Battlefield Commander WWII

I am a diehard fan of Close Combat and I an excited to support the game. However, it still needs significant work to get to the level of Close Combat. Compared to Close Combat, it is more clunky, less intuitive and less immersive. Hope my feedback helps get you there. [b]Overly clunky controls[/b] -navigation is too slow. Default navigation movement should be adjustable or at least be same as when pressing left ctrl. shouldn't need 9 buttons for camera control -no tool tips when hovering over commands (im just supposed to memorize all commands) -no navigation button customization -no way to click shift and select multiple units. can only do it by selecting an area (what if i only want to select certain units within that area) -no way to unselect LoS or move action when clicking into it -when telling a unit to stop, they should stop whatever they are doing (walking or firing) -separate UI buttons for ambush, engage when visible, hold fire, move and engage -when moving the cursor to the edge of the screen to move left/right/up/down, if the cursor ends up on a unit, the screen does not move [b]Graphics[/b] -units are hard to see. -color contrasts don't highlight units properly (i am ok sacrificing a little scaling realism to have a better view of the individual units). Close Combat achieve this balance really well. Maybe make vegetation/buildings less opaque when i zoom in to a unit -hard to understand unit condition. dead/wounded/out of ammo indicators should be easier to see or have different color -very hard to understand terrain. could include a topographic overlay [b]Gameplay[/b] -no deployment phase. you can only select and deploy units after the battle has started. I am forced to put the game in tactical pause and then deploy units. -no way to un-deploy a unit if its mistakenly selected -hovering on a unit does not display its technical capabilities -once a unit is deployed it is unclear if they are selected and if i can give them orders -deployment points are not marked on the map -better event log. current log window font is too big and not informative enough. -ability to retreat instead of just surrendering so that i can save units/resources -fire option should have ambush, engage when visible, hold fire, move and engage -no suppressive fire option (i.e. fire in a given direction/building even if no enemy spotted). Can only fire at units once visible but can't suppress possible enemy locations -hard to visually tell when a unit is wiped out -vehicle crews don't fight after vehicle is destroyed -when selecting unit and clicking FoV, it should show the FoV of the given unit -units for some reason go past buildings instead of going into them -no multistory buildings or mechanics -buildings don't seem to provide much in terms of added cover (might be just my experience) -concealment level hard to understand -hard to tell which units are in contact -when selecting multiple clumped unites only 1 is shown -No way to tell indirect fire units how much ammo to use on a given target (they just keep firing until empty) -no way to resupply units. should be able to deploy ammo trucks to resupply (especially indirect fire units) -clicking on spotted enemy unit should show unit composition and capabilities -previously spotted (or killed) enemy units should still be somehow marked on the map to maintain tactical awareness [b]Realism[/b] -no way to set a specific historical period for the campaigns or single battles (i.e. early war units vs late war units). -should be able to limit units to a specific historical period or have a progressive campaign where more advanced units become available later -campaign map selection should have option to be randomized and have sequential seasons (i.e. logically changing weather) -more maps (especially historical maps). there are no urban maps -ability to create custom/mini campaigns with limited resources. this would allow players to dictate max number of units on the map and create a more intimate tactical fight (closer to how Close Combat was) [b]Likes[/b] -ability to split off individual team members -ability to deploy additional units after battle has started (as opposed to being force to deploy everything from the start) -unit orientation arrow -mini map shows directions of fire

I can not recommend this game currently and I´d advice caution in future. I refunded the game after 40 minutes simply because I had experienced the whole game after roughly half an hour. Aside from barely having any content the gameplay itself which is praised in other reviews as a mix of steel division and combat mission in difficulty disappointed me alot, especially because it seems nice and fluent at first but lacks any debt, feedback and accessability. Once the dev adds more units, maps and objectives maybe the game would be worth half the asking price but right now it´s just an expensive proof of concept

So this is a VERY quick collection of my thoughts having played a few skirmishes and a couple of campaign missions. First, it's Early Access, so bear that in mind. It is not feature complete and things can and will change. So for an EA game, how is it ? The concept and execution are very nice. The graphics are detailed enough but not "FPS realistic" Think nice functional rather than OMFG that's so pretty ! That said, the models are detailed and look clear enough to recognise vehicle types to me. There's only two factions so far (GER and SOV), with lots of units for each. The tactical part of the game which you will use in skirmishes and the battles of the campaign are real time, with a selection of units you can choose from with the points you have available. With your points, you will DEFINITELY need to pick a balanced, combined arms group rather than spending it all on King Tigers and then watching as the ISU152 that you can't see because you didn't take any recon is picking you off. The AI is "okay" but needs more work. It doesn't really push in a co-ordinated way yet, but I am sure it will get there. Control of your troops is easy enough, with simple commands around crawl, walk, run, hold fire, fire at will etc... only around six keys needs for the majority of it. The tactical part if a lot of fun, and you quickly start to realise that you need to husband your men and material rather than throw them away foolishly. BUT, and it is a big BUT (no s♥♥♥♥♥♥ing at the back you children !), it seems to only default to be one map so far, so every tactical game you play will be on the same map unless you choose a different one. There's six that I can see, but half of them are the same with snow. That really limits playability for now. The campaign map looks simplistic for now, rather than a HOI4 level of detail, map of Europe with large hexes. Not sure of the scale, but they look to be a few hundred kilometres per hex. Again, not too much going on in there for now, and it needs fleshing out (I told you about s♥♥♥♥♥♥ing at the back !). So overall, buy or not ? Like with Manor Lords, if you buy into the concept and want to support the dev whilst they improve it, but it now. If you want a polished game with lots of features, maybe avoid for the time being. I'll update this with more info as they progress with the game.

