Hey Mangs. As long as we're back on the topic of AW, a while back I convinced a Commander Wars modder to make a bunch of the COs that didn't make the cut in the Mangsvance Wars CO contest. I was wondering if you still had a list of who submitted what, since I was never able to get into contact with the creators of Julia, Rashelle, Tara, Hughes, or Polish to let them know.
I'm a bit surprised you haven't covered "Empires Shall Fall" since it's another game in the style of Advance Wars. Though I'll admit the lack of player vs. player matches might be part of the issue. After all, the only way to play against someone else is to do so at the same machine.
@@geopold2a4 i was referring to ranked matchmaking and asynchronous matches. Wargroove also has multiplayer but thats completely random or with friends. But yes, some form of multiplayer is guaranteed, so we could always get the deej/mangs combo warside stream
Considering there is a medic unit that heals infantry it would make sense for there to be an equivalent mechanic unit to fix vehicles, perhaps not implemented yet.
actually having only infantry be able to be restored on the field, whereas any vehicle has to go back to base to fix it is a good idea, gives flexibility to otherwise squishy infantry
@@rrenkrieg7988 Another compromise would be the vehicle mechanic unit / Repair vehicle can only repair vehicles to a certain HP level, and facilities are needed to fully repair.
I'm skeptical of the capture system. The win condition of AW is to disable the enemy infantry line, which is both crucial and vulnerable as it doubles as the meat shield. Here, even if you don't have infantry, you can disable the opponent's economy and take it from there. It might lead to very long games all about HQ capture. However, this could be addressed by introducing objective-based maps to multiplayer.
Or giving map-makers the choice of how many hit points a captured city has, that way they can balance the maps themselves depending on their size and layout
Imagine if there was a Grit, Adder, or Eagle CO, with either indirect supremacy or double attack mobility. You could city/factory wipe someone from a stalemate posture.
But you can also create way more unit than advance wars. With just two base you can create 6 units per turn which is insane. With four which will probably the case you can create 12 units per turn ! I think the game is designed to pump up tons of infantry, and ferry them with truck and IFV to create a frontline Since property are so vulnerable, unit count to defend them become much more important and cheap okayish quality unit that get the job done become much more stronger. I think thats also why there isnt a mech unit and IFV is a thing. The game will probably look like two wall of basic infantry that cover the whole map and each player try to make a breakthrough, much like ukraine warfare ironically Thats also why each faction will get a unique unit that have criwd control, I think unit placement will be even more key than advance war The big risk is the game becoming an infinite slugfest tho, but with that many unit if a player disrupt the economy he will have an insane lead tho
@@anonyme4881 But infantry can cap/attack out of the transport, so a +move transport heli unloading three +move infantry could insta wipe a base from miles away. Any normal CO could potentially do it too if there is fog. Being able to produce 3 units a turn your could make that whole base play force in a single turn too with a single ground and 1 air base. All they have to do is wait for power or a turn where you can't afford to triple build and it's over. Triple build also sounds like a nightmare in unit count, single base maps play like triple base and a classic AWBW strong side weak side map with 3 bases suddenly has 9 build. Sounds like a potential slog of trying to wallbreak infantry.
I can see the concern, and i guarantee warside maps will look a lot different from AWBW maps. But, the mechanic does seem to have a lot of potential for very dynamic games, because you essentially always want to be sending out attack group's to try and kill undefended properties, meaning a big deathball, whilst hard to stop in it's tracks, is way more vulnerable to having it's economy ravaged. But, of course, if you do have a big deathball pushing into opponent's territory you have a decision to make in if you want to kill the enemy units, or spend shots killing the eco in order to prevent them rebuilding. All of that, with having to pay super close attention to positioning because 2 rhinos could drive an infantry walled mega tank into a mountain, killing it instantly for zero cost, so any sort of deep walled formation is far from invulnerable. Additonally, i think the whole "3 unit from 1 base" isn't as high eco as you might think, because you can punp infantry, but anything expensive like tanks and artillery you'll probably struggle to even get 2 of them out. In AWBW, if you have 17 K income, you can build a tank, a battle copter, and an infantry, nothing more, no matter how many bases you have. Same here. And with bases being infantry of vehicle units, not both, pure infantry spam won't be as easy to pull off as it could be Now, The idea of base backstabs with T copters is very scary, but adds to the dynamic aspect of the game, be about placing units to defend your bases, or just leaving scouting infantry on possible attack paths and splitting your army off to respond to threats when they appear, and of course splitting off a drop but losing those units from the frontline with 2 or 3 turns until a possible payoff is a significant decision to make. Even moreso given 2 anti air in a bad position could end up killing your entire drop with 4 units in a single turn. We will see how it plays out, but the system definitely has a lot of potential, assuming it's balanced right, and the fact both players can do everything does mean anything which is strong is more likely to be annoying than specifically overpowered.
I gotta say on the point about mechs, to me they're a unit that is very important to the overall balance of the game. If there aren't mechs, then it becomes impossible to challenge tanks unless you have tanks of your own. Sometimes you just don't have that money, and this could make even a tiny income difference completely snowball a match. Sometimes there's an area of a map where only one player can send vehicles, if mechs don't exist then a second player just has to completely concede the area and can't even make a play to deny it. I just can't imagine Advance Wars without mechs. They're a very balanced unit due to only having 2 movement.
I find sniper maybe the counter to tank and light vehicle. One sniper may do 10% damage to tank, but when there's several of them, tank seem less of a problem. That mean, the opponent will have to opt for heavier tank. But then they risk being under populated.
Mechs are a terrible unit, not even Sami and Sensei want to make them, but because tanks gatekeep everything that isn't heavier than them (arty would be ok if tanks didn't have 6 move) mechs are a necessity. Days of Ruin has an equal but opposite unit in the Anti-tank gun, which is pretty much a tank that also counters other tanks, and the game is terrible because why would you build anything else. The fundamental problem is the gap that tanks cause. Why does it have 6 move and so much armor. Why is it so cheap compared to other vehicles, why ever build a recon if you're not playing fog of war? And why are mechs so slow and expensive? It's just an infantry squad carrying an explosive tube. Because they have such a great value exchange against tanks, with situational good exchanges with medium tanks and neo tanks. If mechs aren't so good against tanks, then mechs can be better as a unit. Make them cheaper, give 1 move, make them better against light vehicles (recons, transports, arty, anti-air) and worse against heavy vehicles (tanks). Now you use mechs primarily to counter anti-air and protect your arty, and unlike regular infantry they can still be used to finish off damaged tanks. Tanks should lose 1 move, but be more resistant to mechs and b-copters.
@@misteral9045 Why build Neo Tanks at all if Md Tanks are the superior unit. Neos are more expensive and only like 10% more firepower and defense. Because mobility. That one extra movement is a huge deal. Tanks innately have more mobility than Anti-Tanks. If you're Grit holding one single front, you don't care about mobility. You inch forward under artillery cover. But when you have two fronts, suddenly mobility is king. Grit can't redeploy on the second front as easily with arty. But tanks can. And then you smash Grit's weak defenses there and take map control. Days of Ruin, along with the other AW games' campaigns are rather basic when it comes to tactics and overall strategy. You need to watch the games the upper middle to pro players play on AWBW because for the most part (ignoring Kartel), the AW AI is super easy to beat when it's not cheating in fog. There's also generally only one front. You can play Grit-style on most campaign missions and be good to go. But make the AI have the difficulty of a medium rated player and suddenly woah, this is actually tough.
@@ElementZephyr If that's the case, why are all movement boosting CO's (with the exception of Max) in Tier 4 or Tier 3 and those who buff attack/defense or who have a utility power are in Tier 1 or Tier 0? It's a noob trap to think tactics are everything, which is what movement is. The meta is warped around the anti tank because not only does it counter other tanks, it's an indirect that can also do direct combat, and it has decent damage against bopters to boot. Literally a one unit army that is only kept in check by it's price. Huh. Just like mechs, but the opposite.
@@fishyfinthing8854 snipers are still very vulnerable to tanks attacking them, not to mention how snipers can't attack at close range which just makes them a cheap artillery that's only good against targets you don't typically need artillery for.
the way they could have water based buildings given their era would be stuff like oil rigs/offshore wind farms or island forts and lets not forget sea terrains like reefs rough terrains mist we got from dark conflict i am also hoping this game works wonders looking forward to the crazyness of it to
my problem with these wargroove-type cities is that a big chunk of the area you're fighting in, specifically the part you're fighting about, is inaccessible. This always felt annoying and restricting in wargroove, as it limits your formations. But at least they're not defending themselves.
They also feel like massive immovable walls which you can use to just protect a unit from one side, and if its diagonal to a mountain thats already 2 of the possible 4 spaces direct combat vehicles could attack from being blocked off, which makes me think there will be a lot of indirect spam to shoot over citites and bases
@@DustD.Reaper By the demo, it that they are. Outright walls that you can use to form a defensive line, I love that the AI counts capture as higher priority than attacking units. I wasted enemy troops by making tug of wars on the property, they ignore my other troops and just focus on recapturing the properties to get blasted by ranged troops.
At least the maps I played so far gave them enough breathing room. I felt more claustrophobic in Advance Wars. Also, we have a full featured map editor in Warside which makes it seem like a solution to any potential property problem will be easy to invent.
Alright, so, as a full casual player, here is my view of it: It looks promising but MY GOD does it look like you can gamebreak this game to hell and back, I already see the cheese and strats fulminating in the pro's head haha. And while it's more a personal point of view, don't really like the portraits, too realistics for my taste and the game itself, would Say it should be more "anime" / cartoony tbh.
I think the big issue with the CO designs specifically, is that at least half of them look like you picked "character creator" pieces, and put them on the exact same template. There is a huge lack of variety in posture, body type, and head/face shape.
