The Ageod dilemma

The Ageod dilemma (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Civil War II

Message

maxstrike -> The Ageod dilemma (9/26/2013 10:47:39 PM)
Ageod is well known for their post release support of their games. So I always am questioning when to start playing them. Do I immediately start a game or do I wait for a few patches? A game of this complexity will always have bugs, so patching is given. Even early in the patching cycle, Ageod games are fun, but I have constraints on my game playing time. So how do I maximize my Civil War 2 game playing goodness? How do other players handle this dilemma?

Toro12 -> RE: The Ageod dilemma (9/26/2013 10:59:37 PM)
For me, it depends on the company. Ageod, there was no question. This game is very playable now, and while there are a few bugs, I'm considering my first game a refresher and learning the new aspects. And, as you say, I know good support will follow. Other companies... won't even consider Total War any longer for, say 6 months or more.

comsolut -> RE: The Ageod dilemma (9/26/2013 11:48:04 PM)
I understand your dilemma. I started the 1861 campaign as the CSA got to May 1862 and hit the Corps formation bug. Will need to start over, but will wait for the first patch. The time spend on the first campaign was well worth it, even having to start over. Learned a lot and it was fun. But I am waiting for the first patch to start another campaign. A game like this does take a while to get good at, so starting a few times is not wasted. But if you want to invest your time only once for a full campaign, wait for a few patches.

mikeCK -> RE: The Ageod dilemma (9/27/2013 12:54:03 AM)
Why not start over now and use the user created quick fix for the formation bug?

Boomer78 -> RE: The Ageod dilemma (9/27/2013 1:10:13 AM)
Just wait a few more days. Patch should be out soon. Thing is, as good as AGEOD games can be, they rarely look that way out of the factory. Then again, what game is damn near perfect from launch? Not many these days. There's great potential for AACW 2 but for now the bugs list is too much for me so I'm holding off playing it until the patches come. The AI bug is probably the biggest bug of all, unless you're playing PBEM. I'd recommend waiting to anyone who still hasn't pulled the trigger on a purchase. Just wait a few more days and I'm sure with the patch the game will be much improved.

mikeCK -> RE: The Ageod dilemma (9/27/2013 1:19:31 AM)
What's wrong with the AI?

Boomer78 -> RE: The Ageod dilemma (9/27/2013 1:31:35 AM)
There are already a few threads here discussing it. Basically, it's suicidal. It throws everything it has at you immediately without regard to strategy or logistics. In the early war as the Union it's easy to find Johnson or some other southern general besieging towns in Pennsylvania or New Jersey right off the bat. Thing is, once the units move north, they seem to lose steam and just sit in some random northern town. It breaks immersion and makes it easy to recover from the initial onslaught, and most of Virginia and North Carolina go undefended as a result. It's a tad more realistic with AI aggression set WAY down to minimum, but even then the AI considers absurd offensives as its default posture.

vonRocko -> RE: The Ageod dilemma (9/27/2013 4:10:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Boomer78 There are already a few threads here discussing it. Basically, it's suicidal. It throws everything it has at you immediately without regard to strategy or logistics. In the early war as the Union it's easy to find Johnson or some other southern general besieging towns in Pennsylvania or New Jersey right off the bat. Thing is, once the units move north, they seem to lose steam and just sit in some random northern town. It breaks immersion and makes it easy to recover from the initial onslaught, and most of Virginia and North Carolina go undefended as a result. It's a tad more realistic with AI aggression set WAY down to minimum, but even then the AI considers absurd offensives as its default posture. Since this problem has been around forever,and is like this from the first AACW,what makes us think it will be fixed any time soon, if ever?

Ace1_slith -> RE: The Ageod dilemma (9/27/2013 8:10:51 AM)
The AI aggression is really toned down in patch 1.01. that is due to release in few days. Nothing is perfect, but compared to other games, AI is actually now ok. If you still feel after patch that AI is over aggressive, give the AI highest ranking, and lowest aggressivity and detection settings.

