Nice! Tin Star was what got me into COG. I’m not really a tank buff but the demo seems engaging enough so far. Looking forward to seeing how this progresses…
2 Likes
This is pretty good so far i love anything with world war 2
2 Likes
I really liked this. I started the demo because it’s history, but I figured it’d be gender-locked – so it was a pleasant surprise to be able to play as a woman. You might want to mention that in your first post.
I’m enjoying all the stats are set up, and the way we can develop our MC’s character both militarily through their tactics and skills, but also informally in whether they are sarcastic or verbose. I liked all the details about the tanks, as they not only show how important they are to the fight, but also give the tanks themselves some character. So far the crew and others we’ve met have been interesting, especially Knox and Abdallah, and I like the different results that can happen depending on what tactics the player chooses.
I only have two complaints – one, perhaps add more description of the setting. During the fight at Casablanca, for example, it would have not only made the picture more clearer as to where the tanks/infantry/etc. are if we knew beforehand that there was a store (bakery) nearby, for example, but it would have added more juxtaposition to the narrative and how we’re killing where people live.
Two, and this is more minor, although overall I liked the ‘extended history’ option, there were sections that seemed to focus too much on unimportant details, or simply repeated previously mentioned info, while not really going into the broader (geo)politics that led to the war and why the MC is fighting. What I mean is that there’s a paragraph that lists the events from the Reichstag Fire Decree to the execution of rivals, and on the first page it repeats the idea that WWI set the stage for WWII, but there’s no outright explanation as to why France and Britain didn’t act at first, or why America was actively joining the fight (and entering this story’s narrative) in 1942, or why France’s armies shattered. So I’d keep the information you already have, but condense it into fewer sentences to allow more room to mention the desire for “peace for our time” after WWI, how there was an alliance in place between the US and Britain through Lend-Lease and shared ideals for democracy, and the shift away from trench warfare and things like the Maginot Line to the use of tanks, as all of these things would have had a direct impact on the MC.
Typos and stuff
Demagogues became commonplace, and their message of hate for a place in far too many hearts.
Should “for” be “found”?
Through a series of maneuvers, he took control of and transformed the National Socialist German Workers Party(NSDAP or Nazi as many called them).
Add a space before the first parenthesis.
First the communists were banded and the Nazi Party gained a correspondingly larger share of the vote and with it a slim majority.
“banded” should be “banned”.
Below, woever, the sand could be treacherous; especially where it has been churned up recently by other tanks.
“woever” should be “however”.
‘Howell’, junior, if you must know.
Is “junior” here supposed to mean that the MC has the same name as their father?
Those will serve as cover…
Remove the extra period.
Understood?
Add quotation marks at the end.
Start down the road./Advance the tank.
Perhaps clarify a bit more the difference between these two options.
With his leather tanker’s helmet off and chewing a wad of gum, Mendoza looks like he doesn’t have a care in the world as he leans against the hull of the Fedala
Add a period at the end.
I should talk with Owens. (Spend Owens’ experience)
I’m not sure how the crew’s experience works yet, but when choosing this option and then deciding on what to spend his experience on, it returns you to the choice for everyone’s experience and allows you to go back to talking with Owens multiple times. It also doesn’t disappear like the other options.
"What about the R-35’s? Or the Char-B?
Add a quotation mark at the end.
Dinner is Not anything to write home about.
“Not” should be lowercase.
“I can’t even think of a million”
Add punctuation at the end.
"Think this is our exit?
Add a quotation mark at the end.
Owens sags against a wall, already exhausted
Add punctuation at the end.
From down the way you see a familiar American tank;
And he’s here to fight.
Remove the space between these two lines.
Yeah, That makes sense. We shelled Casablanca.
“That” should be lowercase.
OIder men in suits.
“OIder” (it seems to be an I instead of an L) should be “Older”.
Removed of gas?
Add a quotation mark at the end.
Looking forward to the next part! 
6 Likes
As if by fate, I just finish up a paper on the use of light armor in North Africa and go to check the forums to find this. I am looking forward to getting into this tomorrow morning.