I agree. Part of the reason why I like advance wars so much, even more so than fire emblem, is that it's not too 'dark'. Every character has their own little quirks. If they are just portrayed standing still, even with different color schemes, clothing, and designs, they just feel the same. Give me some funny looking COs like Drake, Hachi, and Adder, some holding comical yet practical tools like Andy and Jess, and then give me some serious looking ones like Eagle, Nell, and Hawke.
@@jawwer00 I... think you're right! If you look at RPGmaker MV, the program has a built in character portrait maker and I swear the kind of pixelated semi-anime thousand-yard-stare style they used looks almost identical to the characters in Warside :P
This is me being picky but I'm a little disappointed by the Rhino. I saw a combat engineering vehicle and I was really hoping we'd get something akin to the DoR Rig, letting us put up temporary facilities and making minor changes to the map.
Tangent... But that gives me ideas on how to implement Super Heavies in an Advanced Wars type without just making them a tank++. Make them mobile CPs with different, possibly faction based abilities: rapid repair, artillery, rapid capture, resupply, etc
Wargroove seems really different on the points that matter. I did not touch it, but since Warside is a lot more like Advance Wars, I am very interested in it.
As an strategy game fan who massively prefers the modern war setting over medieval or fantasy settings, this is something I'm definitely going to add to my wishlist.
I like how, since Advance Wars uses midcentury aesthetics - the factions are themed either after cartoon versions of WW2-era armies or evil invaders from outer space - this game is using more modern aesthetics. The blue faction dress like modern generals, impeccable uniforms covered in bars and commendations. The green faction are Mad Max-style post-apocalyptic raiders, and the orange faction has a Middle Eastern militant vibe.
More like free peoples/outlaws/Fremen where it consists of frontier people who have set themselves in harsh lands and refuse to let the civilized forces take over
I like having both. I have had enough of Advance Wars to enjoy its straightlaced alternative competitor. Also, the gameplay is ironically more absurd now with the Rhino.
Am I the only one that found some of the early demo maps being very stingy for funds? Especially for what they are asking you to take down. On more than one occasion, I found myself looking at 3 enemy tanks, and the only way to make anti-armor to stop them was to make tanks of my own. However, I would need 10,000 funds for a single tank, where, despite holding half the properties on the map, i was only making 5,000 per turn. It also hurt to see the 10k i just invested in that tank be make useless the second it hit 5hp and could barely hurt anything bigger than infantry with no way to heal it. I also worry about the idea of faction-specific units, as it risks an entire category of CO's getting bumped up in tier by solely the fact that they have access to the "stronger" exclusive.
Well, I don't think CO tiers being affected by faction exclusive units is necessarily a bad thing. Also if units such as the rhino are going to be banned anyways, then it'll be even less of a factor
I think things were being designed more around experienced players. I think having a smaller amount of properties makes sense and being able to produce multiple infantry from one building makes up for a lot more than Advance Wars could on low funds, but it does limit your ability to play around with units. I forgot the Rhino existed because it was an expensive unit.
The explosions look wimpy. Like they disappear in a puff of smoke instead of being immolated. The COs have no animation reaction to winning/losing. Lifeless. I really love the Rhino though.
Oh yeah… I imagine meta strategy will be making sure that in the case of Crowd control you not in a position where your enemy can shunt or drag the line. My guess is that 1 faction will have the rhino… another will have some kind of indirect dragging unit that uses a hook to pull targets closer to it. Positioned well, you can beach warships by fishing them onto the land.
@@Motleydoll123 You get an achievement for dragging a Battleship from the sea to a lake using the hook unit (unlike a car getting thrown into water, ships wouldn't immediately explode if they got beached, ergo, you should be able to keep dragging them along the ground after fishing them out of the water)
I really hope this game is freat! I enjoyed Advanced Wars a lot back in my times! Honestly, don't care at all about multyplayer. I also don't care much about the sotry, I just hope there is a strong and and challenging campaing with complex versatile maps different objectives and hybrid warfare. And yes, I want anti-tank infantry!
I suppose "Empires Shall Fall" does scratch that itch a bit with it's inclusion of a ranged mortar units and an infantry unit outfitted with an anti-air gun. It also includes an infantry unit comparable to the scout from Days of Ruin as well. Though, I'll admit that game is rather average overall due to the campaign not being that challenging for experienced Advance War players nor is it all that replayable since it lacks a hard mode. It also only has effectively two COs despite both factions having three commanders each. This is because all of the commanders for a given faction have the same powers. I suppose on the bright side this makes balancing them a bit easier, but the game also lacks multiplayer; so this benefit just makes playing battles as a given faction a bit more tedious since their is little to distinguish their commanders. It also doesn't help that you can recharge your power meter after popping one of your four powers. So it's possible to daisy chain kills into overwhelming advantage pretty quickly against the computer as well. And in my opinion the empire has better powers with it's global healing and global damage abilities. While the healing ability only recovers 20 hit points like Andy's basic power. The ability to reliably pop this power once a turn for multiple turns in a row is pretty overwhelming. In comparison the Republic's unique CO powers are a bit of a fusion of Adder's movement powers with a slight stat buff like Max's powers. And while the extra movement is useful in my opinion. The bonus isn't big enough to make it as useful as global healing or global damage. Though, I suppose I really can't complain that much since the game itself is only $13 roughly before tax. So I got a an alright experience for what I paid for it.
@@thesacredlobo I'm not sure what you are talking about by the end of your message, but the campaign for Warside is not represented in the demo. The missions are different in the full game. They gave no real information on the enemy faction in the demo.
@@sigurdtheblue - "I'm not sure what you are talking about by the end of your message, but the campaign for Warside is not represented in the demo." I'm talking about another turn-based strategy game inspired by "Advance Wars" on Steam called "Empires Shall Fall". My final paragraph is about the game being alright for it's price even if it is a bit disappointing in some areas for an experienced player of "Advance Wars" or turn-based strategy games in general.
Been supporting this game on kickstarter for about a year now, definitely has potential to become the next advance wars since nintendo is neglecting it
Nintendo franchise neglect is becoming a big issue outside of Mario, Zelda and Pokemon if your a fan of any other Nintendo IP your lucky if you see any new game within a decide.
The dozer pushing things around actually reminds me of Into the Breach, and I really enjoy the idea of this kind of stuff. The art design, along with the blue color scheme, reminds me a lot of a Space Marine vehicle, and when I learned that it's called a Rhino, I really had a genuine smile on my face.
This is a game that will likely never released. First it was scheduled for q4 2023, then sometime 2024, now it's suddenly jan. 2025. Close to no communication from the dev... I've lost faith that this game will ever be a thing.
I find so clashing the CO art in comparison to the unit art But way more important, note what I say, _the main feature of AWBW and Tiny Wars is the non-real time multiplayer_ . All AW clones multiplayer fail because of this, and thus, have a much harder time developing a community around it. It's not mechanics nor artwork, it's non-real time multiplayer. Problem is, knowledge on how to do it is rare in the indie scene. Monthly payment is something that scares the crap out of indies. Still, more alternatives the merrier. Where there's Will (DoR joke...) there's a way. Eventually someone will make it, and it'll be glorious Thank you Mangs for covering this. We need to support alternative IPs as much as we can. Community will never evolve being unofficial, we NEED to support an IP that gets us
I don't know the first thing about managing servers, but as far as I know AWBW and Tiny Wars devs are just a small group of passionate people. Is there some reason they can make asynchronous matches but most indie companies can not?
@@Eternalwarpuppy To my understanding, complexity. I assume both of them happened to someone with the skills/will to do it and be an AW fan. Indies (but in reality any gamedev) already struggle to have anything released, so online on top makes the task much more daunting. So in short, technically nothing, but in reality, sorta many. One more thing to worry about that potentially can go very wrong. _What's the point of expending significant amount of resources to a game that can potentially not be received well?_ Borrowing an IP, and making it open sourced, decreases the risk of everything going in vain
you dont need subscription for non real time mp you just need a p2p connection and a savestate on both sides that gets updated when the opponent finishes his turn
Ok a huge issue for me (maybe I'm a bit stingy?), is that the factions got the same units. I loved the different styles in AW and Wargroove. Americans (red) Russian (blue) German (green) Japanese (yellow) That was great. Meanwhile here looks everything the same and I find that pretty unappealing.
First two COs are way too bland and generic looking. Compare Soldier McSoldierFace to Andy. A simple design, but the suspenders, star, and the massive wrench adds plenty of character and unique style. The busts also losses out somewhat on some of the more dynamic poses we see from Advance Wars COs. Like Flak's art often depicting him like a hunched over brute or Hawke posing heroically with his scarf fluttering in the wind.
As someone who loves uniforms i personally think beckett looks the best out of all of them, but i definetly agree that no poses is a big downside. Reaver just looks like some random cosplayer the way he's standing around. But while i agree that having 2 generic officers might seem weird, i personally really like the idea of at least one faction having proper uniforms. But they really need posing to differentiate them better
From what I can understand, the two Generic COs are basically American-ish military. Shock and Awe, overwhelming force, y'know the type right? The orange faction looks like they're modern-day desert nomads. Y'know, back in the day they probably traveled the dunes, gathered food and materials, traded for stuff, and moved to the next area, on camel backs. Now they do the same but with trucks. Of course, when the Not!USA comes into their desert in full force to investigate what the greens have been up to, they start to think they're being invaded by Not!USA. The green, I... There's no nice way to say it, they look and talk like Raiders from Fallout who got lost into another game. I've got nothing else to say. So you've got the Not!USA, the nomads from Not!Africa and the Not!Middle-East, and the raiders from Not!Fallout. I think the designs work well enough at characterizing them. Actually, Reaver mentions there not being much life in the "Wastelands", so that area might have been nuked, as in actually really hit by actual nuclear strikes.
I saw this and had this wishlisted since early 2023. I thought it'd gonna be up late 2023 or early 2024, and I was praying they didn't just stop working on it. Very happy to hear they're gonna release it soon!
