NCP syndrome

[squarian]

Jarkko is in his usual fine form, but when filtered for hyperbole I see that many of his comments parallel mine above, as do others. Fine, then. PhilT and Pocus are both aware of the issues and Pocus has already said he's got some significant work underway.

I and several others have noted that 1) Athena is too fond of erratic long-range raiding and suffers from a general lack of strategic "focus"; and 2) in terms of game mechanics, siege warfare seems too easy and/or unpredictable despite some changes in 1.02RC.

I've already raised some reservations about corps/columns but I'll repeat them here: one of the reasons the game doesn't feel right for this period is that we seem to have corps d'armee prematurely at our disposal. We (and Athena) can maneuver too well, too flexibly, too Napoleonically with the corps/column rules as they stand. IMO, march to the sound of the guns should be eliminated or curtailed for ROP, and the C-in-C's bonus range for corps should also be much more limited. Columns should be a means of organizing a field army, not a means for independent elements of that army to maneuver independently - not unless you're simulating the Napoleonic wars.

[soundoff]

<snip>

I've already raised some reservations about corps/columns but I'll repeat them here: one of the reasons the game doesn't feel right for this period is that we seem to have corps d'armee prematurely at our disposal. We (and Athena) can maneuver too well, too flexibly, too Napoleonically with the corps/column rules as they stand. IMO, march to the sound of the guns should be eliminated or curtailed for ROP, and the C-in-C's bonus range for corps should also be much more limited. Columns should be a means of organizing a field army, not a means for independent elements of that army to maneuver independently - not unless you're simulating the Napoleonic wars.

+1

18th Century it most certainly is not. An embryonic start at NCP2 it might be. Heaven forbid though...if NCP2 gets off the ground that turns are longer than a week otherwise MTSG will again be a bone of contention

[Nial]

Well, I had some serious issues when I tried to DD the game a few weeks ago. While waiting for those to be cleared up, I purchased another title. So while I still would prefer a hard disc. I will probably eventually break down again and purchase the DD copy at some time in the future.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Generalisimo]

You see wrong. It is not possible. If you still claim to see those things, it just spices up the game. It is fun the game is an arbitrary lottery where you have absolutely zero chance to affect the outcome.

If you disagree with the above, some semi-official board member will come shortly and use foul language at you. That should teach you to behave!

You are about to cross a thin line there... I really think you do not need that... seriously.
We can all disagree and have different points of view on this matter... but I will really suggest you calm down a bit. I think we are all trying to play games in this forum and have fun with them... so, you don't need to get rude, with anyone.

Yeah, this is the comments I get all the time. I've actually played the game a bit, you know, like actually played it through a couple times. Once even with the latest patch (although I admit it was more to see if *anything* has changed and I didn't spend much brain power; yup, there were a few new portraits, which is nice, but not exactly what I had hoped would have changed).

Has anybody on the dev-team even played the campaign through lately? You see, I can not fathom how the devs and betas seem to have absolutely no idea of what is happening in the game if they've played through the campaign.

EDIT: And just to save my sanity and the other forumites from my poisonous comments, I will now de-install the game. Else I will just in vain hope launch a new campaign after the next patch, and I will be even more pissed off

I do not think anything I can say will make you change your mind right now... you've already made your judgement and we are all guilty of doing nothing.

It is a bit nonsense that I've to come here to report to you my activity with this game (or any other beta in any case). There has been a lot of people trying to help to make ROP better on each iteration... some investing hundreds of man hours to produce/test patches/changes.
Sadly, there are some things that cannot be solved in a matter of minutes... but also, many "solutions" require testing before they are even made public.

Actually, if you read this thread carefully from the beggining, I already commented about this problem 2 days ago. I told you that we used to call this problem the "WIA Syndrome" (because of the way how the AI plays the game, like if it was playing WIA instead of ROP).

Sadly for you, you can't access the ROP-Beta forum to see what has been going on there... so, I supose it is difficult for you to know what's really going on behind the curtains.

I really regret you are having a really bad time playing ROP right now... I am sure that was NOT the intention of any of the game developers and neither the volunteers. So, my only suggestion for you right now would be to try PBEM games for the time being. It is not really difficult to set up a game like that... and I think you already have enough experience on that.
If you just can't find anyone to play... I will see if I can make some time to play with you if you want.

