What was the most frustrating part when you started playing atWar?

-

I'd say it's a pretty easy game to pick up to be honest. i guess it beta stages then not enough opponents to play with would work. but now that's not such an issue.

For newbies game mechanics is complicated, i think.

I found many aspects of the game to be hard to figure out. I'm still fuzzy on the Order of Battle. The tutorial is great but it leaves MUCH unexplained. Especially how to start a game. Help chat's #1 Q is 'How do I pick a country?'. Over all, it was easy to get the hang of, it's just the finer points that eluded me at first.

When I first came last year, I was frustrated that the higher ranked players were so arrogant and full of themselves, and I would never win

My biggest frustration was leaving beginners room full of victories to be raped in the main room

For me it was all the fucking ally fags but now I am good enough to beat most ally fags. REMOVE ALLIANCES FROM ATWAR! ONLY TEAM GAMES!
I voted losing every game, it was the closest one, it's not exactly because of going into main room or anything, mostly the ally fags.

For me, it was Strategies and Upgrades. High-ranked players have all of them, while we only have some. In the Main lobby, you don't learn anything by playing countless shitfest games like UN, but when you do try and play a fair game, better strategical knowledge and upgrades destroy you. Thankfully, I've learned a few strategies very well, and have a good number of upgrades now (even though I find Upgrades to be P2W).

Complicated mechanics for me..

I was dumbfounded by everything and was lost.. I remember picking Morocco next to Spain and Spain killed me quick and I wondered why! D:

This game really does deserve to be played by more people...

For me it was not having enough opponents to play with. I was trained when I was rank 3 and no one in beginners lobby wanted to play me so it was frustrating sitting there forever trying to get a good game.

It was not difficult for me.
For me is not having enough opponents and enough variety of games.

Well it was fun to play and easy to pick up but the distance in strategy compared to how i play now is a huge gap. Before it was just oh make a bunch of high attack units and try and kill things. but now it's different and i win more

How can it be anything else than allyfaging?the only thing that bothered me in the game.I never did that so they always did it on me and mostly high ranks.Thunder knows how many noob higher rank allyfags we made cry together when we were rank 5
this nightmare is getting real again whenever i play an alt.if i show you pictures of ranks 8 allyfaging against low rank u gonna throw up!half of atwar is on my shitlist for being bad to alts
otherwise game was and is pretty awesome.

> Not enough opponents to play with <

Kirjutas Mauzer Panteri, 05.09.2013 at 23:07

> Not enough opponents to play with <

hes right, there are over 400 people online, but only a small group of them are skilled players. This few players arent enough for play frequently 3vs3!!

The "not enough opponents to play problem" goes hand in hand with the imbalance created by rank difference. For example, very few rank 5-6 players are skilled enough to beat a rank 9 opponent that has more upgrades and more experience. So they just don't join 3v3s with high ranks. The no upgrades/strats mode is nice, but isn't interesting enough to be played regularly.

I actually put "user interface". I remember having trouble with making walls, moving units in tough spots and un-cancellable rangefails (actually still have that problem sometimes) xD

To me, this is like asking a 20 year old "What was your favorite film when you were 6?"

Kirjutas pupbenny, 16.09.2013 at 11:28

To me, this is like asking a 20 year old "What was your favorite film when you were 6?"

Same, it only applies to the new ones like me really, it's irrelevant for the older players since atwar or afterwind as it was has changed a lot.

Its not just too less opponents its not enough varieties, i lose from high ranks because they have more experience and upgrades, and i win anyone my rank or just a bit higher because they don't know how to play, its either noob or pro there is no middle class

Complicated mechanics , when I go into the game!!!

Kirjutas The Tactician, 17.09.2013 at 08:55

Its not just too less opponents its not enough varieties, i lose from high ranks because they have more experience and upgrades, and i win anyone my rank or just a bit higher because they don't know how to play, its either noob or pro there is no middle class

hmm, I think you'll find that's because you consider everyone worse than you noobs and better pros, there are some mid ranks but they are still the minority of Atwar, there are still plenty though.

