Lot's of bad reviews. Is there a similar...

[TokyoDan]

Lot's of bad reviews. Is there a similar online multiplayer game that is better?

[justinrenna]

Originally posted by tokyodan:

Lot's of bad reviews. Is there a similar online multiplayer game that is better?

Triple A is a good fan made online game. However, my Firewall never let me play an online game, so I don't trust it. Also A&A online makes it easy to match up with other players.

[Maverick1701]

Its literally good. People are just idiots. The only issue ive had is that if you set the ai to max speed (which is basically insane) the game crashes.

[BSWEN]

I second what maverick said..

[TokyoDan]

Thanks guys. I think I'll go with this game over TripleA with its antiquated UI design.

[Old Soldier]

Originally posted by tokyodan:

Thanks guys. I think I'll go with this game over TripleA with its antiquated UI design.

If you think TripleA's UI is bad, wait til you see how awful this one is.
There are no more "idiots" leaving bad reviews than there are idiots leaving good ones.
There are very good reasons why this game has so many negative reviews.

Full disclosure: I am one of those "idiots" who gave this title a bad review. Based almost entirely on the current UI design.

[TokyoDan]

Originally posted by Old Soldier:

Originally posted by tokyodan:

Thanks guys. I think I'll go with this game over TripleA with its antiquated UI design.

If you think TripleA's UI is bad, wait til you see how awful this one is.
There are no more "idiots" leaving bad reviews than there are idiots leaving good ones.
There are very good reasons why this game has so many negative reviews.

Full disclosure: I am one of those "idiots" who gave this title a bad review. Based almost entirely on the current UI design.

I have neither game but from the video reviews I've seen this game seems to have a much more modern-looking UI. but if it is easier to use or not is another thing.

[nicewolf64]

it's not a horrible game. The UI, especially for transports, is not very intuitive. and of course the AI is really bad. before I figured out the 13 victory cities, i had no clue how many times that lone inf sitting in Hawaii saved me from defeat, and yet the Japanese never took it. Each AI player also seems to have a turn at which point they think they must be losing, regardless of the actual game, and they go into defensive mode. So the Japanese will build a ton of destroyers, regardless of the existence of any ally ships at all, stop defending the mainland IC. and the brits will put dozens of land units in England, but never build any transports. the funniest part is that neither of those territories need to be taken to win the game, so those strategies are completely useless. the german doesnt understand once it's panzers and luftwaffe are gone, it is doomed, so it leaves a lone armor or fighter sitting duck just waiting to be destroyed. i'm hopeful that once I learn to stop making stupid mistakes and move on to playing human players, that it'll be the same fun as the board versions. but after initially thinking of asking for a refund, i think it's worth the beta price.

[nicewolf64]

so here is what I mean about terrible AI. its turn 4, and my panzers take moscow. the japanese are moving towards honolulu and calcutta. the few remaining russian units are hunkered down in "stalingrad" (sorry, dont know the game name), but in reality, they are dead. 4 russian inf are in the various siberian territories.

it'll take 2 turns for my panzers to roll over calcutta. but in doing so, i left paris with a single inf, rome completely undefended, and a couple of armor in berlin to counterattack. the royal navy has been completely sunk.

on turn 4, the brits put 3 units in calcutta but move half their army towards "stalingrad", where it gets destroyed by the Japanese. the rest is spent on inf in london. the americans and russians smartly leave their handful of units in calcutta.

the americans, who have zero fleet in the pacific, have a decent army and a large fleet, 2 bb, 2 ca, 1 cv, 3 t, and numerous d , and move everything to eastern canada. so instead of taking their troops and going to africa where they can hit either paris or rome the next turn, they now only have paris to chose from next turn, but surprisingly do not build anything that would be of value for the next couple of turns.

turn 5, i squash stalingrad with minimal losses so i'll have 15 panzers to hit calcutta next turn. I load up berlin, rome, leningrad and moscow with inf. the brits build 3 inf for calcutta and more for london, and still no way to use all those units. the japanese take honolulu giving us 9 VC. but they rightly decided that calcutta is slightly too much for them.

so here comes the big US counteroffensive.....their airforce takes out my inf in paris, but their fleet just sits there. game over. i mean WTF.... granted i probably take calcutta for #9 the next turn anyways but it would have been a big fight that only a few bad rolls would have swung the balance and there had already been 4 massively lopsided battles that game (2 for, 2 against).