[sergentboetch]

Juste pour rappeler à certains "râleurs" que si Ageod n'existait pas, il faudrait se contenter des jeux de stratégie en temps réel ( leure et autres wargames tout nul qu'on peut trouver à micromania ou "il faut cliquer de partout très vite"... Ou bien de jeux abscons, ou tu déplaces des petits symboles Otan, comme en 1980, pour les profs d'histoire contrariés et tout ceux qui aiment se taper des règles de 120 pages et lancer 3 dés 12 et 4 dés 6 - le facteur terrain + 1 dés 20 comme ça !!
Bref pour moi c'est un compromis parfait pour ceux qui aiment réfléchir et jouer, ça me rappel la Fac et le temps passé sur les jeux Talonsoft (je sais ce que certains "puristes" me diront...). Concernant ROP, certes il n'est pas parfait, certes l'IA n'est peut être pas "formidable" (qui connait des IA parfaites ??) certes certes, mais bon moi j'ai bcp aimé ACW et WIA, sur lesquelles j'ai passé bcp d'heures, même si là aussi l'IA m'a parfois agacé...
En plus j'ai jamais vue d'équipe qui assure un tel SAV et autant de patch (il y en a encore pour ACW !!) quant on voit ce qu'est devenu le marché des jeux vidéo, la pauvreté des jeux, leurs prix etc... Moi je m'emrerveille que des gens comme AGEOD existe encore, alors il faut les soutenir et les encourager plutôt que de pinailler parce que tel dragons devrait avoir le revers de veste vert et que dans le jeux il est bleu, ce qui historiquement est impossible, car selon la doctrine en vigueur patati patata ...
Je suis pour l'historicité, mais à certains degré j'appel ça des TOC ...

Bref continuez !!

[PhilThib]

Merci

[Lannes]

Juste pour rappeler à certains "râleurs" que si Ageod n'existait pas, il faudrait se contenter des jeux de stratégie en temps réel ( leure et autres wargames tout nul qu'on peut trouver à micromania ou "il faut cliquer de partout très vite"... Ou bien de jeux abscons, ou tu déplaces des petits symboles Otan, comme en 1980, pour les profs d'histoire contrariés et tout ceux qui aiment se taper des règles de 120 pages et lancer 3 dés 12 et 4 dés 6 - le facteur terrain + 1 dés 20 comme ça !!
Bref pour moi c'est un compromis parfait pour ceux qui aiment réfléchir et jouer, ça me rappel la Fac et le temps passé sur les jeux Talonsoft (je sais ce que certains "puristes" me diront...). Concernant ROP, certes il n'est pas parfait, certes l'IA n'est peut être pas "formidable" (qui connait des IA parfaites ??) certes certes, mais bon moi j'ai bcp aimé ACW et WIA, sur lesquelles j'ai passé bcp d'heures, même si là aussi l'IA m'a parfois agacé...
En plus j'ai jamais vue d'équipe qui assure un tel SAV et autant de patch (il y en a encore pour ACW !!) quant on voit ce qu'est devenu le marché des jeux vidéo, la pauvreté des jeux, leurs prix etc... Moi je m'emrerveille que des gens comme AGEOD existe encore, alors il faut les soutenir et les encourager plutôt que de pinailler parce que tel dragons devrait avoir le revers de veste vert et que dans le jeux il est bleu, ce qui historiquement est impossible, car selon la doctrine en vigueur patati patata ...
Je suis pour l'historicité, mais à certains degré j'appel ça des TOC ...

Bref continuez !!

Rien à redire 200% d'accord

[Adlertag]

Ou bien de jeux abscons, ou tu déplaces des petits symboles Otan, comme en 1980, pour les profs d'histoire contrariés et tout ceux qui aiment se taper des règles de 120 pages et lancer 3 dés 12 et 4 dés 6 - le facteur terrain + 1 dés 20 comme ça !!

I would add that it's those old games, with nato counters by hundreds, gigantic maps and the like that gave me the desire to continue playing wargames on PC...
Therefore I keep a certain state of high requirement toward historicity and I don't think that "reneging the past" will also help us to have good strategy games.
Players are plurals with what they like or dislike so, at first, we should keep respect to them all.