I like a unique take on anti-vehicle infantry, maybe something like a mine layer who sets up anti-tank minefields? A mechanic who could repair vehicles and get cities up and running faster And maybe the ability to garrison infantry in cities, to make it slightly more defensive. Damaged facilities would need mechanics to bring them back to full capacity or it will be reduced production speeds, limited troop selection, or both. Saboteurs who can damage said facilities in such a way.
as a long time casual fan of advance wars this game looks really promising, my only nitpick is that different factions don't have different sprites for their units like AW did but its easy to overlook honestly
A possible fix to over production is just to add a global build limit per turn that can be adjusted either in map creation or through other in game rules, this would also allow you to add more production facilities to the map witout adding to unit count increase
Love the art style! Kinda hoped the Rino would have been for terrain modification based on it's looks, but that's a really interesting power. Sounds like they should have the option to leave Infinity garrisoned in freshly captured properties to prevent the ping ponging, BUT at the same time the volatility of properties may be a great way to make the gsme stand out.
I mean the multiplayer is important, but they are not making an esport for sure, so it would be nice to see some busted fun play piece like the Rhino and people not ban such innovative ideas
I am missing the fow. with the idea of fighting in towns. It still be not broken, bc your income is reduced for each repaired unit. When nobody enabled 9k/structure income, it still not be good and artillery can pin single units down like real war is. You need to rescue units with space to flee for full repair or let them dying. To tick a town is weird, you lose many actions for ticking a town back to 0 with no effect. Advance Wars used the thought to conquer after battles are over (where you can gain profit of properties) and only with infantry. To destroy a town looks like a genocide, when you remember no military is in position (ik its symbolic, but it is some kind of bad action). It would be better, when you split units in a town, when you tick it with vehicles and making counter of what is in there. Means fast conquer, but split your army into many pieces for short time
I hate the CO portraits, the semi-realistic style really clashes with the rest of the game, I feel that they should be more stylised. But hey, maybe the devs thought it looked enough like advanced wars.
Honestly, I think it will grow on people. I have never played advanced wars (this game actually made me discover advanced wars and not the other way around) and I like those portraits much more than what I have seen from AW. So there might be a bias of nostalgia for many people.
@@BenjaminBoslet-rm6jr I have zero nostalgia for AW, yet I also think that the art style difference between the gameplay and the COs is very distracting. It's not about the design being bad, it's about the styles clashing for absolutely no reason. So they can "grow on me" all they want, the difference will always be apparent.
Here's an idea for implementing mechs: What if the mech's abilities were rolled into standard infantry instead? Modern real-life infantry forces up to the end of the Cold War (at least in NATO) carried around some anti-vehicle ordnance by default, which should be sufficient to defeat any armored fighting vehicles short of a main battle tank (though even they could suffer if sufficiently outdated). Even so, some more specialized anti-armor forces might be utilized with firepower that's sufficient to bring down even a main battle tank, though this would often come at the expense of anti-infantry capabilities. So yeah! Mechs or no mechs would be justifiable. I simply prefer to see lightly-armored vehicles get sufficiently threatened by ordinary infantry units instead of being more cost-effective tanks than, well, actual tanks.
@@dumb214 Of the rocket-propelled variety, as used in recoilless weapons such as the RPG-7 or the Mk 153 SMAW for example. Weapons like those I'd imagine would be standard-issue for ordinary infantry squadrons, while the heavier, more expensive tank killers, like the Javelin and NLAW, would be reserved for anti-armor specialist units.
@@epicgamerzfail4575 Even if IFVs, with their autocannons that could punch through armor short of the front of a main battle tank (kind of like Anti-Air), were to be considered the equivalent of light tanks, while main battle tanks would've been considered the equivalent of medium tanks, or even neo tanks?
"I simply prefer to see lightly-armored vehicles get sufficiently threatened by ordinary infantry units instead of being more cost-effective tanks than, well, actual tanks." Try snipers, they are effective against light vehicles
From what I saw of the screenshots and videos like a month ago, my main concern was that the game would be *too* faithful to AW1/2, which admittedly to some people will be a bonus, but to me at least, it's a negative. It's been over 20 years since AW2 released, *SURELY* there must have been some new ideas, some ways to innovate the genre in the meantime, and forcible movement is definitely a step in the right direction, I just fear it might not be enough to get me interested. I do hope I'm wrong, and that this game will blow people away though!
I agree. It looks like it's in a bit of a no man's land in that way, which is to say, it looks different enough from AW that it's going to make the average AW player feel out of sorts, but not SO different that it feels distinctly better/worth playing for its own sake.
This is like people complaining about "Smash clones" when in reality there have not been enough on the market and none of them put the effort into being a straightforward game for a long time. Warside is the game I have been waiting for because it is a proper turn-based strategy game without any stupid gimmicks. I love the concepts in Advance Wars and love a different take on it. This game is better too. I think it is definitely worth it to give the Advance Wars community a real replacement option with good multiplayer but apparently you have to complain about this blessing the community waited forever for.
The rhino looks AWESOME but for balance reasons I think it should only be able to move one unit at a time. This would make it more situational and less controversial. But if someone's not being careful or you play your cards right it could be amazing.
Maybe a way to balance the rhino so it doesn't push multiple units at once is something like what happens in "Into the Breach" where pushing one unit against another or some immovable terrain results in damaging the units involved, here I could also increase the damage based on the weight of the pushed units.
not going to lie, this game looks dope. I am sold. Love their choice with the art direction as well. Couldn't stand the weird art style of the advance wars remake.
This looks really cool, I think the biggest concern I have from what I saw was that units seem to be very expensive and there are not a lot of income properties on the maps. If properties are still worth 1000 funds, then it will be very difficult to ever afford any premium units. If they are worth more, than even a slight property lead for 1 player will be insurmountable.
It could be a fun time. It really does have a mix of Advance Wars and Wargroove. Will be interesting to see how the CO powers work. It is nice that you can tell what a unit does by their appearance
This game has been on my wishlist ever since a friend first told me about it. I'm crossing my fingers and hoping that this ends up being the spiritual successor I've been waiting for all this time.
I'd fix the city properties by letting us park our units in there to repair like in Advance Wars BUT make it so the city takes some of the damage suffered by the unit it's protecting and its defense bonus decreases the more damaged it is, that way it's still a good defensive strategy without it becoming a near unassailable wall, in other words a city with 5 out of 10 hit points would only provide half the defensive bonus of a full health city also I like how the soldiers on the Rhino unit pull out flags and point them forward like "CHARGE!"
SO glad you gave this game some cover. I'm excited for it as well. I enjoyed the fantasy equivalent take on it, Wargroove, but I still love the more modern style aesthetics closer to Advance Wars proper more.
Other thing that I noticed: 0:06 (for a fraction of a second, the green map, Green vs blue) Seems you can see the airport design, which looks ok. The thing that is most striking however; is that a Nuclear Power Plant [Right Middle]? Could just be a stylised HQ perhaps. Still, interesting.
Visually it's miles above Reboot camp but how you describe some of the game mechanics worries me slightly. I presume income is not high enough to actually pump out 3 units from multiple bases and an airport unless it's just basic infantry. Capturing seems to be the most worrying thing, but contested properties being constantly flipped might not be bad as they will fail to provide anyone income until someone gains an advantage.
Agree with a lot of comments talking about how the co’s need to be more stylised and expressive with more reaction animations take what’s happening in the battle. The game seems to want to be more fast paced than advance wars with the ability to quickly swarm the map and move units up with transports which is interesting and hard to see how balanced it will be without seeing it in action. The pusher units seems to have been introduced with this in mind having, making a fortified position is far faster than advance wars able to make multiple units a base and being able to move artillery up fast means getting a foot hold in an area can be done with far more ease. The devs clearly want a more fast paced and explosive game play style though so having. The game be very siege heavy isn’t what they want to lean too which is why they introduced a “crow control unit” as they put it so there’s a way to quickly break up these forward positions. The pusher is going to be. A pivotal unit of its kept legal and will change the way the players look at the map and where they can set up or not but I can see what the devs are going for and why they put it in not sure how it feels in practice and map design will have to be made with it in mind if it’s kept. They should definitely try make the cos more expressive atlesst if they don’t want to change the cos designs too much they should give them very exaggerated and cartoony reactions to there units getting destroyed and attacked give some contrast to there serious appearance and will give them a lot more personality.
This game reminds me more of a game series that I grew up with that, to me, was my advance wars by web: Battalion. The Battalion series was a franchise of flash games whose last or second to last game was a peer to peer multiplayer game community, most of the games are still available on Flashpoint and are more similar in aesthetics to this game. All this to say, I miss Urbansquall (devs of Battalion)
I think this game has promise, but even though I like Wargroove's version of how to capture properties I think Warside's decision to make enemy properties not able to counterattack is a weird choice. It's like the worst of both worlds.
Honestly, the moment I saw the unit and map visuals I inmediatly thought "Why wasn´t Re-Boot Camp like this?". I like the portraits well enough, I see why some people may prefer other style but it´s fine to me. I agree that the gameplay changes are very promising if done rigth. I will definetly keep an eye on this one!
