Very first impressions

[RobertCL]

Hello,

I have played three scenarios and I started yesterday evening:
a) 1st tutorial - German side (no choice)
b) Sealion 40 - British side
c) East Germany - German side

I have taken a look at the purchase menu of all nations.

My comments and suggestions after 3 hours:

Pros

1. Superb design especially for tanks, AT units and planes.
2. Great general tone/color for Soviet, German and British units. I expect Olive drab for US units.

To be improved

1. I expect to see other scenarios that those designed primarily for SSI (PG DOS). Couldn't you use some larger maps to simulate the whole Barbarrossa operation for instance (Northern, Center and Southern fronts together) ? Maybe there is a map size limitation.
2. No screen allowing the player to chose the game resolution (is it automatically fitted to the Windows resolution ?)
3. Su85 Soviet unit icon is a T34. You can do better.
4. Please correct the sound for jets (movement sound for Me262 for instance)
5. Unit stats are not easy to find (a left menu is not the best)
6. Some units are missing (Ju87G, German horse cavalry, German Kubelwagen for recon or Krad, some 1946 Luftwaffe icons like the flying wing, add the V1 and V2, add also Waffen SS infantry because they have better stats than others and existed historically wether people like that or not.)
7. I do not find the cheating codes, yes I want to use the Dora railgun
8. Add more transport units (including leased line equipment (trucks, halftracks) for Soviets at the end of the war but with extra cost of course)
9. Get a special Free French army look (Olive Drab for vehicles with French flag for instance)
10. Game is superb but I think too slow (and I have a very fast machine)
11. I don't like the background color: the Green of the ground makes me think too much about Pacific General. But this is a pure personal standpoint. I loved the simplicity of PGF in term of design.
12. The soldier icons should be larger
13. All planes should be presented properly (some aircrafts are presented in the purchase menu, other not at the right part of the screen)


My system:
Desktop Alienware AMD® Athlon™ X2 5800 3.0 GHz Dual Core 2 - 4GB DDR2 SDRAM - 2x250 SATA 3Gb/s 7200 RPM - 512 Mo Mo GDDR5 ATI® Radeon™ HD 4870 - 2x19" TFT LCD DELL E190S 1280*1024 - Win XP PRO FR SP3 - High-Definition 7.1 Performance Audio - Logitech Z 2300 2.1

Impressions after 30 seconds:
1. Superb presentation and unit icons

Impressions after 5 minutes:
1. Difficult to find buttons, especially the next turn button, see no intrest in "sleep"/skip a turn mode.
2. Cannot find a button or menu to chose myself the game resolution.

Impressions after 15 minutes:
1. I don't like the grass, makes me think about Pacific General
2. Game too slow: the computer thinks fast enough but combat actions are too slow (I do not use combat animatyions and I don't know where to find the button enabling them BTW)

Impressions after one hour (see above after 3 fours):
1. A great game but where are scenarios with Americans ?
2. Will terrain/map change in snow or desert combat ?
3. No "what if" scenarios I like so much / Just a "copy-paste" of PG DOS SSI scenarios ?
4. German flag is fine but a German historical flag would be the first thing modders will try top adapt if the rest of the game is fine.
5. Hard to understand the deployment rules, which button of the mouse must I use, right of left ? Ok it was right and in the absence of adjacent AI unit
6. A computer to computer mode is absent, one should be able to watch a full battle computer vs computer to discover the game (very 1st approach to study graphism and speed at ease without thinking about game tactics).

Robert

[lordzimoa]

Excellent feedback thanks!

Things like campaign menu, scenario menu, briefings, missing tutorial pop-ups, graphic effects, animations, main UI, MP UI, SFX, missing icons... and another big list are most of the time placeholder or unfinished art.

We add stuff every new Beta build, so you will notice the difference and get rid of all the temporarily art and media.

Just so you know there are still a lot of things missing like the total Western Campaign, missing SFX, the temp animations and effects slow the game down, but they are just placeholder, missing icons... over the course of the next weeks every build will get more and more final content. Keep reporting anything you see though...


