Warside - Official Release Date Trailer Analysis

[@Mangs1337]

If you want to watch some high-level competitive Advance Wars, tune into my stream tonight! kzbin.info/www/bejne/g6qmoaCviqeonbM

[@HauntedCorpseGaming]

2:44 Emp-like weapon, seems to ignore the standalone soldier in ground zero but also the one in the hat on the right as one would expect. The powers in this look like they're really going to breakup walling strategies.

[@Fiinix_]

2:33 I dont think it excludes the unit in the center, it probably is supposed to be an EMP disabling mechanical units. You can see the recon in the top is disabled but the sniper to the right is not. Otherwise great coverage

[@Mangs1337]

Nicely caught.

[@gameknight504]

Was gonna mention about it, neat to see someone caught it too

[@BigDaddy9754]

While that is possible, and extremely likely, one more possibility I noticed is that it could be the tiles they are on as well. If a unit is over a certain defense tile such as forest, it may receive a "cover and concealment" bonus effect and wont be hit.

[@richard7199]

Wonder if it’ll knock air vehicles out of the sky.

[@gameknight504]

That would be pretty interesting as if their opponent plans poorly, they run the risk of letting the player with the ability bring down needed air support for their front

[@DestructivelyPhased]

I’m sorry, you missed the key fact: those “landers” are hovercraft. That means they could traverse from shoals to land and carry the units on board further ashore. Also, that scale of hovercraft are cool. Edit: Also the Von Bolt-esque ability seemingly doesn’t affect infantry, as both the central unit and a unit two tiles to the right aren’t affected and both are infantry units but the building two tiles two the south is.

[@Mangs1337]

Really cool!

[@PRORAGEGUY]

aye, hope they add amphibian attack vehicle too to accompany hovercraft

[@J069FIX]

The exploding bolt of lightning could be an EMP (electromagnetic pulse) which in other games also tends to affect non-infantry units (and like in this case, in some games they also affect structures (see for example the EMP cannon in Command and Conquer Tiberian Sun)). The building with the two smokestacks could be a power plant (possibly nuclear).

[@Kbrookesy]

They look a lot like the transports from Command and Conquer

[@J069FIX]

@@Kbrookesy Yeah, now that you mention it, the transports very much ressemble the original CnC transport ship.

[@frazonedracaoo6981]

5:26 sorry mangs that building looks identical to the orange ship yard that appears just a couple second later.

[@DootNeon]

I think the lightning bolt power is actually an EMP that specifically disables vehicles and buildings because of how it ignored both the sniper and infantry

[@dominicsantiago271]

2:40 the small bolt indicates that this might be a E.M.P. (Electro Magnetic Pulse). If this power makes the affected air vehicles crash it will change your strategy agaisnt this C.O.

[@dominicsantiago271]

It'll be funny watching a new player make a death ball of air units and losing a chunk of them because they didn't know how this C.O. power works. (Similar to the cryo bomb in halo wars)

[@kommodore6691]

Also infantry are immune to EMP, why the center wasn't affected, not that the middle isn't hit like he suggested. The sniper was in range and not affected also.

[@ShawFujikawa]

It's also worth noting that the map maker offers proper 2Q symmetry similar to AWBW! I'm very glad that's a feature.

[@indaDark]

2:18 it look sto me that this power only works against anything that isnt a foot soilder. seems like the range is 2 squares wide, and the sniper to the right wasnt affected as well

[@Mangs1337]

Good catch!

[@tanphamnhat969]

So an EMP-based power then

[@NCHProductions]

1:17 CnC1 Tiberium powerplant lmao.

[@ARockRaider]

Yah I noticed that as well!

[@pablosaiz5849]

I was getting CnC vibes all along the trailer

[@hairyninja2072]

The fact that the map editor mirror your actions to make a symetrical map is pretty good imo

[@hairyninja2072]

Oh and, no fog of war for now ?

