AGEOD Forums

Posted: **Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:17 pm**

I'm an old miniatures and board game player.

PC games provide great advantages: rigid rules controls, no need for dedicated space and referee, no wife and kids wasting months of hard gaming.
The AI is the weak point. It cannot bear the weakest human opponent.
This topic confirm my thesis:
http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?t=12223

I'm looking with interest to NCP and WIA, and I'll try the demo versions.
I'm doubtful over BPEM chances: few opponents seem to be interested with.

Please assist me in the right choice: keep mind I’ll search for tough PMEB gaming. :cool:

Posted: **Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:26 pm**

Hi!

Without any doubt, AACW, the American civil war game, has the most lively PBEM community.
And its the most matured and complete game of the three current Ageod games. But AACW is bordering the "monster game" in the complexity/time needed, beware

. This can be a pro or a con depending on your tastes.

If your choice is only between WIA and NCP, i will personally choose WIA.
IMHO, it "feels" better.
Its less huge and complicated than AACW but very fun :coeurs:

It's also the ideal game to learn the AGEOD games system.
But of course, much depends of your interest on the games subject. All three are very good in any case.
Regards

Posted: **Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:29 pm**

rivette88 wrote:I'm an old miniatures and board game player.

PC games provide great advantages: rigid rules controls, no need for dedicated space and referee, no wife and kids wasting months of hard gaming.
The AI is the weak point. It cannot bear the weakest human opponent.
This topic confirm my thesis:
http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?t=12223

I'm looking with interest to NCP and WIA, and I'll try the demo versions.
I'm doubtful over BPEM chances: few opponents seem to be interested with.

Please assist me in the right choice: keep mind I’ll search for tough PMEB gaming.

I'm biased of course :w00t:

, but I think you'll find the AI getting more difficult to beat....

With advanced activation, hardened attrition and the newest patch to WIA, beating the AI is not simple. Logistics failures will kill you.... :blink:

I don't believe that the demos contain many of the recent improvements to the games, so they give you only a 'feel' for what is possible...

If you look for 'grand campaign', WIA has 3 [1755, 1775, 1812],but AFAIK NCP has none at this time..... both have many enjoyable scenarios and 'short campaigns'

Good Luck! :thumbsup:

Posted: **Sun Jan 11, 2009 3:26 pm**

It was AACW to lead me here: know it!

Complexity does not fear me: on the contrary it’s exiting.
Remember I’m an old miniatures and board game player. I'm used to assimilate tons of complex rules. I’m also trained to harsh gaming discussions over way rules are to be regarded: quite common in wargamers tribes. That’s reason why I look to PC wargames for referee keeping.

Old is to be referred to miniatures, not me. :neener:

Posted: **Sun Jan 11, 2009 3:36 pm**

Without a doubt, AACW is the best of all Ageod's superior games. The complexity only makes it more challenging. As others have stated, the AI is getting tougher and is constantly evolving & improving. Play it!

But, of your two choices, I would highly recommend WIA - but your decision may rest in your preferred time period.

I don't think you'll be disappointed regardless.

Posted: **Sun Jan 11, 2009 6:36 pm**

lodilefty wrote:If you look for 'grand campaign', WIA has 3 [1755, 1775, 1812],but AFAIK NCP has none at this time..... both have many enjoyable scenarios and 'short campaigns'

Well, Napoleon does have the Spanish Ulcer scenario, which is actually longer (in turns) than the full American Civil War campaign! Of course, the map is a bit smaller, and the political and logistical decisions are more limited. NCP is a purely "operational-level" wargame without the additional strategic issues involved in AACW.

Posted: **Sun Jan 11, 2009 9:55 pm**

Now I'm completely lost. :confused:

I said: It was AACW to lead me here; I know it!

Are you suggesting I have to stay over the old game and give up with buying WIA or NCP? :blink:

Today I played WIA demo scenario: it was not simple, rather superficial when compared to AACW.
No chains of command and army, corps, division organization in the demo.
I searched at forum:
http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?t=9788
It seems like chains of command is not present at all in the complete game too.
Why?
Then, the war economy and national war effort management is missing.

Till have to go after NCP demo.

Posted: **Sun Jan 11, 2009 10:02 pm**

rivette88 wrote:[...]Today I played WIA demo scenario: it was not simple, rather superficial when compared to AACW.
No chains of command and army, corps, division organization in the demo.
I searched at forum:
http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?t=9788
It seems like chains of command is not present at all in the complete game too.
Why?