In order to balance the great-deployement hability of bases, how about a feature (that the player can turn on or off before starting a map) that makes the units cost a little bit more high than usual once the player built a certain amount of that single tipe of unit? For example, you build a lot buggys, now de buggys cost more money to be deployed. As single as that. I haven't think so much about what could be done with this, It's just an idea trying to balance things off. Great video by the way
2:32 Will say this looks like an 'EMP' stylised ability; as it only appears to disable the movement of vehicular units (the two infantry types seem unaffected). 4:00 Capture system I've got to say, I like the sound of this hybridised system. Being able to essentially encircle an enemy property and eliminate its resistance (attack the city) with any units is good. Then just having to sweep in with the infantry afterwards to capture it is nice. It then remaining at 2Hp makes it feel very similar to the Civilisation (and similar) stylised capturing of cities, where you essentially have to be able to capture AND HOLD the city. You can't just sweep a unit in and then have the city for (in advance wars) at least 2 turns. You're always at risk of it being immediately retaken. It also, as you point out, makes it so that the map flow can be rather dynamic, as you're potentially capable of threatening an opponents income at multiple points of the map, not just the main front, so you can't let that one single tank go unchecked. 6:20 Factories & Barracks (Anyone that is familiar with the Kuju Battalion Wars (1 & 2) games that are a bit of an offshoot of the Advance Wars family, will instantly be familiar with these buildings, and conceptually make a lot of sense, especially seeing the additional variety in footsoldiers that is present). I like the idea of your production power being higher the more secure your bases are and goes back to potentially enhancing the map flow. It also adds a bit of variation for player vs player. 9:20 Movement Advance Wars By Web gave us Boosties. Is Warside giving us SUPER Boosties... I appreciate that there is the choice between the completely unarmed Truck (The pure transport) & the IFV which trades off some of its transport prowess for being able to participate in the battle at large. The Rhino (& Equivalent mechanics units) does as you point out seem difficult to balance, but from a conceptual point, does seem very fun to use. 12:40 I'm instantly in love with the ability for T-Copters to drop off light vehicles (1 light vehicle & 1 infantry, or 3 infantry). I'm hopeful that we'll potentially see a Military Cargo Plane capable of deploying Heavy & Light Vehicles. B-Copters being more akin to their 'Gunship' counterparts (It's unlikely the tank column will even know you're there, let alone return fire) is a reasonable change provided its balanced somewhat effectively. Will definitely follow closely. Lots of potential. And the market gap, though somewhat niche, firmly exists after the comparative failure of Reboot Camp. If they can nail online multiplayer, they can secure a firm (rather uncontested) foothold.
I already see a strategy that will be devastating. a transport helicopter with 1 rocket and 1 Sniper , Especially if the game includes fog of war and hides infantry in forests.
Woah transport units look to be absolutely crazy, and with the increased production it seems the devs are aiming for a large higher army count than a typical AW game. The lack of a Mech equivalent is ... interesting to say the least. My main worry is that since Infantry can't reliably deal with tanks, it is going to be a race of who gets the most tanks soonest. But I perhaps the improved mobility of infantry units due to better transports can make up for it?
As long as Warside doesn't use their intellectual property (CO names, nations, factions etc) then there's nothing they can do. Nintendo doesn't own the right to turn-based military strategy games.
There's some talk about Warside's sprites being too similar to Advance Wars', but AW's are based on real vehicles so I don't think it'd hold much water..
As someone who enjoyed watching the battle animations and the different army appeance on my GBA Advanced Wars, I hope they make the units of different armies have different appeances.
I hope that they make a good game for multiplayer that's properly balanced, and then sprinkle in some gems like the Rhino to spice things up for non-competitive play, like campaigns and scenarios.
I think they need to change the property system a bit, you should be able to sit on it to defend it but maybe add a way to invest money into a property like a bunker or repair facility, that way they become more valuable and fight back maybe even leading to a point where you when flipped get 5 hp as well as defense bonuses to the property which makes defending it easier but you first need to invest the money which isn't worth it for backline properties in most cases
the buggy is a really fun unit for chevauchee. if you can get it around the line, you can start hitting their prod buildings. also, i really wish there was a one-button end turn. hitting escape every time and then selecting it seems off.
Dude sweet I didn't know the demo was out! Between this and Metaphor ReFantazio this is a great week for checking out upcoming titles! I played the ever loving heck out of AW2 when I was in Iraq.
They should have an option to make units' values (cost, damage, movement, etc.) customizable for multiplayer. This way, players can adjust settings based on what they feel is "balanced" and devs don't have to overburden themselves with balancing the game competitively.
I am definitely excited, I really hope they do it right. A couple of the ideas in the game are exactly what I thought of if I would make an advance wars type of game. Not necessarily a priority but hope they add a unit which is like an engineer which can build defenses and other types of buildings, maybe as a map editor unit, not something for the game per se, I think it would change the game a bit; and I hope the COs are good and interesting, especially the navy COs.
Don't play any advance war games at all and only know about it from this channel. I'm glad the developers are talking directly with the playerbase for feedback, and agree they should find a way to work with the advance wars by web folks. Those guys would be immensely helpful, and would be MORE than willing to help them make the best game they can. I don't know if this will be my kind of game, but I can tell there is a lot of passion and effort being put into this. I wish them good luck and hope the advance wars community can get a big win with this game.
It looks like the same Demo you were given can be downloaded on Stream. Can't wait to try. While the sprite work looks nice, I feel it could do with some work in the animation department. Not sure I like the changed capture system, but I won't knock it until I have tried.
I like the way Ranked/Casual is handled in Master Duel. When you play casual, they still match you with people of a similar ranking, so the matches aren't overbearing. I hope they have a dedicated server for multiplayer, or let players host their own servers as a tradeoff, that would make multiplayer so much better that the abomination Suetendo has for 'multiplayer'.
One game I hope Mangs reviews in the future is a game called Noobs in Combat. It’s a Roblox cooperative multiplayer turn-based tactics game (though it does have PvP maps) with many interesting mechanics that Advance Wars and other games like it don’t have - building defenses with the sapper unit, overwatch units, suppression and vehicle immobilization, splash damage, morale as a separate HP bar, limited ammo, reloading times, veterancy, and most importantly, vision range, meaning you can hide troops and vehicles in trees and buildings to ambush the enemy. It changes up the Advance Wars formula quite a bit, and is pretty well-balanced too. It’s still actively being developed, and I’d love to see what Mangs thinks of it.
Agree with the battle animations looking a little too slow, but it's so much easier to look at than Wargroove where it feels like every animation look like every other frame is missing and animated like slime blobs hitting each other.
I kinda want to be able to stand on my cities to defend them. Maybe have cities not heal until 10 hp is the solution? Or have the captured city start with 1 Def star and have a infantry unit that can upgrade the Def stars of the city to be able to build a defensive line using the city. To counter this add bonus damage to cities the more they are surrounded to make sure they fall easely if not defended properly. Just some wild thoughts as I was watching the video.
This looks very nice. I'm a bit iffy on the artstyle of the commanders, but more importantly, the unit sprites seem to be the exact same between factions, which is something I always adored in AW.
I hope this game gets popular! Also, I hope this game gets an active multiplayer scene and becomes a regular part of your videos like Fire Emblem and Advance Wars! Otherwise it might fade out like Wargroove.
Thank you mags. In sea of endless video game releases I don't keep track of any of them. Always have been and always will be a fan of turn-based pixel games like this. Instantly putting it on the buy list.
So this is basically Wargroove if Wargroove *_actually looked and felt like an Advance Wars game._* Wishlisted, will buy day one full price, don't care; I *_NEED_* those Advance Wars vibes on my PC.
🎮 Steam: store.steampowered.com/app/2368300/Warside/
💸 Kickstarter: kck.st/3JGr4S1
Hey Mangs. As long as we're back on the topic of AW, a while back I convinced a Commander Wars modder to make a bunch of the COs that didn't make the cut in the Mangsvance Wars CO contest. I was wondering if you still had a list of who submitted what, since I was never able to get into contact with the creators of Julia, Rashelle, Tara, Hughes, or Polish to let them know.
Have you checked out Athena Crisis? If so what do you think about that "Advance wars" like.
I think you should check out Tiny Metal too, it's pretty underrated.
🤘
I'm a bit surprised you haven't covered "Empires Shall Fall" since it's another game in the style of Advance Wars.
Though I'll admit the lack of player vs. player matches might be part of the issue. After all, the only way to play against someone else is to do so at the same machine.
let's hope this one gets multiplayer right
It will.
I mean, it's hard to get multiplayer wronger than Nintendo
If I remember right, they said it's gonna have multiplayer on the Steam page
@@geopold2a4 i was referring to ranked matchmaking and asynchronous matches. Wargroove also has multiplayer but thats completely random or with friends.
But yes, some form of multiplayer is guaranteed, so we could always get the deej/mangs combo warside stream
Real
Considering there is a medic unit that heals infantry it would make sense for there to be an equivalent mechanic unit to fix vehicles, perhaps not implemented yet.
actually having only infantry be able to be restored on the field, whereas any vehicle has to go back to base to fix it is a good idea, gives flexibility to otherwise squishy infantry
How about a mechanic infantry?
@@rrenkrieg7988 Another compromise would be the vehicle mechanic unit / Repair vehicle can only repair vehicles to a certain HP level, and facilities are needed to fully repair.
I hope there is at least some way for all factions. Not having a repair option for my units would frustrate me a lot
I think its better this way, could make the infantry usefull late game, having units that repair vehicles would just make them too tanky
The Steam page has been updated and says 28th January 2025 for the release date.
Looks like Mangs video delayed the launch, lol
@@SynergyGamingTV He gave away too many spoilers, so now they have to redo everything. 😁
more you know
1:37 - "Not perfect, but easy on the eyes." That's exactly what I put on my dating profiles.
LMAO
Hopefully Nintendo won’t sue them because they have a patent on cartoony tanks
It's a patent on the Rhino pushing things, because Mario pushes things sometimes.
I wouldnt put it past nintendo - they're being cunts lately.
Nah, that's way to specific. It'll infringe their patent of units in a video game.
The knowing the pile of dung Suetendo is, would not surprise me
Nintendo have patented "graphics"...
.... This game is screwed!
I'm skeptical of the capture system. The win condition of AW is to disable the enemy infantry line, which is both crucial and vulnerable as it doubles as the meat shield. Here, even if you don't have infantry, you can disable the opponent's economy and take it from there. It might lead to very long games all about HQ capture. However, this could be addressed by introducing objective-based maps to multiplayer.
Or giving map-makers the choice of how many hit points a captured city has, that way they can balance the maps themselves depending on their size and layout
Imagine if there was a Grit, Adder, or Eagle CO, with either indirect supremacy or double attack mobility. You could city/factory wipe someone from a stalemate posture.
