Act of Aggression

 PC
User Score
7.1

Mixed or average reviews- based on 99 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 56 out of 99
  2. Mixed: 22 out of 99
  3. Negative: 21 out of 99

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. Ca55
    Sep 23, 2015
    4
    For me, AoA has been a massive disappointment. By far the biggest fun suck is the economy - there are too many resource types, resource nodes are spread thinly and far apart, and they're vulnerable and very difficult to defend. Heavy armour - the most fun aspect of any RTS - is too expensive to mass and too easily killed (as well as being too difficult to repair). Ultimately, you're leftFor me, AoA has been a massive disappointment. By far the biggest fun suck is the economy - there are too many resource types, resource nodes are spread thinly and far apart, and they're vulnerable and very difficult to defend. Heavy armour - the most fun aspect of any RTS - is too expensive to mass and too easily killed (as well as being too difficult to repair). Ultimately, you're left feeling like you just never have enough money to do anything fun. I already have that IRL, I don't need my games to remind me of it.

    Thanks to the far-flung resource nodes, there is a massive reliance on rush tactics and small-group action involving loads of micromanagement. If micro isn't your thing, and especially if you prefer to play at a slower pace and turtle a bit, then this game is most definitely not for you.

    The net result of all of this is that you spend so much time worrying about resources that the game feels more like some kind of badly done economic strategy game than an actual strategy game involving actual, memorable tank/other battles, which is what most of us will want, but won't get.

    Another criticism is that the jets are far too slow, and by slow I mean some of them are slower than an APC. I mean, come on.

    If you still insist on buying this, wait until it's like 75% off on Steam a year or two from now and get it then. I guarantee that the multiplayer community won't stick around long, so you won't be missing out on much anyway.

    Eugen, if you read this, I have some quick and easy suggestions that'll put the fun right back into this:
    1. Reduce resource load from three types, to one. Having to collect and manage three separate resources adds zero gameplay value, in fact it's just frustrating and a major point of irritation. I'd rather focus on building tanks than worrying about finding and defending resource nodes.
    2. Make the passive resource generating buildings cheaper to build (both in actual cost and in power requirements), or just increase their income rate substantially.
    3. Reduce costs of most of the units in the game.

    Do those three and bam, you're back to doing it like the "golden age RTS" you claimed this was.

    TL;DR: I came to AoA looking for an RTS full of memorable tank battles. I left disappointed.    … Expand
  2. Avadon
    Sep 3, 2015
    3
    The game looks ok graphically and the soundtrack is cool. It also has many types of units and upgrades. But the campaign is absolutely terrible. There's supposed to be a story somewhere in there, I think, but I don't get almost anything about it. Also, did you expect FMV cutscenes with cheesy acting like the old Westwood games? There's none of that here. It feels like a budget campaign,The game looks ok graphically and the soundtrack is cool. It also has many types of units and upgrades. But the campaign is absolutely terrible. There's supposed to be a story somewhere in there, I think, but I don't get almost anything about it. Also, did you expect FMV cutscenes with cheesy acting like the old Westwood games? There's none of that here. It feels like a budget campaign, but they're not charging a budget price for the game...

    Also, there are a lot of gameplay problems and bugs. Unit pathfinding and responsiveness is a mess. You click 5 soldiers to go around a building, 2 of them will go one way, 2 more will go the other way, and 1 of them will get stuck and sort of twitch around for a bit. You have 2 tanks side by side and you order them to attack different targets, they start attacking, then if you select them again and order them to change and focus the same target they just...ignore you forever. I right click 50 times and they don't focus or reposition if they are out of range, they just ignore you and keep attacking separate targets. You select a group of long range snipers to kill garrisoned soldiers, some of them do it while others keep running until they reach melee range and get slaughtered. Completely inexcusable. You wanna micro your wounded units to the back of your army mid-fight? Yeah, good luck with that. And the devs have the nerve to add bonus objectives to not lose any troops on some missions, when units do whatever they feel like. Awesome.

    Also, there are typos EVERYWHERE. In tooltips, in menus, everywhere. The first thing you see when you log in the game is the message "Welcome in Act of Aggression!". Lovely. Then you start the campaign and the game tells you to press A and click to attack-move. It's a lie. A is camera scroll left. Q is attack move. Wrong button prompts on the tutorial. Seriously?