mikeCK -> RE: The Ageod dilemma (9/27/2013 6:10:57 PM)
You guys keep saying "soon" but here is the second weekend that we don't have the patch! Argh Anyway, I found that AGEOD AI is quite good if you follow the recommended settings. Turn AI aggressiveness to normal and give a +1 activation bonus with a little better view than you get of the map. Still happens in ACw1 but I don't find the AI too aggressive at all in ROP, Bor or AJE...so I suspect it will be fine. In fact, I own every AGE engine game and the AI really only does that in ACW so hopefully it get fixed....that's why there is hope. Just have to go another weekend without playing. (I have corp fix but still need economy fix and AI aggressiveness to play)

mikeCK -> RE: The Ageod dilemma (9/27/2013 6:14:17 PM)
Nevermind...I see the 1.01 release Candice is out on the AGEOD site!

maxstrike -> RE: The Ageod dilemma (9/27/2013 7:50:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mikeCK You guys keep saying "soon" but here is the second weekend that we don't have the patch! Argh Anyway, I found that AGEOD AI is quite good if you follow the recommended settings. Turn AI aggressiveness to normal and give a +1 activation bonus with a little better view than you get of the map. Still happens in ACw1 but I don't find the AI too aggressive at all in ROP, Bor or AJE...so I suspect it will be fine. In fact, I own every AGE engine game and the AI really only does that in ACW so hopefully it get fixed....that's why there is hope. Just have to go another weekend without playing. (I have corp fix but still need economy fix and AI aggressiveness to play) The problem is AGEOD makes classics, just not classics out of the box. They will probably support this game for at least a year, but I'm not going to wait that long to start playing.

Ace1_slith -> RE: The Ageod dilemma (9/27/2013 9:25:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: maxstrike The problem is AGEOD makes classics, just not classics out of the box. They will probably support this game for at least a year, but I'm not going to wait that long to start playing. The one thing that fascinates me with AGEOD is how long they support the product. They've patched AACW1 up to last year. Other companies would have released 3 expansions out of it[:)]

mikeCK -> RE: The Ageod dilemma (9/28/2013 3:06:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: maxstrike quote: ORIGINAL: mikeCK You guys keep saying "soon" but here is the second weekend that we don't have the patch! Argh Anyway, I found that AGEOD AI is quite good if you follow the recommended settings. Turn AI aggressiveness to normal and give a +1 activation bonus with a little better view than you get of the map. Still happens in ACw1 but I don't find the AI too aggressive at all in ROP, Bor or AJE...so I suspect it will be fine. In fact, I own every AGE engine game and the AI really only does that in ACW so hopefully it get fixed....that's why there is hope. Just have to go another weekend without playing. (I have corp fix but still need economy fix and AI aggressiveness to play) The problem is AGEOD makes classics, just not classics out of the box. They will probably support this game for at least a year, but I'm not going to wait that long to start playing. Well I enjoy all their games right out of the box. All games get better as they are patched. I played ROP and AJE to death for a month after they came out and loved it.

Moltrey -> RE: The Ageod dilemma (9/28/2013 1:03:53 PM)
I have always found that I need to play a lot of "starter" games that I don't get very far with in order to learn the game enough to enjoy the experience. But that might just be me.

elmo3 -> RE: The Ageod dilemma (9/28/2013 2:08:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pdwest64 I have always found that I need to play a lot of "starter" games that I don't get very far with in order to learn the game enough to enjoy the experience. But that might just be me. Not just you. I do the same thing, although after years of alpha and beta testing many games where you have to restart on a regular basis it feels like the normal way to play to me. [;)]

Emmeric -> RE: The Ageod dilemma (10/14/2013 9:45:59 PM)
quote: The AI aggression is really toned down in patch 1.01. that is due to release in few days. Nothing is perfect, but compared to other games, AI is actually now ok. If you still feel after patch that AI is over aggressive, give the AI highest ranking, and lowest aggressivity and detection settings. Toned down? Playing as the Confederacy the AI is raining federal troops all over me. Pre-patch, I was able to breath. Now? I'm losing regions faster than historically possible.

Ace1_slith -> RE: The Ageod dilemma (10/15/2013 8:25:49 AM)
Are you saying AI is now too good?[sm=00000289.gif] Toned down aggression means AI will be more careful not to wonder too much into enemy territory without the retreat path if defeated.

Pocus -> RE: The Ageod dilemma (10/15/2013 10:10:38 AM)
Military AI is probably the hardest thing to code in the AGE engine. People should not expect it to rival Deep Blue (which is only handling 64 regions and 32 units [;)] )

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.90625