Armor Clash II

Really divided on this one: not a bad game that has good sides, but it has quite a lot of flaws. Therefore it's rather "No" than "Yes" for now. [h1]Gameplay + Review Video, if you'd rather watch[/h1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NR02meYibY0 [h1]Short Description[/h1] Armor Clash II is a classical Real-Time-Strategy game that involves Base Building. While the game offers everything that modern RTS Base-Building games could offer, it feels lacking for some reason. [h1]Pros[/h1] • Every cool RTS function is there: unit groups, build shortcuts, selecting all similar units on screen when double clicking. • Great unit models and graphics • Upgradable “general skills” that level up as you battle • Day/Night cycle is pretty cool (but I did not see it affecting the game in any way) • Good naval unit implementation: the naval units supplement the ground units well • Good variety of units [h1]Cons[/h1] • Balance issues: ships actually seem overpowered at high tiers, one side (the one with heavy armor/tanks) seems much stronger than other. • AI is not great • Only 8 skirmish maps, at the time of writing this review • Lack of internet-multiplayer. LAN Only games. • The fight for resources is not exactly intense: sure, there are points on the map, capturing those brings you extra credits. But other than that: you just build resource gatherer at the very start of the game (at your base) and just carry on. I did not exactly run out of resources. • Lack of polish in some aspects: it’s easy to miss level-up in the midst of the battle; the skirmish settings do not save between matches, etc. Lots of seemingly small stuff that make impression from the game worse in the end. Also, the ai difficulty resets completely when you change maps which adds to annoyance. [h1]Game mechanics[/h1] Armor Clash II made me seriously think what makes RTS games good. Because the game has everything that you would expect from a classical Base-Building RTS: rock-paper-scissors unit mechanics (only with more depth), build queue, attack-move, general skills and factions. However, it still just did not seem enough. The reason for this is probably how the game is set up: balancing RTS is no joke, and while game author does a good job on implementing technicalities, it still is not enough to provide a meaningful tactical gameplay. For example, if you look at starcraft 2 or company of heroes – there’s always a tradeoff between when picking a strategy. I.e. if you decide to focus on capturing points in CoH – you are exposing your flanks and cannot build strong defense effectively. If you decide to concentrate on building infantry – you will be lacking in vehicles. Essentially, you pick the way to play and if your way of play is better than opponents – you get rewarded. Armor Clash II does not have a lot of tradeoffs like this: there are two factions, but they don’t feel much different. You can build most of the buildings right at the start and it kind of kills the “technical progress.” The AI is not terrible, but not great either. That would not be an issue if you could play over the internet. However, the game has LAN multiplayer only, so you probably won’t be able to play against other people. [h1]Summary[/h1] I’m really on the line about the game. It’s not a bad game and despite the negative traits, I think the game has potential if developer keeps working on it. Right now, Armor Clash II is a game that you could go once a day and play one quick skirmish game against AI. If you want something like that – it’s not a bad RTS for killing 15-20 minutes. Whether you feel it’s worth $15 – totally up to you. Right now, however, I would not recommend it.

