Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DesertRanger
This franchise has always been obsurdly overwhelming but Soldiers and FoW at least offered some tactical and strategic options along the way. The MoW series is even more obsurdly overwhelming and offers almost no tactical or strategic gameplay - wave after endless wave of enemies is neither tactical or strategic! CoH is an arcade clickfest with a relentless, overwhelming enemy. MoW (Assault Squad included) is even more of an arcade clickfest than CoH and, quite frankly, as far as arcade clickfests go - CoH is more fun.
|
Sounds to me like you aren't playing the game right if it feels like a clickfest in SP missions, because it's never felt that way to me and certainly doesn't seem to be designed with that in mind - Don't forget, there is the option to slow down the pace of the game, making it anything but a clickfest. If you still can't handle the pace on a speed of 1 (default being 3), perhaps you should try turn-based games instead?
To be honest it seems like you just don't like the fact the game now features more than a dozen units under your control at once - So instead of adapting, you claim the game has lost it's tactics in favour of a "clickfest" when in reality it hasn't changed at all other than the size of your forces.
Yes it can seem overwhelming to have 20+ units to order around, but nobody said you have to issue an order for each, every second.
It's true on some missions there are a lot of enemy units constantly attacking, but that doesn't make it a clickfest. You decide how to deal with the threat, it's not up to the game to explain to you the tactics available, be creative, excessive clicking is never required, if it were, i would of lost interest long ago.
The terrain, various pieces of cover, wide assortment of weapons available, hold fire/movement orders (and all the other commands) all make the game far, far more tactical than any arcade game such as CoH with it's simple "move here, attack this" approach.
For example, lying men in wait and giving the hold-fire order can result in devestating ambushes. Or setting up an arc of cover fire with MG units and/or vehicles while you assault a position. Or moving individual units forward and into cover in small groups in a leap frog fashion. There's also the ability to control a unit yourself, which in many of my games has made the difference between victory and defeat. I've lost count of the times i've had a massive assault planned out with units ready and in range to toss a grenade into the enemy before the s__t hits the fan - It's a far more rewarding way of playing the game than simply treating the game as another CoH clone and merely telling unit A to attack unit B and then going on to issue orders to others.
To say it isn't tactical is simply wrong, and i wonder what you actually mean by "tactics"? You still have all the options available to you as you did in the original titles, the only notable difference (apart from setting/story) would be the inclusion of more units at your disposal. But once again, nobody said you have to order them all around constantly - It's your own fault if you treat this game as a clickfest, because i certainly don't and i thoroughly enjoy fighting huge battles. (even when it gets a bit stressfull)
I do have to agree that Assault Squad feels more designed for those hyped up on red bull, but what do you expect? It's an MP game and in basically every MP game since the dawn of MP gaming, a fast hand and quick thinking is always going to win. (Think Quake, Starcraft, C&C, Diablo, the list goes on...)
The original MoW, and Red Tide too, are filled with numerous possible approaches to a mission. While some may work better than others, a quick read around these forums will show you that it's rare to see two people using the same tactics on a specific mission.
I won't bother adressing the rest of your rant as that seems to be all it is, just a rant. Perhaps you should just try replaying the SP missions of MoW, at the slowest available speed, and try different approaches to the missions. There is no shortage of tactics or strategies available, you are more or less only limited by your imagination.
Before you label me as a MoW fanboy, lately i've spent more time with Theatre of War and Combat Mission while i wait for Vietnam to release. Both have their strengths but also have their weaknesses. However, none of them are a click fest if you play with patience and in the right frame of mind.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by psycho_pigeon
it's the same as all the other MoW games, stop moaning. CoH is nothing like this game. Also, why are you moaning about single player? MoW has ALWAYS BEEN for multiplayer. Always.
|
Just wanted to add - I strongly disagree with this statement - MoW has NEVER been about multiplayer for me, and i know i'm not alone. Never touched it, never will.
While i'm sure some have fun with MP, if the game is ever a "click-fest" it's in MP, where the player with the faster hand movements will always win (not saying that's new of course, see my comment above).
In SP however, the design of the missions allow for planning and strategies to unfold, a clever arrangment of units laying waste to an oncoming enemy, or a single unit tossing a grenade into a group of enemies before the others open fire - The SP missions are, for me, where this game truly shines.
This is why i've only bothered playing the demo of Assault Squad and will pass on the full game and instead wait for Vietnam to get my MoW fix.