Kirjutas Xenosapien, 20.09.2013 at 19:20

Kirjutas The Tactician, 17.09.2013 at 08:55

Its not just too less opponents its not enough varieties, i lose from high ranks because they have more experience and upgrades, and i win anyone my rank or just a bit higher because they don't know how to play, its either noob or pro there is no middle class

hmm, I think you'll find that's because you consider everyone worse than you noobs and better pros, there are some mid ranks but they are still the minority of Atwar, there are still plenty though.

if what you are saying is right then that means I'm the mid rank

Kirjutas The Tactician, 21.09.2013 at 01:28

Kirjutas Xenosapien, 20.09.2013 at 19:20

Kirjutas The Tactician, 17.09.2013 at 08:55

Its not just too less opponents its not enough varieties, i lose from high ranks because they have more experience and upgrades, and i win anyone my rank or just a bit higher because they don't know how to play, its either noob or pro there is no middle class

hmm, I think you'll find that's because you consider everyone worse than you noobs and better pros, there are some mid ranks but they are still the minority of Atwar, there are still plenty though.

if what you are saying is right then that means I'm the mid rank

Um, noo.. mid rank is from 5-9 sure there are a lot of noob mid ranks but there are good mid ranks, just like you get noob high ranks and good high ranks.

The game is easy to pick up I think the company/at war team needs to spend more money on raising awareness of the game through advertising I think this would greatly increase the amount of players playing the game just my 2 cents -Max

The game controls were easy enough to figure out, but I didn't understand any of the tactics, strategies, or goal of the game. I remember choosing Russia Siberia and no strategy my first game and slowly moving tanks without transports down to china with a guy in Vietnam spreading out really fast. How does he move so fast?! By the time I reached the first capital city the guy in Vietnam was ready to take it from me. I remember getting really frustrated not knowing what to do. So the hardest most frustrating thing was figuring out how to actually play.

Kirjutas Guest, 04.09.2013 at 15:17

For me, it was Strategies and Upgrades. High-ranked players have all of them, while we only have some. In the Main lobby, you don't learn anything by playing countless shitfest games like UN, but when you do try and play a fair game, better strategical knowledge and upgrades destroy you. Thankfully, I've learned a few strategies very well, and have a good number of upgrades now (even though I find Upgrades to be P2W).

Exactly this. The power curve in AtWar has increased enormously. I still wouldn't call the game pay-to-win, but the power curve (the formal name of this in game design) is higher now than it has ever stood. It is no longer about skill when a rank 4 faces off against a rank 8 or 9, even if they are the AW equivalent of a grandmaster at chess.

The power differential between longtime players with lots of upgrades and newbies has to be decreased somehow without making the purchase of upgrades and/or the addictive element of the game fade away.

Kirjutas YOBA, 09.10.2013 at 11:57

Kirjutas Guest, 04.09.2013 at 15:17

For me, it was Strategies and Upgrades. High-ranked players have all of them, while we only have some. In the Main lobby, you don't learn anything by playing countless shitfest games like UN, but when you do try and play a fair game, better strategical knowledge and upgrades destroy you. Thankfully, I've learned a few strategies very well, and have a good number of upgrades now (even though I find Upgrades to be P2W).

Exactly this. The power curve in AtWar has increased enormously. I still wouldn't call the game pay-to-win, but the power curve (the formal name of this in game design) is higher now than it has ever stood. It is no longer about skill when a rank 4 faces off against a rank 8 or 9, even if they are the AW equivalent of a grandmaster at chess.

The power differential between longtime players with lots of upgrades and newbies has to be decreased somehow without making the purchase of upgrades and/or the addictive element of the game fade away.

Is call: SM + Air Capacity.

By level 4 you should have all of them and a couple of other upgrades.

Kirjutas The Taliban, 09.10.2013 at 12:55

Kirjutas YOBA, 09.10.2013 at 11:57

Kirjutas Guest, 04.09.2013 at 15:17

For me, it was Strategies and Upgrades. High-ranked players have all of them, while we only have some. In the Main lobby, you don't learn anything by playing countless shitfest games like UN, but when you do try and play a fair game, better strategical knowledge and upgrades destroy you. Thankfully, I've learned a few strategies very well, and have a good number of upgrades now (even though I find Upgrades to be P2W).

Exactly this. The power curve in AtWar has increased enormously. I still wouldn't call the game pay-to-win, but the power curve (the formal name of this in game design) is higher now than it has ever stood. It is no longer about skill when a rank 4 faces off against a rank 8 or 9, even if they are the AW equivalent of a grandmaster at chess.

