strategic/operational/tactical level

[marek1978]

Hi guys.
I am ageod heavy user – since the first Birth of America.
I own all games and will definitely buy new one.

There were number of great things about those games – flavour of history, events, great units, PBEM fun just to name few.
One of the things I reale loved was operational level wargaming – with loads of cunning moves, hidden strategies and tough qiestions – how to organize one army, how to set the posture and how to march? Will the opponent decide to flank or push forward.
That spirit was great in World War One games and in Revolution under Siege and most of all in Civil War Series – the games with 2 weeks per turn and dense region scale but it was present and pleasant even in Wars of Succesion as well.

Yet in the new game regions are spare and turns are long. But there is tactical dimension present.

My question is whether it is going to be a general direction? Are we not going to see any more operational level games?
I was wondering – would it be possible to have a grand strategy layer – with long 6 – 24 monts turns – when one decide big strategy/ building/diplomacy things – on grand region/theatre level – while then has operational fun on 2/4 weeks bases?
I know it might sound like urealistic dream yet I wanted to ask – especially that in old ageod engine – there were theatre and as far as I understand there will be a possibility to group provinces in to region in new one – just to avoid micromanagement?

[Ace]

I watched Twitch stream of Empires and it seems Empires will be more Empire building games vs strategy/tactical games of previous titles. I feel that we can't have it all. If they tried to put it all in one game, it could end up a mess. Empires feels like a Civ/TW type of game.

[marek1978]

I watched Twitch stream of Empires and it seems Empires will be more Empire building games vs strategy/tactical games of previous titles. I feel that we can't have it all. If they tried to put it all in one game, it could end up a mess. Empires feels like a Civ/TW type of game.

thats clear for me, yet i wonder whether it is direction for future ageod games

[wosung]

Don't forget it's the very first Ageod game with the new engine.

I'd think for future games the scales of space and time (regional seize and turn span) may vary, depending on the game subject.

This game is about "our" antique world. So it's better to compare it with AJE rather than with ACW, TEAW or RUS.

And I really like the scales of FOG:Empires. We'll have:

1. a stategic layer not so different from AJE,
2. two possible tactical layeres (FOG:Empire, FOG2),
3. all the empire building stuff,
4. a long time span & a vast map containing practically "our" whole antique world.

AJE is lacking 2. & 3. & 4. And somehow I felt a tactical layer was really missing, as well as the empire building stuff.

Plus, it's a new engine and Pocus already posted that turn resolution is much faster than with the old engine. This is great news.

Last but not least, historical games in a broader sense really are popular when they are focussed on Empire building and/or add a tactical layer. Think of Total War, Civilization, or Ultimate General Civil War. Thus, FOG: Empire is a big chance for Ageod. If they are successful we are getting more historical games.

[Baris]

I watched Twitch stream of Empires and it seems Empires will be more Empire building games vs strategy/tactical games of previous titles. I feel that we can't have it all. If they tried to put it all in one game, it could end up a mess. Empires feels like a Civ/TW type of game.

thats clear for me, yet i wonder whether it is direction for future ageod games

I think its up to future scenario designers . AI and turn processing is good. All it may need good scenario designs for future games like it has been in the past such as in RuS, CW'2, RoP, AJE, Espana etc.. for more operational and maybe more factions for these well known games.

[loki100]

I don't think anything is set.

The new game focusses on grand/long term strategy, taking a point in ancient history where almost any power could have charted a route to dominance - or some sort of stalemate.

But there is no reason why you couldn't remake say Rise of Prussia using this engine, even better it would be easier to intergrate with the WiA scenario - a key gain is the British reinforcements can only be used once .. on the Rhine or to shore up N America. That alone is a significantly interesting option.

So my feeling is the first release potentially does lose some of the detail and focus of the traditional AGEOD games but you gain a long time period and a dynamic world. But no reason why it couldn't be used for a wide range of time scales and focus.

[Baris]

I don't think anything is set.
But there is no reason why you couldn't remake say Rise of Prussia using this engine, even better it would be easier to intergrate with the WiA scenario - a key gain is the British reinforcements can only be used once .. on the Rhine or to shore up N America. That alone is a significantly interesting option.

Excellent idea to merge past games with different geography but same war. Unless overall more well known grand strategic conflicts dictate designs.

[Baris]

Don't forget it's the very first Ageod game with the new engine.

I'd think for future games the scales of space and time (regional seize and turn span) may vary, depending on the game subject.

This game is about "our" antique world. So it's better to compare it with AJE rather than with ACW, TEAW or RUS.