[squarian]

Juste pour rappeler à certains "râleurs" que si Ageod n'existait pas, il faudrait se contenter des jeux de stratégie en temps réel ( leure et autres wargames tout nul qu'on peut trouver à micromania ou "il faut cliquer de partout très vite"... Ou bien de jeux abscons, ou tu déplaces des petits symboles Otan, comme en 1980, pour les profs d'histoire contrariés et tout ceux qui aiment se taper des règles de 120 pages et lancer 3 dés 12 et 4 dés 6 - le facteur terrain + 1 dés 20 comme ça !!
Bref pour moi c'est un compromis parfait pour ceux qui aiment réfléchir et jouer, ça me rappel la Fac et le temps passé sur les jeux Talonsoft (je sais ce que certains "puristes" me diront...). Concernant ROP, certes il n'est pas parfait, certes l'IA n'est peut être pas "formidable" (qui connait des IA parfaites ??) certes certes, mais bon moi j'ai bcp aimé ACW et WIA, sur lesquelles j'ai passé bcp d'heures, même si là aussi l'IA m'a parfois agacé...
En plus j'ai jamais vue d'équipe qui assure un tel SAV et autant de patch (il y en a encore pour ACW !!) quant on voit ce qu'est devenu le marché des jeux vidéo, la pauvreté des jeux, leurs prix etc... Moi je m'emrerveille que des gens comme AGEOD existe encore, alors il faut les soutenir et les encourager plutôt que de pinailler parce que tel dragons devrait avoir le revers de veste vert et que dans le jeux il est bleu, ce qui historiquement est impossible, car selon la doctrine en vigueur patati patata ...
Je suis pour l'historicité, mais à certains degré j'appel ça des TOC ...

Bref continuez !!

Summary for the Anglophones:

"If it wasn't for AGEOD we'd have little choice: play wargames face-to-face or play realtime clickfest strategy games or monster wargames for history profs or people who really love to count factors on NATO-symbol counters and 120-page rulebooks.

Concerning ROP, some things aren't perfect, but WIA and AACW have given me much pleasure. I've never seen a company which paid so much attention to patches and support for their games as AGEOD. We ought to support people like the AGEOD team."

[translator note: I heartily agree Now, back to getting this game right, eh?]

[Philippe]

... if we were to make the game rules follow all those historical constraints strictly, the game would probably attract even more critics for being to restrictive.

I really, seriously hope that that sentiment, taken out of context, only represents a part of the design philosophy behind RoP.

When I decide whether I want to buy a wargame or not I ask myself two questions:

A) Does the game system accurately represent the constraints that the historical commander was operating under ?

and


B) Is the map accurate enough to correctly model the flow of units in the historical terrain ?


If the answer to either of these questions is the wrong one, I might as well play one of the Total War games.

Perhaps something was getting lost in translation in the original quote, or maybe the full concept needs a bit of fleshing out?

[Philippe]

Juste pour rappeler à certains "râleurs" que si Ageod n'existait pas, il faudrait se contenter des jeux de stratégie en temps réel ( leure et autres wargames tout nul qu'on peut trouver à micromania ou "il faut cliquer de partout très vite"... Ou bien de jeux abscons, ou tu déplaces des petits symboles Otan, comme en 1980, pour les profs d'histoire contrariés et tout ceux qui aiment se taper des règles de 120 pages et lancer 3 dés 12 et 4 dés 6 - le facteur terrain + 1 dés 20 comme ça !!
Bref pour moi c'est un compromis parfait pour ceux qui aiment réfléchir et jouer, ça me rappel la Fac et le temps passé sur les jeux Talonsoft (je sais ce que certains "puristes" me diront...). Concernant ROP, certes il n'est pas parfait, certes l'IA n'est peut être pas "formidable" (qui connait des IA parfaites ??) certes certes, mais bon moi j'ai bcp aimé ACW et WIA, sur lesquelles j'ai passé bcp d'heures, même si là aussi l'IA m'a parfois agacé...
En plus j'ai jamais vue d'équipe qui assure un tel SAV et autant de patch (il y en a encore pour ACW !!) quant on voit ce qu'est devenu le marché des jeux vidéo, la pauvreté des jeux, leurs prix etc... Moi je m'emrerveille que des gens comme AGEOD existe encore, alors il faut les soutenir et les encourager plutôt que de pinailler parce que tel dragons devrait avoir le revers de veste vert et que dans le jeux il est bleu, ce qui historiquement est impossible, car selon la doctrine en vigueur patati patata ...
Je suis pour l'historicité, mais à certains degré j'appel ça des TOC ...