[@PinkP0nyPr0ducti0n5]

@@hairyninja2072 It will definitely have FoW, since you can see in the production menu that units have something called "view", which only can be interpreted as vision for fog.

[@hairyninja2072]

@@PinkP0nyPr0ducti0n5 true dat. I Guess it's just not balanced yet so not shown during the trailer !

[@connorhilchie2779]

PLEASE let them get Warside right when it comes out. If they manage to have a fun campaign and PvP scene they can print money due to ReBoot Camp flooping

[@ninjaexperto7217]

5:12 that is a sea port, the half it´s the same as the one you talked about in the beggining, but orange instead of blue. (you can see a full orange one on the top left at 0:40)

[@ninjaexperto7217]

top right*

[@novaeclipse139]

If the Warside Devs are here i have a small request: please do not take this good reception and let it go to your head. The advanced wars community has been itching for another good tactics-based game. You have an opportunity to deliver something to a community that has been starved for content for decades. Don't let all the attention get to your head and make you rush the development to get it out as fast as possible because of the sudden peak of interest. We've seen in the past multiple times how this story ends: There's immense interest for a new tactics-based game, it gets rushed to finish development and released early or not with proper multiplayer and matchmaking and it flops. If you want this game to live on you need to invest resources not only in making the game true to your vision and not just a copycat, but also invest in the longevity of the game. Invest in the multiplayer, listen to the players who will keep interest in your game and drive new players to the tactics-based games genre. I said this all because I love tactics-based games and want to see them succeed. not to put some type of immense pressure on you.

[@Mangs1337]

@@novaeclipse139 preach.

[@viewtifuljon8105]

The multiplayer is going to be the deciding factor for me. I never got reboot camp due to the multiplayer. This needs to be close to what awbw offers just in a more user friendly package.

[@yummmemonty7450]

5:26 is also visible at 5:30, it’s definitely a port of some kind

[@inversepie6512]

Warside demo was fun but if they dont make it flashier and more user friendly it will fail

[@monkeyorful]

End turn being in the menu was crazy for me as an obvious qol improvement

[@viikable]

controller using was definitely lacking, weird speeding up only after holding the stick for a while plus it was really bugging with the mouse. obvs no settings either to adjust stuff, ik its alpha but 4 months isn't that long to polish everything. Like there didn't seem to be the target area highlighted with the artillery in the first mission which is where I stopped, you can see the enemy you can target but the total range needs to be highlighted too.

[@inversepie6512]

@monkeyorful i hated how there was no controls option in the menu so I couldnt even see if there was some function i was missing on some random button

[@Teinve]

I thought athena crisis is better, which is why I'm surprised mangs isn't covering that. I'm guessing he's sponsored by Warside and just not mentioning it?

[@rmzing]

@@Teinve This is the first time I have seen that name, and seems like nobody else in the comments knows of it either. So, I'm chancing a guess at 'under the radar and unseen' rather than an unmentioned sponsorship

[@tonygalloy6017]

The space laser probably dealt a certain amount of currency as damage. Like 15.000 credits. That would explain why the aircraft took only 7 hp or damage.

[@Mangs1337]

@@tonygalloy6017 makes sense

[@mghegotagun]

2:36 looks more like it just doesnt hit infantry since the sniper is the same distance away from the basic infantry as the property to the south and the vehicle to the north

[@baileybox218]

@mangs Sorry if this was mentioned before, but the last building you pointed out @5:25 matches the Harbour @5:30 near the end of the trailer footage you show (same boxes on left of sprite, missing the crane).

[@lero4827]

The game looks great and has alot of potential, but if the cards are played wrong it can easily be forgettable. Let's hope the game is getting positive feedback and a competitive sceen and the game will flourish. I don't wanna see a another turn-based strategy game die in a fire.

[@SarajevoKyoto]

Those landers remind me immediately of the landing craft from C&C Tiberian Dawn. No idea if that's intentional, but it's still awesome

[@kleverkitsune4363]

Planning to buy this just to play co-op with my hubby. Hopefully they have a Grit, Sasha or Sami-like character, they were my favourites in past games.

