The bad AI and the game being too easy are the only complaints I have seen.
These can both be fixed in patches.
Is there anything else wrong?
These can both be fixed in patches.
Is there anything else wrong?
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Well not really. Some of the abstractions (trade for example) take a while to get used to, though. I've been playing the game for a few days now, and starting to like it more and more. The AI was a rude shock, but it shows some potential even now.
IMHO the AI and difficulty are the only problems. Although they are huge. I mean, what's the point if you can kick the games arse every time.
This could be my all time favorite game if it had a reasonable AI. As it stands right now, I think it'll be collecting some dust until the next patch.
On a side note, I think the NDA was a bad idea. I know all game companies use it, but think about this. All we heard for months were the good things about the game, because the NDA would not allow a beta tester to say anything negative about it. This had the effect of raising expectations to great levels. Had we known the complete story, people would've known what to expect out of this game at a reasonable level.
I mean, was Paradox worried about any negative publicity hurting game sales? Do they not know that we can return the game now that we know what it really is?
I personally will keep my copy in hopes that patches will make this game at least a bit of a challenge. But perhaps in the future Paradox will be more open concerning the development of patches and games so that the sort of backlash that we're seeing now may be avoided.
This could be my all time favorite game if it had a reasonable AI. As it stands right now, I think it'll be collecting some dust until the next patch.
On a side note, I think the NDA was a bad idea. I know all game companies use it, but think about this. All we heard for months were the good things about the game, because the NDA would not allow a beta tester to say anything negative about it. This had the effect of raising expectations to great levels. Had we known the complete story, people would've known what to expect out of this game at a reasonable level.
I mean, was Paradox worried about any negative publicity hurting game sales? Do they not know that we can return the game now that we know what it really is?
I personally will keep my copy in hopes that patches will make this game at least a bit of a challenge. But perhaps in the future Paradox will be more open concerning the development of patches and games so that the sort of backlash that we're seeing now may be avoided.
I think that, aside from the AI problem which most likely can and will be patched, the second most troublesome thing about the game is the Trade/Econ/World Market model.
Industry as represented by ICs cannot be grown in a logical way. The way the game works, it is many many times cheaper to build a factory in a low industry zone than a zone which already has many factories. Essentially this means that if you don't have alot of low industry provinces, you really can't grow your industrial capacity rationally.
The World Market / Trade model is badly designed. Its purpose is to enable nations to acquire the critical resources : coal, steel, oil and rubber by "trading" with other nations. The problems with this are as follows :
1. If NO ONE if offering, say, Oil in the World Market, you can still BUY OIL. The whole thing is abstracted and has no relationship to either the deals offered or the total worldwide production of these goods.
2. If you buy these goods, it takes zero ships to bring them to your country. They are automatically added to your resource pools each day. This one fact TOTALLY REMOVES the need to conduct a strategic war for resources such as the Sub Campaign.
Resource production never changes. There is no way to increase coal, steel, oil, or rubber output. There are at least technologies to enable you to use them more efficiently, and this may be enough to satisfy people who care about accuracy.
Whatever a province has can be used, in full, by whoever acquires it. This includes "manpower". This, for reasons I hope I don't have to explain, is just plain wrong.
There have been a number of suggestions in the Suggestions thread on all of these types of issues. I hope the design team is listening, and can address some of them in the patch process.
Industry as represented by ICs cannot be grown in a logical way. The way the game works, it is many many times cheaper to build a factory in a low industry zone than a zone which already has many factories. Essentially this means that if you don't have alot of low industry provinces, you really can't grow your industrial capacity rationally.
The World Market / Trade model is badly designed. Its purpose is to enable nations to acquire the critical resources : coal, steel, oil and rubber by "trading" with other nations. The problems with this are as follows :
1. If NO ONE if offering, say, Oil in the World Market, you can still BUY OIL. The whole thing is abstracted and has no relationship to either the deals offered or the total worldwide production of these goods.
2. If you buy these goods, it takes zero ships to bring them to your country. They are automatically added to your resource pools each day. This one fact TOTALLY REMOVES the need to conduct a strategic war for resources such as the Sub Campaign.
Resource production never changes. There is no way to increase coal, steel, oil, or rubber output. There are at least technologies to enable you to use them more efficiently, and this may be enough to satisfy people who care about accuracy.
