Reduced PP for DOW on Major Powers from 4 to 3

Reduced PP for DOW on Major Powers from 4 to 3 (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars of 1805 - 1815

Message

Mardonius -> Reduced PP for DOW on Major Powers from 4 to 3 (11/13/2008 1:56:32 PM)
In the box version of the game, DoWs cost 3 pp. In the Computer game, they cost 4 pp. This increase derives from Empires in Harm, but in EiH there were many means of being able to DoW for only 2 pp with a Casus Belli so it balanced out. As we have no Casus Belli and reduced DoW in EIANW for the PC, it would seem prudent to revert to the 3 PP cost as the high cost of entering wars really slows things down, (particularly if you get rid of the PP for making free states which had served as a counter weight to some degree.) Please let me know your thoughts

NeverMan -> RE: Reduced PP for DOW on Major Powers from 4 to 3 (11/13/2008 2:42:38 PM)
I'm all up for any part of this game reverting to Empires in Arms.

Marshall Ellis -> RE: Reduced PP for DOW on Major Powers from 4 to 3 (11/13/2008 3:06:44 PM)
When / If it does, it will be in a different scenario with counters and maps for EiA.

Murat -> RE: Reduced PP for DOW on Major Powers from 4 to 3 (11/13/2008 6:31:28 PM)
I like the 3 pp loss as well instead of the 4, Mardonius made a good argument.

delatbabel -> RE: Reduced PP for DOW on Major Powers from 4 to 3 (11/15/2008 12:22:47 AM)
Agree, without the casus belli rules from EiH, the 4 PP DoW makes no sense -- so it should revert to 3.

borner -> RE: Reduced PP for DOW on Major Powers from 4 to 3 (11/15/2008 3:04:44 PM)
the more EiA, the less EiH, the better

timewalker03 -> RE: Reduced PP for DOW on Major Powers from 4 to 3 (11/16/2008 4:57:40 PM)
I am 100% with you Borner. Also it is somewhat disturbing seeing Marshall state "When / If it does, it will be in a different scenario with counters and maps for EiA." That is bothersome seeing that a port to EiA may not be 100% certain in the future. HMMMM!

NeverMan -> RE: Reduced PP for DOW on Major Powers from 4 to 3 (11/16/2008 10:36:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: timewalker03 I am 100% with you Borner. Also it is somewhat disturbing seeing Marshall state "When / If it does, it will be in a different scenario with counters and maps for EiA." That is bothersome seeing that a port to EiA may not be 100% certain in the future. HMMMM! It's quite more disturbing that we are getting the 1812 campaign AHEAD OF Empires in Arms. How messed up is that????? It really doesn't matter how much people say on this forum, Matrix continues to hold their strategy: listen to the few who don't complain about the game and ignore the many who just want this game to be good.

NeverMan -> RE: Reduced PP for DOW on Major Powers from 4 to 3 (11/16/2008 10:36:31 PM)
duplicate, sorry

Marshall Ellis -> RE: Reduced PP for DOW on Major Powers from 4 to 3 (11/17/2008 1:19:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: timewalker03 I am 100% with you Borner. Also it is somewhat disturbing seeing Marshall state "When / If it does, it will be in a different scenario with counters and maps for EiA." That is bothersome seeing that a port to EiA may not be 100% certain in the future. HMMMM! Don't read too much into my "when/if" please! We have not totally discussed the details yet so it's an idea with a few plans around it but I do not have anything official from Matrix yet. There is much to approve. GDW also needs to be involved. I fully intend to add this element but there is a lot of business to discuss yet...

Marshall Ellis -> RE: Reduced PP for DOW on Major Powers from 4 to 3 (11/17/2008 1:21:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NeverMan quote: ORIGINAL: timewalker03 I am 100% with you Borner. Also it is somewhat disturbing seeing Marshall state "When / If it does, it will be in a different scenario with counters and maps for EiA." That is bothersome seeing that a port to EiA may not be 100% certain in the future. HMMMM! It's quite more disturbing that we are getting the 1812 campaign AHEAD OF Empires in Arms. How messed up is that????? It really doesn't matter how much people say on this forum, Matrix continues to hold their strategy: listen to the few who don't complain about the game and ignore the many who just want this game to be good. #1. You don't have the 1812 scenario yet, do you :-)? I would never ignore you Neverman LOL!

NeverMan -> RE: Reduced PP for DOW on Major Powers from 4 to 3 (11/17/2008 11:00:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis quote: ORIGINAL: NeverMan quote: ORIGINAL: timewalker03 I am 100% with you Borner. Also it is somewhat disturbing seeing Marshall state "When / If it does, it will be in a different scenario with counters and maps for EiA." That is bothersome seeing that a port to EiA may not be 100% certain in the future. HMMMM! It's quite more disturbing that we are getting the 1812 campaign AHEAD OF Empires in Arms. How messed up is that????? It really doesn't matter how much people say on this forum, Matrix continues to hold their strategy: listen to the few who don't complain about the game and ignore the many who just want this game to be good. #1. You don't have the 1812 scenario yet, do you :-)? I would never ignore you Neverman LOL! I apologize if I misunderstood you saying earlier that the 1812 was coming soon.

