@JuliusBorisovBeamdog Whoops. Must have missed that in the interview itself. Sorry about that.

Don’t take my (admittedly) harsh tone the wrong way. I am definitely looking forward to playing this game on release and am glad to have a representative from Beamdog on this website in communication with the (more hardcore) fans.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, I fully understand what this game is for the time being. I’m just expressing hope that this game becomes a starting point for something bigger instead of just a one-off deal. A hope I’m sure you and your team share as well.

Looking forward to getting in the Early Access when the time comes.

@djensen

@djensen said in Q&A with Axis & Allies Online Developers, Beamdog:

@DoManMacgee @Panther The TripleA team does a great job but it’s TripleA, it’s Axis & Allies but it’s also not Axis & Allies because it’s not allowed to be. TripleA is great for the die hards, the A&A obsessed, the experts, and the soon to be experts.

Axis & Allies Online provides accessibility for a much wider audience, which also includes TripleA players. There are a lot of folks out there who have not played a digital version of A&A since Iron Blitz. I would previous send them in the direction of TripleA and never heard back. Even when I would post to social media about TripleA, there was a lot of talk but there were very few takers. With AAO, you get Steam (if you don’t already have it), send $20 and you’re up and running; it’s easy, known, and comfortable.

Lastly, there are just not that many people here playing 1942 SE here anymore, everybody is on Global and Anniversary.

Then why is the marketing/interviewing portraying this game as (paraphrasing here) an “Axis & Allies Game for Axis & Allies Fans, By Axis & Allies Fans” instead of “A New Way to Bring New Fans Into Axis & Allies and Bring Past Fans Back to the Game they Loved”?

If that level of honesty was provided, with a hint of more to come if the initial product were successful, I think the support would be more uniform among the community.

There are reasons people don’t play 42SE, and it’s not only because AA50 and G40 are bigger/more involved. Balancing is certainly a key issue and Beamdog seems to be willfully ignoring it for now. to their credit though, they are taking feedback and I imagine if enough of us speak out during Early Access something can be done to address things.

@Argothair said in Grand Plans, 3rd Edition?:

I also think that the interviews from Beamdog so far don’t admit that they’re focusing on casual players – the marketing pitch says that people like me are supposed to enjoy this game. So, that’s part of why I’m pushing back

Agreed with this. If Beamdog was more honest with their/WoTC’s intentions I imagine all of us would be on the same page.

For example, WoTC pretended Zombies was going to be accessible to “long time fans” and it’s mostly turned out to be 41 but with a tiny extra pinch of depth from the play-testing myself and others have done.

@Panther We seem to be on slightly different wavelengths, but ultimately hoping for the same thing.

I program for a living (although nowhere near the video game industry) so I understand how difficult/time-consuming dealing with technical challenges/implementing rules can be. I don’t expect to have all the functionality that’s been developed piecemeal in TripleA over several years available immediately. I’m just hoping that Beamdog doesn’t stop after 42SE.

This is a huge opportunity for A&A to have a wider audience/appeal. It would be a shame if the only version of A&A the wider gaming community knew was 42SE, that’s all.

@crockett36 said in Grand Plans, 3rd Edition?:

argothair,

Is there a map you like, one that you are thinking of?

To be fair, Revised is a more-balanced and less-nuanced 42SE, and AA50 is a slightly-more complex but infinitely superior 42SE. Either of those would have been preferable as a starting point in my mind.

I understand Beamdog’s choice though, as 42SE is the most “modern” edition the developers are most familiar with (Revised is like 15 years old at this point, Classic is over 30).

Here’s an interesting but possibly off-topic thought I had. According to the interview Beamdog gave djensen, development has been going on for >2 years, from a time before the reissue of AA50. Is it possible that 42SE was chosen over AA50 because no one from Beamdog was aware the game even existed?

@djensen said in Q&A with Axis & Allies Online Developers, Beamdog:

@DoManMacgee said in Q&A with Axis & Allies Online Developers, Beamdog:

Support for additional games (G40, Revised, AA50, etc.) down the line.

@redrum said

I’m interested to see if they eventually try to tackle say Global 40, how they would try to adjust that to fit the vision of make asynchronous play easier and faster.

As the article mentioned, they’re putting all of their focus on 1942 Second Edition. However, you should take a look at Beamdog’s track record. If A&A Online is successful, the sky could be the limit.

Hence the “down the line” comment from me. I understand fully that A&A Online is just going to be 42SE at-launch. That’s not really anything I care about, since 42SE kind of sucks. But I will still be buying/supporting the game with the hope that A&A Online can be fleshed out into a better TripleA. Who wouldn’t want a better, official/legal TripleA? Why shouldn’t we want that?

@Panther I disagree. The rule changes are not major enough to call them different games in the slightest. It’s just OOL being predetermined, and no shared carriers/transports.

TripleA has a 42SE scenario that I can play online, and dozens of other scenarios that I can also play online. TripleA also has a built-in forum poster.

A&A Online has a 42SE scenario that I can play online, with shiny graphics. Other than tutorials to help new players get up to speed, that’s about all the game has to offer.

One is clearly superior to the other here, at least initially.

I’m on @Argothair 's side on this one. Making things worse is that djensen confirmed in the other thread that this is 42SE OOB, so there’s not even the LHTR to fix the balance issues.

However, I’m not going to take as extreme a position as Argothair. I still plan on buying the game in the dim hope that it’ll either spur the creation of another A&A Title, or that the online platform will improve down the road.

@redrum I already play and enjoy TripleA. The reason I am asking for these features in A&A Online is because TripleA is the bar that A&A Online needs to meet/surpass to be taken seriously by the community.

Beamdog is a professional Video Game Company. They should be more than capable of out-performing a well-made fan-project, or else what’s the point beyond appealing to casual audiences?

@djensen said in [Q&A with Axis & Allies Online Developers, Beamdog]:

The Axis & Allies community has strong opinions about the board games, especially 1942 Second Edition, and will definitely have ideas to share regarding Axis & Allies Online. What is your plan to gather and incorporate feedback into the game?

@Cody said:

We’ll be paying attention to player feedback through several different channels. We’re going to be gathering feedback through our Early Access survey, which will available through the game or via the End-of-Game e-mail notifications, the Steam Community sites and our Social Media channels. In addition, players can file specific feature requests through our support site, which is also available in the game. We hope that by having a lot of different avenues for players to provide feedback and input to the team, we can work together to develop Axis & Allies Online to be the best game it possibly can be.

@Trent said:

Our plan is relatively simple:

1. launch the game into early access

2. gather feedback

3. engage in discussion with the community about how to best resolve the concerns / feedback

4. clearly communicate the upcoming changes in the build

5. push the planned changes to a beta server and gather feedback on the changes. If the feedback is positive we push the beta build to live and start taking broader feedback.

6. return to step 2.

Sounds like we’ll need to mobilize on our front and make our voices heard if we want things like:

• Using the Balance Mod instead of the Imbalanced OOB Setup.
• Support for additional games (G40, Revised, AA50, etc.) down the line.
• Possibly additional balance rehashes to the 42SE Map.
• An independent release of the game outside of Steam (for us privacy nuts that are biting our tongue and buying the game anyway).