"Iron Harvest" really needs more variety in the game! ...

[✠GER✠ ™k0b0ld™]

Iron Harvest really needs more variety ...

The whole thing is really good about the campaign and the game.
But from the feel of the game that always comes to me somehow
again right ahead.

Because you keep building the same combat robots and
there is no transport or normal tanks. which one on
because battlefield can call.

I think that the battle robot is a very, very good idea.
Still, it wouldn't hurt.
If there are troop transporters or even normal tanks in the game
would give.

I mean you're working hard on the game yourself right now and I think
it is great from all of you.

But what's the point when the game is finished and there isn't any
there is variety in the game. and there is very little choice of vehicles
gives. and that only combat robots.

My Company of Heros, for example, doesn't have very much either
many vehicles to choose from, that's true of course.

but for this you can, for example, use fighter planes
call battlefield. which is also very important for
this game is.

And that's why Company of Heros / CoH 2 also has more variety
in the game. because there are different generals.
Like air support, ground support and whatever
gives.

And in Iron Harvest it's always the same hero, with the same soldier and combat robot, which unfortunately makes me very sad
find.

I don't know what others think about it, but without change
in the game, few vehicles and only combat robots and again and again
fight the same battle without alternating strategy choices.

And over and over again the same robots in the battle cries without
Another vehicle alternative is really boring.

Sorry for the criticism, but there is really a lack of choice
strategy in the game.
because it's actually a better game than company of heros
with the story you have shown that you can do it.

And sorry again :)

[Jay Akula]

You forgot mention the upgrades you can give to your units. Upgrades also help give a greater sense of variety by changing a units function in battle. Like how the Sdkfz 251 Halftrack can be upgraded to be an armored flame thrower vehicle or a light mobile rocket artillery. Also majority of abilities in CoH are not locked behind some veterancy level.

[primordialegg]

Yeah I've always felt like there's not a lot differentiating each game and there's a particular build order that just works. While adding new units would be ideal, it might take a while for that and balancing it.

In the interim it would be interesting to have commander skills as a skirmish option ala CoH e.g. infantry commander getting cheaper infantry with either a lower pop count cost or larger squads and mech commander getting cheaper mechs or some such so no new assets required but new ways to play none the less.

[✠GER✠ ™k0b0ld™]

Escrito originalmente por Maillotins:

You forgot mention the upgrades you can give to your units. Upgrades also help give a greater sense of variety by changing a units function in battle. Like how the Sdkfz 251 Halftrack can be upgraded to be an armored flame thrower vehicle or a light mobile rocket artillery. Also majority of abilities in CoH are not locked behind some veterancy level.

+1

[✠GER✠ ™k0b0ld™]

Escrito originalmente por primordialegg:

Yeah I've always felt like there's not a lot differentiating each game and there's a particular build order that just works. While adding new units would be ideal, it might take a while for that and balancing it.

In the interim it would be interesting to have commander skills as a skirmish option ala CoH e.g. infantry commander getting cheaper infantry with either a lower pop count cost or larger squads and mech commander getting cheaper mechs or some such so no new assets required but new ways to play none the less.

I think "MECH" or fighting robots should
become a specialization. At least the big ones
"Mech" and combat robots.
The remaining units should also
Battle tanks, combat airships and transport
Vehicles, which is very important in war.
With air defense battery cannon!

Combat airships should of course also have a specialization
be a hero.
But battle tanks and transport vehicles should
whole already have. with an upgrade of course the one
has gotten to.

Because otherwise there is no change in the game.
And of course at some point the game is too
Boring. if you only ever
same battle leads.

[ausfo55]

Why not just play Company of Heroes instead of turning this game into it?

[Jay Akula]

Escrito originalmente por ausfo55:

Why not just play Company of Heroes instead of turning this game into it?

I can not speak on behalf of the other but I can speak for myself.

Yes, it is good to have a unique game in order to differentiate themselves from other game. But if what they are offering is an inferior product compare to their competitors then there is really no reason for people to continue playing this game.