Cheers,

Tim aka LZ

[uran21]

Hi Robert glad to see you here.

Icon for SU-85 is actually a bug. Thanks!
German cavalry should be in and Ju87G exists but it is not implemented yet, icon arrived recently. For other units only improvement that can be expected is LL equipment for Soviets and SS tanks.

Western scenarios are not in jet but number of scenarios is lower than in PG so you shouldn't expect surprises in operations chosen.
Nonetheless neither maps neither scenarios are copy-paste. All maps are made by geographical pad images, battlefields are somewhere different (Balaton, Bagration for example) and somewhere very similar (Low Countries, Norway). Similarity is because such approach was most economic (combination of desired size for map with area where most fightings happened) not copy paste. Also you can check ownership of cities in Early Moscow, Moscow and Moscow 43.
Barbarossa opening phase was my wish and big desire and making bigger branching on top of it but number of scenarios to be included made approach to follow AGC and later in 1942 AGS more economic and obvious decision.

[RobertCL]

Hi Uran 21,

By Copy-paste, I know of course that this is not that easy because game engine and graphism are brand new and completely different from the old PG DOS game.
I meant why using the same "looking-like" scenarios ?
Because they have already revealed to be good for players so that they can try to compare in a kind of "known world" ("déjà vu") ?
I would like to see maps and scenarios which could be brand new like the Demjansk or Tcherkassy Pocket in USSR.
Those scenarios existed so it is possible.

For Barbarrossa I meant using a very large map.
In the other PG project guys are even using a large European map where all battles can take place, I do not ask this but a very large map for Barbarossa would have added a great added-value.

BTW in Barabarossa scenario the Karl Gerat cannot move, you should have placed it in a railway instead of in the middle of a field on the grass incapable of even attacking the Soviet Pillbox...

Do you plan to add Japanese and US Marine Corps with also Australia ?
Imagine a what-if scenario where Rommel meets the Japs in India.

I would also like to see a scenario taking place in 1945 or 1946 where USSR and USA are fighting against each other.

Imagine also planned operations which never occur like the invasion of Malta in 1941.

Other idea: could we imagine that neutral countries like Switzerland have their own army as third country, then if human player (USA) or the computer (USSR) attacks Switzerland in Germany then Switzerland allies to Germany. Will you manage multiple AIs in other words ?


Now I come back to the game:

In East Germany scenario I saw my sole Tiger without ammo on a VH NOT being attacked during 6 turns!!!
I was surrounded by 10 Soviet units, it is not normal I was not attacked.

I really love the icons you use and in particular: British paratroopers (red berets), C47 Dakota - Skytrain, German tanks in General.

Other question: Do you plan to add camouflaged icons or will you prefer to keep the same color orientation per nation ? Both options can be defended.
You can have colorful aircraft icons or camouflaged tanks (in Summer in Normandy or in Winter).

Anyway for the moment the way AI works should be (and is probably) your top priority (PGF is still unfinished, let's finish this one properly then let's finish PGF).

Other question: am I allowed to install the game on another PC of mine ? I would like to install it on my M17X laptop far more powerful than my already powerful desktop. This way I could test the impact on "horsepower", the screen resolution (1920 *1200 on my lappy, 1280*1024 on my desktop) and the OS (XP PRO on my desktop, Win 7 PRO on my lappy).
I think it could be interesting for you to get the result of my comparisons.

This game puts me away from PeG for a while but it's also a good thing for me to test new things and when I was young I loved PG and I like very much PGF (I hope it will be polished too).

Think also to improve the e-file with units having a large range of fire (distance), especially Jets using missiles like Me 262 (a wunderwaffen end of 1945) or 88mm AT gun (already at a range of 2 if I remember well).

As I already said, let's also see the impact of weather on maps: snow, mud, ...

Think also about the possibility or not to stack units.

