Players as testers?

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[berto]

What I would like to see is an updated manual in some sort of modular format that can be more easily edited/changed in those subject areas in which the game itself has been reworked or enhanced.

A Wiki devoted to AGEod game manuals and closely watched/tightly moderated, perhaps?

[soundoff]

A Wiki devoted to AGEod game manuals and closely watched/tightly moderated, perhaps?

+1 although it would be quite a task and I'd admire tremendously anyone that could do it

[arsan]

+1 although it would be quite a task and I'd admire tremendously anyone that could do it

Hmm... so your are not volunteering in the end?

[berto]

We should not have to build the text of the AACW Manual Wiki from scratch. Hopefully someone at AGEod could do a text dump of the latest manual into the Wiki container. Then players could start editing that basis at their convenience. Of course, formatting the text would be a b*tch, but that, too, would be done at everybody's convenience. (I'm guessing that this would be too much of an additional workload for Gray, on top of his AACW Coordinator duties. Serving also as Wiki Cop, I mean.)

[soundoff]

Hmm... so your are not volunteering in the end?

I was always taught by father....'never to volunteer'. In any case it would need someone who was 'multi-lingual' say with Spanish as their mother tongue.

[lodilefty]

We should not have to build the text of the AACW Manual Wiki from scratch. Hopefully someone at AGEod could do a text dump of the latest manual into the Wiki container. Then players could start editing that basis at their convenience. Of course, formatting the text would be a b*tch, but that, too, would be done at everybody's convenience. (I'm guessing that this would be too much of an additional workload for Gray, on top of his AACW Coordinator duties. Serving also as Wiki Cop, I mean.)

um, like this?
http://ageod.nsen.ch/aacwwiki/Manual:Overview

[berto]

um, like this?
http://ageod.nsen.ch/aacwwiki/Manual:Overview

Yes, but:

--more officialized, with pointers to it everywhere to encourage its upkeep and use
--more up to date! (some of that stuff is, what, a year old or more?)

[Rafiki]

We should not have to build the text of the AACW Manual Wiki from scratch. Hopefully someone at AGEod could do a text dump of the latest manual into the Wiki container. Then players could start editing that basis at their convenience. Of course, formatting the text would be a b*tch, but that, too, would be done at everybody's convenience. (I'm guessing that this would be too much of an additional workload for Gray, on top of his AACW Coordinator duties. Serving also as Wiki Cop, I mean.)

It is indeed a fair amount of work

(I allow myself to speak with some authority on the subject )

--more officialized, with pointers to it everywhere to encourage its upkeep and use

I'm not sure what you mean by "everywhere"? Within the wiki? To here? Elsewhere?

--more up to date! (some of that stuff is, what, a year old or more?)

AFAIK, it's as up-to-date as the latest official manual, and then some. Keep in mind that most of the game hasn't changed that much since release, so things don't become irrelevant simply due to ageing.

[Dixicrat]

Why all this uproar? I'm missing something here, obviously. Ageod has games that a large community of dedicated wargamers feel are simply the best availible. I number myself among them. As with any product, there are obviously going to be people who don't care for it, for one reason or another.
I'm sorry y'all are so upset over the comments of a disgruntled person or two.

How is it, that the current patch provides such a radically different game experience than the original release? I came in to this forum about a week ago, so I've missed out on previous versions, and thus have nothing to compare my beloved AACW with. I started with 1.10d, and now have 1.11; has there really been that much of a difference in the game experience between the original release, and now? And what's this "agenda" that the fellow referred to?

For myself, I can state without ANY doubt that with AACW, Ageod has created the most "realistic", thought-provoking, addictive wargame that I've ever encountered... or for that matter, dreamed of. Thanks, to all of you!

[Injun]

pasternakski:

Additional comment:

The fact that someone else posts a comment or question regarding how AGEOD conducts its business in regard to game design or patch/update procedure does not extend an open invitation for you to continue impugning the hard work of all the volunteer coordinators and betas.

