Digging around for a new game (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Forge of Freedom: The American Civil War 1861-1865



Message

rroberson -> Digging around for a new game (6/14/2007 8:25:14 PM)

...long time strategy player looking for a new game. Read a lot about it last night, but not quite sold on it (that 72 dollar price makes me leary of picking it up and then watching it collect dust if I dislike it).


SO is it worth the 70 plus dollars (UPS) that I would have to pay to get it to my house?

I don't mind games with high learn curves (big WITP player here) so that doesn't intimidate me.

Sell me on it :)



Yogi the Great -> RE: Digging around for a new game (6/14/2007 8:35:12 PM)

Well, if your are referring to Forge of Freedom, I believe you can get it for about $49.99.



Mr. Yuck -> RE: Digging around for a new game (6/14/2007 9:41:48 PM)

It is worth it. It's all I've been playing for a couple months now. Do the download and you won't have to pay UPS.



BigJ62 -> RE: Digging around for a new game (6/14/2007 9:49:44 PM)

Strangely enouph this game reminds me of WITP. I like very much how the game plays. Read some of the stickied AARs for details on how the game plays.



General Quarters -> RE: Digging around for a new game (6/14/2007 10:28:29 PM)

I love it. It has a smart AI and gameplay that feels historical to me. I have played it almost every evening since the day it was released -- 7 months ago! That may be a record for me.



dude -> RE: Digging around for a new game (6/14/2007 10:55:56 PM)

Well worth it... the improvements from the latest patch clinched it as perhaps one of my favorite war games (turn based) of all time (i'm actually having a hard time recalling one I really enjoyed more during the last 20 years).  It has a very good historical feel and for me it has just the right amount of detail at each level of play (economic/strategic/tactical).  Most war games have a tendency to be "too" much in one of those categories.  I enjoy Crown of Glory for example (which FoF is based off of) but at times felt overwhelmed by the economic aspects.  FoF tones those down enough but without loosing much while keeping the strategic/tactical aspects of CoG that I enjoyed.

Also with the large set of "options" you can really fine tune it to the level of play you enjoy most... not to mention that the data files are just text files that you can easily modify if want to try your own modifications...

Dude



rroberson -> RE: Digging around for a new game (6/14/2007 11:19:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yogi the Great

Well, if your are referring to Forge of Freedom, I believe you can get it for about $49.99.


59.99 for a physical copy which would include a cherished manual.

plus like 8 more for ups delivery ;).



rroberson -> RE: Digging around for a new game (6/14/2007 11:21:02 PM)

I have read mixed reviews at a board that will go unnamed here regarding the tactical battles. It is the one thing I dreamed WITP had, and FOF does.

How do they play out? Are they fun or is the AI easy to pound through its own stupidity?



cesteman -> RE: Digging around for a new game (6/14/2007 11:27:24 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rroberson

...long time strategy player looking for a new game. Read a lot about it last night, but not quite sold on it (that 72 dollar price makes me leary of picking it up and then watching it collect dust if I dislike it).


SO is it worth the 70 plus dollars (UPS) that I would have to pay to get it to my house?

I don't mind games with high learn curves (big WITP player here) so that doesn't intimidate me.

Sell me on it :)

First off, I'd like to point out that the manual is included with the download. The game has been updated since it was released, so there are some things in the manual that will conflict with the updated patch. I'd also like to point out that the manual has not been updated since the new patch was released, so you will have to review the notes for the patch to see what issues have been updated. I'd suggest downloading the game from Matrix and then saving the manual which is in PDF format to another file so you can review it without having to load the quick menu from the game. Well worth it to purchase btw, everyone here has provided feedback to help improve the game quality and play ability. I would say that the game is well worth buying.



Yogi the Great -> RE: Digging around for a new game (6/14/2007 11:30:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rroberson


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yogi the Great

Well, if your are referring to Forge of Freedom, I believe you can get it for about $49.99.


59.99 for a physical copy which would include a cherished manual.

plus like 8 more for ups delivery ;).


$49.99 at Naval Warfare and the shipping is cheaper too.[8D]

http://www.navalwarfare.org



Drex -> RE: Digging around for a new game (6/14/2007 11:41:25 PM)

Depending on what level you want to play at, the AI is challenging. I'm stuck at the major level myself. the tactical battles are another game all by themselves. You can be good at the strategic yet suck at the tactical. but for me the tactical(detailed combat its called) is the most fun with cavalry, artillery , manuever.



Gil R. -> RE: Digging around for a new game (6/15/2007 1:16:25 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rroberson

I have read mixed reviews at a board that will go unnamed here regarding the tactical battles. It is the one thing I dreamed WITP had, and FOF does.

