AGEOD Forums

Please answer what are is your preferred playing mode for BOA/AACW.

Solo only. I'm too unreliable to be a good PBEM opponent. AI thus is a very BIG deal to me.

Solo only...

The only strategy game i've played online on a regular basis is ST: birth of the federation

I always play versus Athenea!
Plan to try some multi... when i improve my gaming a little...
But i will say 95% is and will be against AI

Cheers!

I initially play against the AI a bit, but soon move to pbem, since you can't beat playing against other carbon based life forms.

I have only played AACW against the AI so far. I do plan on PMEM when I am
confident that I can be a worthy opponent.

I practice at home when I'm alone, just like "Love and Death".

Except for the Grand Campaign, solo only

I like to play simultaneous games against the A.I. I'm currently playing 1 game as Union and 1 game as Confederate. I did the samething for BoA - 1 game as American and 1 game as British.

I play 90% of the time against the AI. Almost all the time that I play multi is with a FPS.

Solo only.
Neither time nor inclination to play against other humans.

So, please, keep cranking Athena up

SP only currently. Nothing against MP (via email), but I'd want short campaigns for that...
Plus the "CSA don't see the replay" problem is a real issue.

You know, I used to post in some wargame forums sponsored by another developer who I will not name, and I got bewitched and bothered for pointing out that studies have shown since the early days of board wargaming that over 70 percent of wargames are played solitaire. The criticism bewildered me.

All I have to say here is that the results are coming down on this poll just about exactly the same.

The lesson for me is, as it has always been, if you can't design a computer wargame with at least a decently competent AI, you might as well round up the camels, fold your tent, and have Salome dance you away into the desert.

The original promise of computer wargames was that you could get a good game even when a human player was not available. The underlying message was, "Okay, you anti-social losers, here's the answer to your frustrated attempts to play against yourself in those cardboard-and-paper age games."

Unfortunately, that promise has largely been left unfulfilled.

Let's face it. Wargaming has always been a place to retreat from the socially bizarre world and find some enjoyment without having to put up with the mundane creeps you encounter in your day-to-day existence (I would say that serious reading and study have similar motivations, but that's a different kettle of unidentified fish).

Yes, I enjoy playing against the few pals I have come across over the years, but the hours you spend unwinding after a tough day at work finding enjoyment beating up on your computer (and even yelling and cursing at it, because it doesn't mind) are irreplaceable. When you are tired of watching the forces of evil gobble up the world and your prayers for the arrival of a planet-killer asteroid to solve all of humanity's problems go unanswered, it's time to go find something at once interesting, challenging, and innocuous to do on your own.

This is the reason I so much appreciate AGEOD's dedication to AI development, and why I wish other designers would follow. PBEM and FTF are great, but the future of computer wargaming obviously depends on coming through on the original promise.

pasternakski wrote:
This is the reason I so much appreciate AGEOD's dedication to AI development, and why I wish other designers would follow. PBEM and FTF are great, but the future of computer wargaming obviously depends on coming through on the original promise.

Yes! I won't buy a game anymore unless I know the developer has a good track record for strong AI. My shelves are littered with promising games (many of them high-profile, big-budget titles) that are all but unplayable due to an abysmal AI. (Since this board is a congenial place, I won't list them here.)

I have played CMAK/BO by computer mail. I lost but enjoyed the experience. None of my opponents ever wanted another match. Guess I wasn't enough of an opponent. LOL. Most of the time I play Solo. I like it that way for all the reasons so skillfully articulated above. I will try very hard not to get booted off of this board. Best, L3

We know this trend Pasternaksi, and if you asked me, I would have said that 90% of the players mostly play solo... So this don't come as a suprise to me. This is one of the reason why we will work on the AI continuously.

tagwyn wrote:I will try very hard not to get booted off of this board. Best, L3

Don't take it too hard, tag. I finally booted myself off "over there." It just has too many self-important, consciously ignorant punks looking to snipe at anyone who harbors an intelligent thought for me.

Here, you get at least common courtesy, even if you are a curmudgeonly old grunt.

Pocus wrote:I would have said that 90% of the players mostly play solo...

You know me to be a kind, understanding person, Pocus, so I take everyone at face value and believe everything they say ... 70 percent is what they admit to ...

It's hard to "come out of the closet" and confess that you are a solo wargamer. The implication is that there's something wrong with you if you enjoy spending time with yourself.

...This bulletin just in from the AGEOD News Eye on the Pie in the Sky News Team ... we take you live to our reporter, Mack Phillipacker ...

-Authorities have just raided the house you see behind me after receiving reports from neighbors of strange activity by its occupant, identified so far only as 'Pastor Slackly,' an elderly recluse. We are getting reports of corpses being found under the floorboards and body parts in a freezer.

Joining me now is one of the neighbors, Phil Beautythib. Mr. Beautythib, what can you tell us about this Pastor Slackly?

"Well, he never said much, pretty much kept to himself. When you talked to him, he seemed to be okay, nothing to make you think he was capable of THAT...."

-We'll have a complete report with plenty of grisly pictures if we can get 'em at 11 on AGEOD Eye on the Pie in the Sky News. With this news bulletin, I am the handsome, vain Mack Phillipacker. Back to you, whoever you are ...

I play a lot of Board Wargames FTF eg the excellent For The People, covering same Grand strategy ACW ground, and with many similar treatments, inevitably. When i cant get oponents for FTF Boardgames I play computer.
Occasionally when one or other of my buddies cant come over we may link a comp wargame....but i seldom have patience for PBEM. I'd forget my..err.. brilliant.. masterplan once i sleep!

