Hi everyone:
Vaccilated when Matrix had this on sale; but it is back again. Though I do have some concerns:
- processing time? I have a I7 2600k with 16 gig ram and a R9 290 with 4 gig... will I experience issues in processing with this rig? I have CWII and while prior to the processing boost, the wait time was manageable, but the boost was very much appreciated; have TEAW as well, but bought it after the release of the turn processing boost, so I can't comment on that. Have AJE as well but don't play it enough to comment.
- the DLC's do they add content? Are they necessary? Add New features? Anything else that might warrant their purchase? More interested in Grand Campaigns versus grand operational slices.
- Has this stood the test of time?
- Saw that Loki100 is involved in this and appreciate his contributions on WITE and I believe CWII as well, and that is a great selling point for me- other thoughts?
- Overall opinions? (Just bought Galactic Civ III and it was a dog so I'm a tad reticent and skittish).
Thanks in advance.
Hello
Maybe your computer will have better processing time mine is about 2-5 or so minutes playing on Phenom2,4gig ram lol as for video card you dont need a powerful one for this game its simple graphics. All the dlc do add scenarios its up to you if you wanna play fraco prussian war or spanish american war but i did get them all just for the sake and try it out sometimes.
If you have played victoria 2 from paradox its almost the same economic,colonial and war simulation.
Maybe your computer will have better processing time mine is about 2-5 or so minutes playing on Phenom2,4gig ram lol as for video card you dont need a powerful one for this game its simple graphics. All the dlc do add scenarios its up to you if you wanna play fraco prussian war or spanish american war but i did get them all just for the sake and try it out sometimes.
If you have played victoria 2 from paradox its almost the same economic,colonial and war simulation.
ifailmore wrote:4gig ram lol as for video card you dont need a powerful one for this game its simple graphics.
What I understood: The video card is not to have a powerfull engine, however it must have a very good memory.
Usualy more than 1Go VRAM is useless for what must be displayed is to be generated, but here it must be read somewhere, it can't be 'invented'. The more the 'painted' map is loaded in graphic memory, the less there will be lag while traveling it.
I'm not a pro, but I feel 4Go graphic memory is the optimum for reading the map!!
Hello,
Well, all I have to say is get the 1880 GC, it's much better and with less issues than the 1850 one. The game is a master piece and I think you should get it right away.
Well, all I have to say is get the 1880 GC, it's much better and with less issues than the 1850 one. The game is a master piece and I think you should get it right away.
"Das Glück hilft dem Kühnen."
German Empire PON 1880 AAR:http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?35152-German-Empire-not-quite-an-AAR
German Empire PON 1880 AAR:http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?35152-German-Empire-not-quite-an-AAR
I agree with HerrDan, except that I have gotten a lot of enjoyment out of the 1850 scenario as well. This is the best, deepest, most immersive, and most enthralling game I have ever played. It is much deeper than Victoria 2, though it is not difficult to play once you learn it.
There is nothing else of this scope in the gaming world. I have played it more than any game I have ever owned, and I am still excited about it.
It is not perfect, there are still some bugs, yet with the current patch it is fantastic.
I recommend that you read Loki's very detailed AAR where he plays Sardinia Piedmont. It contains much good information about how to play the game, and shows what a rewarding experience it can be.
I am not a computer expert, but your system sounds like it should work okay.
As fir the DLC, the 1880 campaign is essential, the others just cover specific wars, and are not absolutely necessary.
There is nothing else of this scope in the gaming world. I have played it more than any game I have ever owned, and I am still excited about it.
It is not perfect, there are still some bugs, yet with the current patch it is fantastic.
I recommend that you read Loki's very detailed AAR where he plays Sardinia Piedmont. It contains much good information about how to play the game, and shows what a rewarding experience it can be.
I am not a computer expert, but your system sounds like it should work okay.
As fir the DLC, the 1880 campaign is essential, the others just cover specific wars, and are not absolutely necessary.
My experience is that the processing time is slower for PON than the other games you mentioned (which happen to be my other favorite AGEOD games). If you are a slave to fast processing times, you will be frustrated; however, if you have 2-3 minutes to take a breather in-between turns, you will not mind the processing time. Some people will multi-task in-between turns; I am actually fascinated by watching the changes in supply (three supply turns are processed during turn processing) and movement, especially when I am involved in a war.
The DLC's are worth buying but not necessary until after you decide on how you like the game. If you are like me, I want the challenge of the original 1850 GC to learn all the in's and out's of the game. Once you like it, I definitely agree that the 1880 GC is a good buy and then you would probably want to buy all the DLC's to either add more content to your game, be able to play shorter games and/or support a great company like AGEOD.