The power differential between longtime players with lots of upgrades and newbies has to be decreased somehow without making the purchase of upgrades and/or the addictive element of the game fade away.

Is call: SM + Air Capacity.

By level 4 you should have all of them and a couple of other upgrades.

No. I believe the best course of action is to follow what some of the most competitive games of the now are doing, specifically MOBA's: Make upgrades in-game purchases. Using credits (Money, resources, whatever (we seriously need an official name)), you could buy specific upgrades at any rank through an in-match store.

If it took too much time to contemplate upgrades, two things could be implemented: 1. A tick-box to include an "Interturn" period with a designated time. You could buy upgrades and watch your battles. 2. An alg/system could be implemented to watch your units and how they're doing in game (How well they perform at certain tasks, what they lack at, what type of units they're weak to, etc), and suggest upgrades for you. (I could go on and on about this).

Now, for Strategies: They need to either be balanced with "None", or be used as temporary boosts (Could use strategy boost for X turns, then a cooldown/recharge period until stat boosts can be used again (Hotbar/keys for multiple strategies?)). I only suggest this because the tide of war can change dramatically. EX: switching to Imperialist when your funds are low is logical, as well as practical in the real world, or switching to NC after reaching coasts. At the moment, there's sort of a power-frenzy between a few strategies, particularly SM (when on high resources) and PD.

With all of this in mind, everything would be in-match, lessening the top 100's dependency on stat boosts and upgrades, and creating a fairer playing field for all ranks in any situation. the No Strats/Upgrades option is very nice, but (not to be rude) most top 100 player's can't play for shit without their upgrades.

Kirjutas Guest, 09.10.2013 at 13:32

Kirjutas The Taliban, 09.10.2013 at 12:55

Kirjutas YOBA, 09.10.2013 at 11:57

Kirjutas Guest, 04.09.2013 at 15:17

For me, it was Strategies and Upgrades. High-ranked players have all of them, while we only have some. In the Main lobby, you don't learn anything by playing countless shitfest games like UN, but when you do try and play a fair game, better strategical knowledge and upgrades destroy you. Thankfully, I've learned a few strategies very well, and have a good number of upgrades now (even though I find Upgrades to be P2W).

Exactly this. The power curve in AtWar has increased enormously. I still wouldn't call the game pay-to-win, but the power curve (the formal name of this in game design) is higher now than it has ever stood. It is no longer about skill when a rank 4 faces off against a rank 8 or 9, even if they are the AW equivalent of a grandmaster at chess.

The power differential between longtime players with lots of upgrades and newbies has to be decreased somehow without making the purchase of upgrades and/or the addictive element of the game fade away.

Is call: SM + Air Capacity.

By level 4 you should have all of them and a couple of other upgrades.

No. I believe the best course of action is to follow what some of the most competitive games of the now are doing, specifically MOBA's: Make upgrades in-game purchases. Using credits (Money, resources, whatever (we seriously need an official name)), you could buy specific upgrades at any rank through an in-match store.

If it took too much time to contemplate upgrades, two things could be implemented: 1. A tick-box to include an "Interturn" period with a designated time. You could buy upgrades and watch your battles. 2. An alg/system could be implemented to watch your units and how they're doing in game (How well they perform at certain tasks, what they lack at, what type of units they're weak to, etc), and suggest upgrades for you. (I could go on and on about this).

Now, for Strategies: They need to either be balanced with "None", or be used as temporary boosts (Could use strategy boost for X turns, then a cooldown/recharge period until stat boosts can be used again (Hotbar/keys for multiple strategies?)). I only suggest this because the tide of war can change dramatically. EX: switching to Imperialist when your funds are low is logical, as well as practical in the real world, or switching to NC after reaching coasts. At the moment, there's sort of a power-frenzy between a few strategies, particularly SM (when on high resources) and PD.

With all of this in mind, everything would be in-match, lessening the top 100's dependency on stat boosts and upgrades, and creating a fairer playing field for all ranks in any situation. the No Strats/Upgrades option is very nice, but (not to be rude) most top 100 player's can't play for shit without their upgrades.

Nope.