The following is a list of the members of the "volunteer" squad, you insult each and every time you post, insinuating their work is sub-par, unprofessional or misguided in any way:

Gray_Lensman, lodilefty, Generalisimo, berto, bigus, jabberwock, Rafiki, GShock, arsan, Spharv2, Primasprit, Paul Roberts, hobbes, runyan99, Reiryc, marecone, rickd79, Adlertag, Le Ricain, Chris0827, Barney, frank7350, Frank E, jastaV, Itr213, Arnaud_Bouis, Chris38, Brigade infernale, Nikel, Matthieu Brevet, doubleun, totobadluck, Walloc, redaman, Duc_d_Heilsberg, TheDeadeye, Stwa, muddymonkey77, lightsfantastic, IronBrigadeYankee, Jagger, moustic, Cat Lord, MapleLeaf71, xjess, Narakir, Wiking, Kriegsspieler, Heldenkaiser, Johnny Canuck, McNaughton, Christophe_Barot, Hasardeur, OHgamer, Boggit, Aragos, JackFox, (apologies to anyone I missed)

Here's a list of some of the staff at AGEOD you're also insulting for having the common business sense of utilizing all this volunteer talent:

PhilThib, Pocus, Hok, Korrigan, MarkShot (again apologies to anyone I missed)

Last, but not least, you're insulting all the other forum posters, who have taken the time to post problems that they find in the expectation that their posted problem is fixed in the most expedient manner possible, regardless of who fixes it.

For your information, I "personally" requested statements from the "official" AGEOD personel, so that you will no longer have any misunderstanding of where they stand as far as utilizing volunteer talent. One last time I'll make the offer to work with you on any game issue that you feel needs addressing, but I will no longer tolerate your insinuations that volunteer work is sub-par, unprofessional, or misguided in any way. If I see any more such insulting/insinuating posts of this nature, in any forum, anywhere, (Yes, I will be searching), I don't need to explain to you what my next "personal" request on behalf of all these volunteers by the moderators of both the "official" AGEOD forums will be.

Lensman, Rafiki, Pocus and Others,

First of all I want to give my thanks to ALL who help in making this game a great gaming experience. The Support is top notch compared to other games that I have owned and I have owned or own a few.

Rafiki , thanks for keeping the wikki updated for a played it has been helpful to me.

Lensman great work on the rail system, Pocus great use of volunteers in making a good game great. Jabber, thanks for the potraits. I could go on.

Yes to those like me this game has been hard to learn, heck, I just figured out how to form those divisions much less how the supply system works. The make is huge and management can be a hassle. Yes you do not have enough Money, Troops or War Supplies to do all that you want. Heck this has always been a problem with a nation at war, infanite possiblities and limited resources. What stratedgy to you want to pursue land or naval. Blockade squadrons or Brigades of infantry? Blockade squadrons can only stay on station so long and then must be rotated? Those ships take longer to builde the recruit, equip and train a brigade of infantry. Yes it is a complex game and one of the most enjoyable for me even though I have only played the first year of the April 61 scenario.

If you are looking for a game you can learn that you can create a defined winning stratedgy that works everytime, this game is not for you. One improvement I would like to see is an over all statedgy planning map or have the jump map expand to 4 times it size, and have the ledger roster with a page for each region or state for units would be helpful. That might help in keeping track of all those units.

Other than that people keep up the good work and support, you have made a good game great.

[berto]

I'm not sure what you mean by "everywhere"? Within the wiki? To here? Elsewhere?

I mean, giving the Wiki official status on a par with any printed docs, or docs included with the game files. (Don't include the Wiki itself. Just have docs with links pointing to the Wiki.) On the official game page, under Support (or wherever), have a prominent link to the Wiki, for example. (Is there one?)

I confess I don't refer to it much, so apologies if it is in fact up to date.

Just highlight it more, and give it your official blessings, to whatever extent that is needed.

Then, when people ask about the docs (and especially to their supposedly being out of date), we can all just say RTFW.

[Clovis]

Well, I can't let a fellow Iowegian hang out here to dry. I realize that by posting I am inviting any number of the "volunteer brigade" to rip me personally without consequence, because they have captured these games and turned them to their own tastes without reference to me.

So, rip away. Talk at length here and on the forums of companies where AGEod markets its games, asserting that I am some dingaling or nincompoop despite my early almost fanatical support of BoA and AACW. Shoot your mouth off about what an idiot I am because I continue to come here looking for support for the games I have bought and that have been changed by latecomers with their own agendas to pursue into strange creatures I no longer know how to play. Laugh derisively at me because you can deduce, then freely talk about, my online habits in doing so.