Bref continuez !!

I've got to remember to spend more time in the Francophone forums. This is the best post I've seen in the English forums in quite a long time.

[tagwyn]

I also agree!!!!! t

[andatiep]

Well, who said that the ROP forum is a desert already ? Ha, yes, this is the thread's topic !

I just wanted to say that :

- It takes time to get to know such a games so don't worry about it. Personnally, i just started a PBEM and i won't do final comments for now.

- Stop always firing on the AI. THE AI does NOT exist. Wargamers may learn with the AI but do play with the humans. That's the school of life...

- I'm happy to pay for each AGEOD's games instead of commenting demos (even if they don't have a GNU/Linux version ...) : when i see all the stupid stuff we all buy in our western societies, i better try to buy less, and to buy better.
My food is local, BIO, or fairtraded, so my games are AGEOD's...
I'm also happy to download the game i bought to switch the ugly racket of the DVD taxes which go in the Major's pockets.

- I don't know if dealing with Paradox is good or bad. I'm actually buying the games of Phil & Phil Co. and i feel that i'm following the saga of good creators and their community rather than a game corporation. I'm anyway still deciding who i follow and what i buy/support but i don't see for now any bad changes in the original spirit and design of AGEOD's games...

- I always believe this kind of games can find in the future a more sustenable economical system with more collaboration with the Educative world (public and private universities and highschools). More pedagogical products in and around the games would bring more volunteers, more custumers and more public or private funds for educative projects.*
I expect my son to have 18/20 in History exams about the XVIII's century sucession wars after i provide him ROP and next AGEOD's games. Be sure i won't let him bring any playstation at home untill he didn't finished it's PBEM with it's teacher...



* Regardez en France comme ils s'extasient sur les partenariats Public/Privé avec les dernières nouvelles réformes universitaires. Pourquoi ce serait toujours les filières techniques et scientifiques qui verraient leurs labos pris d'assaut par les grosses méchantes boîtes ? Pourquoi pas à terme des partenariats public/privé ayant plus de sens dans les filières de sciences humaines avec des PME, SCOP, ou SCIC pour fournir des jeux éducatifs de niveau secondaire et universitaire ?
Allez, quoi, y'a que 50 m à traverser à la nage dans l'Isère boueuse entre le siège d'AGEOD et le premier campus du coin, non ?

[Jarkko]

I do not think anything I can say will make you change your mind right now... you've already made your judgement and we are all guilty of doing nothing.

I can assure you that is not the case. What annoys the living poo out of me is tat I am treated by some forumites (who apparently are in the beta) as if the things I reported don't exist. Not until I actually began to heat up was anything I (or several other forumites) posted even recognised.

I've been a beta myself in quite a few games, and I know betas and devs tend to get the "Can not see the forest because of all the trees" -syndrome. Ie seeing and reporting bugs (because reporting bugs is why the betas are there, after all) and lots of dev time is spent on fixing those (game devs hate bugs, I think that is pretty universal among the coding people), but not actually looking how the game plays out. In my experience betas and devs launch the game to see if it crashes or if there are any glaring bugs, not necessarily to see how the game actually plays (especially if using an engine which works fine for some other time period or scale, which (again, in my experience) by default is taken a sign the model will work in any other setting too).

Having an essentially bug-free game is great, and worth lots of applause. However, just because there are not bugs is not an excuse for a messed up campaign model. Trying to defend the mess with comments like "it makes the game more fun" or "that is not possible because the gamecode looks just fine" might just make somebody go ballistic (especially if they have short fuse).

I also find it rather unjust that I personally have been somehow (or so I feel at least) made to look like a source of antipathy towards the game. I had high hopes for this game, and I think I have promoted the game on various venues more than you could expect from a normal gamer. At least I haven't seen many others outside the devs and betas to post AAR's or answer the questions of various people on various venues, but perhaps that is just because I am so full of myself (which is quite possible, I am usually quite full of myself ).

