February Update

February Update (Full Version)

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

Message

Marshall Ellis -> February Update (2/5/2005 7:16:38 PM)
Hey all: Well we've implemented a small development pause to allow the testers to review any design issues that might detract from the game. As you know, we found that the TMR was and is critical to game play thus we're adding it. We're now allowing our testers to look for other hidden gotchyas! Apologies but please understand that this original engine design was NOT EiA and was simply "The Wars of Napoleon" and did not comply with EiA / EiH rule sets thus TMR was not in the system. I cannot honestly tell you the severity of this impact yet! We're optimistic that it is minimal but I was optimistic before the TMR issue was found so I'm probably not the best source of good judgement on these types of isses. I'm deep inside 250,000 lines of code which makes it a bit difficult to see all of these things! Can't be that bad since the EiA rule book is only 47 pages right? LOL! Thank you

CICERON -> RE: February Update (2/5/2005 8:23:27 PM)
"TMR"? What is it please?[&:]

Wandering Eye -> RE: February Update (2/5/2005 8:36:38 PM)
TMR = tactical maximum rating. The TMR of the leader in charge dictates how many corps he can command without being penalized in tactical rating, and is used in assorted rules specifying how much he can go over, as well.

Freddy Fudpucker -> RE: February Update (2/7/2005 3:28:42 PM)
Though we may be dissapointed that there is again a delay, we very much appreciate being kept well informed of how things are going. Thanks for posting the upate Marshall.

pooroldflick -> RE: February Update (2/7/2005 8:13:13 PM)
good to hear that the TMR was added. i do pitty the position you guys are in. you're dealing with a bunch of people who have played this game for years and you're forced to please them. i started playing the game almost 20 years ago when i was 10, so it's very much a part of me. plus you're dealing with a game that takes 100's of hours to finish the grand campaign, so it only makes sense the play testing takes a while. but it'd be better for the release to be "right" than to miss a few important rules. very much worth the wait. i know several people that can't wait to buy it. flick ---- http://www.eagertofly.com

Treefrog -> RE: February Update (2/8/2005 3:54:34 AM)
Most people have a positive time preference for everything, including hobbies. When I began wargaming in 1959 the entire wargame library was basically one game: Avalon Hill's Gettysburg. Thereafter Avalon Hill released two new games per year. Those two releases constituted the entire addition to the library of military simulations for the year. We were absolutely elated and counted ourselves fortunate as the new games entered the pipeline: Tactics II, D-Day, Stalingrad, Midway, Waterloo, etc., all now classics (as in modern gamers probably never heard of them). A good simulation is like a good woman: don't rush'em. [;)]

Hanal -> RE: February Update (2/8/2005 2:56:42 PM)
Treefrog...you forgot "Kriegspiel". and "Blitzkrieg"....these were the wargames that I cut my teeth on!...[:)]

Regeurk -> RE: February Update (2/9/2005 2:16:38 AM)
Ah, the good old days of Avalon Hill wargames. The first game I ever owned (at age 12) was Richtofen's War, followed quickly by Luftwaffe. After this "air force phase" I read C. S. Forrester's Hornblower series, and in my later teens moved into a naval fascination -- Midway, Jutland, and my favorite for many years, Wooden Ships & Iron Men (I've sometimes wondered how long it would take to play an EiA game where, for every naval battle, the players involved would move to WS&IM to play out and resolve the battle tactically with that game!). Then I moved into my 18th century strategic phase -- 1776, War and Peace, Soldier King, and ultimately, like finding my soul mate, EiA, where I have remained ever since, almost like a monogamous lover! I play EiA to the exclusion of all others, and am devoted to it. I can guarantee I will buy this game when it is released, and, although some of what I have learned has disappointed me slightly (I'm glad TMR got included!), and I am not thrilled with some of the graphics (I agree with whoever it was who said they like the corps counters "nice'n'square"), let's face it, even with a few (from my point of view) disappointments, there will be nothing like it in all the world. So keep at it, Marshall and all the rest. I'm waiting faithfully and, well, as patiently as I can. But I'm not getting any younger![:)]

ardilla -> RE: February Update (2/9/2005 8:12:05 PM)
I totally agree with you Regeurk. It would be GREAT to play EiA with the WS&IM naval rules!! That will be f**** realistic and LONG game to play, probably a real year for a game year! But, yes, I had to admit that I love naval fighting and that this game, EiA would be even better than perfect if they got some more realistic naval warfare system... Hope with time MG will do and upgrade for it and that we enjoy as much as land battles the naval ones, left out in this game and as important as the land ones!!! But now lets help and cheer up MG to finish the game as it is and they we will talk about upgrades and scenarios.

