User avatar
beuckelssen
Posts: 751
Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2006 11:16 pm
Location: Galicia caníbal

Wed Dec 12, 2012 11:51 am

Congrats and good luck. :)

In my opinion ACW2 mains a lot of sense since it would sell a lot. But personally I´m not interested in the conflict, so I´ll wait for the next AGEOD title.


I hope the new AGEOD launches maintain the actual price police. I would never pay the "outrageous" amount of money that Matrix ask for some new games.


Regards

User avatar
Blind Sniper
Sergeant
Posts: 79
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 12:55 pm
Location: Italy

Wed Dec 12, 2012 12:11 pm

I hope the new AGEOD launches maintain the actual price police. I would never pay the "outrageous" amount of money that Matrix ask for some new games.


Which games are you talking about?

DanSez
Sergeant
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 7:08 pm
Location: Lip o' Heck

Wed Dec 12, 2012 6:15 pm

It seems like most of their current titles are $40+ with a dvd but then consider that console game new releases are clocking it at $59.95 locally. I don't mind paying for companies that make games I like to survive and produce/support new and current titles.
Still getting near the $40 mark crimps my 'impulse purchase' reflex.

User avatar
John S. Mosby
Lieutenant
Posts: 131
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 2:53 pm
Location: Virginia, CSA

Wed Dec 12, 2012 9:26 pm

Ethan wrote:Regarding AACW2, I can't either wait!! :happyrun: :happyrun:

By the way, I think it would be fantastic if we could buy it in boxed version... Hopefully! :w00t: (Yes, I'm from the 80's. :neener :)

Also being from the 80s, I second the box version!
Or at the very least a dvd backup option with a small additional cost of course.

User avatar
Kensai
Posts: 2712
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 4:54 pm
Location: Freiburg, Germany

Thu Dec 13, 2012 2:53 pm

May I ask something? Given the fewer factions (essentially two) and smaller scope, will you develop it with AGE v2 or v3 engine? I would really like to have a limited but substantial economic aspect in it going on, which means by definition v3 (PON's engine). With fewer factions to manage it could be much easier to nail perfectly and it will definitely help further develop the non-war aspects of the engine, benefiting all future AGEOD titles. :w00t:
Care to unify Germany as Austria? Recreate the Holy Roman Empire of the 20th Century:
Großdeutschland Mod
Are you tough enough to impersonate the Shogun and defy the Westerners? Prove it:
Shogun Defiance Mod (completed AAR)

User avatar
Ethan
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1923
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 1:22 pm
Location: Gádir

Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:30 pm

John S. Mosby wrote:Also being from the 80s, I second the box version!
Or at the very least a dvd backup option with a small additional cost of course.


¡¡Boxed version!! :p ompom: :p ompom: ¡¡Boxed version!! :p ompom: :p ompom:


:innocent: :siffle:
[color="Navy"][font="Georgia"]"Mi grandeza no reside en no haber caído nunca, sino en haberme levantado siempre". Napoleón Bonaparte.[/font][/color]

[color="Blue"]Same Land. Different Dreams. - Photobook[/color]

[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

veji1
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1271
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 6:27 pm

Fri Dec 14, 2012 1:16 pm

I must say I am pretty happy. Matrix being a grognard game type of company always seemed more adapted thant the increasingly arcade oriented Paradox. Now my hope is that you can do a great AACW2; which I will buy, and NCP2 + Grand Siècle + Wars of Louis XIV etc on a brand new super duper Europe map that you are working on.

Keep up lads !

User avatar
FENRIS
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1463
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2012 11:02 am
Location: Marseille (France)

Fri Dec 14, 2012 1:23 pm

veji1 wrote:I must say I am pretty happy. Matrix being a grognard game type of company always seemed more adapted thant the increasingly arcade oriented Paradox. Now my hope is that you can do a great AACW2; which I will buy, and NCP2 + Grand Siècle + Wars of Louis XIV etc on a brand new super duper Europe map that you are working on.

Keep up lads !


Whaou ! NCP 2 + Grand Siècle + Wars of Louis XIV ! what a BIG project !