3 Likes
@Zen1 I see your point on the morality choices… well, that’s why this is in Beta. Part of the issue is that the PC is a sergeant and there are often officers around who out rank them. Second, that there are a lot of witnesses right now. Third… well, we will have to come up with an opportunity and reason for the player to demonstrate some of the inherent cruelty of war. Such as interrogating prisoners or civilians concerning the whereabouts of the enemy, gunning down fleeing Vichy troops because they might come back, taking gear/rations/water from surrendered foes, etc.
What did you think about the scavenging and looting option after the fall of the French Fire Control Center?
@MIGSey - Glad you enjoyed Marine Raider. And yeah, this is going to develop. The PC hasn’t even met the Germans yet. All they’ve had is a three day fight with the Vichy French.
And if you see grammar mistakes, please cite them if you can. Every little bit helps. After all, if it were obvious, the grammar would already have been fixed. 
@expectedoperator - Yeah, no genderlock here. Admittedly, it is thin ice historically, but if a player doesn’t want it, they don’t have to choose it.
So, you want more detail. Can do.
You also want less verbiage. Can also do.
These are not mutually exclusive. A good part of writing is knowing when to add and when to take away.
The next part may take a while though… Until then, thanks for the grammar check.
@AjaxTheMediocre - We’ve probably tapped some of the same sources for this. What was the thesis on your paper, if you don’t mind my asking?
8 Likes
Oh shit. Ooooh shit. I need to try this out when I have time since I both love Tin Star, and is an avid wargamer and tank lover. North Africa is such an interesting piece of WWII. Hopefully I’ll have time to take a look tomorrow.
3 Likes
I’d imagine you’d have the Vichy, Italians and Germans appear in that order, in varying difficulty ?
Also, just to add on @expectedoperator about the extended history option (which I enjoyed as a blast from the past of my IGCSE history lessons and a WW2 book), I recalled a chapter in that WW2 book that detailed how the North African campaign kinda occurred; namely how Italy was seeking glory, getting embarrassed and asking Germany for help and the rest was history. Just though that be an important paragraph to add as well.
As I say, simple ones
(Redeploy)
(Its)
(“Italy would declare war on the Allies…)
Think it’s better to replace decrease with spend, unless there’s another reason why there’s spend and decrease.
3 Likes
Very happy to see you back @AllenGies . Just a suggestion to make things easier, maybe you could add the demo link to the first post? I didn’t see it at first as I was scrolling too fast and I just skipped by the post you had made that had the actual link. I’ll edit this post once I’ve played the demo again and have some more feedback, but for now, I’m really enjoying it.
Edit: Have not finished playing the demo yet, but my suggestion for now is to add some sort of glossary. I’m not really familiar with all the terms being used in the game, and while for the most part they are explained in some detail, I’m still not really clear on how most of them work. I feel like that can be solved by adding a glossary or list of terms to the stat screen so that we can refer back to it when needed.
2 Likes
I don’t think a good/evil morality stat is necessary, unless it’s closer chooser whether to prioritize warmongering(racking up kill, taking little to no prisoner) or in trying to keep a low-kill count by getting the enemy to surrender(i.e. close to a pacifist/diplomat)
@MIGSey - The order of appearance is something to consider. As you wrote, scaling up difficulty would be Vichy, Italians, Germans, 5th Panzer, and finally the Afrika Corps. The 5th had better equipment, but the Afrika Corps had an incredible amount of experience.
As for the back and forth fighting in the desert, yeah, there’s a lot to it. Mussolini figured it would be an easy conquest and the British showed them otherwise. The entire Italian war effort seems like that, the attacks into France which went nowhere, the fighting in Egypt and Libya that saw a huge loss in manpower and equipment, and the efforts against the Greeks which required heavy German intervention to settle.
Your grammar suggestions are excellent. You and @expectedoperator are doing me a real service. My credit list will definitely include you.
@augustus27 - Good idea about the link. Forgot that it is easy to go back and edit posts like that here.
@Bahamuht - You are right in that a simple morality stat probably won’t work. What we can do is track certain decisions. Firing on the first batch of the French, scavenging from a disabled tank, looting the French tower, shooting soldiers fleeing a disabled/burning tank, interacting harshly with civilians, etc.