Never the less, I've deinstalled the game for the time being. Based on the previous record of the AGEOD team I have no doubt the game will be in much better shape in the future. Thanks for making a good looking and (essentially) bugfree game, now please actually make it feel like something one would expect an 18th century war game would be like I'll install the game again then, and perhaps I will be old enough to behave better then...

[Generalisimo]

I can assure you that is not the case. What annoys the living poo out of me is tat I am treated by some forumites (who apparently are in the beta) as if the things I reported don't exist. Not until I actually began to heat up was anything I (or several other forumites) posted even recognised.

Like who?... because I have said in this same thread that we are aware of this "problem".
Actually, my post is one of the first one on this thread.

I've been a beta myself in quite a few games, and I know betas and devs tend to get the "Can not see the forest because of all the trees" -syndrome. Ie seeing and reporting bugs (because reporting bugs is why the betas are there, after all) and lots of dev time is spent on fixing those (game devs hate bugs, I think that is pretty universal among the coding people), but not actually looking how the game plays out. In my experience betas and devs launch the game to see if it crashes or if there are any glaring bugs, not necessarily to see how the game actually plays (especially if using an engine which works fine for some other time period or scale, which (again, in my experience) by default is taken a sign the model will work in any other setting too).

We have an entire beta thread talking about this issue since a looooong time... with reports from many people.
But being yourself a beta on other games, you may know that some things, specially some AI behaviours deep inside the code, are not easy to eradicate... they take time to recode and a lot of time to test them.
It is not that Pocus can do this in his spare time by not going to the bathroom... and we can be sure it is fixed by just firing up the game.
So, I really think you were a bit "unfair", with all of us...

Having an essentially bug-free game is great, and worth lots of applause. However, just because there are not bugs is not an excuse for a messed up campaign model. Trying to defend the mess with comments like "it makes the game more fun" or "that is not possible because the gamecode looks just fine" might just make somebody go ballistic (especially if they have short fuse).

In this thread you have seen those comments?... i will have to reread the whole thread to find them...

EDITED: Have just re-read the whole thread... actually, the only comment directed to you is from me.
So, really, I think you are seeing ghosts in this case... read the whole thread and you should see that I never said the problem doesn't exist and the game is great... and you are a liar.
Probably you are talking about an older discussion?

I also find it rather unjust that I personally have been somehow (or so I feel at least) made to look like a source of antipathy towards the game. I had high hopes for this game, and I think I have promoted the game on various venues more than you could expect from a normal gamer. At least I haven't seen many others outside the devs and betas to post AAR's or answer the questions of various people on various venues, but perhaps that is just because I am so full of myself (which is quite possible, I am usually quite full of myself ).

My only comment directed to you was that I thought you were overexagerating... but I made quite clear that you were NOT lying... actually, like I said before, I was describing the problem as the "WIA Syndrome"...
So, I think you can guess I am not saying something that contradicts your point of view... actually, I am confirming the problem exist and it is real.

Never the less, I've deinstalled the game for the time being. Based on the previous record of the AGEOD team I have no doubt the game will be in much better shape in the future. Thanks for making a good looking and (essentially) bugfree game, now please actually make it feel like something one would expect an 18th century war game would be like I'll install the game again then, and perhaps I will be old enough to behave better then...

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Clovis]

About boxed editions: no more. Economically a suicide. Now I can understand why some want a CD and a printed manual, but in any case the time of physical delivery is over ( and not only for PC games...) I will never adopt a Steam system, simply because patches aren't available immediatly and because I dislike any DRM schem too untrusive.

About AI. Some are forgetting how much AGE AI is better than in the 1.0 version of AACW. They are forgetting too AGE rules have been improved, modified, added, removed since 5 years. Each time an AACW patch was delivered, I had to rework AI in SVF, and from time to time, only because some small rules had been modified.

Now, of course, the most glaring shortcoming of AI are well know. there is work about. it's difficult. It's slow, especially because so few precise reports are made. I know Pocus needs turns to be sended. I need in SVF feedback. And sorry to say I didn't got much feedback. So I play myself to get feedback. It's time consuming and time is the rarer ressource I have. Fortunatly, I do SVF for me first, because when I bought AACW I knew instantly it is the Civil War game I always wanted to play and it had the potential to get a decent AI. Not a super AI, but a decent one which force you to think in order to win and which produces the immersion feeling.