Forgive me if all those ideas have already been developped by others, I have only time to playtest and to write down what I have in mind.

Next post will be more structured, I shall try a campaign.

[uran21]

Approach was to use big operations and with scenario limitation it left little freedom than to include what was already seen and what is classic from WW2 battles.
This is how I envisioned Eastern front at first: Moscow would not be enough for victory but you should capture Moscow + Leningrad or Moscow + Stalingrad in order to win. This could offer freedom to branch throughout whole Eastern front in series of real and hypothetical battles and it would also show Eastern front in more realistic scale (more involvement) compared to Western one.
Barbarossa would be one big scenario from which, depending on result you would go in different directions. All this felt in the water when limitation on scenarios was made. Of course that limitation was logical and rational decision with our resources and time on mind but I explain it here so you can understand our current path better.
Later issue with desired complexity and map size appeared which defined what we have now but those decisions didn't affect fact not big Barbarossa will be involved but it sure made clear that would never happen anyway.

Karl Gerat in Barbarossa scenario is actually without fuel and ammo to simulate its latter arrival. Just give it supply. That pillbox at Brest will be changed for Brest Fortress (at least in statistics not in visual appearance) with better values so it can have valuable opponent. Not all things are on its place for now.

Japs and Pacific Theatre is possibility but nothing official jet.
Australia will have its representative in form of infantry which is still missing in Greece scenario as well as New Zealand.

I do not think that multiple AIs will be included in near future.

What you see in icon colouring is what we will have for now with addition of special camouflage for SS.

We are aware of flows in AI section, especially in offensive. Every recommendation how to improve it is very much welcome.

On you question about installation I hope someone more competent will give you right answers.

[lordzimoa]

You should have no problem installing on your laptop, just download and use the same serial number.

[RobertCL]

Thx for your explanations!

East Germany scenario:

1. I captured ALL VHs but I have the message "Allied Victory"--> so the victory conditions do not work;
2. During 10 turns the computer does not attack me! It attacks me only when I present it my units --> there is perhaps a spotting feature not working.

Barbarossa:

1. I repeat: A railgun not on a railway is a nonsense! The player cannot do anything with this unit. At least in Stalingrad scenario you have one for Sebastopol.

M17X Alienware (2nd computer):

1. On a very powerful computer the game is still strangely "slow".

Marketing

1. OK for using old SSI scenarios slightly modified I understand, but in the final version I think players will like to see something new (extra scenarios).

[Kerensky]

1. On a very powerful computer the game is still strangely "slow

My guess for this is the current pace of combat, IE playing sounds, then playing explosion graphic. The devs have stated in several threads this was done as a temporary measure to help promote the game, and that they intend to re-work and improve visuals, audios, and pacing of combat animation.

Or were you talking about sound and video stuttering and clipping?

[lordzimoa]

The slow down is caused because of the placeholder animations and effects as they are not synchronized, first the attacker and defender are highlighted, the sfx is played, after that the explosion, than counter attack.... all totally annoying , slow and impracticable... so we know about it and it will be much better once we have all the new effects tested and ingame.

So please endure it as long as possible....

[Razz1]

This reminds me of a question...

How much multi threading are you doing?

Since all the PCU's are multi core now a days.

[Rudankort]

This reminds me of a question...

How much multi threading are you doing?

Since all the PCU's are multi core now a days.

There is not much you can multithread in this game. AI works in its own thread, but other than that it is one main thread. You don't need several threads for UI, and game logic is calculated very quickly, so no need for any additional multithreading...

[Rudankort]

Hi Robert!

Took me some time to get to your thread. Thanks for your comments, Kresimir has already answered to some of them, here are a few more answers.

Cheat codes of PzC are described here:
viewtopic.php?t=21909
I'm sure many of them will look familiar to you.

Ground graphics changes according to situation (dry, muddy, frozen). A quick way to see this is my using ground cheat. Muddy and frozen tilesets are not 100% finished, but should give you an idea.