[@kuyagab4444]

Offshore oil rigs would be a good idea for a sea based property. Make these properties give out huge amounts of funding per round. This would make naval maps competitive since they'd also be fighting for resources on the sea with maps that have little cities.

[@lanteanboy]

for the EMP power.... it,s an EMP. It didn't affect the middle unit AND the unit in the back because they were infantry. (And yes, I am assuming that because we can see it has a range of 2 tile from the center with the back unit not being affected and being an infantry as well)

[@phoenixmarktwo]

That paralyze ability seems to exclude infantry specifically, as every vehicle and building in a 3 tile radius gets paralyzed, but the infantry in the center and the sniper 3 tiles away don't.

[@TheHeavenlyGoddess]

Unfortunately mangs, that property at the end matches the side of the red Harbour so I'm pretty sure it's a Harbour, but we can still be hopeful

[@brandonalligood1817]

Unicorn overlord got me to go and actually play through and finish the fire emblem games, I am hoping to have another one of those with warside and advance wars

[@AlphaAurora]

The blue ball looks like an EMP. LOL, the map looks like an Air vs Sea map in terms of which side has advantages.

[@abyssal113]

The way I'd make power plants work is increase the amount of available units produced per factory you control. Also, maybe one of those new land properties could be a repair center or something like that to heal units.

[@andresmarinoruiz585]

hey mangs, i think the stun is an EMP, and that's why both infantry units don't get the stun. i guess it just works on mech units (and buildings)

[@ARockRaider]

The ability sgown at 2:45 doesn't effect infinity, you can see a sniper to the right who is also not effected.

[@volksdude1970]

The one CO power that knocked out everything except the center unit looks like it would have been an EMP. It makes sense it wouldn't disable infantry, because infantry doesn't use many electronics (aside from radio communications). I'm really excited to see how this game turns out. Keep up with the good work covering this!

[@zevreth8826]

Can't wait for the video "Can you beat Warside without losing any units?"

[@DarkOrderSolDjango]

At least it can't do worse than AW reboot camp.

[@mehemynxm6974]

I have semi high hopes for this. The game has charm, and I hope they do take community help with map making and possibly unit balance.

[@nit11]

I think the "vox machina" excludes infantry, not the unit of the center. Im really expecting this game, looks really nice. If it has a good multiplayer, it would rule

[@fireblast8972]

Some QoL changes I think need to be made before the final release: 1. Cheaper units/ More Properties. In each demo map, i find myself unable to make anything with decent firepower unless I spend an entire turn doing nothing due to how low the economy is, while the opponent feels the urge to camp out my fresh captures and even ignores my units for the sake of divebombing my main base with units I don't have the income to counter. There needs to be a better way to get money. 2. Fix how moving units works. I can't begin to count the number of times i messed up an important play, be it a capture, a move, or eliminating a target, because the game not only won't let you backtrack a move before making the unit wait, it wont let you choose your target after the move. So if i accidentally clicked next to the property i want to capture instead of on it, my infantry just stands there like a chump and i wasted my turn

[@brandonwilliams6119]

I too am hoping for Naval Properties, I’m surprised Advance Wars never did that, it makes Naval Combat more important for scoring extra income.

[@lasselen9448]

COP damage may be fund-based rather than HP-based. This would explain why the very expensive fighter was left with more HP than the two cheaper other units. It would also balance some powers out if manual targeting is a thing (and it clearly is for this one).

[@ziljin]

I tried the demo i wish they let me confirm before finalizing my movement i kept on thinkin its move first then attack as two separate actions like 99% of turn based strategy games...

[@DekuLord]

Agreed, my biggest gripe with the demo.

[@truegamer_007]

Fingers crossed for oil rig naval properties

[@Laloa.]

Fun fact: The ship seen at 0:45 is based on the “LCAC” a landing craft primarily used by the U.S navy

[@seansch8314]

The lightening bolt power excluded the sniper as well. I think it only effects buildings and machines.