How do they play out? Are they fun or is the AI easy to pound through its own stupidity?



rroberson,
I just bumped up an old (pre-patch) poll thread that shows that about 75% of FOF's players play detailed battles. (The thread also has some discussion of detailed battles.)

Regarding that board you've been to, it's important to consider how old the comments are -- the recent patch has so many improvements to both the strategic and tactical games that criticisms made before the patch might be obsolete.



rroberson -> RE: Digging around for a new game (6/15/2007 1:51:11 AM)

okay, I'm sold. I will be making the purchase in about an hour (when work ends). I will go digital download only since the paper manual isnt updated...and that 70 bucks was a big factor in me holding off.

I'll let you guys know how it goes.

thanks for your time.



rroberson -> RE: Digging around for a new game (6/15/2007 3:24:13 AM)

ok, purchased. In 90 minutes I will be entering a new genre (for me anyway ;) ).




cesteman -> RE: Digging around for a new game (6/15/2007 7:16:33 AM)

Good luck [:)]



rroberson -> RE: Digging around for a new game (6/15/2007 7:18:23 PM)

so....

I was up till 2 am [X(] playing.

I barely scratched the surface of the game.

of course 4 of those hours was a large battle between my forces and the the evil feds. Good stuff.

Found the tactical battles somewhat unwieldly...once I got all my brigades in a line I kept look for the all button to move them forward as oppose to having to move them one at a time.

Other then that.

Good stuff.

Of course I'm a wreck at work. [:D]



chadandpia -> RE: Digging around for a new game (6/15/2007 7:28:32 PM)

I always lose track of time when playing FoF. I think i've only been sitting there for 30 minutes when i look up and see that 2 hours have passed!! [:D]

Never thought any wargame would beat out how much I loved Uncommon Valour (or witp)but FoF is doing it! [;)]



Gil R. -> RE: Digging around for a new game (6/15/2007 7:33:56 PM)

quote:

Found the tactical battles somewhat unwieldly...once I got all my brigades in a line I kept look for the all button to move them forward as oppose to having to move them one at a time.



There's definitely a group-move function. I don't have the manual handy, so I can't give you the page number, but it's in there.



Ironclad -> RE: Digging around for a new game (6/15/2007 7:57:23 PM)

Its a great game but can end up dominating your waking hours.

Re moving your brigades together. Sometimes at the start of detailed battle you will get the chance to place a complete group in one move by selecting just one unit to place - the others then form around it. (This occurs when a container has good command ratings.) Other options for moving group units together are shown on the advanced menu. This is the button on the right hand side at the top of the battle information box.

The ones used most regularly are the Set Center and Auto Move buttons on the other side at the top of the box. Set Center allows you to fix a group center location when one of the group units is awaiting a move order. Having placed the group center location marker , you then click Auto Move and all the brigades in the division that haven't yet moved will be moved in and around the marker - in a cluster, not in line (or towards it if they haven't enough movement points to get all the way there). Next turn you can then repeat Auto Move or can relocate the Set Center Marker (cancel it by right clicking when you are setting the marker). Even if the marker is still located you can choose to move the group's units in the normal way, one at a time.

Details of these various options can be found in the Intermediate Game section of the Manual pages 121-124.



parusski -> RE: Digging around for a new game (7/7/2007 1:45:28 AM)

YES, YES, YES. This game was slow to take up a lot of my time, but it does. Among FOF, TOAW and SPWAW I no longer work.



Blackadar1 -> RE: Digging around for a new game (7/7/2007 4:04:23 AM)

Until some of the play balance issues are fixed, I'd have to recommend folks to stay clear.  I really regret spending my hard-earned $70 (the price of the hardcopy game) on this one.  



Gil R. -> RE: Digging around for a new game (7/7/2007 5:52:52 AM)

What play balance issues are these? I know of nothing that seriously impairs gameplay.




Blackadar1 -> RE: Digging around for a new game (7/7/2007 6:13:44 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

What play balance issues are these? I know of nothing that seriously impairs gameplay.




http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1487177

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1486853



Overly large Confederate armies seriously impairs gameplay. Unless you play as the South, of course.



Gil R. -> RE: Digging around for a new game (7/7/2007 7:53:53 AM)

Oh, that issue. As you know, we're internally testing some tweaks that would prevent the CSA AI from getting unusually large armies, and hope to produce a patch soon to take care of this.

I should add that the game was in public beta-testing for two months and no one ever pointed out the problem, so while a few players do exhibit understandable concern over this, it does not appear to be a game-breaker for the majority of players -- otherwise the complaint would have come up earlier and been repeated far more often.



