So why didn't you buy?

Valor & Victory is a fast-playing, easy to learn World War II squad-level game system. Based on the original Valor & Victory board game, the digital edition provides you with an accessible and deep challenge, developed for classic tabletop game lovers.
yobowargames
Posts: 415
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 8:59 pm

So why didn't you buy?

Post by yobowargames »

I would love to hear why you decided not to buy Valor & Victory.

Your comments would help us understand what we could have done better and what you feel is missing to make it a must-buy purchase.

Do the graphics not do it for you or maybe the marketing didn't hit the sweet spot?

Whatever it is time to unload those pent-up frustrations!

Lance
YOBOWARGAMES – “BRINGING THE JOYS OF BOARD WARGAMING TO THE PC”
GiveWarAchance
Posts: 450
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2015 10:42 pm

Re: So why didn't you buy?

Post by GiveWarAchance »

The graphics look very good with the gritty war atmosphere.
Settings are good and game style seems appealing.
I haven't bought yet cause I am single player type player and this seems like a made for tournaments type of game. Am still interested though. I don't play mp cause I am a casual player and don't memorize game mechanics to the nth degree so I will probably just lose all mp games and get depressed so I stick to single player games.
User avatar
Zovs
Posts: 8581
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 11:02 pm
Location: United States

Re: So why didn't you buy?

Post by Zovs »

This is perfectly suited to single player.
Image
Beta Tester for: War in the East 1 & 2, WarPlan & WarPlan Pacific, Valor & Victory, Flashpoint Campaigns: Sudden Storm, Computer War In Europe 2
SPWW2 & SPMBT scenario creator
hapshott
Posts: 89
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2014 8:32 pm

Re: So why didn't you buy?

Post by hapshott »

I bought it recently. The main reasons of the long wait is the fact that there was no random scenario generator. I also read that the AI wasn't very good. This is an issue for me as I only play single player.

I bought it immediately when I found out that a random scenario generator was added. I'm very happy with my purchase.

The AI is good as I lost several games. I really like the random scenario generator. Esp. since I added the "global ww2 mod" units to the valorForces.xml file.

There is one thing which I currently miss. That is a map editor (or generator). I would love to convert the Tigers on the hunt scenarios to V&V.

The scenario editor can be improved. It is very basic. I cannot add reinforcements (or I overlooked it). But it is easy to use.
User avatar
Duck Doc
Posts: 738
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 12:22 am

Re: So why didn't you buy?

Post by Duck Doc »

I bought the game and all the DLCs except the last.

The graphics and sound and user interface are among the best I have played and are the main reasons I bought the game with the additional content. The game mechanics are simple and functional and believable and make for an immersive game experience. So far so good.

But let me tell you why I don't play so much.

When playing the die rolls and CRT cause such widely varying combat results it is difficult to plan anything in the game. Every turn and every game plays so wildly differently it is impossible to plan ahead with any likelihood of achieving any success using the assets available. Every game and even every turn is a crap shoot.

I am at a loss to explain this phenomenon. It seems quite unique in my long gaming career. I cannot help but wonder how such a good-looking game with such functional mechanics can turn out to be not a fun gaming experience.

I realize no one who is a likely buyer of the game would have a clue about my experience and this may not be relevant to your query to those who didn't buy the game but I thought I would let you know.
robhic
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2023 11:50 am

Re: So why didn't you buy?

Post by robhic »

I have actually bought the game and think it is good. However having played the game a number of times now (against the AI), I have the following initial comments on (and issues with) the user interface and game mechanics (in no particular order). These are of course my own personal opinions and others may differ!

(1) It appears that if you are in the middle of moving a unit (or stack of units) and use the LOS tool (binoculars) to check for a safe further movement, when returning to move the same unit after deselecting the LOS tool the unit is 'greyed out' and further movement cannot be made. This does not seem right. The ability to move a particular unit (or stack) should remain active until another unit (or stack) is started to be moved, regardless of whether LOS is checked or not during the unit's movement.

