1.04c Beta impressions

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

1.04c Beta impressions

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Age of Muskets] >> Birth of America 2: Wars in America >> 1.04c Beta impressions

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

1.04c Beta impressions - 1/29/2009 7:32:12 PM

GShock

Posts: 1245
Joined: 12/9/2007
From: San Francisco, CA - USA
Status: offline

I was not surprised of the results this patch gives to the game.

I started a few acres of snow campaign again and all problems i pointed out were solved (yes including ship repairs). The game seems to be very stable and the AI is now a much more credible opponent. I am playing standard difficulty settings, the least invasive activation rule and a medium FOW advantage on the AI and I can see the french AI is not risking during winter, it falls back in clever defense pattern with regular troops while constantly raiding forts, cities and indian villages. It also uses the ships smartly enough to raid the british commercial lanes where the sea warfare has been for the past 6 months a cat and mouse game. I do beat them with superior firepower but i can never inflict so much damage as to end the french fleet threat forever because they always disappear before i can intercept them.

This is definitely the way to go.

The AI still needs to be taught some tricks, specifically related to the indian villages. Natives destroy forts, raid countryside but can't capture settlements. The indians are ok with capturing indian villages but they don't destroy them and this is a calamity for the surviving tribes will go back there for winter quarters whereas destroying them would eliminate this threat. Also, it doesn't look like the AI actually wants to defend its own villages and this gives the player a distinct advantage for it's ultra easy to destroy its villages and remove those tribes...since the AI doesn't do the same, their raiders shrink in numbers turn after turn.

There still is an event involving the second british general who gets recalled to England (not Braddock but the guy who gets recalled next). His replacement is already on the map when the event takes place saying he arrives in New York. Troops arrive in NY but the guy is already on the map. Sorry but i dont remember his name right now...might be Abercombe but am not sure. An easy solution could be to just remove his name from the evt description so that only the troops arrive there. Of course to make things properly according to history (and i am total inept in this historical period as of this day), that general should be removed from play and actually arrive with his troops in NY when the evt takes place.

Minor imprecisions to fix while this is becoming the grand game i always thought it would be.
Congrats to the team, I am really enjoying it now!

EDIT: General Amehrst for example is said to arrive in Nova Scotia but he arrived in Philadelphia.
EDIT2: General Putnam arrives in Albany but supposed to arrive in Charlestown.

< Message edited by GShock -- 1/30/2009 5:48:44 PM >

_____________________________

How long will you pretend you can't do anything about it? Support www.animalsasia.org

Post #: 1

RE: 1.04c Beta impressions - 1/31/2009 7:18:30 PM

GShock

Posts: 1245
Joined: 12/9/2007
From: San Francisco, CA - USA
Status: offline

I managed to take notes this time about the message imprecisions. I also found a bug which has been reported as per standard procedure.
The imprecisions mentioned in the previous message are then (and adding to the aforementioned message):

AUG 1756 New Regiments and Supplies arrive in Nova Scotia / these troops were delivered in Boston (where they are much more useful indeed)
FEB 1757 General Abercomy arrives with reinforcements / This general has been on map for months already.

I have received a pm suggesting a slight change in the mechanics so as to help the AI actually destroy enemy indian tribe villages. I ll let the man post them in public if he wants. One of the 3 is very suitable and easy to implement.

_____________________________

How long will you pretend you can't do anything about it? Support www.animalsasia.org

(in reply to GShock)

Post #: 2

RE: 1.04c Beta impressions - 2/1/2009 10:25:32 AM

JastaV

Posts: 97
Joined: 9/20/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: GShock

The AI still needs to be taught some tricks, specifically related to the indian villages. Natives destroy forts, raid countryside but can't capture settlements.

Indians cannot capture settlements: this is a major weakness in some scenarios. For example in "Few acres of Snow" the french indian guerillas in the south is useless for that reason. British player can even ignore it in so far no damage arise till the time irregular indian forces cannot occupy or claim control of settlements.

HAVE A SUGGESTION AS REGARD!
1. Most colonial settlements could be replaced with forts: indian and irregular forces can destroy them.
2. Any Fort (as settlement) should host a colonist unit: this is a quite weak units that when destroyed is worth some VP.

So the British player, ( in the "Few acres of Snow" scenario) should be forced to recall forces from major military operations in the north to protect settlements, (Forts) in the south.

Perhaps it could be worth to experiment that in some small scenario. (MAY be by a modding attempt?)
1. We have to delete Small Settlements in cities file.
2. We have to edit, (add) forts in setup file and eventually add colonist units into the same file.
3. In the Units/Models files VP for eliminated colonist unit could be re-worked, (increased).
I suppose a 3rd party volunteer, with some practive od AGEod files could take charge of the experiment........
BTW is the last uploaded WIA DB updated to present beta patch?

Then it could be possible to associate the actual number of colonist units on the map per turn to an increase or decrease of the NM value: when a side lost some colonist units its NM will start dropping!
Guess this one is more complex to manage: possibly changes to game hard codes will be needed.

(in reply to GShock)

Post #: 3

RE: 1.04c Beta impressions - 2/2/2009 11:09:41 PM

GShock

Posts: 1245
Joined: 12/9/2007
From: San Francisco, CA - USA
Status: offline

Well, apart from these minor glitches, i think this is the best patch so far...especially from the AI point of view.
There is a very serious problem however i spotted this morning regarding sieges with the besieged AI actually gaining strenght during an uninterrupted year (more or less) of siege. This might account with the overly long siege problems but in my opinion a siege is done to starve the besieged so the time it takes is ok...what's not ok is that they basically don't starve...on the contrary in some occasions they gain strenght and i am not sure if this is due to the MC never going above 95% (which could allow enemy troops to sneak in during the siege) or to the fact some structures keep building supplies while under siege. Top priority to be checked imo.