RE: Tactical battles (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> English Civil War



Message

xj900uk -> RE: Tactical battles (5/18/2017 9:10:10 AM)

it seems that the Royalist have more options than the Parliamentarians, at least for the first couple of years of the war.
Also, Charles I is a better military leader than Essex? WTF? He was a blundering and tactless at the best of times!
And Rupert was, in Clarice's own words, 'The Greatest Cavalry Commander the world has ever known.' Rupert was so confident of victory, he would ride in at the head of his 'spear of horse' (as he so delicately called them!) wielding nothing but his pet poodle...



DEB -> RE: Tactical battles (5/22/2017 6:46:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: xj900uk

it seems that the Royalist have more options than the Parliamentarians, at least for the first couple of years of the war.


Reasonable ( IMHO ).

quote:

Also,Charles I is a better military leader than Essex?


He did have advisers. I think his effectiveness depends ( or should do ) on which ones are with him...

quote:

And Rupert was, in Clarice's own words, 'The Greatest Cavalry Commander the world has ever known.'


This was believed to be true by both sides in the ECW for some time...



theprisoner -> RE: Tactical battles (5/23/2017 3:21:08 PM)

One of the great what-if questions concerns the Earl of Lindsey, who by seniority was the commander of the King's army, who brought it from Shrewsbury to confront Essex at Edgehill and who, after a argument about battlefield tactics, resigned his command, fought with his infantry in the front and was killed.

We have no idea how things would have gone had Lindsey continued to command but it is likely that if he had, the King would have followed his lead and stayed out of day-to-day military decisions.



xj900uk -> RE: Tactical battles (5/23/2017 6:37:36 PM)

Agreed. Lindsey was definitely the brains behind the Royalist army, he was easily the equal of Essex.
The Royalists tended to do better on the battlefield if Charles didn't make any of the tactical decisions.
There should be a 'card option' for Lindsey resigning after arguing with Charles if particular circumstances or an important battle is about to be fought.



Jabba -> RE: Tactical battles (5/23/2017 9:27:29 PM)

Seeing as this appears to have become the thread where people point out various errors with a view to future improvements, may I point out that the possessive form from Essex is not "Essex'", as appears repeatedly throughout the tutorial, but "Essex's".

This repeated grammatical error in the introduction to the game immediately gives the impression that it has been sloppily and hastily put together - which may be unfair but this is the first impression. I also noticed that Wycombe was misspelt several times as "Wycombie".



Leibst -> RE: Tactical battles (5/24/2017 5:03:25 AM)

Jabba, that is my fault, I saw the error with Essex's and correcte it in a lot of places but as I see, not in all of them. WIll fix it. Same regarding Wycombe.



altipueri -> RE: Tactical battles (5/24/2017 7:50:23 AM)

To be fair to Leibst who made this game and is Spanish, he apparently asked some English friends to check the text for him and they would appear to have let him down.

Those who have bought Ageod games before and like them will have confidence that after some patches they will have a game that produces a lot of enjoyment and historical immersion.

To those who have not tried Ageod games and have been put off purchasing by reading some of the comments on this forum I would say that there is still available a free demonstration version of the Ageod game on the Russian Civil War - "Revolution Under Siege". This includes a tutorial and a short scenario that could give you an introduction to the Ageod system, albeit an earlier incarnation. It is available from this part of the Ageod site http://www.ageod.com/products/396/downloads/




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.8125