NeverMan -> RE: February Update (2/10/2005 5:26:43 AM)
MG upgrading??? Let's just worry about ACTUALLY getting the original. Here it is February and no game in sight. Not even close. Still running into bugs and still having to add things that were left off to begin with (TMR). Let's just hope for a product within the next 20 years, I am not even going to think about upgrades or patches just yet.

Nordiska -> RE: February Update (2/10/2005 2:47:33 PM)
Yeah it is kind of funny, awhile back when EIA was delayed,I bought Knights of the Old Republic to "tide me over" until EIA would be out(back in 2003). This week KOTOR 2 was released for the PC. Guess I'll have to go and get that to "tide me over" again until EIA comes out. Certainly hope this game is well polished when it comes out.[:D]

ardilla -> RE: February Update (2/10/2005 9:53:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NeverMan MG upgrading??? Let's just worry about ACTUALLY .... I am talking about upgrades, no patches, the willing of MG is to upgrade with options and new optional rules from EiH the final game, and I think that giving future support to this game is very important, also new scenarios. Of course, firstable is to finish the game, but this is a very complex game as everybody knows and it is a difficult task.

HordesOfSerbs -> RE: February Update (2/11/2005 3:16:50 AM)
I dunno if it's difficult, but it's not well managed, that's for sure. It's becoming a joke. It makes you wonder at what state this beast is really in when Marshall talks about 250K of lines and manages to drop a basic thing like maximum tactical rating while piling them. Going back to my pet hate, it looks like the bulk of that code has got something to do with squeezing the counters tall and narrow and sticking fuzzy blobs on them.

Bluestew0 -> RE: February Update (2/11/2005 5:32:11 PM)
I'm just happy someone is working on this project and that it continues to progress. In current times, all too often projects are started, hopes rise and then for one reason or another, usually financial, the project is dropped. Matrix seems very committed to completing EiA and for that they have my gratitude. I'm a bit of a programmer and just pondering this program gives me the willies. It is no wonder things keep popping up during the testing. Converting a face to face boardgame to the PC platform has a host of problems all its own. So I'll continue to be patiently impatient. [:)]

NeverMan -> RE: February Update (2/11/2005 7:11:13 PM)
Yes, I am happy someone is doing it. Yes, Marshal seems dedicated to finishing it. If Matrix drops this project, I would forever and always consider them a joke and so would a lot of people. I know this is a VERY hard project to undertake, but they undertook it (if you will), so it is their responsibility. All that said, I will continue to bitch until this game comes out, but when and if it does, and when and if it is REALLY good (at least 80% of what boardgame EiA is), then I will have no problem singing praises forever and more, and I will have no problem throwing a good amount of cash down for this product and then some. Until then.............AAAAAAAARRRRRGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

YohanTM2 -> RE: February Update (2/11/2005 7:43:06 PM)
Ah, good old Blitzkreig. It and Waterloo were our first games. quote: ORIGINAL: J P Falcon Treefrog...you forgot "Kriegspiel". and "Blitzkrieg"....these were the wargames that I cut my teeth on!...[:)]

ardilla -> RE: February Update (2/11/2005 8:04:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HordesOfSerbs I dunno if it's difficult, but it's not well managed, that's for sure. It's becoming a joke. Have you ever played EiA boardgame? Do you know all the rules for sure, because there are many times during a campaing game where I and my game mates had discussed some of the rules and take a look to the rules, forward and backward and as we many people and sometimes we didnt find the right answer until we asked in the empires in arms yahoo forum. As many people said and I totally agree with them, the rules are kind of a "mess" and have some weak points. And if you take this and try to do a program to control everything, even those situations that came out once every 3 or 4 campaings you will understand how difficult it is to program everything right and dont leave nothing out. But again, I dunno if you had ever played EiA or either if you know about programming. So, think twice before you make such comments if you "dunno" about it nothing.

Marshall Ellis -> RE: February Update (2/11/2005 9:16:00 PM)
HordesOfSerbs: Just to clarify ... I didn't drop TMR BUT I NEVER added it! There's big difference! I didn't miss it BUT intentionally left it out because our original engine design (NON EiA) did not call for it! There is a long history here but to summarize, let me just say that the engine we're using now was originally designed to be a simultaneous movement / combat system during ther Napoleonic era. We had totally different rules, pieces, etc. I intentionally made the call to list this as a deviation with the thought that the impact would be minimal but the time savings would be great and I was wrong! Our testers brought this up and they made their points crystal clear to me so PLEASE thank them THEN blame me. Note that I'm not saying I don't miss things because I do and if you don't then send me your resume and I'll make you an EiA developer in a minute :-) Thank you

anarchyintheuk -> RE: February Update (2/11/2005 9:24:15 PM)
No kidding about the rules. I think this is the only game I ever played that ended due to a rules dispute.

