AGEOD Forums

First of all my compliments for your courage in choosing the Russian Revolution as background for your next game! I am looking forward to another excellent strategy game from a small company.

I am still enjoying ACW (one of those rare strategy games which remain fun for a very long time). On the other hand Napoleon was something of a disappointment for me. Why?

1) Lack of lengthy multi-theater campaigns (with the exception of the Spanish campaign).

2) No recruitment panel. Limited replacement system.

3) A lot less political and economical options (ACW gave you control over taxes, drafts, infrastructure, foreign relations, ... Napoleon, on the other hand, was mostly limited to the military).

I do understand that some of what I perceive as shortcomings are due to historical considerations (e.g. the shorter campaigns), however, 2) and 3) added up deprieving Napoleon of an additional dimension.

So here is my question: Will RUS have a recruitment and replacement system like ACW?

And what about the huge changes in the political and economic system of Russia, will they be in the players hands?

OneArmedMexican wrote:So here is my question: Will RUS have a recruitment and replacement system like ACW?

It will be like Rise of Prussia, yes: You will decide which recruitment to make and which replacement to buy. Given that the constraints will be different for the two players: The Reds had lots of conscripts but very few material. The Whites received all the British surplus from ww1 (and there was a LOT of it), but were struggling to find soldiers.

OneArmedMexican wrote:And what about the huge changes in the political and economic system of Russia, will they be in the players hands?

This would be very tricky to do, but there will be an option system, like in BoA2 and other game since: You will be able to spend Engagement Points to take decisions, that will have (mostly) militaristic range, but also economical or diplomatical range (like building Arms factory to increase your WSU; or having a minor country enter the war on your side).

Cat

A small request if at all possible: Could you possibly put some sort of prioritze option for replacements? One of the few things that annoys me in AGEOD games are when I have a limited amount of replacements which, instead of going to refill my depleted front-line troops, are sent to add extra garrison troops in places far, far from the front. Not the end of the world either way, but it would be a very nice addition.

Thank you very much for the information. Sounds very promising.

I have to admit, I am less thrilled about the engagement point system. It seems to impose unnecessary limits without a historical reason.

OneArmedMexican wrote:Thank you very much for the information. Sounds very promising.

I have to admit, I am less thrilled about the engagement point system. It seems to impose unnecessary limits without a historical reason.

I think it is a great idea. Basically, from what I understand, it means that you cannot do everything in any one turn given your limited resources of absolute control. It would really add to the strategy as to decide not only what will happen, but what you are able to do immediately, but what you will also have to put off for another turn.

McNaughton wrote:I think it is a great idea. Basically, from what I understand, it means that you cannot do everything in any one turn given your limited resources of absolute control. It would really add to the strategy as to decide not only what will happen, but what you are able to do immediately, but what you will also have to put off for another turn.

That's the idea: It's all very interesting to create a lot of new powerful units with your WSU points , but if you don't keep some of them to replenish your rail pool (which, as in AACW, is diminishing regularly by wear and tear), all these wonderful units will take a long time to join the front...

So it's like in life, you will have to make hard choices.

Cat