    I could go on. The game might have potential, but right now it's a hot mess, and its problems are very serious. Anyone who has played an RTS with bad pathfinding knows that patching never fixes it. If it's screwed on release, the game's doomed, period. The game is definitely, DEFINITELY not worth the premium price tag, but I'd even hesitate to recommend it for 50% off. Just because there are very few alternatives doesn't mean that we should be satisfied with rubbish.    … Expand
  3. XitArS
    Sep 12, 2015
    4
    What a Disappointment! I really love the wargame-series games and I loved C&C Generals. So I was really thrilled when I Heard that Eugen would create a spiritual successor to Generals, but this was nowhere near what I expected.
    Graphics is nice but feels disconnected from the action (Wargame gameplay feels more involved). Music and sound is almost worthless. Effects and voices are really    What a Disappointment! I really love the wargame-series games and I loved C&C Generals. So I was really thrilled when I Heard that Eugen would create a spiritual successor to Generals, but this was nowhere near what I expected.
    Graphics is nice but feels disconnected from the action (Wargame gameplay feels more involved). Music and sound is almost worthless. Effects and voices are really low-grade. This could however be easily overlooked, but the thing is, the game isn't involving. You're heavily constrained with Resources and the resource-system is the worst I've ever seen in any RTS game. Build a refinery, 5 minutes later, you'll have to sell the refinery to build a new one a few meters away from the previous site because the resource-pools happen to be spread all over the Place... This is a stupid and tedious system. They've also opted for the COH-type of progression where you'll have to unlock move powerful units and Buildings by upgrading to higher defcon levels. This might work great in COH, but I can't say the same for this game. And don't even get me started on the Aircrafts... They use the exact same mechanism as in the Wargames-series. Which is, you'll have to call in air support. While this worked great in the wargame-series games. It's just stupid in a small-scale RTS. And the fact that your airplanes will fly as fast as any guy can run, it's just a sad sight.

    Sadly, I can't recommend this game to anyone. If you want a cool large scale action RTS, play any of the Wargame-series games or World In Conflic. But if you want a "real" RTS, then the old C&C Generals (with the hundreds of different mods) is a much better gaming experience than this game. If you just want something new, then I suggest you wait until this is at 75% sale on Steam.

    As a standalone game in a World where C&C didn't exist nor the Wargame-series. Then I would have given this game a 6 or 7. But since the mentioned game series DO exist and the developer here played the "Spiritual successor to Generals"-card it deserves no more than a 4.    … Expand
  4. MrPrimwhoozle
    Sep 24, 2015
    3
    I bought this game because I played Act of War and the expansion High Treason and LOVED them. There was so much detail in the units, in their animations. Also the story (at least of the original) was great and the movie- sequences had that shlock-charme to them. This one however...the actors who speak the units sound demotivated and dull, the animations are actually worse than in theI bought this game because I played Act of War and the expansion High Treason and LOVED them. There was so much detail in the units, in their animations. Also the story (at least of the original) was great and the movie- sequences had that shlock-charme to them. This one however...the actors who speak the units sound demotivated and dull, the animations are actually worse than in the original (just check out the infantry and helicopters- they look like robots and toys respectively) and the story is nonexistant.

    The gameplay is also weird. Every unit dies in seconds, even very expensive, upgraded ones. Looking for resources is tedious and complely useless- the system of the predecessor worked perfectly, why change it? And everything feels just...wrong. Like someone took all the love and care out of this game.

    Maybe you will have some fun with it in Multiplayer, I don't know, but if you own the original Act of War, play that instead- it's better in every way.    … Expand
  5. Samhirai
    Sep 9, 2015
    0
    This game might have been great if it worked. If only they addressed all the crashes people have been reporting. As it stands this game and the company that made it are mediocre at best. Hey at least you can get a REFUND on steam (just click the support button from right clicking the game).
  6. skimmedmilk
    Sep 9, 2015
    4
    This game is like a tedious version of C&C or act of war. You have 3 resources to acquire, resources run out so quickly, units and upgrades are very expensive, units die extremely quickly despite their expense. There are mechanics for resource generation but again they take a long time to build to due expenses, one of the mechanics relys on collecting prisoners which only your infantry canThis game is like a tedious version of C&C or act of war. You have 3 resources to acquire, resources run out so quickly, units and upgrades are very expensive, units die extremely quickly despite their expense. There are mechanics for resource generation but again they take a long time to build to due expenses, one of the mechanics relys on collecting prisoners which only your infantry can do, this just makes the resource management experience even more tedious. Why the hell they decided to make resource management so time consuming and unnecessarily complex is beyond me. Have 1 resource. Have it be mine-able and have buildings that can generate it... boom, problem solved!

    You cant build anywhere (fair enough) but the build radius is often quite small and makes building your base very annoying, also the radius depends on the building... yeah some buildings you can build quite a distance from your HQ, others have to be literally right next to it.

    RTS games like this are in a difficult position... they arent small scale enough to do effective micro in and indeed there are very few mechanics here that support micro in the way that say company of heros does. But this game isnt large scale enough to support huge armies and massive battles like supreme commander, I mean the engine and map size certainly support this but the current resource management and unit costs certainly dont. Act of aggression sits awkwardly between these two types of RTS....