:thumbsup:
[color="#FF8C00"][/color]Eylau 1807

"Rendez-vous, général, votre témérité vous a emporté trop loin ; vous êtes dans nos dernières lignes." (un russe)

" Regardez un peu ces figures-là si elles veulent se rendre !" (Lepic)[color="#FF8C00"][/color][I]
[/I]

User avatar
Pocus
Posts: 25659
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:37 am
Location: Lyon (France)

Fri Dec 14, 2012 5:06 pm

Kensai wrote:May I ask something? Given the fewer factions (essentially two) and smaller scope, will you develop it with AGE v2 or v3 engine? I would really like to have a limited but substantial economic aspect in it going on, which means by definition v3 (PON's engine). With fewer factions to manage it could be much easier to nail perfectly and it will definitely help further develop the non-war aspects of the engine, benefiting all future AGEOD titles. :w00t:


warning, nerdy explanations ahead!

For us V3 vs V2 is more about 'what is the graphical library we will use'. As such, we will use V2, as V3 (as in PON) has some problems that we don't believe are easily fixable. Hopefully, we will be able to update slightly the V2 graphic library though, for AACW2 (just slightly).

Now back to your question, gamelogic wise we have big game concepts that can be declined in variable levels: not existing, simple, advanced (sometime referred as complex). For example WIA or AJE supply system is what we call 'simple supply' whereas AACW and others games often rely on advanced supply.

Diplomacy is either non existing (WIA, you only have 2 possible loyalties, if you are not me, you are my enemy), simple (like in RUS, ROP, WIA, AJE) where you can have an indefinite number of loyalties plus a relationship rating. Relationship value directly correlates with your stance toward the other faction. If you have a relationship of 25 or more, you are ally, if between -24 and +24, you are neutral, and less than -24 is at war. And then you have advanced diplomacy, with treaties, like in PON. AACW2 will use simple diplomacy.

So is economy, we will stay at the simple level. Complex, as in PON, would mean merchandises and trade transactions, and we don't want that. But don't despair, this does not mean we will have the same system as in AACW1. The AACW2 economy will be very close to the AACW1 one, because focus is not on economy, but we will do things slightly differently, with structures to build to get additional war supplies (foundries, steelmills) or ammunitions (arsenals, etc.). In the end, the game will still revolve around the same resources, supply, ammo, WSU, money, but we are dropping the industrialization screen in favour of something with more substance and possibly (we hope) fun.
Image


Hofstadter's Law: "It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's law."

User avatar
Chaplain Lovejoy
Brigadier General
Posts: 440
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2008 12:20 am
Location: Fairfield, OH (near Cincinnati)

Fri Dec 14, 2012 5:24 pm

Nicht kleckern, sondern klotzen!
[SIZE="1"][font="Arial"]Places I've lived: 180, 314, 409, 418, 859, 1051.[/font][/size]

User avatar
Blind Sniper
Sergeant
Posts: 79
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 12:55 pm
Location: Italy

Fri Dec 14, 2012 5:25 pm

Pocus, about supply system, how it will handle?

DanSez
Sergeant
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 7:08 pm
Location: Lip o' Heck

Fri Dec 14, 2012 8:28 pm

Oh please do something about the random placement of built forces. Suggestion - militia forces pop up all over (in population centers) but regular army units either be designated to cities that produce war supply or actually build Marshalling Center(s) where official units can be ordered to assemble and train.

User avatar
FENRIS
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1463
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2012 11:02 am
Location: Marseille (France)

Fri Dec 14, 2012 8:53 pm

DanSez wrote:Oh please do something about the random placement of built forces. Suggestion - militia forces pop up all over (in population centers) but regular army units either be designated to cities that produce war supply or actually build Marshalling Center(s) where official units can be ordered to assemble and train.


Yes ! no more brigades appearing in small town and no one in the state capital (ex : in Winchester Virginia and no in Richmond)

:wacko:
[color="#FF8C00"][/color]Eylau 1807

"Rendez-vous, général, votre témérité vous a emporté trop loin ; vous êtes dans nos dernières lignes." (un russe)

" Regardez un peu ces figures-là si elles veulent se rendre !" (Lepic)[color="#FF8C00"][/color][I]
[/I]

Baris
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1945
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:50 pm

Fri Dec 14, 2012 10:41 pm

How are the loyalties handled apart from 2 factions? I guess no green,peasant revolts as in RUS? Wealthy landowners exploiting slaves,locals with no cost?

User avatar
Pocus
Posts: 25659
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:37 am
Location: Lyon (France)

Sun Dec 16, 2012 8:57 am

We will switch to the new system devised since ROP for production. It led to long debates but we will try to retain part of the nice look of the AACW1 build interface, while having drag&drop build.