(2) Further to (1) above, all it takes during the Move Phase to prevent further movement of a unit or stack is to click anywhere else on the map (other than one of the highlighted move hexes). This can happen accidentally so that the intended movement is aborted by the software. It would be better in my opinion if the ability to move a unit or stack was only terminated when its movement limit has been reached or when another unit or stack has actually started to be moved.

(3) I don't actually see the need to have to select and de-select LOS mode at all. It would be far easier to do away with LOS mode, and instead simply show LOS (by highlighting the visible hexes) temporarily while, say, shift left-clicking on a hex. This would remove the need for a menu button at all and keep the UI active in whatever phase is currently in progress.

(4) In the Move Phase when a unit is selected to move, the hex highlighting used is identical to that used to display LOS. This is confusing as the player cannot easily determine if the adjacent highlighting is because an enemy unit has LOS or not when selected.

(5) There is no ability for a player to allocate which units in a stack are to take any combat losses or suffer pinning (unlike in the manual game). I feel that this ability should be provided (even if it is only an option).

(6) The V&V manual makes three references (on pages 31, 37 & 62) to tables provided in the appendices, but there are no appendices provided in the manual (and hence no tables)!

(7) Rather than having to remember how many movement points have already been expended when moving a unit (or stack), it would be very helpful to have some indication how many movement points are remaining.

(8) It would be useful to have some indication of a unit's (or stack's) total APFP and/or ATFP before designating a fire attack. This would aid the player to determine which row in the appropriate combat table would be used if an attack were to be made.

(9) Unless the map is considerably 'zoomed in', the bottom one or two rows of hexes are obscured by the menu (even if the map is fully scrolled). I realise that the menu can be hidden, but this is annoying if the player wants to use one of the menu options on a unit hidden by the menu itself. This could be circumvented if the map were able to be scrolled further so that all the useable hexes are visible, or alternatively give the option to dock the menu to either side of the game window as well as the bottom.

(10) During the Command Phase the player has the ability to move weapons between units in a stack. The method for doing this is very 'clunky'. It would be much simpler just to left-click on the desired stack with the mouse to display the unit selection popup, then use the mouse to drag/drop/swap the weapon(s) between the unit rows. This would obviate the need for a menu button at all.

(11) It is not very clear when assault movement has been selected. It is easy to miss the short-lived indicator and the button highlighting to determine if it is active or not is not obvious. Perhaps the cursor, for example, could be changed to a different symbol, or the hex highlighting and/or movement cost numbers be shown in a different colour or a suitable graphic placed on the moving unit.

(12) Unless there has been some sort of combat effect or other unit state change, it would be useful for the player to be able to 'undo' certain actions without penalty (e.g. undo a move without having to use up more movement points to return to the previously occupied hex).

This is a great game system with plenty of potential, but as it currently stands the user interface is not very user-friendly and can detract from gameplay and overall enjoyment. I'm sure it would not take too big a programming effort to make a significant improvement to the UI.
lollipops
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2022 3:40 pm

Re: So why didn't you buy?

Post by lollipops »

The main reason I held off buying for so long was because I wanted to buy 'either' Valor & Victory 'or' Lock n Load tactical. So I started looking at reviews online for them both and to be honest there seems to me to be a good deal more love for Lock n Load tactical. There are of course devotees of both games and it may be that I simply happened upon more of one than the other. Still, I came away with the distinct impression that paying €3.99 for a game with an awful lot of good reviews was probably a better starting point than paying €16.99 for a similar game.

I am however aware that there are a lot more scenarios in Valor & Victory. I'm also aware that the UI in Valor & Victory is leaps and bounds better than the Lock n Load UI. But still, for someone just wanting to see what game I liked better, the €3.99 price point was a no-brainer really.

Anyway, I ended up buying Valor & Victory as well. But in answer to your question, for me it was just a matter of the price being a lot better for Lock n Load. And even though it's only really a little taster and doesn't really have any real scenarios with it, it was still a good option for me to try it out without really having to spend any real money.

