Gameplay - Early Impressions? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War I] >> Guns of August 1914 - 1918



Message

flintlock -> Gameplay - Early Impressions? (7/24/2007 8:24:34 PM)

The majority of posts I've read from early adopters thus far have been generally focused on the game resolution and interface related comments. I appreciate that it's a little early, though I'd be interested to read comments and early impressions on the gameplay GoA offers.



Copper -> RE: Gameplay - Early Impressions? (7/24/2007 8:47:43 PM)

Like I said in another post...I havent been able to delve too deeply into the game because of its interface...

However, from what I've played it is actually a pretty interesting game. There's tons of events that take place and are reported at the end of each turn. Some pretty cool events as well, not just generic ones. The map is well detailed for its scale. Theres tons of stuff to play around with, national morale, naval battles, technology in general. Like World War 1 however it is pretty slow moving and stagnate, this is to be expected though.

However, the resolution presents a minor problem... most will probably be able to look past. The interface however is completely off putting. The game seems more like work than fun.

If you can look past the interface and resolution problems, I think you'll find a very entertaining World War 1 game, with a wealth of options.

That's the hard for me though...looking past the interface, dont know if I'll be able to.



sol_invictus -> RE: Gameplay - Early Impressions? (7/24/2007 8:59:21 PM)

7th Sommerset's post made the interface sound rather simple. Is it more a matter of unfamiliarity with the Turn/Phase sequence than the actual difficulty in moving units? Does the manual simply not explain the sequence well? I still don't have a good sense on what is so hard about the interface. Resolution is a non-issue for me. I won't have the game until tomorrow, but would like to grasp what the problem is that some people are having.

What are some examples of the events that occur? What effect do they have?



wesy -> RE: Gameplay - Early Impressions? (7/24/2007 9:06:13 PM)

I bought this game with not that much expectation (ok throw stuff at me now ;)), but I've really been pleasantly suprised and am finding the game quite fun and addicting. I am getting used to the UI, but most of the stuff is minor to me. I haven't been much of a "Great War" kind of wargaming guy, but this to me has been one of the best games that I've bought recently.



Copper -> RE: Gameplay - Early Impressions? (7/24/2007 9:13:49 PM)

main problem with the interface is that it's incredibly dated.

When you're used to the streamlined interfaces of today, going back to an interface that harkins back 15 years is not that easy.

However, like I said, most people that really want to play this game will not be deterred by this, and will find a damn good game waiting for them.



Aurelian -> RE: Gameplay - Early Impressions? (7/24/2007 9:37:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Arinvald

7th Sommerset's post made the interface sound rather simple. Is it more a matter of unfamiliarity with the Turn/Phase sequence than the actual difficulty in moving units? Does the manual simply not explain the sequence well? I still don't have a good sense on what is so hard about the interface. Resolution is a non-issue for me. I won't have the game until tomorrow, but would like to grasp what the problem is that some people are having.

What are some examples of the events that occur? What effect do they have?


From my short time of play, it's a list of events that take off map Things like the renaming of St Petersberg. Or Wilson declares the US neutral. Or Japan demands the surrender of..... Or South African troops win this or that



ejs6263 -> RE: Gameplay - Early Impressions? (7/24/2007 11:08:15 PM)

Having been involved in the beta testing, my overall assessment is that the interface actually is relatively simple to grasp although it may be rather confusing to those unfamiliar with the concepts involved. The combination of the strategic and tactical and how they interact may prove rather confusing (as it did to me the first time around). All I can say is give it a chance.

My only suggestion would be for Erik, Frank (and perhaps 7th Somersets or SMK) to put together a small AAR-type play-by-play tutorial on the Forum to introduce players to the game system, something that can be incorporated into the manual. This game is engrossing and an excellent simulation of World War I and personally I would regret to see players turning away from GOA out of frustration. I do agree with the resolution issue which I hope is resolved with a patch.



sol_invictus -> RE: Gameplay - Early Impressions? (7/24/2007 11:08:56 PM)

Copper, I really like an intuitive interface, so I can see how this would be a problem for many people. I am certainly interested in the subject, so I am willing to put in the effort.

Aurelian, so mainly flavor/chrome type of events?

ejs, yes, that would be a real shame. I understand that many people simply want to dive into games that they have just purchased, but this one seems to require a good read of the manual and several practice runs before things click.



*Lava* -> RE: Gameplay - Early Impressions? (7/24/2007 11:26:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ejs6263

My only suggestion would be for Erik, Frank (and perhaps 7th Somersets or SMK) to put together a small AAR-type play-by-play tutorial on the Forum to introduce players to the game system,


This is an excellent idea.