I believe the game came out in 2011 and it is still going strong for several reasons. 1) The devotion of the developers and testers to this game to improve it and to help satisfy the wishes of their very devoted customers (hello other companies, are you listening????) 2) The devotion of the customers to this game. It is a bit of a tough nut to crack (I HIGHLY recommend reading Loki's AAR on Sardinia-Piedmont, it should probably be an addendum in the manual because it will unlock the mysteries that stump first time players - especially the economic aspects of the game, which are daunting, but once learned, easy and fun). The game is still going very strong and word is that once the current two projects are completed, more time can be spent on improving the game with a gold version or PON2. This game is not going away.
See above paragraph on my opinion of Loki!
In a previous thread, someone mentioned that if they had only one game to play PON would be it. I second that thought. There is nothing comparable to it. I believe it is light years ahead of the competition for players who like the more realistic and historical aspects of gaming, yet can still play "what if scenarios" within their game. Sorry, I do like GCIII, although by now, the game is more repetitive in play than the original game so I won't be playing it as much, but for me, it is a fun distraction.
In summation, if you enjoy thinking out turns (and obviously, taking the time to do this) rather than point and clicking in a RTS, and enjoy the strategy involved in preparation for war and in post-war planning, PON is a must have game, IMHO.
The DLC's are worth buying but not necessary until after you decide on how you like the game. If you are like me, I want the challenge of the original 1850 GC to learn all the in's and out's of the game. Once you like it, I definitely agree that the 1880 GC is a good buy and then you would probably want to buy all the DLC's to either add more content to your game, be able to play shorter games and/or support a great company like AGEOD.
I believe the game came out in 2011 and it is still going strong for several reasons. 1) The devotion of the developers and testers to this game to improve it and to help satisfy the wishes of their very devoted customers (hello other companies, are you listening????) 2) The devotion of the customers to this game. It is a bit of a tough nut to crack (I HIGHLY recommend reading Loki's AAR on Sardinia-Piedmont, it should probably be an addendum in the manual because it will unlock the mysteries that stump first time players - especially the economic aspects of the game, which are daunting, but once learned, easy and fun). The game is still going very strong and word is that once the current two projects are completed, more time can be spent on improving the game with a gold version or PON2. This game is not going away.
See above paragraph on my opinion of Loki!
In a previous thread, someone mentioned that if they had only one game to play PON would be it. I second that thought. There is nothing comparable to it. I believe it is light years ahead of the competition for players who like the more realistic and historical aspects of gaming, yet can still play "what if scenarios" within their game. Sorry, I do like GCIII, although by now, the game is more repetitive in play than the original game so I won't be playing it as much, but for me, it is a fun distraction.
In summation, if you enjoy thinking out turns (and obviously, taking the time to do this) rather than point and clicking in a RTS, and enjoy the strategy involved in preparation for war and in post-war planning, PON is a must have game, IMHO.
-
loki100
- AGEod Guard of Honor
- Posts: 2399
- Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2011 4:15 pm
- Location: Caithness
- Contact: Website Twitter
seathom wrote:...
The DLC's are worth buying but not necessary until after you decide on how you like the game. If you are like me, I want the challenge of the original 1850 GC to learn all the in's and out's of the game. Once you like it, I definitely agree that the 1880 GC is a good buy and then you would probably want to buy all the DLC's to either add more content to your game, be able to play shorter games and/or support a great company like AGEOD.
I believe the game came out in 2011 and it is still going strong for several reasons. 1) The devotion of the developers and testers to this game to improve it and to help satisfy the wishes of their very devoted customers (hello other companies, are you listening????) 2) The devotion of the customers to this game. It is a bit of a tough nut to crack (I HIGHLY recommend reading Loki's AAR on Sardinia-Piedmont, it should probably be an addendum in the manual because it will unlock the mysteries that stump first time players - especially the economic aspects of the game, which are daunting, but once learned, easy and fun). The game is still going very strong and word is that once the current two projects are completed, more time can be spent on improving the game with a gold version or PON2. This game is not going away.
See above paragraph on my opinion of Loki!
....
I'd agree that PoN is truely addictive. I suspect the next patch will end the official development of the game and Pocus has indicated he'll look at adapting some of the speed optimisation from ACW2/EAW.
Some of the scenarios are good. I'd strongly suggest the Boer War (which comes with the base game) as it will give you an insight into how PoN models asymetric warfare ... this is the core of the colonial game as regular European armies struggle in poor terrain when they have to lug around supply wagons etc.
Of the ones to buy, I'd agree about the 1880 scenario. I think the 1850 start is better as the nations are less developed so you can get an overview a bit easier. But 1880 Europe has gone through the national unifications and its downhill to WW1. Also 1850 creates a bit more space for one of the historically less successful powers to grab a seat at the top table. The Franco-Prussian war is good fun too ... its unbalanced but France is hard to finish off if you are Prussia and it'll teach you a lot about army management, sieges and so on.
For a first game (even if you don't take it that far), I'd think of something like Prussia or S-P. France is good in lots of ways but you have some pretty tricky hard wired domestic dissent to deal with till the fall of the Second Empire. US is good if you fancy being left alone but again up to the civil war you face some inbuilt domestic unrest which can be tricky to deal with. Russia is vast, Ottomans are complex and Japan is fun but till the 1880s you are really hamstrung in what you can do.