And I really like the scales of FOG:Empires. We'll have:

1. a stategic layer not so different from AJE,
2. two possible tactical layeres (FOG:Empire, FOG2),
3. all the empire building stuff,
4. a long time span & a vast map containing practically "our" whole antique world.

AJE is lacking 2. & 3. & 4. And somehow I felt a tactical layer was really missing, as well as the empire building stuff.

Plus, it's a new engine and Pocus already posted that turn resolution is much faster than with the old engine. This is great news.

Last but not least, historical games in a broader sense really are popular when they are focussed on Empire building and/or add a tactical layer. Think of Total War, Civilization, or Ultimate General Civil War. Thus, FOG: Empire is a big chance for Ageod. If they are successful we are getting more historical games.

I generally remember the names but I think I don't remember you in any beta testing. Did you enjoy previous Ageod games in pbem?

[wosung]

My last post wasn't about beta testing. Just about FOG: Empire infos already kown from the Twitch-Stream.
I do play most Ageod games, but I'm sorry to say that PBEM is not my cup of tea.
Did a little (beta) testing for Ageod in the past. Do so now as well.

[Tamas]

Empires does have more strategic and (slightly more) tactical focus than older Ageod games, and consequently there are slightly less options to micro-manage operational detail.

However, often this simply switches the decision-points elsewhere. For example, we don't deal with the construction of supply depots, but your supply level is derived from food production of the nearby area, something that you can directly set under normal circumstances, as you'll be drawing enemy regions under your control during your advance.

In terms of future games, well we first want to make this one as great a strategy game as we can,, then we have plenty of plans how to grow on what we have/will have in Empires.

Just Empires itself has a lot of systems that can easily be a foundation to a series of games just like Birth of America was in its own time. And Slitherine's engine that Ageod can now utilise has been made (and being constantly improved) with war and strategy games in mind. You already see how well it works for Field of Glory (a tactical game) and Slitherine has several games in development of different scales and timeframes. So we have more versatility in our toolset than ever before.

[Stratman]

Good news!
Tamas, thanks a lot for this post.
I guess all you have wrote above is extremely important for all AGEod players.
There is not so much information at the moment but many more questions.

[veji1]

Regarding the tactical game, I would have liked to have something akin to what the old computer game conquest of the new world where you had simplish but fun battles in the scheme of a civ type of game set in the new world. It would be nice to have that as a non-FOG layer rather than either big tactical battles à la FOG or automatic ones.

[Tamas]

Good news!
Tamas, thanks a lot for this post.
I guess all you have wrote above is extremely important for all AGEod players.
There is not so much information at the moment but many more questions.

We are planning to have regular posts from Pocus (mainly) explaining details about Empires. Stay tuned.

[marek1978]

Empires does have more strategic and (slightly more) tactical focus than older Ageod games, and consequently there are slightly less options to micro-manage operational detail.

However, often this simply switches the decision-points elsewhere. For example, we don't deal with the construction of supply depots, but your supply level is derived from food production of the nearby area, something that you can directly set under normal circumstances, as you'll be drawing enemy regions under your control during your advance.

In terms of future games, well we first want to make this one as great a strategy game as we can,, then we have plenty of plans how to grow on what we have/will have in Empires.

Just Empires itself has a lot of systems that can easily be a foundation to a series of games just like Birth of America was in its own time. And Slitherine's engine that Ageod can now utilise has been made (and being constantly improved) with war and strategy games in mind. You already see how well it works for Field of Glory (a tactical game) and Slitherine has several games in development of different scales and timeframes. So we have more versatility in our toolset than ever before.

i did't want to sound complaining or anything
i love and admire your work guys
i was just wondering whether it is a general turn and future games would be more - strategy and tactics

( my dream obviulsy would be - strategic and operational for which i loved Athena)

[Stratman]

We are planning to have regular posts from Pocus (mainly) explaining details about Empires. Stay tuned.

Oh! For sure!

[Searry]

I am hoping for extended support for the titles coming in the future.

[RebelYell]

Empires does have more strategic and (slightly more) tactical focus than older Ageod games, and consequently there are slightly less options to micro-manage operational detail.

However, often this simply switches the decision-points elsewhere. For example, we don't deal with the construction of supply depots, but your supply level is derived from food production of the nearby area, something that you can directly set under normal circumstances, as you'll be drawing enemy regions under your control during your advance.

In terms of future games, well we first want to make this one as great a strategy game as we can,, then we have plenty of plans how to grow on what we have/will have in Empires.

