I will not write a complete review, there are enough of those here. I will not rant, either. I have played the game and I like it; the complexity, micro-managing and pace are fine by me (except you either get declared war on by everybody immediately or nothing happens at all).
HOWEVER, I cannot, in good conscience, recommend this game for a very simple reason: It's incomplete, and thus borders on a SCAM; at the very least, it reflects poorly on BattleGoat's business ethics.
This game (main game and addon) was supposed to receive additional attention after release, adding several more features (including a fallout/radioactivity and an environmental impact system). The game did indeed receive several content updates and additional features but, sadly, BattleGoat abandoned the game before the addition and/or revision of several critical features, leaving the game with a stupid AI, pretty damn buggy and, worst of all, content incomplete (which shows - there are buildings, designs, research that are completely pointless because the corresponding parts of the game were never implemented).
I therefore recommend that you avoid this game (and other games from BattleGoat) at all cost. This game is basically a polished Alpha and if the devs couldn't be bothered to finish this game, even after people already bought it, they are not worth your attention. Business practices like that should not be condoned or supported, so think twice before you buy from them - There may very well be a better, finished game out there.EDIT: Since one of the devs commented on this 'review' (and my full response doesn't fit in a single comment), I will add his statement and my response to it to the 'review' itself.
chrisahl [developer] wrote:"Many statements in this review are completely false. The game received multiple updates for approximately 18 months after release of the core game including the life cycle of the expansion pack. The game is no buggy, it is one of the most stable titles on the market. I'll hold it up to anything else out there. Features such as radioactive fallout where never promised and many never promised features were added. The content was also completed with multiple campaigns and scenarios. The tech tree is complete containing hundreds of technologies to research. Unit designs are all buildable and as usable as their specs warrant."
I don't know what game you're talking about, Chris, but it's not this game.
I played it a lot more than my record says, and there are few games that have crashed so often on me as this one (which is why I eventually stopped playing when you guys announced that you were moving on - it got to the point where it was simply not enjoyable because the game became more unstable [and lost a lot of performance] as the world progressed and units were built). And that happened pretty much in every session because, of course, you need an army to get stuff done. For what it sets out to do, the game is not nearly optimized enough - and that's not great but we can chalk that up to a lack of experience if we want to be nice about it.
That, however, does not apply to the crashes. Those are bugs (unless you want to call it a feature?) and gamebreaking bugs that are left in the game at the end of its lifecycle (which is technically not over since Steam allows you to still make some sales) are not exactly a sign of good business ethics.
As for fallout and environment: You can say they weren't "promised", great. And I realize that I implied that you didn't add anything to the game (which I have rectified), which is unfair. But it still doesn't reflect positively on the development team when they obviously intended to implement it, put in some elements (and adjusted tooltips to hint at this feature and tell the player what he'd need this building or that research for), then decided "Oooh, lets do this, this and this first" instead of delivering on what was already halfway done and, finally, announced that they were done with the game when there were still a lot of loose ends. The least you can do is go through it and remove the redundant content.
Yes, that would have been extra work for you guys when you were eager to create your Cold War version of this, but it would have been at least an attempt at making it look like you were sorry about it.
(As for the other things you mentioned [campaigns, tech tree, units]... Well, I don't really know why you did. I didn't put their existence into doubt and their being there doesn't change that some other features simply did not receive enough attention.)