I am not asking for IH to be clone of CoH, but at this moment IH offers us a re-skin of CoH with worst mechanics. I would like to see IH do well, but if they can not at the very least match the experience CoH offers then I see IH just being another name to add to the list of failed and forgotten RTS.

[Dekarchos]

Escrito originalmente por Maillotins:

Escrito originalmente por ausfo55:

Why not just play Company of Heroes instead of turning this game into it?

I can not speak on behalf of the other but I can speak for myself.

Yes, it is good to have a unique game in order to differentiate themselves from other game. But if what they are offering is an inferior product compare to their competitors then there is really no reason for people to continue playing this game.

I am not asking for IH to be clone of CoH, but at this moment IH offers us a re-skin of CoH with worst mechanics. I would like to see IH do well, but if they can not at the very least match the experience CoH offers then I see IH just being another name to add to the list of failed and forgotten RTS.

To be fair some of those RTS games got there by harsh community responses. These types of games are hard to develop and program compared to shooters and they are for a niche audience therefore it is already unlikely developers will take them on. I have seen some good RTS games get attacked in reviews like Act of Aggression and Grey Goo back in the day. As a result those series will never continue which is a shame because they are fun and good RTS games but they died from the community. It keeps happening over and over and then folks will ask why there are no more RTS games. The community can be super toxic. Some RTS games deserve it like Empire Earth 3 but most do not and just need some help to get where they need to be. I do not think it needs to be Company of Heroes if anything since the focus of this game is on mechs the gameplay in balances should reflect it more. Ancestors Legacy is also in a similar vein to Company of Heroes but differentiated by focusing more on hand to hand combat and alteration in resource distribution.

[Jay Akula]

Escrito originalmente por Dekarchos:

To be fair some of those RTS games got there by harsh community responses. These types of games are hard to develop and program compared to shooters and they are for a niche audience therefore it is already unlikely developers will take them on. I have seen some good RTS games get attacked in reviews like Act of Aggression and Grey Goo back in the day. As a result those series will never continue which is a shame because they are fun and good RTS games but they died from the community. It keeps happening over and over and then folks will ask why there are no more RTS games. The community can be super toxic. Some RTS games deserve it like Empire Earth 3 but most do not and just need some help to get where they need to be. I do not think it needs to be Company of Heroes if anything since the focus of this game is on mechs the gameplay in balances should reflect it more. Ancestors Legacy is also in a similar vein to Company of Heroes but differentiated by focusing more on hand to hand combat and alteration in resource distribution.

In the world of business, in order for your product to compete with others you need to offer something better than what the current competitions is offering. Or you use something called blue ocean strategy and carve out a new market.

Iron Harvest (IH) at the moment does not offer anything better than Company of Heroes (CoH), nor does it do anything different from CoH like "Ancestors Legacy". Yes, IH has mechs, but when take a closer look at them you begin to see that they just function like any old tanks in CoH but with a lot of dumb down features. Small things like vehicle component destruction can really help some depth into the game. You get scenarios where a heavy tank get knocked out of fighting with a light tank.

In IH I am just not getting the same feeling when I play CoH. Instead of "one more match', its "why I am still playing this". Looking at the Steam charts I am not the only who feels this way. Unless they start making changes that players have asked for I do not see IH making a come back like No Man's Sky.

[Pickle-Down Rickonomics]

Escrito originalmente por Maillotins:

Unless they start making changes that players have asked for I do not see IH making a come back like No Man's Sky.

No Man's Sky also had people that actually gave a ♥♥♥♥ about the game

[Sheep_wielder]

Escrito originalmente por Synth:

Escrito originalmente por Maillotins:

Unless they start making changes that players have asked for I do not see IH making a come back like No Man's Sky.

No Man's Sky also had people that actually gave a ♥♥♥♥ about the game

You know full well how much we care about the game.
More unit variety will come with time and updates.

[✠GER✠ ™k0b0ld™]

Guys, no reproaches for developers now, start a hassle!
I just wanted to help you develop the game better
can. I didn't want more!

I just wanted to tell developers that it's all right now
only runs in one direction. without specializations of a class.