Because this kind of military organization did not exist in that time. :neener:

Then, the war economy and national war effort management is missing.

No, it's not missing, it is not included by design.

Cheers
Norbert

Posted: **Sun Jan 11, 2009 10:04 pm**

The simpler command rules of WIA are because structures such as the ones you see in AACW didn't exist during that timeframe.

Also, though I really like the ways I have to organize my troops into efficient fighting machines in AACW, it's also has its charm to simply have a leader grab as many troops as he can grab and can lead and march off into battle, like you have to do in WIA

Of WIA and NCP, I recommend WIA

Posted: **Sun Jan 11, 2009 10:07 pm**

Primasprit wrote:Because this kind of military organization did not exist in that time.

What?

Posted: **Sun Jan 11, 2009 10:15 pm**

Shocking, isn't it?

Wikipedia wrote:The first corps in the United States Army were legalized during the American Civil War by an Act of Congress on July 17, 1862,[...]

Posted: **Sun Jan 11, 2009 10:18 pm**

rivette88 wrote:What?

What he said :neener:

Washington or Howe armies (not to mention Montcalms' and company) were very small and little organized armies when compared to Napoleon's or the AACW ones. On WIA, a 5.000 army is big one. in AACW is just a very understrength division.
An effective Corps organization was first used by Napoleon, and real and organized divisions (not just a bunch or regiments and brigades tossed under Lord x or Marquis Y command) were not used then... at least not on the American wilderness wars.
IMHO, this simplicity of command structure lets you focus on the important: war startegy, teh supply problems and how to control a hueg continet with sucha meagre force you suually ahve. Lots of important decision.
And besides the no army/corps/divisions system helps the AI a lot :coeurs.
Regards

Posted: **Sun Jan 11, 2009 11:59 pm**

The British Army was modelled over Frederick the Great doctrine.
Regiments were standing units. On the field the British army war organized in Columns, Divisions, Reserve, Center, Left and Right Wing.
The chain of command was strict, tough, organized in depth for troop deployment and maneuvers on the fields.
Washington Army went after the British model following early defeats: he had former British officers, as French (Lafayette), or Prussian (von Steuben) to form troops over the Prussian army model.

I played miniatures battles from the American Independence War, where army organization was strong, although not using Napoleon's battles terms as Corps.
Indeed, chain of command control was basic issue behind most miniatures battles rulebooks

Here a good reference link:
http://www.britishbattles.com/index.htm

Posted: **Mon Jan 12, 2009 12:14 am**

Hi!
But we are not talking about battlefield (tactics) but at operational/strategic level.
For what i know, the kind of "divisions", "wings" and the like you talk about are perfectly represented by normal stacks.
I highly doubt divisions were permanent groupings like on the ACW. They were just groups of regiments (battalion sized normally on the british army) that acted together for some action or campaign. Just like you can do each time you select several units and put them together under a general or two,
If i recall correctly, even at the start of the Peninsula campaign (1808) the British still did not used permanent division. Just brigades.
Of course "Armies" and "corps" like used on the other games, capable of operating with some degree of coordination while deployed on different regions, are out of the question. The operational and strategic cooperation was pretty poor. And the communications awful. Half the campaigns was were played on wilderness terrain :bonk:

And the size of the forces were so small they needed no such kind of organization anyway.
Regards

Posted: **Mon Jan 12, 2009 6:50 pm**

Washington or Howe armies (not to mention Montcalms' and company) were very small and little organized armies.

Arsan

I disagree.
British army organization was always strong in European, Asian and American theaters.

An effective Corps organization was first used by Napoleon, and real and organized divisions (not just a bunch or regiments and brigades tossed under Lord x or Marquis Y command) were not used then

Arsan

Napoleon did not reformed French army organization or introduced Corps.
He improved maneuvering and used French army to the very far limit, but corps, division, brigades system was already used before revolution.

Because this kind of military organization did not exist in that time.

Primasprint

Are you then suggesting WIA has chains of command and army, corps, division organization in later scenarios as 1812-15 Madison’s War?
NCP has for matching time scenarios. :neener:

Anyway I’ll go after WIA. :thumbsup:

I have Athens, Milan, Marseille in my agenda for the week.
I’ll get chance to buy WIA there.

Posted: **Mon Jan 12, 2009 7:44 pm**

Better buy it from us with a download. We will earn something like 5 time what we earn, after the publishers and shops outlet have taken their share.

Posted: **Mon Jan 12, 2009 8:24 pm**

Hi rivette

I think our differences are manily "semantics".