I think most new games should be accompanied by an AAR on or just before release... especially if they are conceptually different or new.

When I was beta testing Mad Minute Games first release "Civil War - Bull Run" I received permission by the designers (Norb and Adam) to publish an AAR just before release, which I did at the wargamer.com.

My overall impression was that it generated a lot of interest and feedback which indicated folks had made positive buying decisions based on the AAR.

For folks to be making buying decisions, at this point, based on the game's interface and/or screen resolution is nothing short of criminal. As wargamers we normally stand firmly on the principle that gameplay is the critical element to the success of a wargame.

Hopefully, as folks get more experience playing the game, we will hear a lot more about gameplay, and that, IMHO, is what it is all about.

Ray (alias Lava)



oldspec4 -> RE: Gameplay - Early Impressions? (7/24/2007 11:41:10 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ejs6263

Having been involved in the beta testing, my overall assessment is that the interface actually is relatively simple to grasp although it may be rather confusing to those unfamiliar with the concepts involved. The combination of the strategic and tactical and how they interact may prove rather confusing (as it did to me the first time around). All I can say is give it a chance.

My only suggestion would be for Erik, Frank (and perhaps 7th Somersets or SMK) to put together a small AAR-type play-by-play tutorial on the Forum to introduce players to the game system, something that can be incorporated into the manual. This game is engrossing and an excellent simulation of World War I and personally I would regret to see players turning away from GOA out of frustration. I do agree with the resolution issue which I hope is resolved with a patch.


An AAR type tutorial is exactly what I need to better understand the game concepts. I have been going to the manual often to learn various aspects of the game but am still confused. However, based on my limited play so far I do think that there is a good game here. The resolution issue is not a factor for me (still using a 19" crt) but can understand the concern of others.



alejes0202 -> RE: Gameplay - Early Impressions? (7/24/2007 11:42:12 PM)

Well...here's someone who has been playing for about 7 hours straight.  This game is a jewel.  It captures the true feeling of WW1.  HQ's are needed to launch offensives--offensives that grind along at a s-l-o-w pace (as they should pre-Blitzkrieg days).  If you're not careful about your use of HQ's, you'll find that your advance quickly runs out of steam, leading to an inability to follow up on breakthroughs or opportunities.  The political rules seem about right.  As the Central Powers player, I put a lot of effort in keeping Italy out of the war.  I delayed their entry into the war for about a year, allowing me to keep the Eastern Front stocked with Austrian troops.  The result was it took Russia a few months later than actually happened historically to capture Przemsyl.  I really like the Economic Points system.  You have to make some hard choices--R&D or stockpile supplies for an offensive?  Invest in arms production or mobilize your navy for a Jutland style battle?  The combinations are endless--and nailbiting.  You must make choices that directly affect your performance on the front lines.  There seems to be some complaining about the interface.  I don't know why.  Once I started using it, I found it very easy, intuitive, and organized just the way it needed to be to make a deep simulation accessible.  The only item I dislike so far is naval combat.  It's just a running script.  That's okay, considering that this is a strategic game.  It would have been nice to have some "eye candy" for naval battles, however.  All things considered, this is one of the best games I've played in years.  I'm enjoying it so much, that although I'm not a Napoleonics fan, I'm going to check out the other games coded by this designer.  This is a terrific game.



SiTheSly -> RE: Gameplay - Early Impressions? (7/24/2007 11:59:44 PM)

I'll add my vote for that. I'm on my third game and its going a lot better. The problem I found was the lack of basic instructions and I'll give an example to explain my point.

I wanted to move the BEF to France obviously as soon as possible to help out in the defence of France. After working out that you have to allocate transports for them I was then confused whether to allocate the transports to the North Sea or the North Atlantic since the Channel connects the two. I my mind I connect transports in the North Atlantic coming from Canada so I put them in the North Sea. Then I thought I'd made sure that I used the North Sea by placing the BEF in London which of course had a major port at this time.

Well I found I couldn't do this from London so frustrated I rechecked the manual - nothing. So thinking about I thought well lets transport them from Southampton which is historically probably where they left from and try allocating transpots to the North Atlantic. So I moved them to Southampton a bit annoyed that the BEF wouldn't make into to France for the initial battles. Then I checked the next impluse to see if I could move them and I could move them to Dunkirk so I did.

I basically lost an impulse so not so bad. I still don't know whether it matters whether its NA or NS but it appears London cannot be used as an embarkment port.