I can't connect with these games anymore. They were fun when I first bought them, now they - to me - are a morass of uncontrolled modifications that have no interest in my understanding or enjoying them. As far as I am concerned, the original developers and publishers - bless 'em, I liked 'em so much and supported them wholeheartedly - have allowed these silk purses to be turned into sows' ears.

Hi ho. Good luck, Madgamer, this former Walford and Mount Vernon boy, who seems to share your frustration, is permanently outta here once again.

[Franciscus]

Please, stop this nonsense. This thread should be closed.

[soundoff]

Please, stop this nonsense. This thread should be closed.

+1.....more if it were allowed

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Rafiki]

[color="Blue"]There are still interesting issues raised in this thread that I don't mind seeing discussed further.

However, there is little point in debating pasternaksi's post any further, so lets let that rest, and stick to the original topic and the discussions following thereof[/color]

[Carnium]

Why is everyone wasting so much time for a guy like pasternakski who NEVER posted anything positive since I am registered to this forum and following this great community ? His avatar tells more than thousand words - angry man that is never satisfied.
For me AGEOD is the BEST company when it comes to support and quality. And how often do you have the pleasure speaking with the game programmers and have the chance to actual see your suggestions implemented into the games you really like for FREE ?
For this I really like this company and I urge you not to take negative persons who seems to have issues outside this community too seriously.
Thanks in advance !

[lodilefty]

<snip>
I will most likely buy the BoA2 game and have some of the same problems but maybe this time I will understand enough to play against the AI. In reading this post I don't understand some of it and I wrote it so if in comes across as the mumbled words of a ranting mind don't give it any thought.
I will in the end keep trying to play the game because I love it and have a high self abuse level LOL

thanks to all
Madgamer

Back to the topic

In my not so humble opinion, you'll find BoA2 [WIA] very enjoyable. It is 'trimmed down' yet still a challenging wargame [remember? this is a game]...

Usually, I don't like to be 'prescriptive' on how to start, but I'll try this time

When you get WIA, I recommend you play 1 or two smaller scenarios before plunging into the campaigns.

First, set attrition to 'hard' [middle setting] and Activation to it's middle setting [don't try to learn the game with leaders getting locked if inactive. I'm not sure I'm ready for that yet ]

Them, I recommend one scenario from each era: 1636 Pequot War, 1759 Annus Mirablis, 1777 Saratoga, and 1815 New Orleans to et started. Then, try 1755 Campaign to start using the entire map and getting used to 'options'. Then you should be ready to go for it.

Good luck. We'll be here to answer your questions!

[Chaplain Lovejoy]

I create a product that sells in excess of 300,000 units annually. With that many customers, naturally there are complaints. Some are helpful, being of the "how about trying this?" variety. But then there are the other ones. One guy was so irritated that he expressed his desire that the person who made such and such change on my product should die a slow and agonizing death.

Having walked in the shoes of someone in the role of creator/developer, I think I've developed a sense of what is productive feedback and what is anti-productive feedback. The vast majority of AGEod Forum posters seem to know the difference too. But then there are those few who haven't thought things through quite as well as they should have.

I tip my had to everyone, paid and unpaid, who labors on AACW!

[Zebedee]

Haven't wargamers always been the testers for games? I know some of us remember halcyon days of walking into a shop and buying a game and not needing to patch the game, but what I think we tend to forget is that was because there were no real methods to patch the games and I can certainly recall several games with such critical flaws, which were never resolved, I couldn't actually play them, never mind those which were so badly balanced I wished I'd never bothered playing them.

Contrast this with the speed of response which one gets with technical problems or game bugs here. It's superlative.

The complexity of any strategy game of any decent standard means that issues will always arise; whether the product is being balanced, fixed or improved. That a small company is willing to do all three and a year or so after the game was first released is a good sign. May it continue into the future.

I have to confess ACW is not really my cup of tea, it's a tough learning curve when one has only the barest outline of the ACW to use as a guide - and perhaps this is something which could be looked at, eg things like which states are neutral etc really could be pointed out a little more clearly in things like event texts or even documentation - and the game is far more complex than it looks on the surface.