Now I'm convinced ROP has the same potential. The AI will be improved. Sooner if rather than long considerations about beta testing awards, there is feedback.

[Jarkko]

@Gray: I know very well the rules, thank you. If I have infracted them, please do inform the moderators/admins to take the appropriate measures. Would be a first time ever I am banned from a forum, but there is a first time for everything

Like who?...

If you need examples, take a look at http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?t=16845 and for example posts #10 and #20. Also notice how it is not even possibly regarded as an issue until post #27, when some dung has already been thrown, and several people from the team (you included ) appear to never have seen the issue...

[Generalisimo]

If you need examples, take a look at http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?t=16845 and for example posts #10 and #20. Also notice how it is not even possibly regarded as an issue until post #27, when some dung has already been thrown, and several people from the team (you included ) appear to never have seen the issue...

See? ... I was right... you were throwing in here another previous discussion.
What I said in that thread, I keep to my words in there... but have NOTHING to do what has been discussed in here.

Really, I think you are overeacting right now... and if you read again the thread, you will see that my comment was:

Do you have a saved game of that?...
[color="Red"]Once I suffered something like that, but it was with an old version of ROP, so I couldn't reproduce it in a newer one. [/color]

Oh yeah! I said I've never seen the issue... oh no, wait...
The thing is, your report was quite "vague", really.... and in the end, you never sent the saved game...

Like I said before to you, I have played a lot this game... alone and on PBEM... so, don't generalize from your own past experience, you may do a lot of mistakes, like you are doing now.

EDITED: ... and I can also said to you that I am NOT the only one that spent a lot of time on this game. There are a lot of people that gave hundreds of man hours to make this game better.

[lodilefty]

@Gray: I know very well the rules, thank you. If I have infracted them, please do inform the moderators/admins to take the appropriate measures. Would be a first time ever I am banned from a forum, but there is a first time for everything



If you need examples, take a look at http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?t=16845 and for example posts #10 and #20. Also notice how it is not even possibly regarded as an issue until post #27, when some dung has already been thrown, and several people from the team (you included ) appear to never have seen the issue...

Post #10 was my [obviously futile] attempt to get you to understand the 'immersion thinking' that goes into a game. Added to that was my attempt to explain the game mechanics. We [betas] are not permitted to discuss the details of beta/design discussions, so I tried to summarize several long [over a year including same discussions in WIA] design efforts.

I apologize if you read that as 'ignoring a problem' and will always give your inputs all of the attention they deserve.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[elxaime]

I like the SYW era, but have held off purchasing ROP mainly because I am afraid it will follow the well-worn path of ACW, another potentially great game that misses due to neglect of the PBEM side of things.

Although a lot of players fight the AI only, there are also a lot of us that PBEM exclusively. Based on my experience with ACW, AGEOD seems to work hard on the AI, but there seems little to no attempt at balancing the scenarios for PBEM. This is not something strange and new - other companies do it. For example, HPS Simulations Panzer Campaigns WW2 games almost always have two sets of the main scenarios, with one balanced for PBEM.

In ACW, for example, the PBEM game as USA is an uphill slog against a competent CSA player. The Union suffers from a variety of "lose 10 morale unless you do this" idiot rules, resulting in being in an early hole of 30-40 morale points. With its huge morale edge, the CSA easily mass recruits and the morale (and VP) edge usually lead to early foreign intervention. Slower replacement of Union losses due to the built-in game replacement rule mean a higher risk of losing morale, even if you win a battle, due to element losses. Your naval edge is less, since amphibious landings are set up so that you telegraph your punches, leading to Omaha Beach style losses if you try and take any but the most remote undefended areas. Speaking of Omaha Beach, CSA bombardment easily shreds any Union navy ships that come near shore, ocean or river. Meanwhile, the northern states are blanketed with CSA partisans and Texas Rangers roam Pennsylvania. I understand there are counters, but as I read Union Player PBEM strategies, it seems the only way to advance is to play the game as you would Starcraft; e.g. full mobilization of the Union in April 1861, trying to zerg the Confederacy with sheer numbers of militia while accepting a paper money/inflation regime worthy of the Weimar Republic.