But you can also create way more unit than advance wars.
With just two base you can create 6 units per turn which is insane. With four which will probably the case you can create 12 units per turn !
I think the game is designed to pump up tons of infantry, and ferry them with truck and IFV to create a frontline
Since property are so vulnerable, unit count to defend them become much more important and cheap okayish quality unit that get the job done become much more stronger. I think thats also why there isnt a mech unit and IFV is a thing.
The game will probably look like two wall of basic infantry that cover the whole map and each player try to make a breakthrough, much like ukraine warfare ironically
Thats also why each faction will get a unique unit that have criwd control, I think unit placement will be even more key than advance war
The big risk is the game becoming an infinite slugfest tho, but with that many unit if a player disrupt the economy he will have an insane lead tho
@@anonyme4881 But infantry can cap/attack out of the transport, so a +move transport heli unloading three +move infantry could insta wipe a base from miles away. Any normal CO could potentially do it too if there is fog. Being able to produce 3 units a turn your could make that whole base play force in a single turn too with a single ground and 1 air base. All they have to do is wait for power or a turn where you can't afford to triple build and it's over.
Triple build also sounds like a nightmare in unit count, single base maps play like triple base and a classic AWBW strong side weak side map with 3 bases suddenly has 9 build. Sounds like a potential slog of trying to wallbreak infantry.
I can see the concern, and i guarantee warside maps will look a lot different from AWBW maps.
But, the mechanic does seem to have a lot of potential for very dynamic games, because you essentially always want to be sending out attack group's to try and kill undefended properties, meaning a big deathball, whilst hard to stop in it's tracks, is way more vulnerable to having it's economy ravaged. But, of course, if you do have a big deathball pushing into opponent's territory you have a decision to make in if you want to kill the enemy units, or spend shots killing the eco in order to prevent them rebuilding.
All of that, with having to pay super close attention to positioning because 2 rhinos could drive an infantry walled mega tank into a mountain, killing it instantly for zero cost, so any sort of deep walled formation is far from invulnerable.
Additonally, i think the whole "3 unit from 1 base" isn't as high eco as you might think, because you can punp infantry, but anything expensive like tanks and artillery you'll probably struggle to even get 2 of them out. In AWBW, if you have 17 K income, you can build a tank, a battle copter, and an infantry, nothing more, no matter how many bases you have. Same here. And with bases being infantry of vehicle units, not both, pure infantry spam won't be as easy to pull off as it could be
Now, The idea of base backstabs with T copters is very scary, but adds to the dynamic aspect of the game, be about placing units to defend your bases, or just leaving scouting infantry on possible attack paths and splitting your army off to respond to threats when they appear, and of course splitting off a drop but losing those units from the frontline with 2 or 3 turns until a possible payoff is a significant decision to make. Even moreso given 2 anti air in a bad position could end up killing your entire drop with 4 units in a single turn.
We will see how it plays out, but the system definitely has a lot of potential, assuming it's balanced right, and the fact both players can do everything does mean anything which is strong is more likely to be annoying than specifically overpowered.
I gotta say on the point about mechs, to me they're a unit that is very important to the overall balance of the game. If there aren't mechs, then it becomes impossible to challenge tanks unless you have tanks of your own. Sometimes you just don't have that money, and this could make even a tiny income difference completely snowball a match. Sometimes there's an area of a map where only one player can send vehicles, if mechs don't exist then a second player just has to completely concede the area and can't even make a play to deny it. I just can't imagine Advance Wars without mechs. They're a very balanced unit due to only having 2 movement.
I find sniper maybe the counter to tank and light vehicle. One sniper may do 10% damage to tank, but when there's several of them, tank seem less of a problem. That mean, the opponent will have to opt for heavier tank. But then they risk being under populated.
Mechs are a terrible unit, not even Sami and Sensei want to make them, but because tanks gatekeep everything that isn't heavier than them (arty would be ok if tanks didn't have 6 move) mechs are a necessity.
Days of Ruin has an equal but opposite unit in the Anti-tank gun, which is pretty much a tank that also counters other tanks, and the game is terrible because why would you build anything else.
The fundamental problem is the gap that tanks cause. Why does it have 6 move and so much armor. Why is it so cheap compared to other vehicles, why ever build a recon if you're not playing fog of war?
And why are mechs so slow and expensive? It's just an infantry squad carrying an explosive tube. Because they have such a great value exchange against tanks, with situational good exchanges with medium tanks and neo tanks.
If mechs aren't so good against tanks, then mechs can be better as a unit. Make them cheaper, give 1 move, make them better against light vehicles (recons, transports, arty, anti-air) and worse against heavy vehicles (tanks). Now you use mechs primarily to counter anti-air and protect your arty, and unlike regular infantry they can still be used to finish off damaged tanks.
Tanks should lose 1 move, but be more resistant to mechs and b-copters.
@@misteral9045 Why build Neo Tanks at all if Md Tanks are the superior unit. Neos are more expensive and only like 10% more firepower and defense. Because mobility. That one extra movement is a huge deal. Tanks innately have more mobility than Anti-Tanks. If you're Grit holding one single front, you don't care about mobility. You inch forward under artillery cover. But when you have two fronts, suddenly mobility is king. Grit can't redeploy on the second front as easily with arty. But tanks can. And then you smash Grit's weak defenses there and take map control. Days of Ruin, along with the other AW games' campaigns are rather basic when it comes to tactics and overall strategy. You need to watch the games the upper middle to pro players play on AWBW because for the most part (ignoring Kartel), the AW AI is super easy to beat when it's not cheating in fog. There's also generally only one front. You can play Grit-style on most campaign missions and be good to go. But make the AI have the difficulty of a medium rated player and suddenly woah, this is actually tough.
@@ElementZephyr If that's the case, why are all movement boosting CO's (with the exception of Max) in Tier 4 or Tier 3 and those who buff attack/defense or who have a utility power are in Tier 1 or Tier 0?
It's a noob trap to think tactics are everything, which is what movement is.
The meta is warped around the anti tank because not only does it counter other tanks, it's an indirect that can also do direct combat, and it has decent damage against bopters to boot. Literally a one unit army that is only kept in check by it's price. Huh. Just like mechs, but the opposite.
@@fishyfinthing8854 snipers are still very vulnerable to tanks attacking them, not to mention how snipers can't attack at close range which just makes them a cheap artillery that's only good against targets you don't typically need artillery for.
the way they could have water based buildings given their era would be stuff like oil rigs/offshore wind farms or island forts and lets not forget sea terrains like reefs rough terrains mist we got from dark conflict i am also hoping this game works wonders looking forward to the crazyness of it to
Hell, we have seen fighting in oil and gas rigs in both the Irak-Iran War and more recently in the Russo-Ukrainian war.
my problem with these wargroove-type cities is that a big chunk of the area you're fighting in, specifically the part you're fighting about, is inaccessible.
This always felt annoying and restricting in wargroove, as it limits your formations.
But at least they're not defending themselves.
for now.
They also feel like massive immovable walls which you can use to just protect a unit from one side, and if its diagonal to a mountain thats already 2 of the possible 4 spaces direct combat vehicles could attack from being blocked off, which makes me think there will be a lot of indirect spam to shoot over citites and bases
@@DustD.Reaper By the demo, it that they are. Outright walls that you can use to form a defensive line, I love that the AI counts capture as higher priority than attacking units. I wasted enemy troops by making tug of wars on the property, they ignore my other troops and just focus on recapturing the properties to get blasted by ranged troops.
Infantry should be able to move onto a city. Then the city takes damage before the infantry does (excess damage is applied to the infantry).
At least the maps I played so far gave them enough breathing room. I felt more claustrophobic in Advance Wars. Also, we have a full featured map editor in Warside which makes it seem like a solution to any potential property problem will be easy to invent.
Alright, so, as a full casual player, here is my view of it:
It looks promising but MY GOD does it look like you can gamebreak this game to hell and back, I already see the cheese and strats fulminating in the pro's head haha.
And while it's more a personal point of view, don't really like the portraits, too realistics for my taste and the game itself, would Say it should be more "anime" / cartoony tbh.
I think the big issue with the CO designs specifically, is that at least half of them look like you picked "character creator" pieces, and put them on the exact same template. There is a huge lack of variety in posture, body type, and head/face shape.
I personally really like the portraits.
I agree. Part of the reason why I like advance wars so much, even more so than fire emblem, is that it's not too 'dark'. Every character has their own little quirks. If they are just portrayed standing still, even with different color schemes, clothing, and designs, they just feel the same. Give me some funny looking COs like Drake, Hachi, and Adder, some holding comical yet practical tools like Andy and Jess, and then give me some serious looking ones like Eagle, Nell, and Hawke.
@@jawwer00 I... think you're right! If you look at RPGmaker MV, the program has a built in character portrait maker and I swear the kind of pixelated semi-anime thousand-yard-stare style they used looks almost identical to the characters in Warside :P
"make it more anime" wow cringe
I've been keeping an eye out on this one for awhile, wonder if you've got any intresting new details bout it.
This is me being picky but I'm a little disappointed by the Rhino. I saw a combat engineering vehicle and I was really hoping we'd get something akin to the DoR Rig, letting us put up temporary facilities and making minor changes to the map.
That may yet make it into the game. Don't be disappointed by lack of units in this video. It's literally a demo.
Tangent... But that gives me ideas on how to implement Super Heavies in an Advanced Wars type without just making them a tank++. Make them mobile CPs with different, possibly faction based abilities: rapid repair, artillery, rapid capture, resupply, etc
@@jonskowitzoh that's sounds good
"like if advance wars and wargroove had a baby" well wargroove is already like if advance wars had a baby so that's kinda alabama
Yeehaw
SWEET HOME ALABAMA
Wargroove seems really different on the points that matter. I did not touch it, but since Warside is a lot more like Advance Wars, I am very interested in it.
As an strategy game fan who massively prefers the modern war setting over medieval or fantasy settings, this is something I'm definitely going to add to my wishlist.