Whatever a province has can be used, in full, by whoever acquires it. This includes "manpower". This, for reasons I hope I don't have to explain, is just plain wrong.
There have been a number of suggestions in the Suggestions thread on all of these types of issues. I hope the design team is listening, and can address some of them in the patch process.
The two things that bother me the most.
The force pool concept, and the capability to capture large back areas with only one unit.
Force Pool - It allows several bad things. For instance England could effetivly block the exist to all german ports to negate them from waging sub warfare. But Germany will just move through the force pool its whole navy to french ports. Kinda makes the big British Navy advantage reduntand. Also you can put all you units in the force pool and just keep them there till you need them, pretty much instand deploy anywere on the mainland. Sure they will have to build up Org. but that is ussuly not a problem before the invading units actuly make it into the target hex.
Same thing with repair, if i go to a Fench port to fix t badly beat up battleship, it should have to be deployed back at the port the repair was initiated.
The biggest kicker is tho having units in the force pool to meet any thread on the board instandly. Even today, we do not have th technologie to deploy reserve units withing seconds and up to full strength in a day. It takes the US 2 to 3 weeks to deploy a division from reserve (force pool) to any part in the states.
Also I belive that if you capture areas, but yet have not annexed the country, (occupied areas) then you should have to deploy a unit as a occupation force, or risk the reversal of this hex back to the original owner, with a Partisan (needing no supply) force popping up there. This would stop the 2 cav take russias rear exploid
The force pool concept, and the capability to capture large back areas with only one unit.
Force Pool - It allows several bad things. For instance England could effetivly block the exist to all german ports to negate them from waging sub warfare. But Germany will just move through the force pool its whole navy to french ports. Kinda makes the big British Navy advantage reduntand. Also you can put all you units in the force pool and just keep them there till you need them, pretty much instand deploy anywere on the mainland. Sure they will have to build up Org. but that is ussuly not a problem before the invading units actuly make it into the target hex.
Same thing with repair, if i go to a Fench port to fix t badly beat up battleship, it should have to be deployed back at the port the repair was initiated.
The biggest kicker is tho having units in the force pool to meet any thread on the board instandly. Even today, we do not have th technologie to deploy reserve units withing seconds and up to full strength in a day. It takes the US 2 to 3 weeks to deploy a division from reserve (force pool) to any part in the states.
Also I belive that if you capture areas, but yet have not annexed the country, (occupied areas) then you should have to deploy a unit as a occupation force, or risk the reversal of this hex back to the original owner, with a Partisan (needing no supply) force popping up there. This would stop the 2 cav take russias rear exploid
Theres little interface things that could be improved (like being able to see the leaders trait wihtout having to assing them a comman) etc,etc. But for the most part its the AI..if the AI was semi decent in fielding large armies and attempting large scale Amphib. Invasions then the easy problems would start to melt away. It also needs to start helping it allies with resources and tech.
Problem #3 with the world market: The most common sort of trade that happens in real life is exchanging raw materials for manufactured goods (consumer goods, military hardware, machinery, etc). This is not modelled at all in the game. It should be possible to trade ICs, or something similar, for resources.
My qualms, in this order:
1) AI:
Relative inability to launch invasions and it's unable to work as a team dooms the USSR, and makes it so that Germany is never challenged.
2) Alliance and diplomacy system:
Unless you're Germany, you can swallow up any minor in the world and no one cares.
3) World Trade:
Things that have already been mentioned.
4) Strategically Deployment Issues:
Same as #3.
1) AI:
Relative inability to launch invasions and it's unable to work as a team dooms the USSR, and makes it so that Germany is never challenged.
2) Alliance and diplomacy system:
Unless you're Germany, you can swallow up any minor in the world and no one cares.
3) World Trade:
Things that have already been mentioned.
4) Strategically Deployment Issues:
Same as #3.
I pretty much agree. To #1 I would add - the AI's inability to build and deploy units. Sometimes it feels like Germany's fighting on a ghost world, where the 30 divisions you start with can roll up almost all of Europe and Russia, and you rarely see a country with more than 20 active divisions.
Here in the good ol' USofA we can't take games back!
I sincerely hope the AI and the resource/industry/trading systems get a major overhaul, but unfortunately I think it's pretty much WYSIWYG.
Hope I'm wrong tho.