That Karl Gerat is Barbarossa is not a rail gun, it is a self-propelled unit. This is the reason why it is not placed on a railroad. All you need to do to make it moving is resupply it. Rail gun in the game is Gustav.

Nice idea for a USSR vs. USA+Britain scenario! Might be a great scen for multiplayer too. We should consider adding this. Malta would also be nice btw, but I doubt we can make it within the existing time constraints. Maybe in a patch.

Strange that your tiger with no ammo was not attacked. Perhaps it is because the combat prediction yielded zero damage, so the AI did not see a point. This is something we can tweak. You always have a small chance to do damage, even if enemy's defense is 1000, and so if it has no ammo, attacking such a unit should be a good idea.

Stacking of units is something we probably will not include.

[Razz1]

That's what I figured, but I have seen 3 if not 4 reports saying it runs slow on a high tech 4 core processors.

It's the same old debate.

Multi vs single vs dual core for games.

Since you have 4 cores at 1Ghtz and I have a dual at 2.2Ghtz I can run faster since no multi threading is taking advantage of 4 single cores.

Most complaints I have seen on other games is when players have 3Ghtz over 4 cores they are running at less power/speed.

But no debating or discussion here. Just wanted to confirm the answer.

[Rudankort]

But no debating or discussion here. Just wanted to confirm the answer.

In our case all this does not really matter, because with graphics as simple as in PzC it is no problem to optimize the game for better performance if the need arises. Right now I'm not sure if the reports about slow game are related to bad combat sequence (which is bad because it is implemented this way, not because PC does not have enough power) or other factors. I don't remember reports about bad performance before the last build, where the combat sequence was changed. So, let us see. If we need to make it faster - I'll make it faster.

[RobertCL]

Hello Rudankort,

Nice to see you found me!

I keep going on with my comments, forgive me if you feel I am too frank.

Scenario tested: Moscow 43 (Soviet side)

1. AD 88mm has a range of 3 whereas the same unit in AT role has a range of 0. 88mm in AT role should have a range of 2 (88mm as AT attacks from far, the Desert Fox will tell you!!! )

2. PLEASE use contrast, the game "hurts the eyes", after 15 min I feel tired (and I'm convinced I'm not alone):

a) Purchase menu: Your metallic grey as background in the menu is a good idea but with German units (or Soviet units, same issue) on it you cannot see the units properly. Turn your grey into a more light grey.
b) Game: your green grass prevents me from seeing units, please make this lighter.

This is a major drawback you have to correct.
Noone wants to become sick due to your game!

Why are PG, AG and PGF (even if unfinished) a success ?
Because the background is very light and all units are easily seen.
You MUST respect this rule otherwise your game will be far less interesting than the original games.

3. Units which fire should be highlighted, during combat mode when AI plays I cannot always see properly WHERE the combat takes place. This is a major drawback, it must be corrected.

4. KV2 icon is wrong, I am sure the KV2 had a bigger (in height) turret

5. SU means AT role whereas ISU means arty role, change the name of SU 122 into ISU 122 because this is an arty unit.

6. My Soviet recon unit attacks a German arty unit (adjacent hex) and the arty unit does not suffer any loss, is it really normal ?

7. OK if you have decided not to allow staking of units. Stacking infantry units only in cities would have been logical but I follow your ideas.

8. A German (AI) arty unit at 1 adjacent to one of my units resupplies at 4 AND attacks my unit during the same turn. How is it possible to ressuply and attack during the same turn ?

9. I see the game is less focused on arty than the original SSI games, it is done on purpose ? The nr of arty units in scenarios is quite low compared with other games.

10. A German arty unit fires at me (it has an entrenchment of 9) and after its attack it KEEPS its entrenchment value of 9. How is it possible ? Once you attack or move you lose at least a part of your entrenchment, no ?

11. From a marketing point of view using ONLY old SSI scenarios (even if units and VHs are placed somewhere else) is a mistake, players will immediately judge your lack of innovation. Here you are facing a serious risk.