    Right now this game is just a chore to play, this is coming from someone who played every C&C up until C&C3, supcom, company of heros, starcraft, wargame series and even act of war. There is a good game in act of aggression somewhere but its just not there yet... If you like RTS keep an eye on it and see if they make it more playable, maybe get it on a sale, right now its not worth it. Oh and the single player is pretty awful, I wouldn't get it at all if that's all you're interested in.    … Expand
  7. Virvelvind
    Sep 21, 2015
    0
    I hardly ever take time in my life to write anything on a forum, but I actually feel I really need to say something about Act Of Aggression. Eugene, I have to say after playing this game for over 70 hours (mostly multiplayer and around 80% winrate, purely for information so you know im not a casual gamer sitting here whining about units being unbalanced because I don't know how to play),I hardly ever take time in my life to write anything on a forum, but I actually feel I really need to say something about Act Of Aggression. Eugene, I have to say after playing this game for over 70 hours (mostly multiplayer and around 80% winrate, purely for information so you know im not a casual gamer sitting here whining about units being unbalanced because I don't know how to play), It's a really ♥♥♥♥♥♥ game, I'm madly dissapointed. The game is so unbalanced and the units are so unresponsive. The mechanics of an RTS that makes it good is that theres always a good unit vs another unit, while in this game you have units like the terminator, that only costs aluminium, that can be upgraded to fight and asskick EVERYTHING and in the game. Its so easy to just mass out as much random units as you can, and it almost always works, its just so mind numbing compared to other games when you actually have to think about what units that counters the enemies units. Also, what the **** did you think when you made the fennek? Yeah, lets make a unit that is really cheap, can outrun everything, make it really overpowered against buildings and give it stealth... holy s*** seriously? Even if you have stealth detection, if you're not inside your base with a huge army with stealth detect at all times, your base will go down so fast against fennek and also the metal storm, that you can just forget about the game if you are more than 50 meters from your HQ at any given time. And yes, the enemy will always find a way around you, and if you are supposed to have enough units and stealth detect to actually counter him, you wont be able to do anything other than turle the whole game. This is especially true in bigger MP games when you play 2on2 or more players together on bigger maps. The fast patches after launch also indicates something positive, but also negative about you releasing the game too early, and not being a finished product. I just wanted this game to be the next good oldshool'ish RTS, but It's not, It's actually a really bad game, objectively I would say, because it really really is.… Expand
  8. spybaz
    Sep 6, 2015
    1
    Cannot assign cursor keys to camera controls (or anything for that matter).

    Cannot reassign spacebar to anything.

    (yes, I ultimately used AHK but I shouldn't have to)

    Cannot pitch camera. This is the deal breaker. An RTS w/o full camera controls is not a good RTS.

    I got a refund from Steam.
  9. TenchuuKhan
    Sep 23, 2015
    4
    If you're simply looking for a solo campaign - skip this one.
    If you think this has the quality of a Ruse or Wargame - skip it as well.
    The missions are pretty horrible and the kind of hard that isn't fun. Basically it appears like they played the mission exactly one way and adapted the wave of enemies for this style. Then they were like: it's beatable. I just can't find a good way    If you're simply looking for a solo campaign - skip this one.
    If you think this has the quality of a Ruse or Wargame - skip it as well.

    The missions are pretty horrible and the kind of hard that isn't fun.
    Basically it appears like they played the mission exactly one way and adapted the wave of enemies for this style. Then they were like: it's beatable.

    I just can't find a good way to play this game. It's always the same: you're low on resources, the enemy keeps sending wave after wave, get frustrated.
    While such missions are common and they should be in an RTS game, pretty much all of them are like this. And it just gets more ridiculous the further you go down the game.

    In the last mission you're low on resources, the enemy constantly sends long-range waves of enemies, stealth airplanes, and in between an endless stream of tanks.
    Once you think you have your defenses set up good enough, I present to you: the Koalitsija, a long-range heavy tank that carpet bombs your base which you can't get rid of fast enough because your Artillery doesn't do **** to it... because it's heavily tanked of course.

    Ruse was hard the first time I played it, you learn it, you can beat it easily, even on the hardest level.
    Wargame is a lot harder but challenging and fun.
    Act of Aggression feels unpolished and unnecessarily bloated in terms of unit/building/resource variety.

    Bottom line - it's the kind of hard that isn't challenging, just hard for the sake of frustrating players.    … Expand
  10. AndyInfin
    Oct 23, 2020
    4
    Act of War (2005) was a good clone of C&C Generals
    Act of Aggression (2015) is a bad clone of Act of War
  11. terminalgrid
    May 24, 2016
    3
    The game offers the finest of the 90s feel and vibe ,the DRM and NO LAN... -.- this clearly indicate that developer never played games in the 90s and know nothing about it

Awards & Rankings

88
#88 Most Discussed PC Game of 2015
56
#56 Most Shared PC Game of 2015

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
71

Mixed or average reviews - based on 37 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 16 out of 37
  2. Mixed: 19 out of 37
  3. Negative: 2 out of 37
  1. IGN Italia
    Dec 21, 2015
    75
    A very classical RTS, with beautiful graphics and an old school multiplayer vibe.
    Read full review
  2. games(TM)
    Nov 15, 2015
    60
    A solid - albeit flawed - RTS. [Issue#167, p.96]
  3. CD-Action
    Nov 15, 2015
    75
    Despite some problems with AI the single player campaign is a really solid, interesting set of challenges. It’s a deep, satisfying game with very different factions that forces you to adapt rather than employ universal strategies. [11/2015, p.60]
See all critic reviews »