Welcome to Wars of Napoleon forums!

[Taciturn Scot]

Well, this is a very exciting announcement though not utterly unexpected I will definitely be watching this forum for updates.

I'm glad to hear that it will have a Grand Campaign as that was probably one of the most asked-for features for NC1. Even though I'll play it, it's not really my thing though. I hope that the individual, shorter campaigns will be very detailed and challenging: a deep and interesting Austerlitz campaign, for example. And my favourite, Germany 1813.

That's a lot of development time though and probably isn't doable for the release, so I'll be happy to buy scenario packs that include some year-long campaigns

[PJJ]

I hope the AI will be able to handle the grand campaign. In EAW, it's been having some trouble. Most people play only against the computer, so it's very important to get the programmed opponent play in a decent way.

[Durk]

Is that really true that most people only play versus AI? If this is true it would surprise me. I understand if players mostly enjoy playing solo. I do find this 'fact,' kind of sad, if true, in that I have met many close friends via pbem. I have met none in play against AI. I am pretty sure even the most professional AI will never match a friend who desires to get you back for the last game.

My way of saying AI is not my top priority, but player engagement

[PJJ]

It really is true. And there's nothing sad about it - it doesn't make you an asocial person if you play against the computer.

But I'm not going to start this argument all over again in this thread. It has been discussed to the death already in this forum.

I'll just say that programming a decent AI doesn't take anything away from people who never play against it. PBEM players shouldn't always respond in such a negative way to AI requests.

[Pocus]

AI is always a challenge yes and we will put attention to it in this game.

[Ebbingford]

Please use the battle report screens from the earlier AGE engine games, IE AJE.
You get a lot more information in a battle report from AJE than you do from one in CW2 or TEAW. Playing these last two I miss the detail that you used to get. Especially missed are all the icons showing the retreat details..

[helm123]

This is indeed very good news and I eagerly await when it's finished. Take your time and get it right for the start.

[helm123]

Is that really true that most people only play versus AI? If this is true it would surprise me. I understand if players mostly enjoy playing solo. I do find this 'fact,' kind of sad, if true, in that I have met many close friends via pbem. I have met none in play against AI. I am pretty sure even the most professional AI will never match a friend who desires to get you back for the last game.

My way of saying AI is not my top priority, but player engagement

I myself rely on the AI to be able to even play. Real life commitments make it to where I'd never be able to play a game that relied on human players only. I'd guess most players would eventually just stop playing against me when it took days to get that turn sent back to them.

[andatiep]

Just wondering, will this include scenarios from the French Revolutionary Wars as well? I thought that was a major shortcoming of the original, but the diplomacy and political interfaces it sounds like are being included would make that time period a really fun one to try.

This would be great to have once French Revolution wars without always Napoleon around. He was a great military leader but a stupid geopolitician. If we could have the option that French revolutionary governement don't lead to a military dictatorship but keep on the 1792-1799 war goals to free Europe from the kings instead of replacing them with French puppets, this would lead to many more interesting 'what if' (no Spanish war, serfs in Russian would be helpfull to invade Tzar's areas, etc).

[veji1]

I myself rely on the AI to be able to even play. Real life commitments make it to where I'd never be able to play a game that relied on human players only. I'd guess most players would eventually just stop playing against me when it took days to get that turn sent back to them.

+1, I have only played the AI in all the AGEOD games I have had. I play when I travel for work, etc.. A decent AI, like it was in AACW, is key. Sure once in 64 it all fell apart, but in a 62 campaign you had 2 solid years of fun playing, which was already great.

[veji1]

As said in the NCP2 thread, I am part of the school of those who favor a solid operational engine (weekly turns, smaller provinces (ideally ROP size), more variability in command chain impact and troop type rather than the almighty leader issue, more important role given to bridges and fortresses, etc.) to have fun with in yearlong campaigns, rather than a more complicated Grand campaign, with all the risks of unrealism it entails in terms of the actual war operations (ie risk of a EiA type of drift).

I haven't bought Civil War 2 as to me AACW remains a very enjoyable game. But NCP was flawed (to me anyway) and I am sure I will by NGP if it can give me that wargame feeling.

[Pocus]

I honestly think that CW2 is better than AACW as it has the same historical base with revised engine and events. Plus Ageod needs customers, as all companies.

[Camile]

I think the key will be how naval warfare was designed. The failure of other games similar style and age has been doing a naval system that prevented proper use (something that happened to EiA). The problem, between human players, was not diplomacy, but the naval problem.
If a system is created that makes it difficult (but not prevent) the invasion of Britain, and also prevent cheating game, it will work fine. But if English can not handle well the naval war, we'll make the same mistakes as before

[ERISS]

If we could have the option that French revolutionary governement don't lead to a military dictatorship (without Napoleon around) but keep on the 1792-1799 war goals to free Europe from the kings instead of replacing them with French puppets, this would lead to many more interesting 'what if' (no Spanish war, serfs in Russian would be helpfull to invade Tzar's areas, etc).