12. Maybe I repeat this but this is important: in order to increase visibility of the icons, enlarge infantry icons.

13. I would like to see like in PGF the ability to set two AIs fighting against each other: Axis being AI and Soviet being AI for Moscow43 for instance. This is a nice way to discover graphics and if the game rules are respected or not. We have two humans or one human vs AI, we need 2 AIs versus each other.

You have just my standpoint.

Despite your great icons, for the moment I prefer PGF, at least I can play an entire scenario without physical problems.
Please correct this ASAP (even a new beta version for testers is recommended).
BTW I would really like to see your US icons.

Robert

[Razz1]

Robert has you read any other threads yet?

Most of this has been mentioned. It good you see the same thing.

1) Normal for all AD AT
4) I agree. Can't remember if they will fix it.
5) haven't checked this yet. Will need to check combat statistics. You are correct it is a heavy howitzer just like the KV-2.
The KV-2 hard attack is too strong.
6) You mean the Ba-64? that is a useless piece. my trucks move farther that it. They have wheels too. The BA-64 is just a scout.
10) not as far as I know. Why would you loose entrenchment? You dug a semi-circle hole. You just pivot the gun and shoot.

[Kerensky]

I won't respond to all of your points because I don't have the answers for them all, but I can address a few of them.

#3. This comes up a lot, which is good because it tells the devs it's an important issue. It is being addressed and improved and should be ready for the next beta, I think.

#4. I mentioned this, apparently there was a mistake, the unit you see is actually a KV-5
viewtopic.php?t=22875

#5. The above link also addressed the issue of the SU line of units. They are going to be 'multi-purpose' weapons. What exactly that means and entails, we haven't yet seen.

It is actually experiment for "transformer" units. There is a button in UI which purpose is to transform particular unit to serve in a different role for that turn. So there will be no two different units but one unit with ability to serve in different roles. Such feature will be used for Soviet assault guns as well.

#6. A stat balancing issue, these are becoming more and more common, and I believe Razz1 has a thread or two for that kind of topic.
viewtopic.php?t=23645

#8. My only guess it that it wasn't the same unit, just the way movement currently works (teleportation) that a new unit actually took it's place. If you have screenshots of before and after, showing clearly it is the same unit(same name) then that's a problem for sure.

#11 This has come up a few times. For what it's worth I agree with you and have tried to argue the point, but the end conclusion is that they are making a campaign and scenarios to fit their needs(broad audience, multiplayer consideration, et cetera). On the plus side, there is a full editor being released with the game, so unlike the Original PG, players will be able to create exactly what they want to create instead of just wishing for it.

[RobertCL]

Hello,

Thx for your answers.

No I don't take time to read many other threads, I am focusing on playtesting.

I forgot to add you need to add the IS3 on the Soviet side for the Berlin scenario and post-war (vs USA) scenarios (scenario to be designed by players via the editor).

My main issue is still the lack of contrast, please adapt the background screen in the purchase menu and above all maps.

Will you deliver the game with an equipment editor ?
I shall put a range of 2 for 88mm gun in AT role.

Great some units will have a double usage feature in the GUI!!!
But having two different units was perhaps easier to implement, no ?

[RobertCL]

Hi,

I have downloaded the very last version of the game.
All in all this is better.

1. US and British icons are excellent, but why in Germany scenario they are faced to the East like the Soviets ? Was it th egame for original PG ? Maybe it was the case.

2. Combats are excellent! However the game remains sometimes too slow.

3. Still the lack of contrast (main screen of battlefield and purchase menu)

4. Missing French units in Purchase menu in 1945 (Berlin scenario)

5. Some units still without movement sound

6. Still piston engine movement sound for jets

[skarczew]

I forgot to add you need to add the IS3 on the Soviet side for the Berlin scenario and post-war (vs USA) scenarios (scenario to be designed by players via the editor).

IS3 was not used in combat during WWII.