Looked good at first very much a revision of Close Combat style games (Looks like its meant to be a spiritual successor to CC3)... But then I started the campaign and I could deploy Tiger IIs... That broke the immersion instantly. It's never a good sign in a historical game to have such a dumb easily correctable thing like that make it to launch. Got a refund.. would check it out again if they ever fix this.

This game could be the one I've been waiting for and it has so much potential. I can't understand the negativity and think some people are forgetting this game is still in early access and I only payed £13.40 for it. I have played Steel Division Normandy for years and I prefer this game. It moves at a better pace with less micro management giving more time to make strategic decisions. I strongly advise doing the tutorial first because the game has depth but is easy enough to learn. I have an old six year old computer and it runs around 35-40 fps smoothly on high graphics 1080p /1920x1080 You do not need 100fps on a game like this its not a racing sim. Graphics are very nice as are the maps and more maps are coming . I highly recommend Battlefield Commander WW2 especially at such low prices but please remember its early access and the game is still being developed.

Very limited content at the moment so you might want to wait for until it's further developed but the foundation of a good RTS is here. Very much a 3D take on Close Combat with simple controls and systems the emphasis is on accessibility and quick missions. Looking forward to further updates which will refine and expand the game.

I applaud the effort and will give a positive review simply for trying. However at the moment it feels like a tech demo or possibly a basis for a better game. I see the roadmap is already outlining new missions and units etc.... Imho that's wrong you should start with ironing out the base game, then add maps and only start adding units and factions at the end. Areas that need improving: Either optimise the game or add more graphic options for player to change UI/UX needs to improve - a player needs to know all the info at a glance, current gray boxes system makes this difficult. Add an optional order delay system for added realism. Functional building occupying by infantry Slightly larger maps - 2km by 2km to allow flanking Need realistic track and infantry movement. Atm tanks move fast through any kind of terrain (take a page out of graviteam tactics book) Voiceacting needs adding - what is there feels like 15% of what should be there. It's all about atmosphere - a vehicle or squad should respond anxiouly on comms when under fire etc Multiplayer There's a lot that needs redoing in this game... it doesn't feel like a money grab but it doesn't feel like a labour of love either. It seems like it was constrained not by vision but from limitations from higher up in whoever has the final say on publishing. All that said... I'd love a game that is a mix between graviteam tactics/close combat but with the atmosphere of company of heroes.... this game is not it, but it is a step in the right direction.

its not realistic when the maps can be choosen. we need smoke granades bigger icons from units which cry for help and which are hit hard. units should gain expierence and should be able to move to the next map units should be able to take defensive positions, trenches and so on, camoflage if been attacked. ambush option. besides that, very nice game

Не плохо, очень не плохо. Не хватает подсказок по режимам поведения юнитов. Оптимизация пока что провальная. Уверен, что поправят. Жизнеспособность пехоты надо подправить, а то я пока смысла в ней не нашёл. Полагаю, что для любителей играть с чашкой кофе в одной руке и мышью в другой будет очень подходящий продукт. Это не похоже на GOH, но .... чем то похоже. Я заплатил для того, чтобы разработчики имели желание пилить игру дальше. Русского языка нет и не уверен, что игру вообще нужно переводить на какой либо язык. Визуал; ландшафт - достаточно, модели техники и людей - достаточно, впрочем текстурки можно и улучшить. Глазуальные спецэффекты - провал. Звук - провал. Впрочем, наверно сейчас, пока нет оптимизации что-то улучшать в плане визуала - значит положить игру совсем. В общем, как я надеюсь, по прошествии года (откуда я взял этот год- понятия не имею) эта игра уже будет доставлять ощутимое удовольствие. Цена за сырой продукт - 500 с лишним рублей, это всего две пачки Winston Legend Blue.. А да, карты ещё. Карт нужно больше и чтобы в компании они выбирались не ручками, как сейчас, а священным рандомайзером

The game has great potential but needs way bigger maps for the type of combat that the game is trying to create. Enemy units are able to shoot across map when spawned in. Other than that some polishing and simpler deployment setup and it would be a flawless game.