This is really disappointing.

[BrutalGlory]

I've been looking forward to this for years now, and i can honestly say this is the first RTS I've been genuinely disappointed by in about a decade. It seems to have kept the core of the old C&C games, but it's also taken all the wrong lessons while discarding the good ones as well.

Granted I've only played the (GDF i believe it was called? it's GDI for all intents and purposes) but the tech tree is an absolute mess. The UI is also messy; ratios for abilities and seeing what units are selected don't match the rest of what's being displayed and reading the abilities is a literal headache.

There's no range indicators for base defenses (at least while building them at a minimum, maybe there is while selecting them but i'm not entirely sure) and we're using the C&C RA3 wall building system here which is painfully tedious (but not the range indicators from RA3 for some unknown reason)

I don't know what the devs were thinking with every units having abilities by the dozen either; sometimes less micro is more. The game can't seem to decide if it wants to be the pre- Tib 3 & RA3 where it was large-scale skirmishes and the micro was in moving and focus fire or Tib 3 & RA3 onwards where it's a more slow and methodical experience and the micro is based on abilities and sieges. The game seems to have a serious identity crisis by trying to cram everything possible into it.

Building garrisons are functionally useless with the upgrade that enables units to deal damage to units inside the structure. Watching 6 basic anti-tank units get slaughtered by 3 basic vehicles while garrisoned is *not* the C&C experience, i don't understand the decision making here. The whole point of infantry in a C&C game is that it's supposed to be cost effective when fighting from cover.

The repair bays are an outdated mechanic from the late 90s. I don't want to be asked to build half a dozen bays and then manually tell vehicles to repair themselves after a fight like i'm playing Generals. It's one thing to ask someone to micro, but this is absurd. In no universe should we be going back to 90's mechanics that we scrapped and require more micro/macro than playing already APM intensive games like AOE 2, AOE 4, WC3, or SC2 to name a few.

As for MCVs they're the worst offenders. The build radius is absolutely *horrible*, they're slow, for some reason packing and unpacking has a cooldown that's much too long, they require tech to build (Seriously, what the hell is this? Just make it default from the vehicle factory!). (I actually edited this part because upon reloading the game queing multiple buildings of the same type worked, it didn't initially don't ask why.)

The eco is an absolute MESS. Resources run out on each node *far* too quickly, and it doesn't seem like there's any justification for having more than one harvester per node. The base storage of 6000 without silos is also absurdly low, if i can keep a factory, 2 mcvs, a barracks, and an airfield all pumping off of 5 nodes and *still* need to be spamming silos just to keep up then there's a serious problem here. Just do away with the storage limit altogether; pick an identity, is this supposed to be a slower RTS or a faster one? I can crank out 5 factories and keep them going if that's what the devs choose, but don't expect me to make 30 silos in the process while trying to tech and do everything else. At some point i'd like to actually take fights instead of staring at my base.

I'm sure there's more but I think I've made my point. This game is a hot mess, I get the devs want it to be C&C but they've crammed all the worst aspects of C&C games into one and created a monster. The last few times there were demos available i couldn't get the game stable enough to try it, maybe it was better a year ago before they decided to rehaul everything, and if so they really need to revert some of the changes they may have made.

(Edit: Mistake of thinking multiple tech buildings needed to get all tech pods removed. Both icons would simply appear blacked out after building one on further testing - goes to UI complaint.)

[Blitzwing]

1 Everybody has an own expectation, but in my opinion the initial post does summarize it's pretty good, the game does miss those expectations.

2 I think this point is very good and important,
that the game looks promising, but feels very generic.

3 Modern day RTS try with same dish to please everybody. Game is like chocolate with broccoli. On its own each component is fine, but combine them feels odd. Or Onions with honey, pickles with sugar and now we have tomatoes with marshmallows.

[KoV]

Games to convoluted indeed
Less skills/upgrading would be nice
Got 2 friends to try and it was to much unclear for them
I read and tried everything and the game feels way off/bad incomplete rn

Also manual reloading air units ... feels bad

[JDPUK]

Found the part about the pre-order skins - interesting...

[Buntkreuz]

Originally posted by Bankai9212:

Originally posted by King_Kiff:

this is called feedback....

remove your EMOTIONS and give the devs this IMPORTANT FEEDBACK in the form of dot points with how you'd like them changed.

Not an emo paragraph for each point.

The game releases in 2 months what feedback can they even use at this point?

Mostly just technical stuff, hence the Agreement you sign at the start.

This is just a way to playtest and iron out crucial issues before release, covered up as a demo.
Im honest, this game is basic.
I dont think its bad and honestly i havent played enough to make a qualified statement on the gameplay.
But the systems it features and the content it offers is just too far behind by todays standard.
Lets get it straight, but a PvP, Skirmish and Campaign isnt going to get me to play it at release.
Past year releases in the genre showed what is fun with RTS games, especially Northgard set a very high bar with its Conquest Modes and recently Bifröst while featuring about 2 dozen different factions that play unique.