[@marxel4444]

5:27 The left side of the new naval building looks like a green level on the bottom left and a shipping container in the top left. similar to the brown habor almost in the center of the map at 5:31 So it seems to be a naval base / Habor again.

[@DavidMarcus1525]

I'm happy to see a advance wars indie game.

[@urgadurga]

This looks reaaally cool, I look forward to its release! I wonder if they'll get Mangs to playtest it or something since I think he can give valuable feedback.

[@hideshisface1886]

The "naval property" is absolutely a harbor - you can compare it with the other ones we've seen, it is exactly the same layout from this side.

[@swagmaster2003]

4:14 No, these powers are not similair to AW global damage in that they can't kill units. In your first Warside video at 14:54, you can see a (full hp) recon getting destroyed by the triple beam power. Looks pretty OP.

[@jw7500]

Looks fun so far, but there are a few thjngs: - As you said, animations are a little slow, that and the explosions/death animations need a bit more intensity - The dialogue looked a little wooden so far, so hopefully the storytelling will be a bit better in the final product - Also, maybe I missed it, but are there any Medium tanks? I haven't seen any. - The characters could use a bit of an upgrade in the personality design: The two Navy guys look a bit generic and Reaver looks like....well.... "Mortarion at home", even down to powers.

[@swissyeti2260]

I don't think it's a naval property as it matches the left side of the orange harbor. (see 2:56 for reference)

[@blahmaster6k]

The demo has some issues with unit balance. At least one of the maps has you start with a massive income disadvantage, and with no mech-like units you just have no way to deal with all the tanks and other vehicles the AI spams at you. I'd call myself a pretty decent or even good advance wars player, but some of these demo missions just feel really hard due to the poor unit balance. Tanks are too expensive, and they're the only way to deal with enemy tanks in the demo. You basically can't build an anti-vehicle unit until you store up 10k, and it can be hard to even get to half that as income on one mission. When the enemy pumps out tanks and rockets every turn and you have 4-5k income, it just feels impossible. With no way to repair units, the tanks you have to save up several turns for just slowly die to chip damage and you get overrun.

[@blahmaster6k]

I should clarify that I did end up beating that mission, and it was the only really hard one. Basically there was only one specific set of actions I found that survived the early turns, and you have to basically just ignore production and save up for tanks. Building only tanks until you can stabilize the game and base skipping every turn just feels bad, though. It also solidifies my impression that tanks really do not have a counter. Whoever has the most tanks wins. If the AI on that map only spammed tanks with his greater income instead of building other units, I would have lost.

[@sebastianselvarajan]

Yea games like this normally follow the rock - paper - scissors model where your units are good vs some, bad vs others and neutral against some like mirror matches. Atm the demo has no cheap counter to tanks. In the AW series you had slow moving missile infantry that were hard to use but dirt cheap, they where the paper to the tanks rock. Now they are missing with no replacement. Artillery at 9k vs the tanks 10k makes it more like the neutral option rather than the cost effective one. I feel taking out the missile infantry and giving nothing equivalent in return is a problem. If they want to avoid the walking missile troops perhaps a mounted missile lightly armoured vehicle could work. Fast, effective vs armour but weak to small arms fire. Either way some solution is currently missing.

[@randomredshirt5274]

@@sebastianselvarajan The triangle in aw is tank

[@blahmaster6k]

@@randomredshirt5274 B-copters would have to be cheaper than tanks for them to solve the problem. If tanks counter every unit cheaper than themselves, then whoever gets a tiny income lead first gets a free win because they can spam tanks and the other player can't. It's almost like having the only airport in a DS map and spamming stealths. You need SOME way for a player with an income disadvantage to try to fight back with superior tactics. It's why mechs are less than half the cost of a tank, why AAs are less than half the cost of a bomber, why artillery is half the cost of a medium tank, etc.