I'm still not sure which I like best really. I'm not at all sure I actually like the impulse system Lock n Load uses. So far it's just enticing me to sit and pass a lot while I wait for the enemy to get closer(at least when defending). I could try charging forward in the hope the dice fall my way I suppose, but that seems a little drastic.

Anyway I've gotten way off point here. The much lower price of the other game is the answer to why I held off buying this one for so long.
yobowargames
Posts: 415
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 8:59 pm

Re: So why didn't you buy?

Post by yobowargames »

Duck Doc wrote: Sun Mar 12, 2023 4:57 pm I bought the game and all the DLCs except the last.

The graphics and sound and user interface are among the best I have played and are the main reasons I bought the game with the additional content. The game mechanics are simple and functional and believable and make for an immersive game experience. So far so good.

But let me tell you why I don't play so much.

When playing the die rolls and CRT cause such widely varying combat results it is difficult to plan anything in the game. Every turn and every game plays so wildly differently it is impossible to plan ahead with any likelihood of achieving any success using the assets available. Every game and even every turn is a crap shoot.

I am at a loss to explain this phenomenon. It seems quite unique in my long gaming career. I cannot help but wonder how such a good-looking game with such functional mechanics can turn out to be not a fun gaming experience.

I realize no one who is a likely buyer of the game would have a clue about my experience and this may not be relevant to your query to those who didn't buy the game but I thought I would let you know.
Hi Duck Doc

It's a very interesting subject, surprisingly common in games, and something we have been doing research on.

As an example, let's say there is a 50% chance of something happening. A very common perception with players is that should they fail to achieve the result the first time then by default they should/must/will achieve it on the second attempt - regardless of the fact that there is still a 50% chance they won't on a second attempt. So many games will actually force that result to happen - IE you failed on the first 50% chance therefore REGARDLESS you will succeed on the second attempt.

The same goes for dice rolls. Let's say we have a 6-sided dice and 1,2,3 is a hit. You roll a 6 - A miss. What some games do is remove the 6 as a number the next time you roll. So now when you roll behind the scenes the random numbers are 1 -5. When the player finally hits the dice is reset.

We don't do the above in this game but its something we are seriously thinking about in our next.
YOBOWARGAMES – “BRINGING THE JOYS OF BOARD WARGAMING TO THE PC”
hapshott
Posts: 89
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2014 8:32 pm

Re: So why didn't you buy?

Post by hapshott »

But still, for someone just wanting to see what game I liked better, the €3.99 price point was a no-brainer really.

I really dislike this way of pricing. For the €3.99 you get very limited content. Just a few simple scenario's. If you want to have more content you need to pay for each separate module. Even the scenario editor is sold separately. Look at what you need to pay for all the content. That is currently €166,97.

This pricing method always get out of hand. Look for example at Warhammer Gladius. This ends up to €114 to have it all.

I think that the cost for V&V is fair . Eventhough it also has DLC which you have to pay for. But you get the scenario generator for free.
Karvon
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 9:00 pm

Re: So why didn't you buy?

Post by Karvon »

I recently dove into V&V, buying all the DLCs. I started playing through scenarios and posted my experience and reactions in the following thread.

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 4#p5080504

I agree with the previous comments about movement; it's very frustrating at times to lose out on remaining movement due to accidental mouse clicks.

I have found the play balance to be terrible in most of the scenarios I've played so far. As designed, it is mostly impossible to win as the attacker if you follow reasonable tactics of maneuver and concentration of fire; you simply will run out of time unless you get very lucky in your rolls. Historically, 3:1 has been considered the desirable odds when attacking. In other WW2 games of similar scale I've played such as Panzer Strike and Steel Panthers, you typically get 2:1 advantage in points when attacking. In many of the scenarios I've played in V&V, it's seemed like more to be 1:1, though I've played with FOW and haven't opened scenarios in the editor, so can't confirm that.

Many of the maps I've played so far are very constricted and do not provide much in the way of flanking options, and given the time limits, you're pretty much forced to do frontal assaults, which usually doesn't end well given the odds.