Don't look just at the terms "Armies", "Corps" or "Divisions" than may have been used before.
Look at the in game effects of the armies/corps/divisions organization. This chain of command game mechanism try to represented a level of coordination and organization and an armies sizes not achieved until XIX century.
You seem to have AACW and have played it.
Do you really think that the level of efficiency and flexibility given by mechanisms like marching to the sound of guns to participate on adjacent regions battle or the huge command points savings that corps and divisions suppose (which enable you to form armies 100.000 men strong and up with perfect command efficiency) are adequate to represent the way the semiprofessional patriot army or the inflexible and lumbering British armies fought on the AIW??
I certainly don't.
On WIA you just play with normal stacks, which suppose you cannot put together huge number or troops without incurring on CP, and that coordination between different stacks is limited.
IMHO; it represents the S.XVIII way of war much better. The era flavor of the game play flow is great IMHO
I hope you agree with me when you try the game :thumbsup:

Regarding the 1812 campaign, no there is no chain of command there.
But you don't miss it as for what i know the biggest armies that fought on it were under 10.000 men strength.
No need of divisions, corps or armies. The scale of the war was totally different.

Regards!

Posted: **Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:08 pm**

rivette88

You're missing the point: of course, there were armies, corps and divisions before Napoleonic times; But it was ad hoc formations, created and dissolved as needed.

The real changes came with the creation of durable divisions with units used to work together and the creation of staff embryons around leaders for corps.

Posted: **Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:41 pm**

Old? That's me!!!

apy:

Posted: **Wed Jan 14, 2009 2:24 pm**

Pocus wrote:Better buy it from us with a download. We will earn something like 5 time what we earn, after the publishers and shops outlet have taken their share.

I just checked prizes few minutes before posting:

Birth Of America II: Wars In America 1750-1815
At Play.com site
EUR 19.49 Free Delivery

Birth of America II : Wars in America 1750-1815
At Matrixgames.com
Physical Shipment Plus Download (44,99 EUR)
Digital Download PC Download (36,99 EUR)
PC Physical Shipment (44,99 EUR)

Birth of America II : Wars in America 1750-1815
At AGEod.com
Télécharger :39,99 €
Boîte 44,99 €

Notice AGeod has anyawy the higher prize.
It's very strange: usualy producers seels for cheaper prizes than distributors. :blink:

Notice this is an Ageod tradition I already pointed out:
http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?t=10770&highlight=buy

Here is PhilThib explanation:
http://www.ageod-forum.com/showpost.php?p=103975&postcount=4

... I guess customers are looking for just one copy not 500! :wacko:

Posted: **Wed Jan 14, 2009 3:00 pm**

jastaV wrote:

I just checked prizes few minutes before posting:

Birth Of America II: Wars In America 1750-1815
At Play.com site
EUR 19.49 Free Delivery

Birth of America II : Wars in America 1750-1815
At Matrixgames.com
Physical Shipment Plus Download (44,99 EUR)
Digital Download PC Download (36,99 EUR)
PC Physical Shipment (44,99 EUR)

Birth of America II : Wars in America 1750-1815
At AGEod.com
Télécharger :39,99 €
Boîte 44,99 €

Notice AGeod has anyawy the higher prize.
It's very strange: usualy producers seels for cheaper prizes than distributors.

Notice this is an Ageod tradition I already pointed out:
http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?t=10770&highlight=buy

Here is PhilThib explanation:
http://www.ageod-forum.com/showpost.php?p=103975&postcount=4

... I guess customers are looking for just one copy not 500!

It's like buying coffee; for my own, I buy mine from companies retroceding a larger part of money to the producers. For wargames, I just do the same.

Posted: **Thu Jan 15, 2009 1:25 pm**

Clovis wrote:It's like buying coffee; for my own, I buy mine from companies retroceding a larger part of money to the producers. For wargames, I just do the same.

It makes sense with coffee: they have different quality, flavor,…..
When a customer buys a game, here, at Play.com, or at any other place he is expecting to get that same product anyway and anywhere.

It makes sense and sounds good to get it for a cheaper price.
Pocus recommendation to buy here was justified but the fact that way AGEod will "earn something like 5 time what we earn, after the publishers and shops outlet have taken their share."
It’s good: I just suggest AGEod should be pleased to get JUST 2-3 time what it earns, after the publishers and shops outlet have taken their share… that way customers too will save 50% their money.