[@damace8571]

This game plays differently from advance wars. The mission is quite easy if you keep decap structures and have enough infantry to build a frontline taking advantage of terrain. Then you have at least a couple of ways to counterattack once you build enough vehicles and neutralized the first wave. See videos on that specific mission, I enjoyed the way this game plays once I understood how it is work - it is a bit more dynamic and do not rely on city strongholds

[@lilwheedle]

I played the demo, and despite the fact it was missing a lot of content, it was still a lot of fun to play. The map where you fight Flint was in my opinion the hardest mission in the demo. But anyway, yeah I am looking forward to this game even more now.

[@bandandra9584]

Did you ever beat it because i haven’t yet

[@lilwheedle]

@@bandandra9584 yes I did. It feels kinda luck dependent based on if the AI decides to split its forces between the top road and the bottom area. I had luck by producing an early sniper turn 2 and positioning him directly above the barracks in the middle of the map to take care of buggy’s. One tip I have in planning your turns is that the AI will always target captured properties over taking engagements with your units. So use that to your advantage.

[@crimsonninja6995]

1:20, looks like a nuclear power plant to me

[@ComradeMihndar]

Just wanted to let you know they released the multiplayer demo for this quietly! It would be super fun to see a video of you and someone trying it!

[@JohnSmith-fo5cx]

meanwhile the devs of the game are watching this video taking notes.....

[@adept7497]

Would be smart...!

[@arcturus64]

During the map creation showcase it seemed like you can mirror and inverse the tile positioning to create perfectly symmetrical maps just like in AWBW which is great

[@mimismomos]

This looks great and the demo was really fun. The only criticism I have, like others have said, is the art of the COs feels a bit flat and dull, though the designs are fine. The unit designs and the environments are really nice, and it's super easy to tell what you're looking at with just a glance. I know a lot of people in the AW-like community don't really care for battle animations in games like this and usually turn them off, but I really like these, and they don't last too long either. I'm glad we are finally getting what could be a true successor to AW. I really tried to get into Athena Crisis, but there's definitely a few factors holding it back from being great, even though it has a lot of interesting and unique ideas.

[@khloros17]

I played the demo and had a lot of fun. I hope they improve the UI a bit with infoboxes and so on, but it's looking very promising

[@Omperor]

Forget the blank-faced portraits and death animation blandness. What about the CO music? How catchy are these? Would you play a 20-minute game with any of them blaring in the background? Did Wargroove have themes you could listen to forever?

[@haveyoutakenyourjoymygoods943]

Hmmmm, honestly, with how much I was able to see of this game, either it's gonna be The godamm second coming of Christ for the Advance War community, or a total flop. Hoping it's the first one tbh, AW reaaalllly need something good. (please don't F ck up the Story, please don't F ck up the Story, please don't Story the F ck up, F ck Story please the don't)

[@Badbufon]

The characters are so dull that I doubt they have any interesting story to tell. Plotwise Advance Wars wasn't good either but it was fun with colorful and wacky characters to lach on

[@Artemas_16]

I think it's probably better to make PvP than plot. Campaign could be added with patch, but if PvP doesn't work, there will be no players.

[@yanami1241]

The gameplay is much more important. The story of Advance Wars always was completely dumb and basic with the exception of Days of Ruin.

[@jimmy_20xx]

This game seems more focused on the gameplay, like, good positioning and management of units is even more important than in Advance Wars. That might make for a better pvp game, but then there's how people will accept it when it launches.

[@marcar9marcar972]

2:48 it’s excluding infantry it looks like, the sniper 2 units away is still good

[@jayfox4291]

Hey mangs. I’m pretty sure that power is an EMP. It affected vehicles and a building. But not the inf.

[@Scrap_and_build_ourselves]

Bwangs ask the devs if we as players can host our own multiplayer servers, like you can do with other games. That on its own would make it better, since we could have our own servers paid by ourselves, so if the official sever was slow or whatever, just make our own.

