>>1227542 There's this pic, not sure if it's up to date though

bros why did war thunder instantly die...it was supposed to be the AW renaissance..

>>1255388 The fact that you confused its title with "war thunder" is probably a sign

>>1255416 kek whatever the FUCK it's called how do you fuck up this hard

>>1255460 I had no idea it was even out, and I had it wishlisted too. Seems like they launched an incomplete game. Devs treated it like an early access game but it wasn't early access.

>>1255581 Is lavabird really only two people? Yeah, two people cannot make an AW clone. Even twenty people would struggle to manage the game complexity and create the minimum necessary amount of content. No wonder it released unfinished.

>>1255581 there had to be some executive meddling, like they were forced to released the game at a certain date before they were ready. There's no way they'd release this shit as it was on purpose and think people would just be okay with it, I expect them to come out with an update that fixes everything and makes the game good, hopefully it wont be too late.

>>1256877 Looks like they have a publisher, so they were probably under contract. They also missed at least one other announced release date.

>>1225757 I know <reeeee eceleb! But just go watch a few of Mangs' videos like his Beginner Mistakes video to learn what basic things to not do, and his Are Superpowrs Worth It to see which COs you go for their COP or SCOP. And also, everyone below 1000 MMR is a moron at the game. You, me, everyone sucks, so don't feel too bad.

>>1255699 I wouldn't go that far. Maybe if they were cooking from scratch, but they already have something to go off of and more tools to work with than the AW devs had. It's mostly a matter of time rather than flat-out difficulty. >>1255581 >>1255460 Something funny is that there was even a bug where properties didn't give you income.

>>1225497 Also, >Large breasts on Sami Fucking RUINED

>>1257353 They were effectively cooking from scratch because they obviously couldn't have used or built on top of AW's code and assets. Having a pre-existing example is like having a cookbook recipe: saves you time of figuring out the recipe, but doesn't save you time from having to cook from scratch. Maybe twenty would be an exaggeration, but if I were managing a team taking on an AW clone, I'd want one guy whose primary focus would be just on the AI, and another with primary focus just on the networking, another with primary focus just on the map editor, as I'd see these three things as the core pillar technologies that absolutely would need to be done right. So that's already three people, and just on tech side of things, not even considering art asset creation, music and sound assets, and the incredibly important but often under-appreciated-in-modern-times map designers.

>>1257347 I disagree with the suggestion of using Mangs as a teacher because he gives literal fake information and only covers wacky games. He's fun to watch, but if you want to learn you should follow Deejus or Elagatua.

>>1262865 seconding deejus, one of the best AW video makes I can find

>>1264493 Deejus is more on the entertainment side of things, but he has great primers for learning the basics of the game. Elagatua is a much stronger player, but it's the kind of stuff you'd watch only after having a sizeable experience in the game. It's the difference between learning to play sports from your jewish school coach with years of experience versus a professional manager.

Unit count is more important than unit value.

>>1297197 Well yeah. Every single unit can deal luck damage, unless the opponent has fuck you defense like a Kanbei Megatank on a HQ or Javier with Tower of Power, eventually you'll wittle them down no matter the unit. Also, defense star (and defense in general) depend on the unit's HP, meaning that even if you have like 130% defense you can still lose weak units.

Do we like Sami here? https://wetpussygames.com/adult-games/h-simulation-soldier-girl.html

>>1344880 Yeah of course I do.

>>1254996 Advance wars royale was really fun, they rebalanced naval prices I think.

Has anyone played Kartal's 2025 or Mangsvance Wars? How about the general rebalance patches for AW1/2?

>>1344880 Best CO, but the match ups are always difficult, man. I even lost to a Koal in FoW despite being even for 90% of the match because I misread a single tile and it all fell apart once I couldn't get to Victory March in time. Double Time is a pretty underrated power though. >>1349458 >they rebalanced naval prices I think. Most mods rebalance naval units' prices because their costs make them nigh unusable in vanilla AW unless the map forces you to. They should have made Battleships and Cruiser much stronger units, at the very least. >>1352813 >Mangsvance Wars The COs are very unique in their stats, I love the one that forces every movement type to be Tires with one extra movement space and the one that turns Fighters into Dusters, but the game is unbalanced as fuck and it's mostly fun for demonstrational purposes only.