You may find it strange but I usually like to play against my self (hot-seat), when I play wargames especially TOAW Century of Warfare, Age of Rifles and Steel Panthers III. Actually I do this because I find that the AI is not good enough and because I try to simulate tactics and the way of thinking of the various commanders. I also imply house roules that try simulate factors that are not considered in the aforementioned games. I am very interested in the topic of war and history in general and I find wargames and historical strategy games a more easy way to conduct my "experiments" then boardgames. I own both BoA and AACW but I don't play them regularly. I find BoA a bit limited I regarded it just a promise for better things to come. I wasn't disappointed after all because of AACW (I have only played it for a few hours but I judge it a very interesting game) and the future release of Napoleon's Campaigns which I am definitely going to buy. By the way, I never expected that I would have a chance one day to communicate with the creator of Europa Universalis (board game). It's an amazing world that we live in. And a question for Napoleon's campaigns:Is the full peninsular theater of operations (I mean 1807-1814 not just 1808) going to be included?

Very rarely play the AI, mainly just to learn the game, its just not rewarding. The interaction (trash talking) with the opposing player is the fun part.

Mike wrote:Very rarely play the AI, mainly just to learn the game, its just not rewarding. The interaction (trash talking) with the opposing player is the fun part.

This is odd, I posted this a day or so ago.

One game against AI for training, and all others games against humain intelligence

I am primarily a PBEM player, as I really found that I enjoy playing a thinking, adaptive opponent. Three PBEMs so far, with three opponents all with different styles and strategies. I have really learned the game in a way that I do not beleive I could have solo.

I still beleive a good AI is important, as many tasks that the player needs to delegate to the computer need to be done in a smart fashion to keep from burdening the player with micromanagement.

The AI should give the player who does not "go wild" a solid game.

The real issue is that after a while, you will "figure out" the AI, whether on a strategic or tactical level, and play to beat the AI. For this reason, I beleive that in the long run replayability will be difficult unless one moves to PBEM.

pasternakski wrote:You know, I used to post in some wargame forums sponsored by another developer who I will not name, and I got bewitched and bothered for pointing out that studies have shown since the early days of board wargaming that over 70 percent of wargames are played solitaire. The criticism bewildered me.

All I have to say here is that the results are coming down on this poll just about exactly the same.

The lesson for me is, as it has always been, if you can't design a computer wargame with at least a decently competent AI, you might as well round up the camels, fold your tent, and have Salome dance you away into the desert.

The original promise of computer wargames was that you could get a good game even when a human player was not available. The underlying message was, "Okay, you anti-social losers, here's the answer to your frustrated attempts to play against yourself in those cardboard-and-paper age games."

Unfortunately, that promise has largely been left unfulfilled.

Let's face it. Wargaming has always been a place to retreat from the socially bizarre world and find some enjoyment without having to put up with the mundane creeps you encounter in your day-to-day existence (I would say that serious reading and study have similar motivations, but that's a different kettle of unidentified fish).

Yes, I enjoy playing against the few pals I have come across over the years, but the hours you spend unwinding after a tough day at work finding enjoyment beating up on your computer (and even yelling and cursing at it, because it doesn't mind) are irreplaceable. When you are tired of watching the forces of evil gobble up the world and your prayers for the arrival of a planet-killer asteroid to solve all of humanity's problems go unanswered, it's time to go find something at once interesting, challenging, and innocuous to do on your own.

This is the reason I so much appreciate AGEOD's dedication to AI development, and why I wish other designers would follow. PBEM and FTF are great, but the future of computer wargaming obviously depends on coming through on the original promise.

You have expressed my feelings on the matter perfectly! I play the PC to unwind, do something interactive and think through some interesting strategic possibilities.

Playing another human sometimes just gets too competitive!

Solo only in my case....for the moment.

When i get confident with the mechanics i will certainly only play MP.

Always Solo...too much time on the road...

I'm carefully venturing into AACW-MP now, though the current PbEM-system is still cumbersome, IMHO. So I'm still mainly playing single player, with an occasional PbEM as a sideshow.

Though, once we get an IP/LAN-Option, I might be compelled to switch to almost entirely playing MP...

Henry D. wrote:I'm carefully venturing into AACW-MP now, though the current PbEM-system is still cumbersome, IMHO. So I'm still mainly playing single player, with an occasional PbEM as a sideshow.

Though, once we get an IP/LAN-Option, I might be compelled to switch to almost entirely playing MP...

I'm afraid, I have to alter my statement above:

Since I really got deep into PbEM (currently four games against three different opponents and looking forward to a fifth [not to hurry You in any way, PBBoeye ]), I haven't touched AACW SP once for a single turn and don't think I will again anytime soon.

So it's at least "mostly" multiplayer for me now, it's terribly addictive...

Though maybe I should schedule a few training sessions against AI as CSA, I'm really not worth a damn with the Grays... leure:

Regards, Henry

I'd love to play an MP but am quite too scared about the magnitude of the full campaign management. I have problems at moving units, assaulting forts, blocking shipping lanes and so on...am still in the learning and experimenting phase.

To this end, the best thing would be to just play a general in the Grand Campaign. That i can certainly do...but if u add on me the politics, economics, reinforcements and so on, i go...ballistic.

As of you RW, pbem allows you to play MP perfectly. Just get organized on how many turns to deliver per week and u're clear to go