I like how, since Advance Wars uses midcentury aesthetics - the factions are themed either after cartoon versions of WW2-era armies or evil invaders from outer space - this game is using more modern aesthetics. The blue faction dress like modern generals, impeccable uniforms covered in bars and commendations. The green faction are Mad Max-style post-apocalyptic raiders, and the orange faction has a Middle Eastern militant vibe.
More like free peoples/outlaws/Fremen where it consists of frontier people who have set themselves in harsh lands and refuse to let the civilized forces take over
I like having both. I have had enough of Advance Wars to enjoy its straightlaced alternative competitor. Also, the gameplay is ironically more absurd now with the Rhino.
Me: Mom can we get advanced wars?
Mom: We have advanced wars at home!
Advanced Wars at Home:
wishlisted! thanks for showing this to us mangs!
Let me know how the AI is if they let you do Versus matches. Wargrooves was sadly lacking and didnt use any counters.
Am I the only one that found some of the early demo maps being very stingy for funds? Especially for what they are asking you to take down. On more than one occasion, I found myself looking at 3 enemy tanks, and the only way to make anti-armor to stop them was to make tanks of my own. However, I would need 10,000 funds for a single tank, where, despite holding half the properties on the map, i was only making 5,000 per turn. It also hurt to see the 10k i just invested in that tank be make useless the second it hit 5hp and could barely hurt anything bigger than infantry with no way to heal it.
I also worry about the idea of faction-specific units, as it risks an entire category of CO's getting bumped up in tier by solely the fact that they have access to the "stronger" exclusive.
Same. The game needs more economy.
@Mangs1337 the games needs alot more work before i would buy it.
That's another reason to have the mec, they should implement it, with the new transport system they would be very useful
Well, I don't think CO tiers being affected by faction exclusive units is necessarily a bad thing. Also if units such as the rhino are going to be banned anyways, then it'll be even less of a factor
I think things were being designed more around experienced players. I think having a smaller amount of properties makes sense and being able to produce multiple infantry from one building makes up for a lot more than Advance Wars could on low funds, but it does limit your ability to play around with units. I forgot the Rhino existed because it was an expensive unit.
Hope there is an anti-vehicle infantry unit. Seems weird to not have the infantry space have minimal interaction with enemy vehicles.
It's not as important with vehicles being able to handle properties now.
The explosions look wimpy. Like they disappear in a puff of smoke instead of being immolated.
The COs have no animation reaction to winning/losing. Lifeless.
I really love the Rhino though.
Oh yeah… I imagine meta strategy will be making sure that in the case of Crowd control you not in a position where your enemy can shunt or drag the line. My guess is that 1 faction will have the rhino… another will have some kind of indirect dragging unit that uses a hook to pull targets closer to it. Positioned well, you can beach warships by fishing them onto the land.
@@Motleydoll123 You get an achievement for dragging a Battleship from the sea to a lake using the hook unit (unlike a car getting thrown into water, ships wouldn't immediately explode if they got beached, ergo, you should be able to keep dragging them along the ground after fishing them out of the water)
I really hope this game is freat! I enjoyed Advanced Wars a lot back in my times!
Honestly, don't care at all about multyplayer. I also don't care much about the sotry, I just hope there is a strong and and challenging campaing with complex versatile maps different objectives and hybrid warfare.
And yes, I want anti-tank infantry!
I definitely feel like there should be way more infantry, air and naval unit types at this point.
Yeah it feels like a very early release with probably some big roadmap ahead...
I suppose "Empires Shall Fall" does scratch that itch a bit with it's inclusion of a ranged mortar units and an infantry unit outfitted with an anti-air gun. It also includes an infantry unit comparable to the scout from Days of Ruin as well.
Though, I'll admit that game is rather average overall due to the campaign not being that challenging for experienced Advance War players nor is it all that replayable since it lacks a hard mode. It also only has effectively two COs despite both factions having three commanders each. This is because all of the commanders for a given faction have the same powers. I suppose on the bright side this makes balancing them a bit easier, but the game also lacks multiplayer; so this benefit just makes playing battles as a given faction a bit more tedious since their is little to distinguish their commanders. It also doesn't help that you can recharge your power meter after popping one of your four powers. So it's possible to daisy chain kills into overwhelming advantage pretty quickly against the computer as well. And in my opinion the empire has better powers with it's global healing and global damage abilities. While the healing ability only recovers 20 hit points like Andy's basic power. The ability to reliably pop this power once a turn for multiple turns in a row is pretty overwhelming. In comparison the Republic's unique CO powers are a bit of a fusion of Adder's movement powers with a slight stat buff like Max's powers. And while the extra movement is useful in my opinion. The bonus isn't big enough to make it as useful as global healing or global damage.
Though, I suppose I really can't complain that much since the game itself is only $13 roughly before tax. So I got a an alright experience for what I paid for it.
@@thesacredlobo I'm not sure what you are talking about by the end of your message, but the campaign for Warside is not represented in the demo. The missions are different in the full game. They gave no real information on the enemy faction in the demo.
@@sigurdtheblue - "I'm not sure what you are talking about by the end of your message, but the campaign for Warside is not represented in the demo."
I'm talking about another turn-based strategy game inspired by "Advance Wars" on Steam called "Empires Shall Fall". My final paragraph is about the game being alright for it's price even if it is a bit disappointing in some areas for an experienced player of "Advance Wars" or turn-based strategy games in general.
This also reminds me of FIELD COMMANDER from the PSP, ahhh I can't wait to play
The capture mechanic of wargrove was one of the single worst aspects of the game. Sad to see basicly the same thing here.
Been supporting this game on kickstarter for about a year now, definitely has potential to become the next advance wars since nintendo is neglecting it
Nintendo franchise neglect is becoming a big issue outside of Mario, Zelda and Pokemon if your a fan of any other Nintendo IP your lucky if you see any new game within a decide.
The dozer pushing things around actually reminds me of Into the Breach, and I really enjoy the idea of this kind of stuff. The art design, along with the blue color scheme, reminds me a lot of a Space Marine vehicle, and when I learned that it's called a Rhino, I really had a genuine smile on my face.
As an Into the Breach enjoyer, I’m always down for CC units. Make players think about positions more, and make it harder to blockade.
Have you tried "Athena Crisis"?
I would also be interested to hear Mangs' opinion on Athena Crisis
There's also Tiny Metal
bro Athena Crisis has DINOSARUS 😂
Athena Crisis is amazing actually
This is a game that will likely never released. First it was scheduled for q4 2023, then sometime 2024, now it's suddenly jan. 2025. Close to no communication from the dev... I've lost faith that this game will ever be a thing.
I find so clashing the CO art in comparison to the unit art
But way more important, note what I say, _the main feature of AWBW and Tiny Wars is the non-real time multiplayer_ . All AW clones multiplayer fail because of this, and thus, have a much harder time developing a community around it. It's not mechanics nor artwork, it's non-real time multiplayer.
Problem is, knowledge on how to do it is rare in the indie scene. Monthly payment is something that scares the crap out of indies.
Still, more alternatives the merrier. Where there's Will (DoR joke...) there's a way. Eventually someone will make it, and it'll be glorious
Thank you Mangs for covering this. We need to support alternative IPs as much as we can. Community will never evolve being unofficial, we NEED to support an IP that gets us
I don't know the first thing about managing servers, but as far as I know AWBW and Tiny Wars devs are just a small group of passionate people. Is there some reason they can make asynchronous matches but most indie companies can not?
@@Eternalwarpuppy To my understanding, complexity. I assume both of them happened to someone with the skills/will to do it and be an AW fan. Indies (but in reality any gamedev) already struggle to have anything released, so online on top makes the task much more daunting.
So in short, technically nothing, but in reality, sorta many. One more thing to worry about that potentially can go very wrong. _What's the point of expending significant amount of resources to a game that can potentially not be received well?_
Borrowing an IP, and making it open sourced, decreases the risk of everything going in vain
@@magicalcapi9148 Interesting perspective. I hope Warside will be willing to take the chance to invest in good PVP.
you dont need subscription for non real time mp you just need a p2p connection and a savestate on both sides that gets updated when the opponent finishes his turn
@@dj_koen1265 then you gonna download the state from whom if the peer is offline?
Ok a huge issue for me (maybe I'm a bit stingy?), is that the factions got the same units.
I loved the different styles in AW and Wargroove.
Americans (red)
Russian (blue)
German (green)
Japanese (yellow)
That was great. Meanwhile here looks everything the same and I find that pretty unappealing.
I desperately hope this is subject to change. Days of ruin was already disappointing in this regard with only having 2 distinct army styles.
Same. Hopefully Reaver's (green) would have hazmat infantry and boxy/industrial look for his vehicles.
I hope they put more infantry units in the game. Also they should add something a bit different to a mech for anti tank.
First two COs are way too bland and generic looking. Compare Soldier McSoldierFace to Andy. A simple design, but the suspenders, star, and the massive wrench adds plenty of character and unique style. The busts also losses out somewhat on some of the more dynamic poses we see from Advance Wars COs. Like Flak's art often depicting him like a hunched over brute or Hawke posing heroically with his scarf fluttering in the wind.
I agree. The two first CO's need a total re-design.
As someone who loves uniforms i personally think beckett looks the best out of all of them, but i definetly agree that no poses is a big downside. Reaver just looks like some random cosplayer the way he's standing around.
But while i agree that having 2 generic officers might seem weird, i personally really like the idea of at least one faction having proper uniforms. But they really need posing to differentiate them better
From what I can understand, the two Generic COs are basically American-ish military. Shock and Awe, overwhelming force, y'know the type right?
The orange faction looks like they're modern-day desert nomads. Y'know, back in the day they probably traveled the dunes, gathered food and materials, traded for stuff, and moved to the next area, on camel backs. Now they do the same but with trucks. Of course, when the Not!USA comes into their desert in full force to investigate what the greens have been up to, they start to think they're being invaded by Not!USA.
