RE: Persistent AP's (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Conflict of Heroes Series



Message

Lebatron -> RE: Persistent AP's (3/1/2012 6:10:54 PM)

Well as analogies go that one is poor. Yes the rules did change when Storms of Steel came out. In SoS actions became more IGOYOUGO then it was in AtB to begin with. It was a very good change, and since SoS all new editions of CoH will use the new rule.

But to say persistent AP is the bees knees, like you are implying, and that it's a natural evolution we all should embrace shows you really don't understand the nuances of tactical depth that activation provided. Persistent AP is a beginners system. I have always said that, and always will. It's fine to play that way and fun too, but being an advanced player I want the extra depth that activation provides. I enjoyed having to mull over whether or not I should pass and take the AP loss if I had an activated unit. In persistent AP no unit losses any AP if you pass. I enjoyed forcing an opponent into switching units and thus forcing him to lose the AP on it because I presented a more important threat elsewhere. In persistent AP my opponent just reacts in the new location without losing the AP on the other unit. So if that's the case, then why would I bother jumping to a new location on the map to do what is basically a flanking move. I does not hinder my opponent in any way under persistent AP to try this flank. It hardly matters what order you execute attacks in, but under the activation system the order of execution is everything. That is why CoH won awards. My options for cleaver tactics are very much diminished under persistent AP. In my book, anybody who says they think persistent AP is superior just tells me one thing. That they are a CoH novice.

Not all game changes are wise you know. Does Chess need to evolve a simultaneous movement system just to claim it's not stagnant and that it does indeed evolve?



vonRocko -> RE: Persistent AP's (3/1/2012 11:27:15 PM)

Sounds like a very important change to me. Why did they go fix something that wasn't broken. For once, couldn't a pc version match the boardgame? [:@]



Prince of Eckmühl -> RE: Persistent AP's (3/2/2012 2:21:37 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: vonRocko

Sounds like a very important change to me. Why did they go fix something that wasn't broken. For once, couldn't a pc version match the boardgame? [:@]


Actually, I believe that there's more than one version, which is to say that it's a work in progress.

As new product has emerged, the rules have been modified and updated.

One can only assume that changes in content were incorporated based on customer input.

If you're interested in the boardgame, you can visit the company website here:

http://academy-games.com/games/conflict-of-heroes

Edit: I'd also note that Erik Rutins mentioned further up the thread that the changes that have been incorporated in to Eric Babe's computer version were made at the behest of the boardgame designer. If that's not the case, or if I'm misinterpreting Erik's comments, then I apologize.



Gil R. -> RE: Persistent AP's (3/2/2012 4:51:40 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl
Edit: I'd also note that Erik Rutins mentioned further up the thread that the changes that have been incorporated in to Eric Babe's computer version were made at the behest of the boardgame designer. If that's not the case, or if I'm misinterpreting Erik's comments, then I apologize.


No need for apologies: you are absolutely correct. Uwe Eickert, the designer of board-COH, is in favor of the way WCS has implemented AP's in computer-COH. And, to be honest, we wouldn't feel right releasing a computer version of COH that caused him to have reservations.



KEYSTONE07950 -> Persistent AP's (3/2/2012 12:41:29 PM)

Gil R:
How does the implementation of Persistent AP's affect group activations?  Wouldn't the whole concept of Persistent AP's negate the use of group activations?







Gil R. -> RE: Persistent AP's (3/2/2012 6:15:22 PM)

Groups share pools of AP's, as in the original. After an action the AP's of each group member are reduced to the AP level of the one with the fewest AP's. And, in keeping with the persistent AP mechanics one can create and disband groups each turn. Overall, group movements remain useful, and are not "negated."



london23 -> RE: Persistent AP's (3/5/2012 8:20:11 PM)

With persistent AP, is there any need to have the concept of opportunity action in the game? With persistent AP wouldn't you just activate a unit where under the old boardgame rules you might have had to take an oppotunity action and marked the unit as used?



genehaynes -> RE: Persistent AP's (3/7/2012 4:10:23 PM)

I definitely am interested in purchasing this game. I don't own the boardgame, but I've downloaded the rules for AtB and SoS. Am I correct in assuming the PC version will more closely follow the SoS rules, which allow for multiple unit activations.




Gil R. -> RE: Persistent AP's (3/9/2012 6:04:43 AM)

London23,
Yes, you are correct.

genehaynes,
Yes, closer to Sos in this respect.