Marshall Ellis -> RE: Reduced PP for DOW on Major Powers from 4 to 3 (11/18/2008 12:38:31 PM)
No apologies here. It actually might come quicker than the classic scenario just because of the business issues involved.

pzgndr -> RE: Reduced PP for DOW on Major Powers from 4 to 3 (11/18/2008 1:08:02 PM)
quote: GDW also needs to be involved. Do you mean ADG and Harry Rowland? It would be nice to see some comments and insights here from those guys occassionally. After all, if Harry himself says such and such change or enhancement is a good improvement to the original game, or not, then that would carry a lot of weight in the development of this officially licensed computer version.

Marshall Ellis -> RE: Reduced PP for DOW on Major Powers from 4 to 3 (11/18/2008 11:10:34 PM)
ADG, Correct! Arrrrg! When Worlds Collide LOL! I agree.

pzgndr -> RE: Reduced PP for DOW on Major Powers from 4 to 3 (11/19/2008 12:32:42 PM)
Not the Worlds Collide Theory! quote: George: Ah, you have no idea of the magnitude of this thing. If she [Susan] is allowed to infiltrate this world, then George Costanza as you know him, ceases to exist! You see, right now, I have Relationship George, but there is also Independent George. That's the George you know, the George you grew up with -- Movie George, Coffee Shop George, Liar George, Bawdy George! Jerry: I love that George. George: Me too! And he's dying, Jerry! If Relationship George walks through this door, he will kill Independent George! A George, divided against itself, cannot stand!* [:D]

Marshall Ellis -> RE: Reduced PP for DOW on Major Powers from 4 to 3 (11/19/2008 12:52:43 PM)
LOL!

iamspamus -> RE: Reduced PP for DOW on Major Powers from 4 to 3 (11/19/2008 1:36:21 PM)
I'd like both. EIH 5.0 and EIA... [:D] Jason quote: ORIGINAL: borner the more EiA, the less EiH, the better

delatbabel -> RE: Reduced PP for DOW on Major Powers from 4 to 3 (11/20/2008 9:56:36 AM)
I actually quite like the casus belli rules from EiH. They allowed some DoWs to only be 2 PPs. However without them, a DoW needs to go back to the EiA method of 3 PPs. It would be nice if casus belli could be implemented as an optional rule though.

Marshall Ellis -> RE: Reduced PP for DOW on Major Powers from 4 to 3 (11/20/2008 12:35:06 PM)
Is 3 the number? I can change this easily for 1.06

Mardonius -> RE: Reduced PP for DOW on Major Powers from 4 to 3 (11/20/2008 12:54:42 PM)
I reckon 3 should be the number. If you include an option for Casus Belli rules later then it could go to -4 or -2 with a Casus Belli. This is probably a good idea. But until then, 3 should be the number.

Marshall Ellis -> RE: Reduced PP for DOW on Major Powers from 4 to 3 (11/20/2008 2:41:49 PM)
"3" shall be the count! Not 2, nor 4 BUT "3" shall be the count! Actually we could still implement a Casus Belli and charge 1 or 2. IMO, I always thought that a Casus Belli should exist for called allies. My reasoning was they were upholding their end of the allied agreement.

iamspamus -> RE: Reduced PP for DOW on Major Powers from 4 to 3 (11/20/2008 8:07:43 PM)
Concur...but we can't have any connection to EIH, now...[:'(] Is that an African or a European Swallow? Jason quote: ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis "3" shall be the count! Not 2, nor 4 BUT "3" shall be the count! Actually we could still implement a Casus Belli and charge 1 or 2. IMO, I always thought that a Casus Belli should exist for called allies. My reasoning was they were upholding their end of the allied agreement.

Mardonius -> RE: Reduced PP for DOW on Major Powers from 4 to 3 (11/21/2008 12:31:04 AM)
That concept makes sense to me... Just the "Just War" parameters should be discussed before hand, as there are multiple convolutions... quote: ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis "3" shall be the count! Not 2, nor 4 BUT "3" shall be the count! Actually we could still implement a Casus Belli and charge 1 or 2. IMO, I always thought that a Casus Belli should exist for called allies. My reasoning was they were upholding their end of the allied agreement.

Marshall Ellis -> RE: Reduced PP for DOW on Major Powers from 4 to 3 (11/21/2008 11:52:46 AM)
This has been changed in 1.06 (Just the 4pp moved to 3pp).

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.9101563