Given the more abstracted combat results, you have to get lucky to win as the attacker, as average or less than average rolls simply won't kill off the defenders in the time allotted. If the defender gets lucky, then you are likely dead.

Mortars proved almost a complete joke in the 2-3 scenarios I had them available. I think I hit maybe 10% of the time and almost for no effect.

OTOH, enemy bazookas consistently toasted my tanks with single shots at their maximum range. Another not particularly realistic result IMHO.

None of the scenarios had smoke or offboard artillery support which are both pretty key aids when attacking. It may be that as these were added in a later update, they were not added in that update to existing scenarios.

I've found tank direct fire vs infantry to be underwhelming in the couple of scenarios I had them available, a very vexing result in light of the bazooka effectiveness noted earlier.

All-in-all, I just haven't found V&V that enjoyable so far, but I will return and pick up my play through when I have more time.

Some other factors mitigating against V&V.

The forums and discord are not very active.
The community seems a bit small.

TBH, I could really care less about graphics and normally play with sound off, so that is an even less critical factor for me in buying a game. Panzer Strike, which is a 40 year old game using sprite based 8 bit graphics is still a great simulation I like to play at times.

After my foray into V&V, I was prompted to go back and play some Panzer Strike and Steel Panthers and found both of those much more fun and refreshing. Maybe I'm just a too granular guy.

Karvon
seanny
Posts: 46
Joined: Tue May 09, 2017 1:43 am

Re: So why didn't you buy?

Post by seanny »

I have bought the game.

I wanted a better Zoom Function in game.
The current Zoom in the game is inhibiting my enjoyment of the game.

I posted on the Steam Forums,
https://steamcommunity.com/app/963870/d ... 859741901/
I am the first post and responded later in thread as well.
I am the last post in this thread as well.

and also on the Discord.
I dont think anyone even read the Discord post dated 5/3/23

And thought maybe the game might be updated to address the zoom issue.


Sorry for whining ,but in the Steam thread a developer posted that they would see what they could do and this was date 12 Oct, 2022.








Nothing has happened.

I just want a more functional zoom to start enjoying the game again.
I want to buy the expansion dlcs and make some more mods for the game.
I wanted a Zoom Update to progress further with the games opportunities.
I am sure other people feel the same way.
DingBat
Posts: 123
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:18 pm

Re: So why didn't you buy?

Post by DingBat »

Hi seanny,

We haven't forgotten about the zoom. I won't bore you with a lot of excuses but both Lance and I took a bit of a break after Arnhem. We've done some work on zoom but I don't think either Lance or I are entirely happy with it. We're continuing to work on it.

That's probably not the answer you want to see here, but I did want to let you know that we hadn't forgotten about your request.

Cheers,
/bruce
eddieballgame
Posts: 881
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2011 2:50 am

Re: So why didn't you buy?

Post by eddieballgame »

I own V&V & all the dlcs. For the most part...I like it a lot.
Just 1 needed component (imho)...a full editor.
Hell, I would pay double the price of this game for that as a dlc. :)
Rosseau
Posts: 2931
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 2:20 am

Re: So why didn't you buy?

Post by Rosseau »

For some reason, the "zoom" issue doesn't bother me. But that's just me.

Now, the addition of a full editor? Wow, that would raise the bar significantly!

Of course, not sure how hard that would be to program.

Also, such an editor could hurt the sales of other DLC?

Not sure about the above issues, but I too would be willing to pay a lot of money for it.
seanny
Posts: 46
Joined: Tue May 09, 2017 1:43 am

Re: So why didn't you buy?

Post by seanny »

Thanks for the reply ,re Zoom issue.
Look forward to an update when you can figure it out.


And in relation to the the other great comment "Just 1 needed component (imho)...a full editor." ,I think a Map editor would really add WONDERS to the games potential.
User avatar
Magpius
Posts: 1679
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2007 11:21 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: So why didn't you buy?