AJE The Hero, The Traitor and The Barbarian
PoN Manufacturing Italy; A clear bright sun
RoP The Mightiest Empires Fall
WIA Burning down the Houses; Wars in America; The Tea Wars
PoN Manufacturing Italy; A clear bright sun
RoP The Mightiest Empires Fall
WIA Burning down the Houses; Wars in America; The Tea Wars
My (with very limited GC playthrough knowledge):
1. Prussia is fun to play, Economically, I found it on the easy side; it's slow go on the colonization side.
2. Sardinia-Piedmont. Like Prussia, reunification the biggest concern; economically more challenging and colonization more interesting. Good starter choice.
3. France. I heard the dissent issue is challenging, but I believe I read that good use of Military Police and maybe large garrisons will quiet dissent rather well.
4. USA. I played 17 years and the Indian discontent is not too tough (just have good cavalry to chase them down) and the pre-civil war unrest is handled quite easily with just 3 MP's in my game. Good game to start on to get a handle on economics as USA is very forgiving nation to play. The developers added two DLC's (civil war and Spanish-American war) so you shouldn't feel cheated that the USA was not fleshed out historically. Colonization outside of the states requires being aggressive in the beginning, but that's not a bad idea!
5. Russia is vast and requires a lot of looking around if you are not too knowledgeable of it's geography, I played a few years and thought it was very fun. A lot of good opportunities early on - the Crimean War is pretty easy if Turkey doesn't get any help and Russo-Japanese war can trigger very early. Economically, you pretty much start near the beginning of industrialization which if fun and not too hard to play.
6. Turkey. I played around 5-6 years and loved it until Russia was crushing me in the Crimean War and Britain and France sat on their butts. Better defense in Kars and proper withdrawing to punish the attackers cohesion can turn the war around and that is a more advanced technique which inexperienced players may want to avoid at first, but as a second game it has a plethora of opportunities.
7. Japan. If you have a lot of patience then good for a second or third game. If you like the challenge of being very ahistorical and very aggressive, then a good second choice.
8. Britain. I loved playing Britain. I found it less cumbersome than Britain in Victoria 2. Economically, I think it is very challenging. Unless I was misplaying it (very possible), the vast British Empire is a drag on the British economy and I couldn't do as much as I had anticipated (it seems AI Britain has more money to do more than I did). You can start very early with a little colonial war or two, just don't think it will be a walk in the park. Not for the faint of heart, but a fun and challenging nation as a second game!
9. Austria-Hungary. To be honest, I haven't even looked into it. It seems that A-H may be more powerful than historical, making a first military venture winnable. Colonization will require patience.
1. Prussia is fun to play, Economically, I found it on the easy side; it's slow go on the colonization side.
2. Sardinia-Piedmont. Like Prussia, reunification the biggest concern; economically more challenging and colonization more interesting. Good starter choice.
3. France. I heard the dissent issue is challenging, but I believe I read that good use of Military Police and maybe large garrisons will quiet dissent rather well.
4. USA. I played 17 years and the Indian discontent is not too tough (just have good cavalry to chase them down) and the pre-civil war unrest is handled quite easily with just 3 MP's in my game. Good game to start on to get a handle on economics as USA is very forgiving nation to play. The developers added two DLC's (civil war and Spanish-American war) so you shouldn't feel cheated that the USA was not fleshed out historically. Colonization outside of the states requires being aggressive in the beginning, but that's not a bad idea!
5. Russia is vast and requires a lot of looking around if you are not too knowledgeable of it's geography, I played a few years and thought it was very fun. A lot of good opportunities early on - the Crimean War is pretty easy if Turkey doesn't get any help and Russo-Japanese war can trigger very early. Economically, you pretty much start near the beginning of industrialization which if fun and not too hard to play.
6. Turkey. I played around 5-6 years and loved it until Russia was crushing me in the Crimean War and Britain and France sat on their butts. Better defense in Kars and proper withdrawing to punish the attackers cohesion can turn the war around and that is a more advanced technique which inexperienced players may want to avoid at first, but as a second game it has a plethora of opportunities.
7. Japan. If you have a lot of patience then good for a second or third game. If you like the challenge of being very ahistorical and very aggressive, then a good second choice.
8. Britain. I loved playing Britain. I found it less cumbersome than Britain in Victoria 2. Economically, I think it is very challenging. Unless I was misplaying it (very possible), the vast British Empire is a drag on the British economy and I couldn't do as much as I had anticipated (it seems AI Britain has more money to do more than I did). You can start very early with a little colonial war or two, just don't think it will be a walk in the park. Not for the faint of heart, but a fun and challenging nation as a second game!
9. Austria-Hungary. To be honest, I haven't even looked into it. It seems that A-H may be more powerful than historical, making a first military venture winnable. Colonization will require patience.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests