how historical? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Napoleonics] >> Crown of Glory >> The War Room



Message

gwgardner -> how historical? (9/11/2006 5:12:27 AM)

Is it possible to play a campaign game and reproduce such historical mega-events as the invasion or Russia - I mean with Napoleon maintaining his hold on most of the continent, maintaining allies, employing allied armies, etc?

In my limited play, things seem to fall apart much too quickly for such a recreation. Also I have a major difficulty just getting a hint of what's going on across the continent, with the fog of war in effect.

So I guess I'm asking: is this game just a series of unending and unrelated battles, or can it truly get one into the feel of the Napoleonic era?



gwgardner -> RE: how historical? (9/18/2006 7:20:49 PM)

Wow, 45 views and no replies.  I kind of take that to mean that no one here has had any experience when playing this game, of recreating such grand campaigns as the Napoleonic Russian invasion.



Southern Hunter -> RE: how historical? (9/19/2006 5:03:44 AM)

I dont play as France so much, so never got to do Russia. Maybe having learned from history, wouldn't try. Pretty much historical type things do happen, but often the diplomacy varies from history quite a bit, as events dictate.




AvalonHillfan -> RE: how historical? (9/23/2006 7:40:31 PM)

Focus isn't on history, but on exploring alternatives. Some of the mod suggestions to the developers concern making the game more historical. I like the ahistorical nature of the game (as France, taking Sardinia from Corsica, as Britain, acquiring all of Italy).



jupiter -> RE: how historical? (9/6/2007 8:13:33 PM)

I do like to play France, but have no desire to recreate the invasion of Russia. I given it a lot of thought becasue I have no problem knocking out Austria and Prussia (for a while anyway) but Russia always remains.

The main problem is supply (is that historical enough for you [;)]. It's either build a LOT of depots (and probably go broke) or watch your army melt away due to attrition. It's also almost guaranteed as soon as you get deep into Russia, you'll get stabbed in the back. I've found the best solution is to sit patiently and wait for the Russians to come to you. The AI is way to aggressive, and they will come at your Grand Armee piecemeal. I've forced Russia into a surrender without ever leaving France.

As to Allies, it's Spain and only Spain. You make get Turkey to ally in the beginning, but they're not much help and will break the alliance later and attack you anyway.

I use Spain as cannon fodder. In a detailed battle, I find a good defensive position, arrange my forces (and put infantry into Line) and let the crazy Spanish bash away at the enemy (like I said the AI is way too aggressive) until they've done extensive damage. They I move out and clean up. Sometimes they even force the enemy into retreat before I've taken a single casualty. Then I just join in on the mop up. [:D]



Russian Guard -> RE: how historical? (9/6/2007 9:15:23 PM)


I have played this game extensively for close to two years now.

More often than not, the game does turn from a historical path and leads to some wild (read: not historical) alliances between nations, with "bizarre" wars flying across the continent (some players like that - not me).

But not always; one of the keys is to remain active diplomatically and try to force some sanity on the AI nations via treaties (if so inclined). For example if I play Austria or Prussia I always try to lock the two into a long-term Alliance to keep them from fighting (at least for a long while). You can use the "Will not ally with" treaty mechanism to try to diplomatically limit strange alliances over time.

But it is a struggle to maintain this, especially if you are playing other than Austria, Prussia or England (as France, why would you? It benefits France to see the other Nations punding on each other)

A post by the designer (EricBabe) just recently, stated that he was looking at modifying the AI for Nations such as Turkey and Spain in order to limit them to more historical behavior, such as limiting A.I. Turkey to border wars and not letting A.I. Spanish troops stomp cross Europe to invade Russia.

I haven't posted a resonse to that yet but I think it's GREAT!






Russian Guard -> RE: how historical? (9/6/2007 9:19:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AvalonHillfan

Focus isn't on history, but on exploring alternatives. Some of the mod suggestions to the developers concern making the game more historical. I like the ahistorical nature of the game (as France, taking Sardinia from Corsica, as Britain, acquiring all of Italy).


I think all of this is possible while still limiting the A.I. to a more historical path. An A.I. Britain might try to accomplish goals that generally reflect Britains historical self-interests; but a player-controlled England can do whatever the heck they want [:D]






vonbert -> RE: how historical? (5/22/2008 12:42:06 PM)

Maybe it would be good to have a:

"Historical campaign" with alliances more strict to historical events.

"other campaign/scenario" as they are now.. cause it would be boring to play "always" the same game.. (such as in Napoleon Campaigns from ageod )

Sure.. first time i saw france allie with England i was a bittle.. astonished.. [:'(] 

But is (more ) fun this way..especialy maybe in PBEM .. as players are free to develop their countries policies.
sure.. i agree that would be nice to have also an "historical campaign/s " with more fixed terms on alliances, and events..




byron13 -> RE: how historical? (3/8/2009 1:45:20 AM)

Agreed.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
5.236328