My suggestion is. The next heroes such classes
get specializations.

As for ground attacks and defense .. Deffensive great

Storm hero class with mechs for offensive

And also ne air support for airship balloon
with assisted mechs or vehicles.

That was my idea to balance the whole thing!

[Sheep_wielder]

Escrito originalmente por Magpie:

So then why did you release it in an incomplete state? How come collectors edition backers still don't have a copy of the game or any of the physical items promised to them? Why did the game release with 5 multiplayer maps? Is that what you call 'caring'? If that is caring what would lazy and incompetent look like I wonder? 4 maps? Honestly! Call a spade a spade!

Hard to accept that you believe what you type. This game releasing with an asking price of $70 (Aud) was an inexcusable train wreck.

I think the issue here is your frame of reference and expectation is purely from the multiplayer side, with much experience from RTS games which have had a lot of time to refine themselves since their inital release. We have continually said is a WIP in Iron Harvest. Also King ArtGames is an indi studio with limited dev resources. Given enough time I'm sure our game will catch up to their quality establihed over many year. I will answer your questions as best and honestly as I can.

1) We released the game when its single player content was complete. We have always prioritised our Kickstarter backers and it was unfair to make them wait longer for a more developed MP when the vast majority of them had voted to single player to be our development focus. MP was a stretch goal. We can see from our data a lot of posativity around the SP experience. These types of players are the silent majority in IH.

2) Covid simply. We used a small, local, high quality company to manufacture our order for the KS Collectors edition. They were hard hit by the crisis but they've been working hard at fulfilling the order and we hope to ship once everything in complete later this Spring. You'll know many small independant firms have had difficulty with producing physical items. The digital rewards were available when the game release.

3) MP was not the priority before release for reasons stated in 1). We have added many more maps since release and more will come.

4) I call, continually engaging with the community (not always on Steam) and working their feedback into future updates, caring. We've routinally done this and I can point to many examples before and after release.

5) As for the price, thats debatable and subjective. But considering we are often on 30% sale, have free demos and we plan to release lots more free content and updates, we feel it's ultimately worth it.

We consider IH to be a moderate success with room for improvement which we are fully committed to. We see much positivity across all the games communties, Steam isn't everything. These are the facts as we see them, no PR bull. If that dosn't satisfy you that's regretable. I wish you the best I hope you find another game that fulfils you better. Hopefully one day you'll come back later and give us another go.

[JDPUK]

Escrito originalmente por Sheep_wielder:

Escrito originalmente por Magpie:

So then why did you release it in an incomplete state? How come collectors edition backers still don't have a copy of the game or any of the physical items promised to them? Why did the game release with 5 multiplayer maps? Is that what you call 'caring'? If that is caring what would lazy and incompetent look like I wonder? 4 maps? Honestly! Call a spade a spade!

Hard to accept that you believe what you type. This game releasing with an asking price of $70 (Aud) was an inexcusable train wreck.

I think the issue here is your frame of reference and expectation is purely from the multiplayer side, with much experience from RTS games which have had a lot of time to refine themselves since their inital release. We have continually said is a WIP in Iron Harvest. Also King ArtGames is an indi studio with limited dev resources. Given enough time I'm sure our game will catch up to their quality establihed over many year. I will answer your questions as best and honestly as I can.

1) We released the game when its single player content was complete. We have always prioritised our Kickstarter backers and it was unfair to make them wait longer for a more developed MP when the vast majority of them had voted to single player to be our development focus. MP was a stretch goal. We can see from our data a lot of posativity around the SP experience. These types of players are the silent majority in IH.

2) Covid simply. We used a small, local, high quality company to manufacture our order for the KS Collectors edition. They were hard hit by the crisis but they've been working hard at fulfilling the order and we hope to ship once everything in complete later this Spring. You'll know many small independant firms have had difficulty with producing physical items. The digital rewards were available when the game release.

3) MP was not the priority before release for reasons stated in 1). We have added many more maps since release and more will come.

4) I call, continually engaging with the community (not always on Steam) and working their feedback into future updates, caring. We've routinally done this and I can point to many examples before and after release.