>Finally reached 1k MMR Feels good brothers

>>1224685 Tactical RPGs and straight strategy games like AW are different genres.

>>1255460 idk how much trump really had to do with it but I know he's the reason I didn't want to give money to an american wargame made my americans in the year 2025

>>1254727 The official games are too perfect in their execution and it's too hard to come up with new mechanics or ideas that wouldn't actively make the game worse. So many clones and fan projects have tried and fell short.

>>1389633 Famicom Wars is better

Bump. Anyone tried the Apes Warfare beta?

>>1777342 Just tried the demo. Only up to the minefield level, but I'll finish the rest later. >sounds good both music and effects wise >looks like AW Reboot but a bit better >runs well and loads very quickly >you can see the exact HP for units >controller friendly >unique tiles like footpaths across rivers that only allow infantry, tiles like trenches for infantry >when selecting a unit to attack, it always lists every target (in range) + damage you can do so you don't need to check per unit (a nice QoL feature) -you earn money for offensive kills and I feel like that may make it snowball -luck mechanic when damaging units (units sometimes over/underperformed) -drones detect mines only after a turn (they ping that the mines are nearby but don't reveal where they are until the next turn) -building sprites look a bit too similar <no battle animations (may honestly be one of the biggest negatives for me) <tanks can't use their machine guns when out of cannon ammo or against infantry <forced to play as a damn dirty ape <rockets have less range than snipers and it is honestly annoying <I would have liked to see more visual variation between human and ape faction, I always liked the faction skins in AW Overall though, it is pretty positive so far.

>>1778330 Finished the demo levels. >weather effects like water freezing are pretty cool >I like the warthog -no navel combat in the demo <CO power being identical between your CO and the enemy is lame (I hope there will be variation later) <can't resupply air units with the APC anymore Also in relation to my sniper complaint, as I played more, they are not as bad as I initially thought. But because they seem to exist to disrupt infantry captures, I feel like this is a unit that is going to steadily build up my annoyance levels until I despise it. If they nerfed the range a bit I probably would be ok with them though.

>>1778330 >Tank has a little feller hiding in it, with cartoony eyes visible Okay that's cute >you can see the exact HP for units That's not necessarily a good thing, I like that in Advance Wars By Web you have to estimate whether you did enough chip damage with your luck rolls. Gives the maps more nuance instead of just minmaxing rolls. >unique tiles like footpaths across rivers that only allow infantry, tiles like trenches for infantry Good >when selecting a unit to attack, it always lists every target (in range) + damage you can do so you don't need to check per unit (a nice QoL feature) Extremely good, especially for live play <no battle animations (may honestly be one of the biggest negatives for me) No one plays with battle animations on for more than a few games anyhow, or if they're making a video about the game <tanks can't use their machine guns when out of cannon ammo or against infantry Retarded and exploitable <forced to play as a damn dirty ape Don't be a featherless biped cuck, apes are great >>1779706 >-no navel combat in the demo There is no way to make naval combat good in AW styled games, because it requires the map to be completely filled with water, making it impassable terrain for most units. >Snipers You need cheap and effective units to clear Infantry walls, stalling is a tactic that works very well in vanilla AWBW since you usually need either a Power, high enough firepower (we're talking 140%) or to spend 8k to build an Anti-Air to clear an unit that costs 1k. Having a cheaper anti-Infantry unit sounds pretty cool.

>>1784339 >No one plays with battle animations on for more than a few games anyhow I always left them on >Having a cheaper anti-Infantry unit That would make sense, but Snipers cost more than both light tanks and anti-air. If they lowered their range (and cost as a result of the range nerf) then they could definitely do what you would like.

On the subject of advance wars like games, I just tried the demo for Tactical Annihilation. It combines Total Annihilation with Advance Wars. Demo was alright, and it was a nice change of pace if you want an Advance Wars-ish game but with some new features. For those who care, the demo has a skirmish mode and a few campaign missions to try.

>>1820590 >Earth vs Mars Another one I found. This one was Advance Wars mixed with a bit of Impossible Creatures for special units you can customize. There is a demo for it on steam, though I haven't tried it yet.

>Got back in AWBW >13 Winstreak in Global League Feels good, but I just know I'm one bad move away from getting my ELO back to square one