|
|
Post by Hobo Joe on Feb 6, 2019 23:17:47 GMT
Usually taste is pretty dependent on the individual. But I've not met a single person who liked ACE. What about the game was so unattractive?
For me it was the menu. It was just a campaign map and I hated that. The experimentation with multiplayer was probably valuable data in making EW6's multiplayer.
Personally, I really like the sci-fi setting and I wish so badly that they got it right.
TLDR: ITT talk about why Easytech messed up on ACE and how they could have improved.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cyrus the Great on Feb 6, 2019 23:20:02 GMT
I don't like the game because many good things require IAP, and IAP is needed here more than any other ET game.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hobo Joe on Feb 7, 2019 15:13:02 GMT
I don't like the game because many good things require IAP, and IAP is needed here more than any other ET game. Do you think ET could have known it would have been a blunder? If they didn't figure they would make a lot of money from normal purchases (the game, typical IAPs), that they raised the amount of IAPs typical? Woulda been a crummy move on their part |
|
|
|
Post by Arya Stark on Feb 7, 2019 16:07:22 GMT
I don't like the game because many good things require IAP, and IAP is needed here more than any other ET game. Do you think ET could have known it would have been a blunder? If they didn't figure they would make a lot of money from normal purchases (the game, typical IAPs), that they raised the amount of IAPs typical? Woulda been a crummy move on their part It's possible they thought 'Oh, this may not be a popular game' and figured that unlike many of its games, it wouldn't have made a lot of money In that case, it'd be a pretty dip*Auto Corrected* move on their part to raise IAP Prices, for a game not as popular as most |
|
|
|
Post by Cyrus the Great on Feb 7, 2019 20:01:06 GMT
I think you have to buy 80k medals with real money to get Zeus unit, that's a problem.
|
|
|
|
Post by Friedrich “Fried Rice” Paulus on Feb 8, 2019 3:04:35 GMT
Do you think ET could have known it would have been a blunder? If they didn't figure they would make a lot of money from normal purchases (the game, typical IAPs), that they raised the amount of IAPs typical? Woulda been a crummy move on their part It's possible they thought 'Oh, this may not be a popular game' and figured that unlike many of its games, it wouldn't have made a lot of money In that case, it'd be a pretty dip*Auto Corrected* move on their part to raise IAP Prices, for a game not as popular as most It was a historic. All other easytech games appealed to historical events. For example, i could go: wow, that guderian general is pretty tough. I wonder what impact he had on the war? Oh, he was responsible for the main push in Barbarossa? Most of the generals that weren’t good, such as Bock, had a personality. In glory of generals 2, you got hot female generals and a guy with a monocle. It was just weird. European war 5 has the same engine but is miles better imo due to having real historical characters in it. |
|
|
|
Post by Singlemalt on Feb 8, 2019 5:18:52 GMT
Usually taste is pretty dependent on the individual. But I've not met a single person who liked ACE. What about the game was so unattractive? For me it was the menu. It was just a campaign map and I hated that. The experimentation with multiplayer was probably valuable data in making EW6's multiplayer. Personally, I really like the sci-fi setting and I wish so badly that they got it right. TLDR: ITT talk about why Easytech messed up on ACE and how they could have improved. If you had the curtesy to read some recent posts you can see some of us kinda liked it. Ofc most didnt but most of the people did not play long enough to even be aloud to give a proper opinion. The last 2 sets of campaigns were reallychallenging and tactical which brought lots of fun. I think most of us didnt like the p2p since people havked the game and the IAP units were way overrated! These units were also neeeded to fuly complete game. I dont mind IAP but it should only buy you time and not give u units that cannot be compensated by ingame units.. Also the game had no reallife reference and scifi is not often what people want. Building up units wqs kinda fun tbh though.. Sincerely |
|
|
|
Post by NetherFreek on Feb 8, 2019 10:11:58 GMT
I kinda liked it,
It had a new strategic layer with the cards and the tanks you needed to upgrade out of battle.
The campaign mode is/was one of the best I've ever seen out of any Easytech Game.
With that being said the campaign mode was the only kinda mode, there really wasn't too much to do outside of that,
for that reason I think many people didn't like it.