1789 is the victory of bourgeois revolution over aristocracy. And then end March 1794 is the victory of bourgeois revolution over democracy, when Robespierre put an end to the sections. End 1799, Napoleon coup-d'état is his said "end of the Revolution": paradoxically it's not the failure of bourgeoisy, it is what put an end to their 'can of worms':
Napoleon becomes the king of all french: the smartly self-effacing bourgeoisy (letting Napoleon reign, bourgoisy even made backup small military units), and the loosers of the revolution: aristocracy dreaming of their lead in a french great kingdom (but not so loosers if agreeing in leading under bourgeoisy controle), and people, disgusted by the bourgeois revolution, dreaming for a controle of bourgeoisy through the empire (it was almost that).
Maybe there could be what-ifs that I don't think about for now, but I don't see how the war goals could be changed: For this, the bourgeoisy early must agree the democracy (not to fake it), and so may desappear... born dead (like the democracy went).

[MarshalJean]

I honestly think that CW2 is better than AACW as it has the same historical base with revised engine and events. Plus Ageod needs customers, as all companies.

As I also said in the NCP2 forum, I'm very glad that a grand campaign will be apart of this new game. There are many games out there already that cover the multitude of operational and tactical decisions faced by Napoleon and the Coalition in the many battles fought during this period. And, granted, there are many games that cover grand strategy (recruitment/construction/economy/diplomacy/movement/supply/battle) during this period, too.

Just none by AGOED. And that's the point!

And that's why I'll be glad to buy this game upon release, plus any DLCs to follow.

MJ

[veji1]

I honestly think that CW2 is better than AACW as it has the same historical base with revised engine and events. Plus Ageod needs customers, as all companies.

Of cours, to be honest the reasoning for me was more that I wasn't motivated enough by CWII to replace my old laptop, while I feel enough motivation for NGP ! But I wish you well guys, of course.

[Person of Interest]

Well it was inevitable but still great to have it officially announced. I am glad there will be a full campaign but care will be needed in how this is handled. Very eager to see how AGEOD handles the diplomatic mechanics.

[leftguard]

Great to hear what the next game will be - I shall look forward to it with great anticipation

I'm currently playing a little RoP (my favourite Ageod game to date), and I always think how cool it would be to have similar systems (I love the army corps model, and the range of units available) applied to the Napoleonic era.

[Emx77]

Please use the battle report screens from the earlier AGE engine games, IE AJE.
You get a lot more information in a battle report from AJE than you do from one in CW2 or TEAW. Playing these last two I miss the detail that you used to get. Especially missed are all the icons showing the retreat details..

+1
i couldn't agree more. Earlier battle report is more informative and aesthetically more appealing.

[vaalen]

+1
i couldn't agree more. Earlier battle report is more informative and aesthetically more appealing.

I agree completely.

[Pocus]

This can't be, we have switched to the new interface screens. What are the retreat details you are missing exactly?

[Ebbingford]

In the earlier games there are two icons that show along the bottom of the battle report. One says how many retreat attempts the side has made. The other tells you if it is impossible to retreat as there is no region that the force can move to.
These are useful when we have a problem with units not being able to retreat from battle. These pointed to a problem with AJE and HAN retreats. If they were present in CW2 and TEAW it would be easier to see if the same problem existed there.

[Pocus]

Ok, good points.

[veji1]

So I'll be the first to shout the usual clamor... "can we hav screenshotes of the pre alpha version ? Pleeeeeease ?"

[Pocus]

That's much too early! Map is not fully finished by the artist.

[marek1978]

That's much too early! Map is not fully finished by the artist.

Can you give us some hint about how many regions will there be and how much space for manouver we will be granted?
Are you going to keep moving in to more hex shaped regions?

[veji1]

That's much too early! Map is not fully finished by the artist.

But Muuuuuuummm ! I want a screenshooooooot !!!

[Duke76]

This can't be, we have switched to the new interface screens. What are the retreat details you are missing exactly?

Happy about that but I think also new interface lacks a bit of "appeal"... I would like to know if my cavalry charged routed units or if "The Guard" entered and changed the battle... I think few but more descriptive facts can be more evocative (and even interesting) than tons of numbers or icons

[Lindi]

That's much too early! Map is not fully finished by the artist.

Question about map.

Because british need to send maybe renfort to Canada in war 1812 do you create area for war between British and USA or only do a small area need send troop here for stop a bad event?

Also Egypt or not Egypt?

(Because 2 without 3)

Napoléon can sen troop to India with event between France and Persia or not ? (that crasy but historical true because the treaty are here)

[Hegyytoportyan]

A must-buy-game!

My favourite thing is the managing my units into bigger ones to build hierarchy (brigades-divisions-corps-armies)

Pocus, can you do this game with all the ingame leaders with a portrait?
For me it's a painfull thing in your games (e.g. AACW, CW2), when we can find a good portrait via google for a leader but it's missing from the game. I don't know the reason. In my opinion it's better to have a false portrait than a generic one.