Post by Magpius »

I bought the game, but not the DLC's because, I've tried numerous time to install user made scenarios, with no luck. The process never loads them into the menu. I've loaded the Varsity scenarios, but Rico's go nowhere.
User avatar
ncc1701e
Posts: 10280
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 7:50 pm
Location: Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards

Re: So why didn't you buy?

Post by ncc1701e »

Because all the rules of the original Valor & Victory board game were not implemented. Is it so now?
Chancellor Gorkon to Captain James T. Kirk:
You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.
Noakesy
Posts: 194
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 9:37 am

Re: So why didn't you buy?

Post by Noakesy »

I bought the original release but have never played it. I'm a bit of a dinosaur in that I like to look at the manual, and it's huge and would drain my printer (and reading on-line isn't really much use). However, I see that there is now a Stalingrad module (guess it has been out a while!) so I may buy that and actually try to play this. ;-)
Noakesy
sfbaytf
Posts: 1264
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 9:54 pm

Re: So why didn't you buy?

Post by sfbaytf »

I was looking at V&V or LnL some time ago and went with LnL. It seemed like a better value and there were comments about the poor AI in V&V. To be fair I've since seen comments about LnLs poor AI by some players.

LnL is a slightly better value, but the very base game is sparse and you'll have to buy more DLC to round it out. You can get on sale though. LnL has a lot more and covers a much larger period as well as the Pacific and some lesser known conflict as well as Viet-Nam, Falklands, Somalia and so on...

I don't regret going with LnL when I did and own most of the DLC-most of which I purchased on sale.

That being said, I purchased V&V a couple of days ago on sale. I gotta say I like it a lot. The graphic in V&V is cleaner and better to me although LnL is quite good. Gameplay is a bit cleaner in V&V, but LnL has things like multi-story building where troops can be on different floors and from what I've seen so far it looks like V&V doesn't.

If I had to pick just one I would still go with LnL, but really if I had just V&N I wouldn't be unhappy either. Fortunately I can have both and I'm very happy with both.

I've seen comments regarding the dice rolling on VnV-you can tweak in settings. I haven't tried it. I have some doubts about computer generated random number generators in general. Years ago I had a pocket craps game and results from the microchip game dice rolls and what I got actually rolling physical dice in Reno at a craps table were wildly different. That was just my observations and could just be nothing....
thewood1
Posts: 9112
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:24 pm
Location: Boston

Re: So why didn't you buy?

Post by thewood1 »

sfbaytf wrote: Sat Dec 02, 2023 8:25 pm I was looking at V&V or LnL some time ago and went with LnL. It seemed like a better value and there were comments about the poor AI in V&V. To be fair I've since seen comments about LnLs poor AI by some players.

LnL is a slightly better value, but the very base game is sparse and you'll have to buy more DLC to round it out. You can get on sale though. LnL has a lot more and covers a much larger period as well as the Pacific and some lesser known conflict as well as Viet-Nam, Falklands, Somalia and so on...

I don't regret going with LnL when I did and own most of the DLC-most of which I purchased on sale.

That being said, I purchased V&V a couple of days ago on sale. I gotta say I like it a lot. The graphic in V&V is cleaner and better to me although LnL is quite good. Gameplay is a bit cleaner in V&V, but LnL has things like multi-story building where troops can be on different floors and from what I've seen so far it looks like V&V doesn't.

If I had to pick just one I would still go with LnL, but really if I had just V&N I wouldn't be unhappy either. Fortunately I can have both and I'm very happy with both.

I've seen comments regarding the dice rolling on VnV-you can tweak in settings. I haven't tried it. I have some doubts about computer generated random number generators in general. Years ago I had a pocket craps game and results from the microchip game dice rolls and what I got actually rolling physical dice in Reno at a craps table were wildly different. That was just my observations and could just be nothing....
A very good assessment about L&L and V&V. Aligns almost perfectly with my assessment. I find V&V simpler to play, but lacking some key things like robust FoW and multi-story buildings. I also like L&L's broad subject matter. But V&V's progress on modules is slowly making up for that.
Post Reply

Return to “Valor & Victory”