[@noname93343]

this game better get a physical release

[@Wafelkowiec]

3:30 map you can see port on the left and its left side looks like the cut-off structure at the end of the video. So unfortunately it's most likely just another port. Though the idea of oil rigs that print money for person who controls the sea seems fun.

[@ThatGuyNamedRick]

Some issues I had while playing the demo is that it just doesn't go in depth on what units do. I understand that it wants you to play around with the mechanics but things like terrain, repairing, and how the movement system works is pretty garbage is not missing entirely. I mean, even Tiny Metal (which Mangs didn't like for some reason) had those tutorials and were better from it. Another is that the fighting animations are pretty slow and at times I just wanted to turn them off about 5 minutes in. The lack of a "backtrack" or cancel movement function was also non-existent. And the smooshed-together "move and shoot" mechanic was really confusing since you couldn't line up units first to work out the puzzle after. A unit mastery system would be pretty interesting to see, even if it would require a special "Academy" building be under your possession. And a mechanic to shut down CO powers by literally taking away their "Power Plant" (get it CO POWER plant) would be a fresh mechanic to bring to the table and add another layer of strategy on top of the regular fighting.

[@yandayixia]

Nintedo's gonna sue them after they are done with palworld lol

[@tubey84]

I had interest until I saw the property capture mechanic and played the demo. My interest is now thoroughly over. I honestly prefer Wargroove, by some distance.

[@cutman15]

I'm looking at the tiles and noticing the bridges somewhat merges with the road sprites. So if there's a CO with a Koal d2d, hopefully bridges work for em.

[@johntrellston9514]

The big question *I* have is just how many views can the Deathless Warside campaign video get Thats KZbin gold in the making

[@hijackdallas6052]

Until i can repair things, it would be nearly impossible

[@lunesaveter8521]

I was interested in this game and Mangs further boost my interest. That being said, after playing the public Demo, I'm not feeling it is ready yet. It feels like it lack polish, or at least the public demo does

[@MARStheFORSAKEN]

2:20 its clearly an emp as you will notice the infantry units in the blast radius are not effected.

[@KHFreack]

this kinda makes me wonder,if you could aim certain co powers like shown here,would it affect the overall value of some co's in competitive play.

[@Badbufon]

It looks great, but the characters are SO DULL.

[@NathanielGlaser-Sietstra]

I think the Ex Machina-power don't hit infantry units like snipers because the sniper was not affected.

[@Dexterritory212]

here's hoping their version of cruisers are like dark conflicts actually decent for their value and it would be cool to have the super famicon wars style battleship expensive but effective over being glorified rockets. make battleships be moving fortresses over a deadbeat rocket that gets swarmed by copters and cant retaliate here's hoping that sea property is a sea one in the end would be nice to see how this goes and if they get a hold of advance wars by web people^^

[@patthecat574]

5:20 in the next clip you can see the same harbor model, one with the blue color and the other the same orange color. Unfortunately it is not a naval propery like Mangs believed.

[@BigDaddy9754]

I'm going to a guess and say that the last property you highlighted is an Oil Rig, based on the supports coming out of the water. I'm going to assume that its going to have a different amount of income from a normal city and might refuel your adjacent unit as bonus effect?

[@elnico5623]

You should check out athena crisis, or the warside demo

[@FlammieLL]

Maybe we should be a bit more reserved since we havent seen all faction exclusive units yet, and some global units that were missing from the demo. Since this game seem to have a lot of buildings that might change gameplay completely depending on where they are located or how many there are. Most maps on Wars by web are pretty damn huge, too huge maps without the ability to repair almost any unit might make it impossible for both sides to approach each other.

[@mintcake2668]

Holy shit this is literally just AW. I'm not complaining.

[@ojhat]

As someone who has always had fun watching AWBW, but never gotten into it, i may never be the target audience... but imo, to even get me that invested, i think character designs need a TOTAL rework, or we need to see aLOT more of the COs and hopefully they look better, because the default ones we've seen here just... don't jive with me. Not when you have those colorful units and maps on screen.

[@chadthomas587]

Do you recommend switch or steam? How good do you think the online support will be?