Erik Rutins -> RE: Persistent AP's (3/9/2012 6:46:08 PM)

Hi everyone,

We've heard the feedback on this and we're going to test a gameplay option that will allow non-persistent APs before release. With any luck, it will be in the release version. Persistent APs are still the main mode of intended play for the computer version of COH, and this decision was made together with Uwe during development, but based on community feedback I'd say the chance is close to 100% that we would look to implement the full original non-persistent AP system as a gameplay mode in the future as well.

We hope that the gameplay option we are looking at now will work out and allow those who want to try a more classic COH AP gameplay to do so at release, though more work would be needed in the future to fully implement the entire non-persistent AP system and all its options.

We also encourage you to give the persistent AP system a try - this has Uwe's full blessing and after playing with with it through months of beta versions, it makes for a great game of COH. In my opinion, especially given that we did this fully together with Uwe, this is a variant of the official COH rules that works well on the computer, where the type of AP tracking that would be more of a chore on the tabletop is not as much of a concern.

I think you'll find the implementation of Fog of War and Line of Sight to also add to the gameplay of COH when played on the computer, without making it something other than COH.

Regards,

- Erik



KEYSTONE07950 -> RE: Persistent AP's (3/9/2012 7:34:05 PM)

Erik:
More than I could have hoped for in the initial release. Thank you.

I will give Persistent AP's a chance upon release.

Haven't been this excited by a PC game in some time.

I asked in another thread, even though the boardgame is not yet release; will Matrix publish Uwe's civil war game? It looks really good.



vonRocko -> RE: Persistent AP's (3/9/2012 7:41:22 PM)

Wow, that is great Erik! You guys are tops!![:)]



Keunert -> RE: Persistent AP's (3/9/2012 7:50:16 PM)

[&o][&o][&o]



Gil R. -> RE: Persistent AP's (3/11/2012 4:10:21 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: KEYSTONE07950
I asked in another thread, even though the boardgame is not yet release; will Matrix publish Uwe's civil war game? It looks really good.


The fact that no one has commented on your questions suggests that it cannot be commented upon.

(I have no comment, but don't like seeing questions ignored.)



KEYSTONE07950 -> RE: Persistent AP's (3/11/2012 1:27:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

quote:

ORIGINAL: KEYSTONE07950
I asked in another thread, even though the boardgame is not yet release; will Matrix publish Uwe's civil war game? It looks really good.


The fact that no one has commented on your questions suggests that it cannot be commented upon.

(I have no comment, but don't like seeing questions ignored.)


Nudge, Nudge………………………………………. I won’t tell anyone. You can comment to me.



Keunert -> RE: Persistent AP's (3/11/2012 4:17:34 PM)

say no more, say no more!



london23 -> RE: Persistent AP's (3/12/2012 5:25:20 AM)

What is the simultaneous play for the game? Does each player make moves at the same time in real time? Or does each player designate a move and then the moves are played out simultaneously like in Combat Mission?



wodin -> RE: Persistent AP's (3/12/2012 10:05:16 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

quote:

ORIGINAL: KEYSTONE07950
I asked in another thread, even though the boardgame is not yet release; will Matrix publish Uwe's civil war game? It looks really good.


The fact that no one has commented on your questions suggests that it cannot be commented upon.

(I have no comment, but don't like seeing questions ignored.)


Your doing what i did when I was a kid..."dad we got your Xmas present today...it isn't a shirt"



e_barkmann -> RE: Persistent AP's (3/12/2012 12:40:22 PM)

quote:

What is the simultaneous play for the game? Does each player make moves at the same time in real time?


It's pretty much IGOUGO but broken down into single actions rather than long turns, so each player only has to wait a few seconds between turns (depending on your opponent of course). The boardgame activation system adds extra depth to the decision making processes for both players.



london23 -> RE: Persistent AP's (3/12/2012 6:00:10 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chris Merchant

quote:

What is the simultaneous play for the game? Does each player make moves at the same time in real time?


It's pretty much IGOUGO but broken down into single actions rather than long turns, so each player only has to wait a few seconds between turns (depending on your opponent of course). The boardgame activation system adds extra depth to the decision making processes for both players.


Okay, that's what I thought it was (like the boardgame version), but then I read in the game discription ("simultanious play") and thought maybe it was somthing more like Combat Mission.



DaveyJJ -> RE: Persistent AP's (3/29/2012 8:42:28 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tide1530

The Civil War map is a beauty for sure.  Like I said over at BGG people should advocate to have the developers make Persistant AP's an optional rule...an easy enough fix in a patch. It was done with extreme assault in the JTCS game.[;)] 


Crickey, that's lovely.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.0625