I'm enjoying the game but a few examples could have made a big difference to my initial reaction to the game.

Since the game is not very complicated I not envisaging a huge amount of problems and by waiting a week or two I could have probably let someone go through the issues and posted questions.

By the same token a FAQ would have helped a lot and during testing these question surely must have arisen.

The game is fun though, I squandered my French artillary and now have an ammo shortage. The Germans have broken through on the way and are on the way to Paris, my French Mobilization is having to walk to the front since I squandered my strategic movement and have no idea when it will come back, I thought I would get the same amount each turn (another one for the FAQ). The Eastern front is the saving grace since the Russians are doing real well but have now run out of HQ activation points to push further into Austria/Prussia.

Haven't seen any bugs yet.



Erik Rutins -> RE: Gameplay - Early Impressions? (7/25/2007 12:42:05 AM)

Thanks for this thread folks, I'm glad to see that gameplay is also getting attention amid the resolution/interface comments.



sol_invictus -> RE: Gameplay - Early Impressions? (7/25/2007 12:45:10 AM)

Well this is more like it. Sounds like things are starting to click. I can't wait to get my copy tomorrow.



Bossy573 -> RE: Gameplay - Early Impressions? (7/25/2007 1:00:45 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ejs6263

Having been involved in the beta testing, my overall assessment is that the interface actually is relatively simple to grasp although it may be rather confusing to those unfamiliar with the concepts involved.


I agree. I've been playing SC2 a lot lately (waiting for this game!) and the interface is very different. The more I played it last night, the better it got. Outside of the resolution issue, this game looks like it may be a good one, and certainly very different from anything I've played recently.

PLEASE, any chance on a patch to scale the screen res?????



SMK-at-work -> RE: Gameplay - Early Impressions? (7/25/2007 1:07:02 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Copper

main problem with the interface is that it's incredibly dated.


Really?

I was under the impression it was the latest one available?

does it actually work tho? I couldn't care less about the look of it - as long as it does the job.

Hell I have no problems with the interfaces from 1980's era games as long as they do the job!!

If yuo want artwork go to a gallery!![:D][:D]



typhoon -> RE: Gameplay - Early Impressions? (7/25/2007 1:52:13 AM)

Just started her up for the first time it's one of those games. Going to be alot of learning plenty of frustration and banging your head against a brick wall but already I can see it's going to be worth it. Interface is fine I even like it that the low resolution means I can read the rules and play as I go something I'm not able to do on some of my other recent purchases. Now what's needed is a good book on the First World War so I know what to do and what not to do Can't start with Poland in this one wrong mindset). My first impression would be it's not the prettiest you will ever see but there's plenty inside to make you think that looks arn't everything I think the deeper you delve the more you will be rewarded.



*Lava* -> RE: Gameplay - Early Impressions? (7/25/2007 1:52:31 AM)

Well...

I was going to wait awhile 'cuse I have about 45 irons in the fire...

but what the heck... I bought it, downloaded and had it up and running in 30 mins.

This digital downloading stuff makes buying waaaaaaay too easy.

Ray (alias Lava)



ASHBERY76 -> RE: Gameplay - Early Impressions? (7/25/2007 1:54:32 AM)

I thought games are ment to be marketed for the consumer.I don't know anything about this game.



JD Walter -> RE: Gameplay - Early Impressions? (7/25/2007 2:02:29 AM)

quote:

SiTheSly:

Haven't seen any bugs yet.


Nor have I.

About 10 hours in on the game I'm playing, and have yet to see any hangs, crashes, "stuck commands", etc.

Frank Hunter's usual dedication to his craft. He is a master coder.



stevekten -> RE: Gameplay - Early Impressions? (7/25/2007 2:15:49 AM)

I like the game, but i seem to be spending an awful lot of time getting used to what i can  and cannot due, as stated above a F.A.Q and more indepth manual/tutorial would solve a lot of the complaints about the interface. I have not had the privious experience with  Mr. hunters games so this is all ground breaking for me.



sol_invictus -> RE: Gameplay - Early Impressions? (7/25/2007 2:20:38 AM)

This all sounds like my experience with The Road From Sumpter to Appomattox. That game took a few false starts until the interface and phases made any sense, but after I got comfortable with the engine, it turned out to be a classic.



Procrustes -> RE: Gameplay - Early Impressions? (7/25/2007 4:51:53 AM)


Oh, man - I'm still learning Blue&Gray and now this comes out... where's that credit card???