The green, I... There's no nice way to say it, they look and talk like Raiders from Fallout who got lost into another game. I've got nothing else to say.
So you've got the Not!USA, the nomads from Not!Africa and the Not!Middle-East, and the raiders from Not!Fallout. I think the designs work well enough at characterizing them.
Actually, Reaver mentions there not being much life in the "Wastelands", so that area might have been nuked, as in actually really hit by actual nuclear strikes.
Maybe just change their pose and expressions?
For me is the opposite, I like them better because they feel less exaggerated. I like a lot the main character, but I can see it can feel bland
Demo seems really promising! The game appears less finished than I had originally thought, but what's there looks and feels good!
I saw this and had this wishlisted since early 2023.
I thought it'd gonna be up late 2023 or early 2024, and I was praying they didn't just stop working on it.
Very happy to hear they're gonna release it soon!
I like a unique take on anti-vehicle infantry, maybe something like a mine layer who sets up anti-tank minefields?
A mechanic who could repair vehicles and get cities up and running faster
And maybe the ability to garrison infantry in cities, to make it slightly more defensive.
Damaged facilities would need mechanics to bring them back to full capacity or it will be reduced production speeds, limited troop selection, or both.
Saboteurs who can damage said facilities in such a way.
as a long time casual fan of advance wars this game looks really promising, my only nitpick is that different factions don't have different sprites for their units like AW did but its easy to overlook honestly
A possible fix to over production is just to add a global build limit per turn that can be adjusted either in map creation or through other in game rules, this would also allow you to add more production facilities to the map witout adding to unit count increase
Love the art style!
Kinda hoped the Rino would have been for terrain modification based on it's looks, but that's a really interesting power.
Sounds like they should have the option to leave Infinity garrisoned in freshly captured properties to prevent the ping ponging, BUT at the same time the volatility of properties may be a great way to make the gsme stand out.
hey the free demo is free for anyone to download and is available now if anyone wants to try it. I just got the demo myself.
I mean the multiplayer is important, but they are not making an esport for sure, so it would be nice to see some busted fun play piece like the Rhino and people not ban such innovative ideas
I am missing the fow. with the idea of fighting in towns. It still be not broken, bc your income is reduced for each repaired unit. When nobody enabled 9k/structure income, it still not be good and artillery can pin single units down like real war is. You need to rescue units with space to flee for full repair or let them dying. To tick a town is weird, you lose many actions for ticking a town back to 0 with no effect. Advance Wars used the thought to conquer after battles are over (where you can gain profit of properties) and only with infantry. To destroy a town looks like a genocide, when you remember no military is in position (ik its symbolic, but it is some kind of bad action). It would be better, when you split units in a town, when you tick it with vehicles and making counter of what is in there. Means fast conquer, but split your army into many pieces for short time
I hate the CO portraits, the semi-realistic style really clashes with the rest of the game, I feel that they should be more stylised.
But hey, maybe the devs thought it looked enough like advanced wars.
Concurre
THO, Some of the orange factions are good.
The blue faction is lacking in personality.
Honestly, I think it will grow on people. I have never played advanced wars (this game actually made me discover advanced wars and not the other way around) and I like those portraits much more than what I have seen from AW. So there might be a bias of nostalgia for many people.
@@BenjaminBoslet-rm6jr I have zero nostalgia for AW, yet I also think that the art style difference between the gameplay and the COs is very distracting.
It's not about the design being bad, it's about the styles clashing for absolutely no reason.
So they can "grow on me" all they want, the difference will always be apparent.
Here's an idea for implementing mechs:
What if the mech's abilities were rolled into standard infantry instead? Modern real-life infantry forces up to the end of the Cold War (at least in NATO) carried around some anti-vehicle ordnance by default, which should be sufficient to defeat any armored fighting vehicles short of a main battle tank (though even they could suffer if sufficiently outdated).
Even so, some more specialized anti-armor forces might be utilized with firepower that's sufficient to bring down even a main battle tank, though this would often come at the expense of anti-infantry capabilities.
So yeah! Mechs or no mechs would be justifiable. I simply prefer to see lightly-armored vehicles get sufficiently threatened by ordinary infantry units instead of being more cost-effective tanks than, well, actual tanks.
grenades?
@@dumb214 Of the rocket-propelled variety, as used in recoilless weapons such as the RPG-7 or the Mk 153 SMAW for example. Weapons like those I'd imagine would be standard-issue for ordinary infantry squadrons, while the heavier, more expensive tank killers, like the Javelin and NLAW, would be reserved for anti-armor specialist units.
I think making just regular infantry a considerable threat to tanks can really mess with the balance of the game.
@@epicgamerzfail4575 Even if IFVs, with their autocannons that could punch through armor short of the front of a main battle tank (kind of like Anti-Air), were to be considered the equivalent of light tanks, while main battle tanks would've been considered the equivalent of medium tanks, or even neo tanks?
"I simply prefer to see lightly-armored vehicles get sufficiently threatened by ordinary infantry units instead of being more cost-effective tanks than, well, actual tanks."
Try snipers, they are effective against light vehicles
From what I saw of the screenshots and videos like a month ago, my main concern was that the game would be *too* faithful to AW1/2, which admittedly to some people will be a bonus, but to me at least, it's a negative. It's been over 20 years since AW2 released, *SURELY* there must have been some new ideas, some ways to innovate the genre in the meantime, and forcible movement is definitely a step in the right direction, I just fear it might not be enough to get me interested. I do hope I'm wrong, and that this game will blow people away though!
I agree. It looks like it's in a bit of a no man's land in that way, which is to say, it looks different enough from AW that it's going to make the average AW player feel out of sorts, but not SO different that it feels distinctly better/worth playing for its own sake.
I wouldn't want another AW1 or 2, but building off AW2 (minus neotanks) would be good.
This is like people complaining about "Smash clones" when in reality there have not been enough on the market and none of them put the effort into being a straightforward game for a long time. Warside is the game I have been waiting for because it is a proper turn-based strategy game without any stupid gimmicks. I love the concepts in Advance Wars and love a different take on it. This game is better too. I think it is definitely worth it to give the Advance Wars community a real replacement option with good multiplayer but apparently you have to complain about this blessing the community waited forever for.
The rhino looks AWESOME but for balance reasons I think it should only be able to move one unit at a time. This would make it more situational and less controversial. But if someone's not being careful or you play your cards right it could be amazing.
The Rhino gives me vibes of Into the Breach, wich cant' be bad given how amazing that game was.
Maybe a way to balance the rhino so it doesn't push multiple units at once is something like what happens in "Into the Breach" where pushing one unit against another or some immovable terrain results in damaging the units involved, here I could also increase the damage based on the weight of the pushed units.
not going to lie, this game looks dope. I am sold. Love their choice with the art direction as well. Couldn't stand the weird art style of the advance wars remake.
This looks really cool, I think the biggest concern I have from what I saw was that units seem to be very expensive and there are not a lot of income properties on the maps. If properties are still worth 1000 funds, then it will be very difficult to ever afford any premium units. If they are worth more, than even a slight property lead for 1 player will be insurmountable.
It could be a fun time. It really does have a mix of Advance Wars and Wargroove.
Will be interesting to see how the CO powers work.
It is nice that you can tell what a unit does by their appearance
This game has been on my wishlist ever since a friend first told me about it. I'm crossing my fingers and hoping that this ends up being the spiritual successor I've been waiting for all this time.
I'd fix the city properties by letting us park our units in there to repair like in Advance Wars BUT make it so the city takes some of the damage suffered by the unit it's protecting and its defense bonus decreases the more damaged it is, that way it's still a good defensive strategy without it becoming a near unassailable wall, in other words a city with 5 out of 10 hit points would only provide half the defensive bonus of a full health city
also I like how the soldiers on the Rhino unit pull out flags and point them forward like "CHARGE!"
So hype to see this! Advanced wars was ignored for too long
Another game you should check out (that's already out) is Tiny Metal: Full Metal Rumble.
Definitely excited for this one i just hope they have a ranked matchmaking
SO glad you gave this game some cover. I'm excited for it as well. I enjoyed the fantasy equivalent take on it, Wargroove, but I still love the more modern style aesthetics closer to Advance Wars proper more.
Other thing that I noticed:
0:06 (for a fraction of a second, the green map, Green vs blue)
Seems you can see the airport design, which looks ok.
The thing that is most striking however; is that a Nuclear Power Plant [Right Middle]?
Could just be a stylised HQ perhaps.
Still, interesting.
Visually it's miles above Reboot camp but how you describe some of the game mechanics worries me slightly. I presume income is not high enough to actually pump out 3 units from multiple bases and an airport unless it's just basic infantry. Capturing seems to be the most worrying thing, but contested properties being constantly flipped might not be bad as they will fail to provide anyone income until someone gains an advantage.
Agree with a lot of comments talking about how the co’s need to be more stylised and expressive with more reaction animations take what’s happening in the battle. The game seems to want to be more fast paced than advance wars with the ability to quickly swarm the map and move units up with transports which is interesting and hard to see how balanced it will be without seeing it in action. The pusher units seems to have been introduced with this in mind having, making a fortified position is far faster than advance wars able to make multiple units a base and being able to move artillery up fast means getting a foot hold in an area can be done with far more ease. The devs clearly want a more fast paced and explosive game play style though so having. The game be very siege heavy isn’t what they want to lean too which is why they introduced a “crow control unit” as they put it so there’s a way to quickly break up these forward positions. The pusher is going to be. A pivotal unit of its kept legal and will change the way the players look at the map and where they can set up or not but I can see what the devs are going for and why they put it in not sure how it feels in practice and map design will have to be made with it in mind if it’s kept. They should definitely try make the cos more expressive atlesst if they don’t want to change the cos designs too much they should give them very exaggerated and cartoony reactions to there units getting destroyed and attacked give some contrast to there serious appearance and will give them a lot more personality.