Do something once and it may be referenced later. Do it twice and the PC might pick up a nickname associated with that. Not that having such a ‘handle’ is a bad thing because in war, being a terrible person can be useful. Think Lieutenant Speirs from Band of Brothers. Men would rather have him in command than Lieutenant Dike, Captain Sobel, or even Lt. Shames.
Tricky to write, but that’s what we’ll try.
8 Likes
So I have finally finished a play through, and I am very impressed by the game so far. There are some complaints I had that I’ll go into later, but for a beta this is really good!
I feel like that stats weren’t well explained for the most part. Some of them were self explanatory, such as gunnery and driving, but I have no idea what the logistics or zeal stat are for. I feel like this problem could be solved by adding a section to the stats screen that explains what each stat is for, as well as what raises and lowers it. Furthermore, I didn’t really understand the verbosity stat. Some of the choices I made led to verbosity increasing or decreasing but there was no way to see what it was at on the stats screen.
I also wasn’t entirely clear on the battle mechanics for the game. I wasn’t really sure when we were hitting with out shots and when we were missing. Maybe giving the players the option to see the chances they have of hitting or missing would solve this? Or maybe you could give us an option at the beginning of the game to get some explanation of tank combat tactics and what they’re generally used for.
This last one has more to do with writing style than actually mechanics, so it’s pretty subjective. I felt like most of the combat was quite dry. There was no real flavor added to what was going on, it was just “you did this, then this happened”. You don’t really get much insight as to your crew’s reactions to your actions or the violence around you. In that same vein, while I’m not asking for gory details or anything like that, I feel like the battles could be expanded on in terms of imagery. Something beyond just explaining the surroundings, and going more into detail about the heat, the smell and such things.
Something weird I noticed
The sentence seems to repeat several times in the paragraph with only one word being changed each time. I’m not sure if this is on purpose or a bug, but I figured I’d bring it up just in case.
A couple of questions as well: Is there any benefit to not upgrading everything on our officer? Or is upgrading every stat the best practice for us?
Overall a fantastic demo and I look forward to seeing the development of the game.
3 Likes
Good critique @augustus27 - Plenty for me to chew on, especially about the stats. A little optional explanation of what comprises a tank commander may be in order. What are Doctrine, Logistics, and Career as skills, and what are Zeal, Delegation, and Adaptation as traits.
For Sarcasm, Verbosity, and Directness… those are personality traits. We could hide those entirely if we wanted and only have the player realize they’ve made choices concerning them when the dialogue options begin to differ. Something to consider.
Of course, we can hide the float texts entirely too. Which would be a pure immersive option, a time consuming one to write, but an option nonetheless.
As far as battle mechanics go, they’re fairly simple but also hidden because they’re simple. There’s no percentage to hit chance, just a quick glance at a few (alright, up to seven or so) variables to see whether a hit is scored or not. Breaking that down for the player is difficult and apparently my effort to do so via text doesn’t quite work.
A bit about tank tactics might go a long way to ameliorating this though. Whether the tank is in motion, how good the gunner is, sometimes how good the driver or assistant driver or commander are at coordinating fire, the range to target, what the target is doing, whether the tank has special gear, whether the tank has fired on the target previously, etc.
With upgrading or not upgrading an officer… that’s also a question. My original intention was to simply have the XP cost for a given skill go up with each rank achieved. Then there was the possibility of purchasing special traits, or increasing Observation, Logistics, Doctrine, or… well, you name it. But the XP economy is supposed to be rather tight and adding all that gets complicated.
So, what do you think about the XP? What feels like it would add the most to the game? Subtly suggesting the player to hold back for specific and cool traits? Allow them to increase out-of-combat skills like Doctrine and Logistics? Just dealing with the core five of leadership, observation, gunnery, driving, and mechanical skill?
And what needs to be shown to the player, as intrusive as that may be?
4 Likes
It was a fairly short paper, more of an essay really, for a not too high level class so I mostly just touched on their uses in infantry support and differences in role between them and heavier cruiser tanks, speed and range, limitations when it came to infantry and armor engagements, so forth. Nothing too fancy or long.
1 Like
Hmmmm, a ww2 game?