If it had legion mode, conquest mode or any other additional mode I think it would've been a great game.
|
|
|
|
Post by Arya Stark on Feb 8, 2019 15:42:06 GMT
It's possible they thought 'Oh, this may not be a popular game' and figured that unlike many of its games, it wouldn't have made a lot of money In that case, it'd be a pretty dip*Auto Corrected* move on their part to raise IAP Prices, for a game not as popular as most It was a historic. All other easytech games appealed to historical events. For example, i could go: wow, that guderian general is pretty tough. I wonder what impact he had on the war? Oh, he was responsible for the main push in Barbarossa? Most of the generals that weren’t good, such as Bock, had a personality. In glory of generals 2, you got hot female generals and a guy with a monocle. It was just weird. European war 5 has the same engine but is miles better imo due to having real historical characters in it. Yeah one aspect I liked about most other ET Games was the historical aspect. EW4 especially, as it sparked my interest in the Napoleonic era |
|
|
|
Post by Friedrich “Fried Rice” Paulus on Feb 8, 2019 19:05:11 GMT
It was a historic. All other easytech games appealed to historical events. For example, i could go: wow, that guderian general is pretty tough. I wonder what impact he had on the war? Oh, he was responsible for the main push in Barbarossa? Most of the generals that weren’t good, such as Bock, had a personality. In glory of generals 2, you got hot female generals and a guy with a monocle. It was just weird. European war 5 has the same engine but is miles better imo due to having real historical characters in it. Yeah one aspect I liked about most other ET Games was the historical aspect. EW4 especially, as it sparked my interest in the Napoleonic era The general bios from european war 6 got me interested |
|
|
|
Post by Max Otto von Stierlitz on Feb 10, 2019 9:40:51 GMT
IMO GOG 2 lacks historical background and strategical possibilities. Like in WCs you have many gens to choose, you can upgrade them differently and so on, but in GOG you get all gens, also you have not much doubt, which gen to upgrade. Besides that, not so good idea is that you have to buy at leas one IAP unit to clear all battles. I have already cleared all campaigns without IAPs, but I can't clear 4th and 10th level in battles of Alpha, and that's just Alpha, in Epsilon I'm stuck on 2dn level in both battles. Just for fun I'm farming now to get all possible upgrades and to check, what I will be able to do than. Assuming battles are played by AI the only way to improve your results is to choose other units and make all upgrades.
But in fact GOG 2 is good game, cards enhance tactical possibilities, also battles are not so long (what I don't like in WCs is that conquests are too long), also it's more challenging that WCs.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tito on Feb 10, 2019 12:03:24 GMT
It's possible they thought 'Oh, this may not be a popular game' and figured that unlike many of its games, it wouldn't have made a lot of money In that case, it'd be a pretty dip*Auto Corrected* move on their part to raise IAP Prices, for a game not as popular as most It was a historic. All other easytech games appealed to historical events. For example, i could go: wow, that guderian general is pretty tough. I wonder what impact he had on the war? Oh, he was responsible for the main push in Barbarossa? Most of the generals that weren’t good, such as Bock, had a personality. In glory of generals 2, you got hot female generals and a guy with a monocle. It was just weird. European war 5 has the same engine but is miles better imo due to having real historical characters in it. How dare you insult the monocle guy? If he has a monocle then it means he is the best at everything and has class. |
|
|
|
Post by Friedrich “Fried Rice” Paulus on Feb 10, 2019 12:28:11 GMT
It was a historic. All other easytech games appealed to historical events. For example, i could go: wow, that guderian general is pretty tough. I wonder what impact he had on the war? Oh, he was responsible for the main push in Barbarossa? Most of the generals that weren’t good, such as Bock, had a personality. In glory of generals 2, you got hot female generals and a guy with a monocle. It was just weird. European war 5 has the same engine but is miles better imo due to having real historical characters in it. How dare you insult the monocle guy? If he has a monocle then it means he is the best at everything and has class. Model is the only monocle boi in my heart : ) |
|
|
|
Post by Hobo Joe on Feb 10, 2019 16:00:25 GMT
Monocle guy is dad tbh
|
|
|
|
Post by theunscript43 on Aug 25, 2019 19:15:32 GMT
The reason why I think it's crap is there is those enemy factions/models that are unplayable (The Soviet one in particular). If there was a idea, then someone could mod GoG2 to allow you to be on the opposite side of the campaign.
|
|