Just Empires itself has a lot of systems that can easily be a foundation to a series of games just like Birth of America was in its own time. And Slitherine's engine that Ageod can now utilise has been made (and being constantly improved) with war and strategy games in mind. You already see how well it works for Field of Glory (a tactical game) and Slitherine has several games in development of different scales and timeframes. So we have more versatility in our toolset than ever before.

Managing logistics and the supply system was one of the best features of old AGEOD games, you cannot understand military history of any period or conflict without the restrictions and planning related to logistics.

Part of the tabletop crowd focus on battle tactics and are not really interested in how the battle came about in the first place, ageod veterans are interested in how the battles will look like before they happen.

Best is to make separate games for these two crowds, BOA, ROP, ACW and WON in one week time scale, realistic logistics, historical OOBs and detailed maps are what the veterans want.

[Pocus]

I believe the supply and logistic code of Empires is very close in spirit (and implementation) to the AGE engine code used in WIA. Except something like 5x faster I would say.

You'll get logistic in Empires, that's what I say. Units need to be fed, and can draw supply from their region or friendly adjacent ones. Ships can replenish from the coast and you even get a semi-nerdy 'conversion ratio' that can be improved with the right buildings or ruler to optimize your logistic (it sounds suspiciously close to the conversion mechanism of 'supply chits' from WIA ).
Plus pillage, foraging, blockaded harbors, besieged cities... Empires is not Risk or Axis and Allies (no offense intended to them)...
And if there is no supply lines, that's because it don't match the period. There is no supply line either in WIA or AJE...

[vaalen]

Thi ssupply system does sound similar to AGE, which worked perfectly for the period. In AJe, supply was a huge, and challenging issue, especially when campaigning in less developed area, like Hispania.

The more I hear about this game, the more excited I am getting about it. Any estimate of a release date?

[Pocus]

Difficult to say, beta has started and depending of feedback, it can varies a bit. 2019... can't say more.

[marek1978]

Empires does have more strategic and (slightly more) tactical focus than older Ageod games, and consequently there are slightly less options to micro-manage operational detail.

However, often this simply switches the decision-points elsewhere. For example, we don't deal with the construction of supply depots, but your supply level is derived from food production of the nearby area, something that you can directly set under normal circumstances, as you'll be drawing enemy regions under your control during your advance.

In terms of future games, well we first want to make this one as great a strategy game as we can,, then we have plenty of plans how to grow on what we have/will have in Empires.

Just Empires itself has a lot of systems that can easily be a foundation to a series of games just like Birth of America was in its own time. And Slitherine's engine that Ageod can now utilise has been made (and being constantly improved) with war and strategy games in mind. You already see how well it works for Field of Glory (a tactical game) and Slitherine has several games in development of different scales and timeframes. So we have more versatility in our toolset than ever before.

Pous, Tamas i grealty admire your work

What i wanted to know is whether it would be possible or cool to have in future games with new engine solution that would have stretegic layer for provinces and operational level for regions

What i understand is thet field of glory allows making decisions on strategic level for group of regions

So maybe, for example in some future games lets say italy would be divided in 12 provinces ( like grand regions in previous ageod games) and lets say 70 smal regions

Regions would be purely for moiving armies. To control one privince would need to grap cities and most of small regions of that Grand Region thing.
So to for example to control Lombardy one would need to captture region of Milano and Mantove.
And then player would be able to make decisions and have income from the Grand Region.
Strategi decision turn would be every 2/3 monts while operational fighing g would be done for example in 2 weeks turns.

I know it is for future devalopment and things can change, yet i just think it would be great to have grand economy/poltics/diplomacy on grand level every couple of turns and fighting in beetwen in shorter turns

Just an idea

[Tamas]

Sorry for the late reply!

It is definitely an interesting idea. Possibly a bit challenging to make it easy to oversee and manage for the player, but it would be an interesting solution for games set in later historical eras.

[marek1978]

Sorry for the late reply!

It is definitely an interesting idea. Possibly a bit challenging to make it easy to oversee and manage for the player, but it would be an interesting solution for games set in later historical eras.

I was thinking it might actually help with devalopment of the games as there wont be need to colect historical detailed information about all regions but only about GrandRegions/Provinces..
Small regions (operational regions) would be just need to have geographical data ( and perhaps level of supply but that couls be as well on the Province scale)

[czert2]

Just saw screenshots and i must say, game looks very promising, and i just hope that devs will allow player a lot of freedom with interesing leaders development, with rndom events/situations.
Similiar to excelent old Tw series games - medival, rome 1 and not "streamlined" versions 2 with fixed traits and other thing.
I loved that in 1 your leader can aqurie a lot od different items, advisors and traits, but in 2..it was extremly limited..and boring.