Personally, if it helps to produce a more enjoyable, accurate and bug-free game, I'll run error logs til the cows come home while I play. I've done it for other games and if a company actively requests its customers participate, then surely that's a good thing? Especially if that participation is listened to and rewarded with the kind of support which it is obvious Ageod is currently providing.

As it is, I'll try to get an installation which isn't corrupted (and huge thanks to Pocus for sorting that out for me with such speed - sadly, my internet speed tonight is nowhere near as customer friendly as he is) and hope to feed back on v1.11a as and when needed or appropriate.

(The good thing about the slow speed of my internet tonight is that it's given me chance to actually read up on things before diving into them headfirst as I usually do ).

[RELee]

When I was young and all they had was Avalon Hill and there yearly release of a new game it was common knowledge that the players would end up as game testers and there followed many,many,many rules changes (in prit form no computers then)
It seems to me that because AGEOD is releasing games with new ideas and formats and tries to please all players that there games need several patch's to get things right. There effort to make there games good is commendable but leads me now wait to buy one because my experience with AACW got worse as the patch count went up. I got to where I could not manage the production/unit replacement/reinforcement sub system because I ran out of men or supplies or money. There was a great deal of change from the released game and the game as it stood with th 1.10d patch and had I known that where it was by 1.10d in the beginning I would not have bought it because I just could not play it by the time I got 1.10d installed.
I think that games have only so much time in which to be developed and then is publish or perish. I admire a company that will develop a system engine through several games and then bring up the previous games with a patch.
First we had BoA then AACW and then BoA2. I think that I will buy more of AGEOD games but not when they are released but after they have been on the market for awhile. I wonder if I am the only person who feels this way.

Madgamer

I absolutely love the transformation of wargames from where they began to where we are today. Even though my arthritis sometimes acts up and makes me a bit cranky and cantankerous on some days, my rants can usually be ignored as "having a bad day." All in all, the fact that we now have computerized wargames that allow for player participation in fine-tuning, bug-elimination, and even allowing for player-designed modifications is the best thing to come along since the invention of sliced bread.

But y'all have to understand just how easily entertained I am. I grew up when having a stick was equivalent to getting a new version of WOW released today.

So you boys, and gals if any are lurking about, continue to crank out all these imperfect updates all y'all want.

Remember those days of computer games that came with bugs that just never would go away, even after the third and final company-release revision? I do. Remember games that would simply freeze up for no good reason and there was no such thing as an internet web site to report it on? I do. Do you remember getting that new board game from SPI delivered by UPS, only to discover hours later after all the required rules reading and game setup that the printer failed to print that one DAS REICH counter, or a month later you go to setup the game and a counter or two had managed to go missing in action? I do.

Shucks. Games these days are a piece of cake. Whip out the credit card, place your order and download it. Instant gratification. Something not working right? Heck, just log onto the forum. Oh, gosh, looky there! It's the game developer his own self answering questions and discussing the game with you. Ooo! I feel so special. (Seriously, folks. No sarcasm today.)

I love it! I love it! I love it! If I had to money to burn I would buy every new game that came out and play and download updates and argue all the fine points non-stop, 24/7, all the time.

[Rafiki]

You know what, RELee? You're a ge-nu-ine good guy

[RELee]

You know what, RELee? You're a ge-nu-ine good guy

Aww, shucks! Not really. I just get tired of folks who forget (or never knew in the first place) just how good they got it.

[Dixicrat]

Please choose whichever one of the following you're happiest with:

1) Here's a shout out to ya from ya peeps, Dawg! (2000's)
2) You're totally tubular and tripindicular, man! (90's)
3) Dude, you totally rock! Rock ON! (80's, 70's)
4) Far out, man! You are groovy! (60's)
... etc.

All of them mean the same thing; all of them apply to you.

Sincerely,
Bill & Hav (Dixicrat & Mae)

PS We remember.

[tagwyn]

Arne: You are a great guy!! t

[RELee]

All of them mean the same thing; all of them apply to you.

Sincerely,
Bill & Hav (Dixicrat & Mae)

PS We remember.

Many, many thanks.