[@ryanbrook8384]

Guessing the lightning bomb is an EMP effecting properties and vehicles.

[@helloimthegrowthsman6382]

Mangs: Sherlock Holmes level observation and detective work Me: Hehehe, cool tank sprite...

[@musiikkimies9241]

One-lander... hovercraft policy!

[@Skal246]

The factory looking building could be a nuclear power plant or refinery that allows you nuclear powered units although i doubt it sonce that might be op af lol

[@evanseifert8858]

Nice.

[@frederico-d3l]

i missed FOG OF WAR. i would love that to be in the meta again... for some reason i dont like to just watch all the map and my enemy units all the time. fog of war makes scouting units a good choice... when you can see the whole map all the time. its kind of pointless to make them, they have some utility to block and attack infantry but still is annoying. having fog of war makes matches way more interesting in my opinion. if you can see all the time enemy units, its very lame most of the time no one takes huge risks if 2 good players play with each other.

[@EmperorKarino]

the landers look like the naval transport from Red Alert.

[@zeroman0460]

It's Linux compatible AHHHHHH!!!! Now I actually want to play it. 😆

[@ericquiabazza2608]

Well there is adventages to the new age of technology. The game clearly goes toward a 2000+ modern warfare. With cargo helicopter transporting vehicles, new landers, APC, etc Wonder if they gonna add drones, missile platform (psible CO Power), or Energy/Infroestructure greed That storage and power plant looked promising, but also may be specific building for campaing, with luck will be a specialize building like radio towers. Unfortunate but the building in the right edge match a port Sea Oil platform could be a nice adition as "water cities", tho capture may need a transport? My previous idea of garrisoning units could still work, yet adding Supply (ammo/fuel) to this oil platform will be needed to make them more valuable and practical, otherwise getting a transport to it will be too much effort. This also mean things could change Before release and AFTER Release. If it playerbase is big and organize enough a "test map" or "publish your own map" period could happen, giving more interaction with the community. Do we know anything about the Dev team and publishers? If there is any way for them to take feed back in organize fashion it could improve the life span of the game, if they want obiously, maybe they already have a vission and will see it trought.

[@somepvpguy69]

Cant wait ngl

[@Kanehil]

02:34 Looks like a EMP Think the effeckt is also on the spot it lands but only triggers on Vehicle and Buildings.

[@paulwebber8931]

Looking forward to the "can I beat warside without losing ant units?" video

[@D0C391]

I love advanced wars!

[@KF7FDB]

Honestly, similar to classic RTS like Starcraft and AOE, I don’t think there is interest in a new game similar to Advance Wars. People want to just play Advance Wars. Don’t see this game succeeding.

[@blazingswordchad3384]

I don't think I agree with that. There are a ton of spiritual successors in development to classic RTSes that people are interested in. Stormgate raised millions of dollars in kickstarter by marketing to old-school Blizzard fans (though unfortunately they seemed to disappoint people and screwed up the game, but that doesn't change that people wanted something good from it).

[@hoanghanguyenvinh8476]

I disagree with Mangs. Asking player from AW is going to make problem much worse than it is simply because AW competitive players are heavily biased with their experience from AW on web and elsewhere (mostly PvP). Especially with their well known dislike for naval unit. Some map might need to exist so that someone can get their fun stomping comp. It would be better to build up with real feedback after some kind of meta has been defined by the game itself, rather than copy pasta from another established meta, essentially turning the game into the same thing. I look forward to Warside because it is new, it does things differently, and the last thing i want is for it to copy wholesale things that used to be. Another thing i don't like is mirrored map (a thing of balancing for PvP). They are boring and uncreative. I would rather map are unbalanced with each side getting different things and go from there. The new properties might just be that.

[@chubz8969]

the armies all looking exactly the same instantly killed my interest in the game tbh.

[@emiliohernandez1571]

I’d get it

[@sgtderp1]

thats not a refinery but looks exactly like a nuclear power plant