Drex -> RE: Digging around for a new game (7/7/2007 4:51:08 PM)

You can beat larger AI armies and conversely you can get beaten by smaller AI armies. It depends on how those armies are built. For my own part, I prefer an opponent who is difficult to beat as it keeps me coming back to the game.



Mus -> RE: Digging around for a new game (7/8/2007 1:22:22 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Blackadar1

Overly large Confederate armies seriously impairs gameplay. Unless you play as the South, of course.


Overly large Confederate armies? The Union should be able to outnumber CSA troops levels by 2 to 1 or more by late 62/early 63 using volunteer musters and conscription properly. Have you tried using those tools to keep up with and exceed the inevitable early war muster on the CSA side?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

Oh, that issue. As you know, we're internally testing some tweaks that would prevent the CSA AI from getting unusually large armies, and hope to produce a patch soon to take care of this.


The number of units they field is fine, the only thing that might be a bit off is the way the AI builds massive amounts of camps instead of spending money in diverse areas the way a human player does. That makes it a bit goofy since all their units tend to be at 100% strength.

What combination of tweaks are you guys looking at? Ive always thought a bit more population cost for reinforcement would be nice, putting in a reinforcement cap based on population and/or increasing the costs of Camps above a certain number, along with whatever you have to change to alter the behavior of the AI which currently seems to go crazy with the camp construction to the exclusion of all else.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rroberson

SO is it worth the 70 plus dollars (UPS) that I would have to pay to get it to my house?

I don't mind games with high learn curves (big WITP player here) so that doesn't intimidate me.

Sell me on it :)


Almost forgot to address the point of the thread.

Absolutely. This game is a huge improvement over Crown of Glory, itself a damn good game, and these kinds of innovative and authentic feeling wargames need to be supported. Dont allow a couple bugs to deter you from supporting a company like Western Civ with your dollars. They support the heck out of their products with patches when needed, they do public betas where knowledgable customers can help mold the final product, and are making big games about big events that get bigger and better with each title thus far.



Gil R. -> RE: Digging around for a new game (7/8/2007 2:34:35 AM)

quote:


What combination of tweaks are you guys looking at? Ive always thought a bit more population cost for reinforcement would be nice, putting in a reinforcement cap based on population and/or increasing the costs of Camps above a certain number, along with whatever you have to change to alter the behavior of the AI which currently seems to go crazy with the camp construction to the exclusion of all else.


Right now, the thing being tested is increasing the chance that camps will deplete the population levels in a city, which reduces the maximum number of brigades that can be raised each year. The downside to that is that it also reduces economic production in a city, so it's not necessarily the perfect "fix." We're still fiddling. After all, we don't want to create a problem that doesn't exist by hamstringing the South's economy further.

The AI does seem to like building its camps. Maybe we'll do something about that. But we first want to change some of the constants before we actually start reprogramming.



Gil R. -> RE: Digging around for a new game (7/8/2007 11:14:14 PM)

Something just occurred to me -- are players who experience these large CSA armies playing with the march attrition/disease rules toggled off? That would certainly lead to bigger armies. (I'm not saying this would be the sole cause, just a contributing factor.)



madgamer2 -> RE: Digging around for a new game (7/9/2007 2:36:57 AM)

WORTY EVERY PENNY! if Civil War is you interest.

Madgamer



Mus -> RE: Digging around for a new game (7/9/2007 4:05:55 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

Right now, the thing being tested is increasing the chance that camps will deplete the population levels in a city, which reduces the maximum number of brigades that can be raised each year. The downside to that is that it also reduces economic production in a city, so it's not necessarily the perfect "fix." We're still fiddling. After all, we don't want to create a problem that doesn't exist by hamstringing the South's economy further.


Now that I think about it more, since it is true that increasing population costs will gimp the economy, the best way of handling it would be by making a "reinforcement cap" above which further camps would do no good and base this cap on the total maximum population of all cities held by each side (ensure the AI wont built "useless" camps as well).

Then beyond that point its just a matter of figuring out which numbers will produce a historical result of each side having more numerous brigades of smaller size as the war goes on due to the impossibility of making good all the losses and the need to carefully spread the limited reinforcements to maximize the number of effective units.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

Something just occurred to me -- are players who experience these large CSA armies playing with the march attrition/disease rules toggled off? That would certainly lead to bigger armies. (I'm not saying this would be the sole cause, just a contributing factor.)



I believe some people are doing a bad job of capturing beaten brigades in the pursuit phase, which allows them to see the upper limits of whatever balance issues there are with the reinforcement numbers.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.375