None of these things are irremediable. But instead AGEOD has taken the position that if you don't like it, its up to you to Mod the game. Meanwhile, they have stopped further versions, so no hope there. I refuse to buy ROP if it means that, in order to enjoy a balanced PBEM game, I have to mod the game myself. I understand that PBEM balance can also be difficult. But there is a difference between trying and failing, and not trying at all.

AGEOD products have tons going for them. Interesting periods, a colorful and visually pleasing presentation, great historical chrome, and a great approach of keeping a lot of the system under the hood so that players don't end up crunching numbers. The problem seems to be in follow through and polish of already released products. As I said, ACW is 90 percent towards being a stellar game. Hopefully the resources will be available to change this approach in the future.

[Generalisimo]

None of these things are irremediable. But instead AGEOD has taken the position that if you don't like it, its up to you to Mod the game. Meanwhile, they have stopped further versions, so no hope there. I refuse to buy ROP if it means that, in order to enjoy a balanced PBEM game, I have to mod the game myself. I understand that PBEM balance can also be difficult. But there is a difference between trying and failing, and not trying at all.

AGEOD products have tons going for them. Interesting periods, a colorful and visually pleasing presentation, great historical chrome, and a great approach of keeping a lot of the system under the hood so that players don't end up crunching numbers. The problem seems to be in follow through and polish of already released products. As I said, ACW is 90 percent towards being a stellar game. Hopefully the resources will be available to change this approach in the future.

A game that has been patched for 3 years after its release.. with tons of new improvements and even some new features.... really, I think you are being *a bit* unfair with the AGEOD family.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[elxaime]

A game that has been patched for 3 years after its release.. with tons of new improvements and even some new features.... really, I think you are being *a bit* unfair with the AGEOD family.

I understand the limitation here being that AGEOD is not some giant company with huge resources. But the above is like telling someone whose car still won't run that they should give the auto repair shop credit for all the work they have done.

I completely agree PBEM game balance is no easy thing. Yet the fact the viable strategies for Union advantage rest on stuff like two total mobilizations in 1861 along with printing stacks of money so you can zerg with militia, that should be a sign we aren't doing well to simulate the ACW.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[elxaime]

Oops, sorry I had revised my post before you answered the question I took out!

Yes, the only mod I have seen is SVF. Apparently then, a lot of people were talking big about making mods but blowing smoke, resulting in the worst of two worlds: halt in updates to accomodate non-existent mods.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Jarkko]

Up until that post it was a good back and forth discussion with you presenting your point of view and others countering with their point of view.

Exactly my point, Gray! Notice how I said in post #45 of this thread "Not until I actually began to heat up was anything I (or several other forumites) posted even recognised." Why was the dung needed, why was it told there are no such issues until the dung was thrown? Why?

Is it because everyone did not agree with your point of view that you felt the need to rachet up the verbage with the first use of "dung"?

Anybody who actually *played* the game saw these things. Yet those who claimed to never have seen these, or claim these flaws are somehow *good*, were the people who supposedly had played the game most. How can somebody "not agree" that the sieges were blatantly all messed up (I urge you to read the RoP manual, and check what is mentioned about supplywagons/depots and sieges there, and thus what I feel to be one of the major design ideas (ie to make forts important and to give us a feeling of a game set in the 18th century), and thus separating this game from the napoleonic era or ACW campaigns)? Apparently there was some discussion on the beta forums about this, and instead the forts being totally useless because they *always* fall when something resembling an enemy force arrives outside the gates, they were changed to be totally useless because they sometimes fall and sometimes not in a pure lottery system (also notice how many times it has been pointed out in various threads by various posters how the forts are deathtraps (when during this era they were the strongpoints); in fact it has been suggested one should avoid garrisoning forts, thus absolutely and totally destroying the feel of warfare in the era. Blaming that on the AI is just something I once again can not understand, because it is a concious game design decission (and something that has apparently been changed very late in the design process, as the digital manual (which one would expect to be quite up to date) explained the situation totally different.


Ah well, going in circles here, and nothing fruitful can come from this You have to understand I had very high hopes for this game, and I feel I didn't get what I expected. However, as I've said, I am quite confident AGEOD will eventually make this the game it should be, AGEOD has a good track in the past to show that they improve their games still years after release