Notice, we are living hard times: Europe and USA, the two main markets for AGEod are managing a harsh economical crisis. People is looking to buy first need products saving few cents.
I think it makes sense saving some ten € or USA $ when buying a game! :cool:

Posted: **Thu Jan 15, 2009 1:33 pm**

jastaV wrote:It makes sense with coffee: they have different quality, flavor,…..
When a customer buys a game, here, at Play.com, or at any other place he is expecting to get that same product anyway and anywhere.

It makes sense and sounds good to get it for a cheaper price.
Pocus recommendation to buy here was justified but the fact that way AGEod will "earn something like 5 time what we earn, after the publishers and shops outlet have taken their share."
It’s good: I just suggest AGEod should be pleased to get JUST 2-3 time what it earns, after the publishers and shops outlet have taken their share… that way customers too will save 50% their money.

Notice, we are living hard times: Europe and USA, the two main markets for AGEod are managing a harsh economical crisis. People is looking to buy first need products saving few cents.
I think it makes sense saving some ten € or USA $ when buying a game!

So another cup of tea maybe?

Now the real question : is Play.com selling coffee?

Posted: **Thu Jan 15, 2009 4:52 pm**

Clovis wrote:So another cup of tea maybe?

Now the real question : is Play.com selling coffee?

+1

Nice and funny point! :neener:

AFAIK it's possible Play.com is selling coffee and tea too! :mdr:

It's a sort of net-mega-store: movie DVDs, games, hardware, eletronic, T-shirt......

But, sorry for my insistence, the point is a different one: When AGEod will sell coffee and tea? :cool:

Posted: **Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:32 pm**

(What a relief... at least they are starting to laugh. It is a start...:cool

Posted: **Thu Jan 15, 2009 8:38 pm**

jastaV wrote:+1
Nice and funny point!

AFAIK it's possible Play.com is selling coffee and tea too!
It's a sort of net-mega-store: movie DVDs, games, hardware, eletronic, T-shirt......

But, sorry for my insistence, the point is a different one: When AGEod will sell coffee and tea?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIV4poUZAQo&feature=channel

Posted: **Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:39 pm**

Clovis wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIV4poUZAQo&feature=channel

The Knights Who Say "Ni!" ? :blink:

I never said "Ni"!
I clear said where I'll buy and the reason behind my choice! :neener:

Posted: **Sat Jan 17, 2009 3:08 pm**

Hi, I’m back home.
I bought my copy of WIA. :neener:

Paid it twice the price reported for buying it at Play.com

Birth Of America II: Wars In America 1750-1815
At Play.com site
EUR 19.49 Free Delivery

jastav

Thank for the tip: I will look at it for the future.

I think our differences are mainly "semantics".

arsan

Chains of command, marching to the sound of guns, war economy and national war effort management as available in AACW are important game features adding depth to game. That comes before historical detail in all my considerations.

Anyway, it’s good time for stopping discussion and playing.
During the weekend I'll get some hours to take some practice with WIA. :cool:

Posted: **Sat Jan 17, 2009 3:20 pm**

rivette88 wrote:[...]Chains of command, marching to the sound of guns, war economy and national war effort management as available in AACW are important game features adding depth to game. That comes before historical detail in all my considerations.[...]

But not all players agree here. Aside from the historical authenticity some prefer a game which is somewhat faster to play then AACW and allows to focus on the military strategy with all other micromanagement minimized.

Posted: **Sat Jan 17, 2009 3:34 pm**

jastaV wrote:The Knights Who Say "Ni!" ?

I never said "Ni"!
I clear said where I'll buy and the reason behind my choice!

The most amazing being you're giving advice where to buy AGEOD games when you wrote some days ago:

"That's because AGEod is used to publish beta-development state games!

I bought BOA, AACW, NCP, WIA, WW1: none of them was stable at time I firstly played it. And I always bought the boxed version usually published some time later the pay for download one.
I apreciate AACW: a good game! NOW!
Unfortunately NCP, I'd love because of subject and age, is till far from a good level.... see problems reported at forum pages. Unfortunately AGEod team is denmostrating few enthusiasm for fixing NCP troubles, may be for reason of times and few human resources.
NCP was published some more a year ago: I bough it out of my money..... how many time till I'll have to wait before it'll reach, if any, a good gaming level"?"

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1997123&mpage=2&key=�

For your full info, I don't buy my coffee only for flavour. As I stated I try to buy in a way as fair as possible for those who earn so few in the Third World. Once again you missed the boat, Resigned Mod.

AGEOD Forums

Help me decide

Help me decide