Erik Rutins -> RE: Gameplay - Early Impressions? (7/25/2007 6:06:28 PM)

Thanks again everyone, we are listening to both the compliments and the criticisms.



Terl -> RE: Gameplay - Early Impressions? (7/25/2007 6:12:47 PM)

Oh, I can hardly wait! I just bought it and dl'd it here at work. Now I have to wait for the day to finish...gah!!! 4 hours to go!!! [:D]



JD Walter -> RE: Gameplay - Early Impressions? (7/25/2007 7:36:46 PM)

quote:

Thanks again everyone, we are listening to both the compliments and the criticisms.


My own appreciations to yourself and Frank, Eric.

Both your company's and Frank's dedication to customer support is well-known, and I am glad to have purchased this game from you.

I believe the criticisms levelled at GoA are more excessive than actually warranted. Although I understand many of the initial reactions (and support the right of the purchaser's to state them), the game itself is an incredible achievement. The design is well-constructed and thought-through. There is an amazing subtlety in the opening moves, not only in how one apportions starting forces, but the tasks and operations he commits his HQ's and infrastructure to. This is true of both sides.

I also note no one has yet posted that the design is broken, or is impossible to win with a given side. This is a testament to Frank Hunter's skills as not only a researcher, but first and foremost a game designer. Frank's always had a good sense of balance.

I am confident GoA will garner more positive comments as players become more familiar with the game and it's great depth.

I have been very satisfied with my purchase, and would not hesitate to recommend this title to other potential players interested in WW 1. It is a fine counterpart to such games as GMT's "Paths of Glory" and Ted Racier's other designs.







06 Maestro -> RE: Gameplay - Early Impressions? (7/25/2007 7:42:56 PM)

I got about 5 hours of play under my belt last night. I have no problem with the UI at all; the choices are clear. I don’t understand the complaints about the UI. What is a little odd is the phase sequence of a turn. This type of a turn is something new for me, so it took a while to sink in. It is simply a way to include things that should occur only once during a turn/time period (R&D, unit construction, diplomacy) and things that occur 2 or three times during a turn (movement, combat). It is actually a brilliant way to set up a turn.

Supply is handled very well through the use of HQ’s. It is very difficult to have a sustained offensive-if you are haphazard with your HQ’s, you will get no where.

The R&D factors make sense; you will have to economize and prioritize as there is no “having it all”, The same goes for unit construction.

Losses are kept track of apparently at any given point of a turn you choose. This is a good tool to help you avoid wasting your army on non productive attacks-or bad defensive positions.

Air and naval forces are represented-I’ve only just begun to toy with them. Their deployment is easy enough-haven’t had contact on the high sea yet.

On the negative side, the manual could have been a little larger-even 2 pages just to better cover the flow of a turn. This would have saved me a little trouble. What’s a “no brainer” for some is “Greek” for others. It should be assumed that all new players have never seen such a system before.

The screen resolution issue is real. I change my monitor (21’’LCD) resolution to get a full screen map. The map and units still look good, but are stretched somewhat. Although it’s not a game breaker for me, it should be taken care of ASAP. It only takes a few seconds to change resolutions-but why should players have to do this? If I do not change the resolution I have about 2 inches of desk top showing all around the game window.

The sounds and music are fine-although I generally mute all sounds for my games (probably would have divorced years ago if I didn’t).

I’ve been a war gamer for about, eh, 40 years. I’ve seen many different types of games-some good, some bad. Guns of August is definitely in the good category-I will certainly get my moneys worth out of this interesting game.

So F. Hunter thanks for a very good game, but don’t slow down yet.





06 Maestro -> RE: Gameplay - Early Impressions? (7/25/2007 8:02:52 PM)

I should have added that the game window can be minumized or move around. I appreciate the ability to move the cursor out of the game. This enables me to fully utilize a second monitor while playing the game. As someone noted above, this allows for having the manual open while playing. When PBEM starts up, this flexibility will be even more important.

I recently purchased a non Matrix game and was unpleasantly surprised to find that I could not move the cursor from the game window or minumize the game. Talk about dated software...



Erik Rutins -> RE: Gameplay - Early Impressions? (7/26/2007 3:07:18 PM)

<bump> for those looking for impressions.



*Lava* -> RE: Gameplay - Early Impressions? (7/26/2007 4:12:51 PM)

Still playing Erik and working my way through the game...

Patience...

Edit: Okay I will give you one thing I really like so far... and that is the heavy FOW and the ability to pierce it using the air recon feature. Quite nice.

Ray (alias Lava)



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.609375