5) As for the price, thats debatable and subjective. But considering we are often on 30% sale, have free demos and we plan to release lots more free content and updates, we feel it's ultimately worth it.

We consider IH to be a moderate success with room for improvement which we are fully committed to. We see much for positivity across all the games communties, Steam isn't everything. These are the facts as we see them, no PR bull. If that dosn't satisfy you that's regretable. I wish you the best I hope you find another game that fulfils you better. Hopefully one day you'll come back later and give us another go.

I agree with these points and can live with them. I'm looking forward to future expansions to the game, the framework is there to build upon.

[✠GER✠ ™k0b0ld™]

Escrito originalmente por Sheep_wielder:

Escrito originalmente por Magpie:

So then why did you release it in an incomplete state? How come collectors edition backers still don't have a copy of the game or any of the physical items promised to them? Why did the game release with 5 multiplayer maps? Is that what you call 'caring'? If that is caring what would lazy and incompetent look like I wonder? 4 maps? Honestly! Call a spade a spade!

Hard to accept that you believe what you type. This game releasing with an asking price of $70 (Aud) was an inexcusable train wreck.

I think the issue here is your frame of reference and expectation is purely from the multiplayer side, with much experience from RTS games which have had a lot of time to refine themselves since their inital release. We have continually said is a WIP in Iron Harvest. Also King ArtGames is an indi studio with limited dev resources. Given enough time I'm sure our game will catch up to their quality establihed over many year. I will answer your questions as best and honestly as I can.

1) We released the game when its single player content was complete. We have always prioritised our Kickstarter backers and it was unfair to make them wait longer for a more developed MP when the vast majority of them had voted to single player to be our development focus. MP was a stretch goal. We can see from our data a lot of posativity around the SP experience. These types of players are the silent majority in IH.

2) Covid simply. We used a small, local, high quality company to manufacture our order for the KS Collectors edition. They were hard hit by the crisis but they've been working hard at fulfilling the order and we hope to ship once everything in complete later this Spring. You'll know many small independant firms have had difficulty with producing physical items. The digital rewards were available when the game release.

3) MP was not the priority before release for reasons stated in 1). We have added many more maps since release and more will come.

4) I call, continually engaging with the community (not always on Steam) and working their feedback into future updates, caring. We've routinally done this and I can point to many examples before and after release.

5) As for the price, thats debatable and subjective. But considering we are often on 30% sale, have free demos and we plan to release lots more free content and updates, we feel it's ultimately worth it.

We consider IH to be a moderate success with room for improvement which we are fully committed to. We see much positivity across all the games communties, Steam isn't everything. These are the facts as we see them, no PR bull. If that dosn't satisfy you that's regretable. I wish you the best I hope you find another game that fulfils you better. Hopefully one day you'll come back later and give us another go.

If you need more development time, you need it!
and if you needed money to develop it further.
Can I get Iron Harvest early release
understand!

Of course, a few :) are missing to improve the gameplay with
Airships or transport vehicles specializations, but I trust
you develop. because Iron Harvest really has potential.

I enter the status "Early Access". So I
at least keep my expectations within limits :)
and also for others.

[Pickle-Down Rickonomics]

Escrito originalmente por Sheep_wielder:

Escrito originalmente por Magpie:

So then why did you release it in an incomplete state? How come collectors edition backers still don't have a copy of the game or any of the physical items promised to them? Why did the game release with 5 multiplayer maps? Is that what you call 'caring'? If that is caring what would lazy and incompetent look like I wonder? 4 maps? Honestly! Call a spade a spade!

Hard to accept that you believe what you type. This game releasing with an asking price of $70 (Aud) was an inexcusable train wreck.

1) We released the game when its single player content was complete. We have always prioritised our Kickstarter backers and it was unfair to make them wait longer for a more developed MP when the vast majority of them had voted to single player to be our development focus. MP was a stretch goal. We can see from our data a lot of posativity around the SP experience. These types of players are the silent majority in IH.

If you focused so much on the Singleplayer aspect of the game, why is the Singleplayer AI literally braindead?