This game needs alot of work but it has the potential to be really great. Honestly I'd love to see it become something similar to command and conquer generals. Note: Alot of this is for the devs Things I'd recommend fixing: Being able to click on enemy units and see their health, damage, ect. Art up the command and control panel. Being able to see through the slightly opaque box causes a loss of character in the factions. Add more units in general. While I love how many subfactions you have I think you have too many to be honest, at least for now. While I get the feeling that you are trying to balance it I think having more specialized units for both factions would be nice. For example in my first game I had no clue what was anti air and when I found that said unit, while it said it was anti air it was barely effective. I think you should try going a little more sci-fi with the Gaia faction maybe use a laser AA system. NOTE: Only replace a main faction unit if its better then the orginal. While yes its nice to have different units per different play style to fit every player. I take this inspiration of Wargame :RD and Wargame: ALB. There are thousands of units if you haven't played it and while some are super similar the difference between them is same exact weapon excepts one has tracks with greater armor and the other wheels with less armor which I can see you have tried to implement but due to your map design and the current agression of unit AI less armor and more speed is a bad thing because kiting in a straight line will eventually end up with you having no place to run. NAVY IS OP compared to land units. The Navy can just choke you out. I'd like to see much less of this. While Naval power is important its really stupid (although unrealistic) when any navy unit pretty much beats out any land unit in a one on one engagement due to firing range. I love the Scale of your ships I really do but I think you went too big to be honest at least for these maps! You should add in many more escourt class style vessels. I'd really look to Wargame: RD they have tons of ships. Don't remove any ships though! I'd suggest making stuff like the Carrier more of a Super Weapon to be honest but please make the jets weaker so much so that they can actually die being able to Nuke any ship in the game with one run is OP which blows the Steel Alliances Battleship out of the water. I'm really curious as to what you guys (devs) think. Message me sometime, I've played tons of RTS games and would love to see this one shine. I want to know your thoughts and maybe help out! I'd love to know more about the story as well! Would I recommend this game? I would, but its still too Raw for anyone not new to the RTS scene to enjoy.

This game had kinda gone for the C&C Generals look, so on that side its good but it goes downhill from there. Its very barebones and lacks content and polish, no strategy is needed, its just biuld units and rush foward.This game has alot of potential just needs a bit of work

Hello community, As a man who Loves the RTS genre I feel compelled to support Indie devs with RTS projects. Having said that let me speak to Armor Clash & Armor Clash II. The models look great as does the graphics in general i.e. terrain, buildings & various landscape ellements. The Base Building is simplistic but encompasses Land, Air & Sea Units which is pretty cool. There are not a lot of maps to battle on right now, but the ones that are there offer great Tactical & Strategic oppurtunities. To me Armor Clash was a proof of concept for the young Indie Developer Windforce( I am assuming here that he/she is younger than my 50+ years lol) It provided a solid foundation of knowlege to make Armor Clash II. Having said all that what it lacks is Story and Campaign ellements to give it body. It is, or can be, a fast paced, crap or get off the pot kind of warfare that only the most aware commanders will master. I do not have a lot of hours in game. A pathetic little actually. But the game. Is. Fun. I whole heartedly recomend Armor Clash II as a fun Indie RTS for all RTS fans.

[h1]Solid single player RTS[/h1] Armor Clash II was a little disapointing from the start. A feature I liked of the prequel, Armor Clash, was that you could mix your own "decks", that's gone now. Other than that, AC II is a skirmish RTS. You can play multiplayer via LAN (or software like hamachi), The gameplay is solid, and the models and animation are good (in particullar the animation, it's full of detail), but that's it. No campaing, no multiplayer match making, not much to do except playing skirmishes. It's not a bad game at all, it's just lacking in many fields. I feel the 10 dollar price tag is adecuate for this product, and I hope the developer will keep working on this. Adding a campaign would be great for this title. [b]I appreciate the Linux support[/b]

The idea is good but the execution is subpar, performance and gameplay are underdeveloped areas and it does not have enough maps. Online is available either, only LAN and that is not enough

Same game copy and pasted I wish I got it on sale or something since it was not worth it and thanks for steam policy for not letting me refund it :)

It is another proof, that simplicity and creativity crossed with well known elements can make a very good and promising game. Some people tell that the game isn't complete. Maybe it is, but it developer has a lot of passion in creating, which lacks in most of mainstream games. That's why I bought game, because work of Windforce is worth contributing and support by gamers - especially if you are die hard Command & Conquer fan.

2都是个半成品就出3，出3你还不如更新2，3都出了是不是还有456要对得起你的价格一个比一个贵还都是半成品我还以为你会更新2结果等来的是个狗几把3居然还有主播推荐，3还是个换汤不换药的东西就TM加了几个新东西其他的跟这个有什么差别我都TM怀疑你是不是故意的。

Great concept when the RTS genre was in a rough shape but now since it is abandoned it is just a tech demo. Inspired by C&C Generals for sure