Stand-alone Crimean War Scenario

[Philippe]

One thing that I miss (and didn't think I would) is a stand-alone Crimean War scenario, somewhat along the lines of the Indian Mutiny.

If you come at this war through the game engine you'll probably have a hard time getting an exactly historical start position. The belligerents probably won't all have developed their resources to the same extent as in the actual war, and the armies and fleets won't be in their proper start positions.

Even if you set the thing up with exactly the same starting forces in the historical start positions, you're still looking at a pretty big range of outcomes: it's by no means certain that the Allies will invade the Crimea once they go over to the offensive. The war might be decided at the gates of Constantinople, or it might involve an Allied grab for Odessa or Georgia.
It's a situation loaded with potentially wild strategic outcomes, and although going after Sevastopol makes sense, it's not the only thing the Allies might have done. So even if you dislike historical simulation because you find it limiting, this is one historical situation where the list of what-ifs can get pretty hairy right off the bat.

[Knight of the Realm]

Yes, it would be nice. I've been playing as the Russians and have reached 1856 and the war doesn't even look likely at the moment...

It would be nice to see a whole bunch of scenarios for the various wars of the time... (things like the 1870's Russo Turkish War would be good too - S&T had a game of it many years ago which I really liked). Sometimes the PON campaign looks like too much of a good thing, and it would be nice to use the system to play a game to an ending a bit more often...

[SonOfAGhost]

First, I'll agree a Crimean scenario could be interesting. However, personally, playing so little it has taken over a month to get 6 years into a GC, I don't see myself dividing my time further with any scenarios

Scripted events that I saw in my previous game however, included the automatic placement of free additional forces on the map for both sides when triggered. So I wouldn't sweat the lack of expected development/build up/positioning beforehand.

Oh, and historical simulation I like, it's historical reenactment that is frustrating. I could read a book or watch a movie for that in less time than a perfectly accurate PoN game would take, and enjoy it more. I don't want to play what happened. I want to play what else could have happened! I agree, the Crimean War very much lends itself to myriad other possible outcomes. First game as GBR I declined to participate on the grounds a stronger Russia, and weaker Turkey, are desirable 70 years later...not that I got far enough to see it play out.

[Franciscus]

IMHO I think the plan was to release regularly new scenarios for PoN (as DLC), including Crimea, the 1880 GC, WW1,...
But the lack of adequate sales probably killed those projects...

[Mirandasucre]

i think there's still some hope for the 1880 dlc this year.....i hope so..

[Philippe]

IMHO I think the plan was to release regularly new scenarios for PoN (as DLC), including Crimea, the 1880 GC, WW1,...
But the lack of adequate sales probably killed those projects...

I'm afraid it's become a bit of a chicken and egg proposition.

Compared to some of the other Ageod releases PON is lacking a certain amount of critical mass. Half a dozen stand alone scenarios and another grand campaign or two would probably make all the difference. As it stands, mentioning that you like PON on one of the other (non-Ageod) forums is essentially an act of faith -- PON is obviously not vaporware, but it hasn't come anywhere near living up to its full potential. I'm willing to give it the benefit of the doubt becasuse I see where it could go, and if it even comes halfway near that it will be pretty sexy. But the development of the game needs to keep moving in that direction at a credible pace. Otherwise I'll start to wonder why the game takes such a long time to process turns.

If I ever succumb to pessimism and decide that PON is half unfinished (whatever that means), I won't get too annoyed though because I bought it from Gamersgate during their year-end sale with a few other discounts thrown in as well. But I will be out the time that I'm starting to invest in learning how to play it.

For me, part of the attraction of PON is a chance to relive parts of a mispent youth. When I was in college several history and economics majors organized a large group political/economic/military simulation of the Crimean War. The sides were so complicated that each country had to be played by teams. I was the Russian military chief of staff, and my moment of glory came when, as a result of some incredible political skulduggery by my Russian political colleague (aka Tsar Nicholas, who to everyone's dismay was literally sleeping with Queen Victoria) Russia and Turkey found themselves on the same side of the war, and I found myself in charge of the combined Russo-Turkish fleet defending the Straights. I had a bathroom floor with hexagon tiles so I was able to rehearse the coming battle to exhaustion before the actual event. I knew that I could inflict a fair amount of damage on the French and British ironclads that were going to sail up the Dardanelles, but that even taking advantage of well-positioned Turkish shore batteries I was bound to lose. Fortunately my opponents weren't as well rehearsed, and after a few ships had been shot to pieces, to my astonishment they called off the battle because they weren't willing to lose that many expensive warships. I'm still chuckling and scratching my head over that one many years later.

[Czert]

IMHO I think the plan was to release regularly new scenarios for PoN (as DLC), including Crimea, the 1880 GC, WW1,...
But the lack of adequate sales probably killed those projects...

So, lets everyone fan persuade at least one person to buy game, so we can hame more dlcs.

[yellow ribbon]

well,

would not work, PARADOX does pooling the profit anyway. at least i would assume this strategy, since they have the power to tell AGEOD to stop work until the new game is out.

i bought the DVD last summer and had to watch all that angry customers, said that they were outsmarted by the once who bought it for 2/3 of the price online after 5 weeks....

lately the big brother of AGEOD had the funny idea of bundling all available discounts at the same time and you could get the game and dlcs for less than the half of the dvds original price...

lets face it, everyone of us crack players will buy additional copies for this low price... and PON is something for crack players or accidental buyers, to complex for just playing it occasionally

despite Paradox saying in the stats PON was second most sold game for a time (GG only), i fear it was not a profit analysis. revenue counted only, covering variable costs first.
free cash for new games/unpaid bills!

I am convinced they (AGEODS team) carry on with patches and maybe-additional-DLCs or campaigns behind the back of Paradox, even on their weekends.

however this means

- no official additional budget allocated to PON
- no official date
- no agreement how it would be published at all (they already confirmed that last autumn), if it would be

no certainty at all...

we can know they will work on it, they will improve it, its their child, but for some of us it will only have practical use the day we think:

"hey, was hell of a fun years/months ago, lets do it again"

[Baris]

I believe DLC's are-were counter productive. To simulate serious wars in Age standards there should be space in maneuver. In PON map it can be easy to defend Kars depot from Muravyev Cossacks if not outnumbered.
PON is different,unique game and should not be harmed with small war scenario DLC's. Just an opinion.