with this, but I've been out of town. I was one of beta testers for Valor and Victory and found it enjoyable to play. I never played the board game, though I did play Squad Leader quiet a few years back. But Valor and Victory is very easy to pick up, play is quick with fairly quick games. I'm looking forward to future modules. Thanks Rick

rickier65 -> RE: impressions anyone? (6/19/2021 9:23:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: z1812 Re Fog of War. This is a very important element. It cannot be considered a complete wargaming system without it. Initially this concerned me as well, but I found it not an issue when I actually was playing the game. Rick

jwarrenw13 -> RE: impressions anyone? (6/19/2021 9:27:20 PM)
Regarding the map editor, I have absolutely zero nil none zilch null problem with a comprehensive map editor. But I'm wondering, seriously, what % of those buying the game will ever try to design a scenario. I've played tons of games. For decades. And have never done it. I've enjoyed games that have random battle generators or even random world generators like Civ or Shadow Empire. But I've never designed a map and scenario from scratch. So is this just a very very niche thing, or is it really important for game sales? I am asking. Is it 1% of players, but players who happen to be very vocal, or is it 20-30%. I have no idea. Maybe Matrix does. I'm not criticizing anyone here. The discussion just got me to wondering about that question.

MrsWargamer -> RE: impressions anyone? (6/20/2021 12:29:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: eddieballgame @MrsWargamer; I concur on how playable this game is. I will add, the Scenario Creation system is also super easy. In short...I like it a lot. I do take umbrage with your...opinion that it is nonsense to suggest that a true map editor would be a good thing. I, also concur that the price is right for what we are getting now. To put it in the price range of Panzer Corps II, for example, seems a huge stretch to me...imho. I would, however, gladly pay double/triple if it offered similar features per creation/modding as does PzC II. You misunderstand me. I think a full on everything editor would be nice. I meant it was nonsense to get in a snit over it not being present. I'm sure the game will evolve nicely and quickly.

thewood1 -> RE: impressions anyone? (6/20/2021 1:26:35 PM)
I don't think anyone is in a snit. Someone asked for their impression and they gave it. I have both V&L and L&L. Both are very good attempts at bringing a boardgame to digital. I really don't care about a map maker if there are enough maps. I'll throw a short comparison with opinions in the mix. L&L - Very inexpensive entry point of $5 for the base game and four scenarios. For another $20, you get a Normandy pack with 12 scenarios and a full scenario editor and battle generator. The battle generator is a great feature if you want to just throw a quick scenario together. I've had a lot of fun with it. But it also have a very feature-rich full editor. I have had the most fun with that. But you only have access to the maps in the modules you have purchased. The first battle pack coms with 10 maps and they can be arranged in multiple formats to create larger full maps. You can also alter the objects and terrain on the map. You can change tree types, ground types, etc. The biggest feature of L&L is that there are currently 12 dlcs covering all WW2, plus modern and cold war. All their maps and units are usable in the editor and generator in various combinations. That's kind of cool. L&L has several levels of FoW that are selectable by the player. There are now 100s of units, including a number of infantry types, support weapons, and AVFs. V&V - Having only just arrived, its content is understandably a lot less than L&L. Pricing for a "full" game is reasonable at $20. It seems a little simpler to play. Its first load of content is quite a bit more that L&L's first DLC with counter mix and 18 maps. V&V has no FoW or artillery from what I can see. Its pretty basic. Like the very first squad leader module. I played for a bit and went right back to L&L. The FoW thing is a killer in a game played on a computer. Even SL has concealment counters. Maybe as V&V adds content I'll be willing to play it more. Its game play right now is seems simpler than L&L, but that might change as they add more features that bring it more in line with L&L. But, in the short -term, I will favor L&L a lot more heavily because of continued excellent support, extensive content, battle generator, great documentation, and mostly, its FoW options.

rico21 -> RE: impressions anyone? (6/20/2021 3:28:37 PM)
I had the chance to be an alphatester on the game, to see the complexity of the development of a game so that it becomes playable, I noted my first impressions, here they are ... 1-I started by opening all the game files I could with notepad + and paintnet. The game will be easily modifiable. 2-I opened the game and went straight to the manual to find out more. 3-I opened the editor to make a first scenario. 4-I started to play but unfortunately the game makes desktop returns at each phase and I had to stop. 5-I send you screenshots. -I liked the graphics of the game, the possibility of dividing the teams into two. -I did not like the lane of fire in its current definition. For me, Valor and Victory is a game that respects the current standards of the genre but to rise above the others, it will have to add more such as the ability to name the units, essential units like the M10 and the MG42 , rare units like the Goliath, mountain or navy units, rare defenses like booby traps and ditchs. In short, as a passionate player, I want to be surprised! I have a little more perspective on the game to understand that this game cannot be conceived as the holy grail of tactical games which would include everything that a tactical wargamer wants. I understand and accept it but many future players will not understand it and will claim impossible features such as multi-story buildings, hidden units ... The only solution, IMHO, is to communicate from the start that this game is an adaptation of the Valor & Victory boardgame, nothing more. The game manual serving as a reference for adapting the game. Future mods will partially meet player expectations. Which will save precious time for the deployment of future DLCs. Did I understand everything?

midgard30 -> RE: impressions anyone? (6/20/2021 6:09:30 PM)
quote: or me, Valor and Victory is a game that respects the current standards of the genre but to rise above the others, it will have to add more such as the ability to name the units, essential units like the M10 and the MG42 , rare units like the Goliath, mountain or navy units, rare defenses like booby traps and ditchs. In short, as a passionate player, I want to be surprised! To my understanding, the developers' intention is to be faithful to the boardgame system and philosophy. So additional features will probably be limited to current missing features of the boardgame (except maybe for FoW, as mentioned in a previous post). Of course, I'm not talking about scenarios, nations, maps, which can be infinite and numerous if they follow the path of LnLT. But I doubted that more advanced features or more detailed units will be implemented, which is perfectly fine, as many people are pleased by it. It's a bit too simplistic with too small scenarios for my own tastes, but V&V is an elegant system for a boardgame, and as mentioned by MrsWargamer there's almost no learning curve. It would be my choice for playing with friends. I realize that my preferences go for games that are developed for the PC (CO2, FP Campaign, SP) and not boardgame. So I'll wait patiently for Second Front, but will continue to play V&V once in while (considering that I already paid for it!) and check on how it will evolve.

thewood1 -> RE: impressions anyone? (6/20/2021 6:55:17 PM)
I'm kind of a hybrid. I like games based on proven systems and mechanics of a boardgame. But my expectation is that they will adapt themselves to PC-based features that can easily be incorporated. If you don't plan on using FoW, just make a VASSAL version. I'm sure the V&V system will evolve and grow. I'm interested in its simpler interface and playstyle that I'll keep watching it. btw, Second Front. I am waiting on that one. If anything looks like ASL on a PC, while taking advantage of the bookkeeping capabilities of a PC, its that one.

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.6103516