Loyalties will use the system in place since some time now, i.e AACW2 will support more than 2 loyalties, contrary to AACW1. Indians for example will be their own faction in some instance, and a painful reminder of their presence to both CSA and USA.

Supply. We are still not too sure. It will be basically the advanced supply system of AACW1 which was improved over the years, but we are thinking of allowing a switch to something simpler, for new players. We will see how it turns out.
Image


Hofstadter's Law: "It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's law."

User avatar
Blind Sniper
Sergeant
Posts: 79
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 12:55 pm
Location: Italy

Tue Dec 18, 2012 11:58 am

Supply. We are still not too sure. It will be basically the advanced supply system of AACW1 which was improved over the years, but we are thinking of allowing a switch to something simpler, for new players. We will see how it turns out.


Pocus, maybe just me but please...no! :)
The logistic is very important for a strategic game, you made a detailed combat system but a simple supply system, why?
I already found that keep the units in supply is not difficult. I really hope you are not thinking something similar to AJE (I don't like at all) but if so I hope you can enable both system :thumbsup:

User avatar
Ethan
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1923
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 1:22 pm
Location: Gádir

Tue Dec 18, 2012 12:33 pm

Blind Sniper wrote:Pocus, maybe just me but please...no! :)
The logistic is very important for a strategic game, you made a detailed combat system but a simple supply system, why?
I already found that keep the units in supply is not difficult. I really hope you are not thinking something similar to AJE (I don't like at all) but if so I hope you can enable both system :thumbsup:


+1
[color="Navy"][font="Georgia"]"Mi grandeza no reside en no haber caído nunca, sino en haberme levantado siempre". Napoleón Bonaparte.[/font][/color]



[color="Blue"]Same Land. Different Dreams. - Photobook[/color]



[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

User avatar
Spharv2
Posts: 1540
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 5:39 am
Location: Tallahassee, FL

Tue Dec 18, 2012 2:48 pm

Blind Sniper wrote:Pocus, maybe just me but please...no! :)
The logistic is very important for a strategic game, you made a detailed combat system but a simple supply system, why?
I already found that keep the units in supply is not difficult. I really hope you are not thinking something similar to AJE (I don't like at all) but if so I hope you can enable both system :thumbsup:


I think you read over this part too fast, "we are thinking of allowing a switch to something simpler, for new players." That would seem to indicate it as an option. I would definitely support that, since supply is probably the biggest part of the learning curve for new players. Get them sucked in by the fun marchy stuff, then let them hit themselves over the head with the supply problems later. :bonk:
Official Queen's Ambassador to the South
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

Baris
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1945
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:50 pm

Tue Dec 18, 2012 4:58 pm

Contradictorily I always find simple supply system much harder than advanced one. It was pretty difficult in WIA to mass army in one place. Plus there was ammunition problems which is difficult to experience in advanced supply.
Railroads and simple supply, how can it work?

DanSez
Sergeant
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 7:08 pm
Location: Lip o' Heck

Tue Dec 18, 2012 7:22 pm

Smple?
Make supply carts that are consumed, not replenished?
That have to be ordered to stock depots and army/corp field groups?

Don't know how far the redesign goes. It would be good to have something in place for the AI and Human opponents to react to when the supply line is threatened and that would be the effect of having to maintain a continual chain of supply carts (potential for lots of micro management - can this be automated/visualized on screen for the player to know and use?)

Sorry, just an excited bystander chirping on the rail here ...

User avatar
Blind Sniper
Sergeant
Posts: 79
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 12:55 pm
Location: Italy

Tue Dec 18, 2012 9:23 pm

Spharv2 I really hope you are right! :)
Anyhow when I was a newbie ACW player I found the most difficult concept to understand how the combat system works, the supply system wasn't so diffcult.
In the winter turns is emough to keep the units sheltered, in the summer turns but very large armies you can move almost everywhere, moreover I think is too easy keep the Union amphibious forces supplied in the enemy territories.
I would say that I would like to see the supply system more difficult instead. :D

Also it would be possible to build railroads?

User avatar
Ebbingford
Posts: 6162
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 5:22 pm
Location: England

Tue Dec 18, 2012 11:14 pm

Blind Sniper wrote:Also it would be possible to build railroads?


In AJE you can build roads, railroads shouldn't be any different. :cool:
"Umbrellas will not be opened in the presence of the enemy." Duke of Wellington before the Battle of Waterloo, 1815.

"Top hats will not be worn in the Eighth Army" Field-Marshal Viscount Montgomery of Alamein K.G.