there's zero reason that AI logic should be that blind to the situation. the US/UK had 2 turns to retake a VC and did nothing. and the brits moving half their forces out of calcutta towards a non VC, doomed that VC. germany was by far the strongest at that point but combined, the US/UK still had more production, a sizable army and navy at the ready, and europe was bare. they could have taken paris and plopped down a IC and had a decent chance to defend it for quite a while. my navy and air force were gone so i had no way to stop an invasion and resupply until i could build a fleet or air force. the AI should have noticed that western europe was virtually defenseless. a human would quickly have seen my all or nothing dash at moscow and would have built transports and invaded france or norway or somewhere.

isnt 9 VC for the axis just way too easy? leningrad has no chance to stay russian, and honolulu is a low hanging fruit. that just leaves calcutta OR moscow, and both are easily had by the 4th turn. the only ways i've won as an ally were to just "lendlease" myself to death by picking a VC and sending everything to it until it could counterattack. most of my ally games last at least 17 turns with some into the 20s. but the lack of decent foreign territories makes building ICs a very iffy strategy. in this particular game, based on the military, the game should have been far from over.

[Julius Borisov]

@tokyodan The game is in Early Access. It means it's constantly getting updated based on the player feedback. It's not a finished product.

The overall reviews for the game are Positive (higher than 70%). This has been the case from November, 2019. When estimating recent reviews, please take into account what exactly is mentioned there. There are quite a few reviews mentioning the unlucky dice, there are reviews mentioning they don't like the Axis & Allies 1942 version setup.

We recommend to check out our forum FAQ (which, among other things, addresses the dice complaints) and the ruleset of the game (and how it compares to other Axis & Allies games).

https://steamcommunity.com/app/898920/discussions/0/3140616601487024190/
https://steamcommunity.com/app/898920/discussions/0/1643170903484413158/

We, as developers, are striving to make the game better. We're trying to accommodate the feedback we're getting.

https://steamcommunity.com/ogg/898920/announcements/detail/1617282814882108891

https://steamcommunity.com/ogg/898920/announcements/detail/2979617355648562446

After getting opinions on the new arrow system after Patch 5, we reacted with Patch 6, which changed the arrows again.

https://steamcommunity.com/ogg/898920/announcements/detail/1726498278434222808

More updates are coming.

We're also working on substantially improving the AI.

Getting feedback, even the negative feedback, is always better than not getting players' thoughts. We appreciate greatly how active and responsive the community around the game is.

[jasonwclark]

TripleA is the only alternative available that I am aware of, but it really depends what you are trying to do. If you want to play 1942 second edition vs other human beings online then you will have an easier time doing that here. If you already have a playgroup, want to play hotseat at home, or if your interest is in playing vs an AI then TripleA might be better. The downside to TripleA is that the set up is more involved, and it runs on java, upside is that there are more maps. Downside to this one is that it only supports the one A&A game 1942.2 and costs 20 bones, upside is that it's easier to find a pick up game if that's the only map you're interested in.

As for the UI in each, I don't know if antiquated vs modern is really the way I'd describe it. Unless you mean like the way Apple or Braun products seem modern because they're minimalist and have fewer buttons hehe. But yeah, the design aesthetic of this one is probably slicker, but there is also less stuff to interface with. Its a self contained game, just 1942 sec Edition, rather than like a platform that has to service multiple maps, so its probably more visually coherent because of that.

I have yet to leave a review because its still a work in progress, but so far I like it. The devs have been pretty responsive and engaged with us. I wish it was a little more like TripleA in terms of what it does, but I'm also a bit of a partisan since I sank a lot of time into that project over the years.

What I like about this one is its relative simplicity and the way it kind of forces everyone onto the same page, which for now is the no bid Gencon version of the 1942 game, due to the ranked play introduced in the last couple patches. Sure its kind of like iron fisted, there are few options to customize the gameplay, but that also prevents the player base from immediately balkanizing into a bunch of different playstyles or playgroups, which is what happens on TripleA typically. Its worth checking out I think, if you want an easy way to hop in a game without having to muddle around or do a bunch of legwork. Gotta pay for the ticket to ride, but it ain't crazy expensive and for now at least the playerbase is pretty active, whereas tripleA for 1942 is going to be deadsville guaranteed hehe. If you get bored later on, want to play G40 or whatever you can always go down the tripleA rabbit hole later if you want. But this one is at least hopping at the moment, which is why we're here right? lol

[nicewolf64]

Originally posted by Julius Borisov:

We're also working on substantially improving the AI.

Getting feedback, even the negative feedback, is always better than not getting players' thoughts. We appreciate greatly how active and responsive the community around the game is.

i know my comments have been on the negative side, but in reality, thats the point of beta is to work the kinks out. but i also just talked a friend into buying the game and hoping another buys it soon too. just so that you know i actually do like the game. :)