7 Likes
I think this would be a good idea, as it wouldn’t leave the player wondering what the stats are for and how they impact the game. This could also encourage some more replaying and help with immersion. I would, however, also like to suggest adding the option to show which choices impact these stats at the beginning (for example, a choice that increases verbosity would be marked as doing so). This could also be used to show when certain choices are locked to the player, for example, if a player has very low verbosity, some of the wordier options could be grayed out saying something like “needs verbosity”. This could be a toggleable option, since it could hinder immersion, but improve the gameplay experience for some players.
I do think this would be helpful. It would also make sense in the context of the game, since the MC is supposed to be a sergeant and would know what they are doing. Something eles that would be helpful is adding a glossary of terms, since some people (including me) don’t have that much knowledge about tanks and WWII era weaponry, which makes the game a bit confusing. This could just be added to the stats page, for easy access. Adding it to the stats screen would also mean that people who already know about these things don’t have to sit through an info dump, while people who don’t, and would like to know more have the option to.
I think giving different rewards for different things would be a good idea. For example, if you end a mission with a decent amount of your ammo/supplies still remaining, that would boost logistics. If you make good tactical decisions, that would boost doctrine. If you inspire your men and get them to do things they wouldn’t otherwise do (what this would be I’m not sure) that would boost leadership. For the other stats, like gunnery and driving, I think simply allocating XP would be decent, since that would show the MC getting more comfortable/training those skills more through the course of the game.
If this wouldn’t be too much coding, maybe give the player an option to gain a trait or two at the end of each major “chapter” if you will. For example, the first mission wouldn’t be considered the end of a major chapter, since there are still related missions to come, but after the whole 3 day battle thing is over but before we move to the next major mission, we could gain a trait or two. This would again be an indicator of the MCs growth through the story, as there is no significant change from battle to battle, but once the mission as a whole is over, MC can reflect on what they learned and how that impacted them.
Another question: Is there anywhere we can see the observation stat, or is that hidden for a reason? I’m again not entirely sure what it does and why I should boost it. Being able to see the stat would also better help with allocating stats to the crew, since I would be able to see which one of them is best at observation and such.
1 Like
If this is 1/5 as good as Tin Star, it will be a masterpiece. I’m quite excited!
Edit: this certainly looks ambitious, based on the story itself and some of the other replies. It’ll be interesting to see to what degree this takes off with the xp factor.
2 Likes
Great game 
Reminded me of World of tanks and War Thunder. I like tanks, so this game made me really happy 
Good luck with your game!
1 Like
@AjaxTheMediocre - Ah. Well, you’ve probably come across the same tidbits as myself. The Stuarts’ cannon being able to use both High Explosive and Armor Piercing rounds, achieving frontal penetration versus light armor only, etc. Let me know if you found the engagements versus the FT-17 and R-35 to be accurate enough.
@augustus27 - We’ll probably hide the character aspects then. However, working with grayed out options has always unnerved me. There never seems to be a right time to use it. Or else that moment passes me by.
A ‘Review my tactics’ page would seem to be a good way to prime the player. Plus they can skip it if they’re playing through a second time. Will sleep on it.
What is interesting is the end of chapter ‘trait’ idea. For example, getting the tank shot out from under you would earn the trait ‘Survivor’ while fighting all the way to the end might give ‘Victor’, and exiting the battle at its peak might provide ‘Prudent’. Any of which might pop up as special options later.
@TheGhost - Hopefully this won’t be too ambitious so it gets finished. And yeah, XP will be a tricky part of things. The coding for this has already given me a headache, to say nothing of tracking how much XP is accumulated on average for a given chapter so that the difficulty of various tests can fall within an expected range.
@Mei_Hiroshi - Always wanted to play World of Tanks. Just don’t have the time. But youtube has got a good selection of the best-of-videos for these sorts games when I need a creative hint.
Question to Beta Testers: What was your experience playing thus far? Let me know your tale to help craft the next chapter properly.
4 Likes
Rather be in command of a British firefly or be a German tiger ACE that would be cool.
3 Likes
Horrible joke/burn incoming, but the Italians were to the Germans what Austria-Hungary were to Germany in WW1.
Somewhere, air horns playing in the background
2 Likes