Thoughts on Cooperative (3+ player) Play?

[pakfront]

I've been playing the demo, and am quite impressed by this game. Unfortunately, I was suprised that it was built for 1 or 2 players only, rather than a more open ended multi-player game. One of the most interesting aspects of any conflict, but 19th cen. conflict especially, is the strategic and logistical coordination between commanders. Second Bull Run is a great example of the nail biting tension this can create - contrast the coordination of Lee, Jackson, Longstreet and with that of McClellan and Pope.

However even though AACW isn't built as 3+ player games, it seems easy to email saved files and turn movies to each other, allowing more players to get involved. The only missing element would be FOW between players on the same side. Teams could even play cooperatively against the AI.

I ahve two friends I think would be interested in this style of play. Has any brave group tried this style of play, and if so, can you comment on your process and/or house rules? Or thoughts from others who have done something similar in other turn based games?

[Childress]

I can't imagine this game, or a least one of the full campaigns, being played MP by any fewer than 4-6 participants. It's too damned huge in scope.

One also gathers that, though playable, it's not fully ready for satisfying PBEMs. For one thing, it lacks a turn replay function for the 2nd player.

[Johnny Canuck]

If you look in this subforum, a group of players is trying a 6-player PBEM game (commanders in the West & East, plus the 'President' in charge of economics, politics, etc.).

[denisonh]

I can't imagine this game, or a least one of the full campaigns, being played MP by any fewer than 4-6 participants. It's too damned huge in scope.

One also gathers that, though playable, it's not fully ready for satisfying PBEMs. For one thing, it lacks a turn replay function for the 2nd player.

Not true. I have three PBEMS going and enjoying all of them, even the one where I am struggling. I really do not need the replay, so it is not an issue for me.

It is much better than playing the AI.

[Hinkel]

I can't imagine this game, or a least one of the full campaigns, being played MP by any fewer than 4-6 participants. It's too damned huge in scope.
.

It works. You have to watch our grand campaign (With lot of roleplay) and you see, how it works.
Just follow Johnny Canucks link and have a look.

[Crimguy]

I can't imagine this game, or a least one of the full campaigns, being played MP by any fewer than 4-6 participants. It's too damned huge in scope.

One also gathers that, though playable, it's not fully ready for satisfying PBEMs. For one thing, it lacks a turn replay function for the 2nd player.

What replay? You mean the 10 minutes of waiting while the turn resolves? apy:
I've never done pbem on this (I've only owned it for 2 days and am still getting my feet wet). Each player still gets the list of events at the bottom after each turn, correct? Can they still click and review individual battles as in SP?

[pakfront]

The Grand Campaign is impressive. Just reading the AARs gives a good feel for this game. Looks like I'll have to experiment a little on my own to come up with a good plan for how to organize a multi-player game to my liking.

[jimkehn]

Crimguy: Yes the non-hosting player can click the red events in the mailbox and review the battles. The replay, in my opinion, is not enough of a reason to NOT play PBEM. The only thing you are really missing out on are the battle sounds and the little semi-circle dial. The rest of the replay the host sees is the same thing the nonhosting player gets in the mailbox. PBEM is all I play now. Playing the AI is just not even fun to me. (although I have on going...I am just left flat everytime I boot it up)

Childress: The game looks overwhelming at first. You will no doubt, after a few turns, slip into a system that works for you. My opponent and I are in April of 1863, we both have a lot of units to move. He has more as he is USA. My turns typically take 20-30 minutes to play. I could probably do them quicker, but I tend scroll around the map in awe of the beauty of the whole thing. I usually will first look around at the more critical battles and areas I am concerned about. Then I click through the mailbox. Some of them I skip over because I have already dealt with them in step one above. I don't usually do this, but you can then click on "e" and "r" to scroll through the units that don't have orders and that aren't fixed. Then I click through the builds, economics, financials, etc. to set my replacements, build my rail, industry, etc. Yes, the game is not Risk (that's a good thing), but it is very playable once you get over the initial intimidation.