This is like that game I played on phone when I was young, Ancient Empire.
This game reminds me more of a game series that I grew up with that, to me, was my advance wars by web: Battalion.
The Battalion series was a franchise of flash games whose last or second to last game was a peer to peer multiplayer game community, most of the games are still available on Flashpoint and are more similar in aesthetics to this game.
All this to say, I miss Urbansquall (devs of Battalion)
I think this game has promise, but even though I like Wargroove's version of how to capture properties I think Warside's decision to make enemy properties not able to counterattack is a weird choice. It's like the worst of both worlds.
I wish infantry could garrison cities.
Honestly, the moment I saw the unit and map visuals I inmediatly thought "Why wasn´t Re-Boot Camp like this?". I like the portraits well enough, I see why some people may prefer other style but it´s fine to me.
I agree that the gameplay changes are very promising if done rigth. I will definetly keep an eye on this one!
Game has a killdozer lmfao
In order to balance the great-deployement hability of bases, how about a feature (that the player can turn on or off before starting a map) that makes the units cost a little bit more high than usual once the player built a certain amount of that single tipe of unit? For example, you build a lot buggys, now de buggys cost more money to be deployed. As single as that.
I haven't think so much about what could be done with this, It's just an idea trying to balance things off. Great video by the way
2:32
Will say this looks like an 'EMP' stylised ability; as it only appears to disable the movement of vehicular units (the two infantry types seem unaffected).
4:00
Capture system
I've got to say, I like the sound of this hybridised system.
Being able to essentially encircle an enemy property and eliminate its resistance (attack the city) with any units is good.
Then just having to sweep in with the infantry afterwards to capture it is nice.
It then remaining at 2Hp makes it feel very similar to the Civilisation (and similar) stylised capturing of cities, where you essentially have to be able to capture AND HOLD the city.
You can't just sweep a unit in and then have the city for (in advance wars) at least 2 turns. You're always at risk of it being immediately retaken.
It also, as you point out, makes it so that the map flow can be rather dynamic, as you're potentially capable of threatening an opponents income at multiple points of the map, not just the main front, so you can't let that one single tank go unchecked.
6:20
Factories & Barracks
(Anyone that is familiar with the Kuju Battalion Wars (1 & 2) games that are a bit of an offshoot of the Advance Wars family, will instantly be familiar with these buildings, and conceptually make a lot of sense, especially seeing the additional variety in footsoldiers that is present).
I like the idea of your production power being higher the more secure your bases are and goes back to potentially enhancing the map flow. It also adds a bit of variation for player vs player.
9:20
Movement
Advance Wars By Web gave us Boosties.
Is Warside giving us SUPER Boosties...
I appreciate that there is the choice between the completely unarmed Truck (The pure transport) & the IFV which trades off some of its transport prowess for being able to participate in the battle at large.
The Rhino (& Equivalent mechanics units) does as you point out seem difficult to balance, but from a conceptual point, does seem very fun to use.
12:40
I'm instantly in love with the ability for T-Copters to drop off light vehicles (1 light vehicle & 1 infantry, or 3 infantry).
I'm hopeful that we'll potentially see a Military Cargo Plane capable of deploying Heavy & Light Vehicles.
B-Copters being more akin to their 'Gunship' counterparts (It's unlikely the tank column will even know you're there, let alone return fire) is a reasonable change provided its balanced somewhat effectively.
Will definitely follow closely.
Lots of potential.
And the market gap, though somewhat niche, firmly exists after the comparative failure of Reboot Camp.
If they can nail online multiplayer, they can secure a firm (rather uncontested) foothold.
I already see a strategy that will be devastating. a transport helicopter with 1 rocket and 1 Sniper , Especially if the game includes fog of war and hides infantry in forests.
Woah transport units look to be absolutely crazy, and with the increased production it seems the devs are aiming for a large higher army count than a typical AW game.
The lack of a Mech equivalent is ... interesting to say the least. My main worry is that since Infantry can't reliably deal with tanks, it is going to be a race of who gets the most tanks soonest. But I perhaps the improved mobility of infantry units due to better transports can make up for it?
A trolling unit approaches, its name is the "rhino."
Hopefully nintendo doesnt come out with a precise patent that shuts this game down.
As long as Warside doesn't use their intellectual property (CO names, nations, factions etc) then there's nothing they can do. Nintendo doesn't own the right to turn-based military strategy games.
There's some talk about Warside's sprites being too similar to Advance Wars', but AW's are based on real vehicles so I don't think it'd hold much water..
It's coming for the switch, too. I don't think they'd release something on their hardware without review
@@link776 You would think, but I don't know if they're still doing the "Nintendo Seal of Quality" business strategy anymore.
@@Mangs1337tell that to Palworld, they also didn't use any © element. They're being sued for patents
As someone who enjoyed watching the battle animations and the different army appeance on my GBA Advanced Wars, I hope they make the units of different armies have different appeances.
I hope that they make a good game for multiplayer that's properly balanced, and then sprinkle in some gems like the Rhino to spice things up for non-competitive play, like campaigns and scenarios.
I think they need to change the property system a bit, you should be able to sit on it to defend it but maybe add a way to invest money into a property like a bunker or repair facility, that way they become more valuable and fight back maybe even leading to a point where you when flipped get 5 hp as well as defense bonuses to the property which makes defending it easier but you first need to invest the money which isn't worth it for backline properties in most cases
This game actually introduced me to advanced wars when I was watching the trailer and everyone kept comparing them. This is also how I found you.
the buggy is a really fun unit for chevauchee. if you can get it around the line, you can start hitting their prod buildings.
also, i really wish there was a one-button end turn. hitting escape every time and then selecting it seems off.
Dude sweet I didn't know the demo was out!
Between this and Metaphor ReFantazio this is a great week for checking out upcoming titles!
I played the ever loving heck out of AW2 when I was in Iraq.
If mountains offer visibility bonuses like in aw, snipers will be nuts.
I'm about as excited as i was before wargroove released. Hopefully, when it comes out, I won't be as disappointed as i was after wargroove released.
They should have an option to make units' values (cost, damage, movement, etc.) customizable for multiplayer. This way, players can adjust settings based on what they feel is "balanced" and devs don't have to overburden themselves with balancing the game competitively.
I am definitely excited, I really hope they do it right. A couple of the ideas in the game are exactly what I thought of if I would make an advance wars type of game. Not necessarily a priority but hope they add a unit which is like an engineer which can build defenses and other types of buildings, maybe as a map editor unit, not something for the game per se, I think it would change the game a bit; and I hope the COs are good and interesting, especially the navy COs.
Don't play any advance war games at all and only know about it from this channel. I'm glad the developers are talking directly with the playerbase for feedback, and agree they should find a way to work with the advance wars by web folks. Those guys would be immensely helpful, and would be MORE than willing to help them make the best game they can. I don't know if this will be my kind of game, but I can tell there is a lot of passion and effort being put into this. I wish them good luck and hope the advance wars community can get a big win with this game.
I hope its any good, Ive been looking for a project like this for awhile!
It looks like the same Demo you were given can be downloaded on Stream. Can't wait to try.
While the sprite work looks nice, I feel it could do with some work in the animation department.
Not sure I like the changed capture system, but I won't knock it until I have tried.
I like the way Ranked/Casual is handled in Master Duel. When you play casual, they still match you with people of a similar ranking, so the matches aren't overbearing. I hope they have a dedicated server for multiplayer, or let players host their own servers as a tradeoff, that would make multiplayer so much better that the abomination Suetendo has for 'multiplayer'.
One game I hope Mangs reviews in the future is a game called Noobs in Combat. It’s a Roblox cooperative multiplayer turn-based tactics game (though it does have PvP maps) with many interesting mechanics that Advance Wars and other games like it don’t have - building defenses with the sapper unit, overwatch units, suppression and vehicle immobilization, splash damage, morale as a separate HP bar, limited ammo, reloading times, veterancy, and most importantly, vision range, meaning you can hide troops and vehicles in trees and buildings to ambush the enemy. It changes up the Advance Wars formula quite a bit, and is pretty well-balanced too. It’s still actively being developed, and I’d love to see what Mangs thinks of it.
roblox lol
By the way, Mangs, there's another Advance Wars-like coming out that might interest you titled "Athena Crisis".
If it has the editor from Wargroove, I'll be buying it.
There should be a 'repair truck' like there is a medic, but to repair vehicles.
Agreed, that would be dope!
God!! I immediately went to kickstarter to donate but the funding is already complete! Wishlisted and cannot wait for more!
Agree with the battle animations looking a little too slow, but it's so much easier to look at than Wargroove where it feels like every animation look like every other frame is missing and animated like slime blobs hitting each other.
I kinda want to be able to stand on my cities to defend them. Maybe have cities not heal until 10 hp is the solution? Or have the captured city start with 1 Def star and have a infantry unit that can upgrade the Def stars of the city to be able to build a defensive line using the city. To counter this add bonus damage to cities the more they are surrounded to make sure they fall easely if not defended properly. Just some wild thoughts as I was watching the video.
This looks very nice. I'm a bit iffy on the artstyle of the commanders, but more importantly, the unit sprites seem to be the exact same between factions, which is something I always adored in AW.
I hope this game gets popular! Also, I hope this game gets an active multiplayer scene and becomes a regular part of your videos like Fire Emblem and Advance Wars! Otherwise it might fade out like Wargroove.
I love the idea of transports being very strong. Transports are a fundamental part of modern warfare and should give an edge if used well.
Thank you mags. In sea of endless video game releases I don't keep track of any of them. Always have been and always will be a fan of turn-based pixel games like this. Instantly putting it on the buy list.
Huh, this reminds me of an old Advance Wars-ish flash game I played on Kongregate. Good times.
So this is basically Wargroove if Wargroove *_actually looked and felt like an Advance Wars game._*
Wishlisted, will buy day one full price, don't care; I *_NEED_* those Advance Wars vibes on my PC.