Image

User avatar
H Gilmer3
AGEod Grognard
Posts: 822
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2011 2:57 am
Location: United States of America

Thu Dec 20, 2012 1:02 am

Blind Sniper wrote:Which games are you talking about?


I'm sure he means some of the monster games, but they are freaking huge games! WiTE and WiTP are huge monster games.

User avatar
H Gilmer3
AGEod Grognard
Posts: 822
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2011 2:57 am
Location: United States of America

Thu Dec 20, 2012 1:04 am

Searry wrote:Can you make a WW1 game for 2014? America isn't that interesting.


I, too, would like an AGEOD engine type game for WW1. And I'll buy AACW2.

User avatar
Blind Sniper
Sergeant
Posts: 79
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 12:55 pm
Location: Italy

Thu Dec 20, 2012 1:43 am

H Gilmer3 wrote:I'm sure he means some of the monster games, but they are freaking huge games! WiTE and WiTP are huge monster games.


If he is speaking about them, beh...they are worth every penny (maybe WitE a bit less), I played both and they are very detailed and complicated games.

Baris
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1945
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:50 pm

Mon Dec 24, 2012 2:01 am

I'm not sure about monster games. Whether they are complicated enough that player have enough tools to influence battle tactically. Or is it complex because there are so many units to move around. HPS series have good OOB, map, better tactical approach and price.



"Can you make a WW1 game for 2014? America isn't that interesting."
H Gilmer3 wrote:I, too, would like an AGEOD engine type game for WW1. And I'll buy AACW2.


Exactly. :D
There are some new good WW1 games out there but would be happy to see one in Age engine. It is French company after all. :)

User avatar
Pocus
Posts: 25659
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:37 am
Location: Lyon (France)

Mon Dec 24, 2012 12:08 pm

You'll be able to order the construction of a few extra sections of rail-roads yes, but only through historical options.

For supply, we are thinking of proposing a new system where supply only really matters in tense situations, like travelling in poor areas, being under siege. Basically, you can forget about supply except in these situations. This is again to help new players climb the hill (or is it a mountain) of the playing curve.

As for battle, what can help new players, for you? Remember, this won't change your way of playing as a veteran, these will be done through options.
Image


Hofstadter's Law: "It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's law."

DanSez
Sergeant
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 7:08 pm
Location: Lip o' Heck

Mon Dec 24, 2012 5:02 pm

Better/clear method of moving and joining units on the move before advancing to another province.

One baffliing combat issue is how retreat paths are chosen. Could it be programmed if in retreat the unit would either - go back to the province advanced from, or if that is now lost, toward the closest formation of friendly forces?

Just adding the increased unit post battle screens from RUS and AJE will help everyone, beginners included.

To address one of the remaining issues from a beginner's point is combating Raiders.
Can you hard command it so that units will not enter territory with more than (lets say 80%) enemy loyalty without a leader?
(turn it on or off as an option?)


Wishing You All ---
Happy Holidays and great success in the New Year.

richfed
Posts: 902
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2006 9:50 pm
Location: Marion, North Carolina, USA
Contact: Website

Tue Dec 25, 2012 10:12 pm

I will pre-order this the minute it is announced. I beg of you - make the Union AI more efficient at taking the Mississippi - or attempting to - from Memphis to New Orleans. It will make for a drastically more interesting solo game!! I know it is easier said than done.
[color="DarkRed"][SIZE="2"][font="Book Antiqua"]"We've caught them napping!"[/font][/size][/color]

vaalen
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1229
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 8:48 pm

Thu Dec 27, 2012 3:40 am

DanSez wrote:Better/clear method of moving and joining units on the move before advancing to another province.

One baffliing combat issue is how retreat paths are chosen. Could it be programmed if in retreat the unit would either - go back to the province advanced from, or if that is now lost, toward the closest formation of friendly forces?

Just adding the increased unit post battle screens from RUS and AJE will help everyone, beginners included.

To address one of the remaining issues from a beginner's point is combating Raiders.
Can you hard command it so that units will not enter territory with more than (lets say 80%) enemy loyalty without a leader?
(turn it on or off as an option?)


Wishing You All ---
Happy Holidays and great success in the New Year.


DanSez, that is a great idea as regards raiders. Trying to deal with the unhistorical, frequent, deep raids is the biggest game killer for newbies, and the option to do as you suggest should be there. And you could keep an option to allow frequent deep raids for those veterans who want them.

Return to “News from AGEod”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 29 guests