Then you have stuff like AoE2DE, 3DE, 4 and AoM that just feature a ton of content.
I invested more than 300 hours into AoE2DE only playing Campaigns, Scenarios and Coop.

Tempest needed to be exceptional to even be able to compete and while that might be unfair as games like AoE2 are old and stuff like Northgard was developed for a decade now, this is the competition it faces.


If it is stable and ok-ish, i will get it at a sale, play Campaign and Skirmish and that will be ok.
But because im not alone with this, the game will likely fail when many do the same.


Now to business:
The Marketing/selling method feels off. Pricetag is too high for what it offers.
Its basically early access without being honest about this.
To me its clear the team runs out of funds, they manage to finish 2/3 of the game but need to release it.
What they do now is giving you a playtest covered as a demo to fix technical issues, then release 2/3 of the game to fund further development to finish it off, hoping it will recoup the investment.
In one timeline, where it doesnt recoup the cost, they will release a statement that says they have to quit support and sadly the 3rd faction wont make it in.
All in all, its not really good looking whats going on to me.
Its all hype, not much substance.
To me it stays a typical "get at 70% off" game.

[spellsnare]

i hope they will take feedback from the demo and fix these issue there still 3 months left before the full release there still time left to fix it

[nafcom]

Originally posted by spellsnare:

i hope they will take feedback from the demo and fix these issue there still 3 months left before the full release there still time left to fix it

well, they just made a sticky post where to address the feedback to, so your chance :) https://steamcommunity.com/app/1486920/discussions/0/744883366278502915/

[JDPUK]

Originally posted by nafcom:

Originally posted by spellsnare:

i hope they will take feedback from the demo and fix these issue there still 3 months left before the full release there still time left to fix it

well, they just made a sticky post where to address the feedback to, so your chance :) https://steamcommunity.com/app/1486920/discussions/0/744883366278502915/

Should be on here, discord is not where the game is sold, all comms should be on Steam, most of us could give two Fs about using discord.

[nafcom]

well, it's not you who decided that. And discord became like the de-facto standard for community building.

[Bankai9212]

Originally posted by JDPUK:

Found the part about the pre-order skins - interesting...

In an RTS no less.

[Bankai9212]

Originally posted by Buntkreuz:

Originally posted by Bankai9212:

The game releases in 2 months what feedback can they even use at this point?

Mostly just technical stuff, hence the Agreement you sign at the start.

This is just a way to playtest and iron out crucial issues before release, covered up as a demo.
Im honest, this game is basic.
I dont think its bad and honestly i havent played enough to make a qualified statement on the gameplay.
But the systems it features and the content it offers is just too far behind by todays standard.
Lets get it straight, but a PvP, Skirmish and Campaign isnt going to get me to play it at release.
Past year releases in the genre showed what is fun with RTS games, especially Northgard set a very high bar with its Conquest Modes and recently Bifröst while featuring about 2 dozen different factions that play unique.

Then you have stuff like AoE2DE, 3DE, 4 and AoM that just feature a ton of content.
I invested more than 300 hours into AoE2DE only playing Campaigns, Scenarios and Coop.

Tempest needed to be exceptional to even be able to compete and while that might be unfair as games like AoE2 are old and stuff like Northgard was developed for a decade now, this is the competition it faces.


If it is stable and ok-ish, i will get it at a sale, play Campaign and Skirmish and that will be ok.
But because im not alone with this, the game will likely fail when many do the same.


Now to business:
The Marketing/selling method feels off. Pricetag is too high for what it offers.
Its basically early access without being honest about this.
To me its clear the team runs out of funds, they manage to finish 2/3 of the game but need to release it.
What they do now is giving you a playtest covered as a demo to fix technical issues, then release 2/3 of the game to fund further development to finish it off, hoping it will recoup the investment.
In one timeline, where it doesnt recoup the cost, they will release a statement that says they have to quit support and sadly the 3rd faction wont make it in.
All in all, its not really good looking whats going on to me.
Its all hype, not much substance.
To me it stays a typical "get at 70% off" game.

From previous projects don't expect them to do anything post launch outside of a patch or 2.

[Bankai9212]

Originally posted by nafcom:

well, it's not you who decided that. And discord became like the de-facto standard for community building.

Its easier to control a narrative barely see any mod in these forums.

[ZTr00p3r]

Originally posted by DavideOwNzAll:

tanks not attacking in movement is really horrible

That still wasn't been changed??? Well that settles it for me on not buying it...

[孢子强袭武斗吐酸番茄]

Does anyone think this game is so much like StarCraft?

[Inco]

While I don't necessarily agree with all points made, I do think the micro required to use the excessive amount of unit abilities is going to get old incredibly fast.

[kuaikukia]

I'm kinda disappointed when I saw the population cap. If Red Alert 2 or any other C&C series can be fun in terms of competitive and casual play without any kind population cap, why this one needs it?