Bluestew0 -> RE: February Update (2/11/2005 9:24:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: J P Falcon Treefrog...you forgot "Kriegspiel Ahhh Kriegspiel...now that brings back memories. Such a simple game and yet very exciting for a 7 year old learning boardgames.

Sonny -> RE: February Update (2/12/2005 4:23:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ardilla quote: ORIGINAL: HordesOfSerbs I dunno if it's difficult, but it's not well managed, that's for sure. It's becoming a joke. .......................... But again, I dunno if you had ever played EiA or either if you know about programming. So, think twice before you make such comments if you "dunno" about it nothing. He doesn't have to know about programming or EIA. All he has to know about is that it is taking a damn long time to get this game out. At least with this game Marshall keeps us up to date with what is going on. Keeps the wait tolerable - or almost so.

yammahoper -> RE: February Update (2/12/2005 4:56:27 AM)
First game was a tank game. Great plastic models with cardboard chits on the back end, though I cannot remember the name for the life of me. Next was "the Illiad", an Avalon Hill game where one side was troy and the other the greeks. Heros were selected by drawing cards so each game wold be different. Ah, good times being 10-13 with unlimited time (almost) to play games (but little money to buy new ones!). yamma

donkuchi19 -> RE: February Update (2/12/2005 9:56:47 AM)
I think the game was called Tank Battle. You had green tanks and tan tanks. It played kind of like Stratego (another fun game) where each tank had a number value. If two tanks met, the higher value won. I think there were AT guns too. I had that one, Sky Battle, which was two Bi-Planes on stands that you shot marbles at. If you knocked out the two stands, your plane was shot down and you couldn't shoot your gun anymore. Don't forget Risk either. And then the granddaddy of them all Chess. Finally, my favorite early war game. I set up my army men. You set up yours. Then we through stuff at each other. We used rubber bands, marbles, and whatever else we could find. I once used a D battery but got in trouble because I accidentally hit my cousin with it.

coregames -> RE: February Update (2/14/2005 12:42:00 AM)
For me it was Tactics II.

pasternakski -> RE: February Update (2/14/2005 1:15:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: coregames For me it was Tactics II. One of my worst memories of wargaming is associated with Tactics II. The map grid (laid out in squares) in my copy was printed so that the roads ran exactly through the corners of the squares, so I devised my entire strategy based on how far units could go when moving diagonally. One weekend, a friend of mine and I got together at his house to play a game. I started moving my units as I was accustomed to do, and he said, "Wait a minute. You can't do that." I looked at his game board. It was printed slightly off, so that the roads didn't go exactly through the corners of the squares. He insisted that I had to count all the squares the road went through, thus slowing down my magnificent offensive and derailing all my plans. I pleaded that it was obvious what the intention of the game designers was, but to no avail. It was his house and his game board. He killed me (he was blue and I was red).

Sonny -> RE: February Update (2/14/2005 2:14:15 AM)
I discovered Tactics II after I got Gettysburg for Christmas.

ardilla -> RE: February Update (2/14/2005 9:21:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sonny He doesn't have to know about programming or EIA. All he has to know about is that it is taking a damn long time to get this game out. It is taking a long time, but it helps if you know how complex it is the game and how complex it is to programming it. I will tell you more, that programming time is probably exponential to the complexity of what are you programming. If you dont know how far it is NY from Alaska and you dont even know how are you travelling, how can you argue it is taking a long time?!?!?! C'mon!! Anyway, as most people said, this is not taking anywhere, I am sure MG are the ones more interest in finishing this "damn" game and make some cash and vacations! Lets them take their time to make this computer game as great as the boardgame or even better!

carnifex -> RE: February Update (2/15/2005 12:08:39 AM)
yamma lol i used to have that game, first time i have ever heard it mentioned since 1982, when my idiot clumsy friend waltzed all over the board and crushed the little plastic tanks [image]http://www.bggfiles.com/bggimages/pic10524.jpg[/image]

donkuchi19 -> RE: February Update (2/15/2005 3:05:16 AM)
I was right. It was called tank battle. I forgot about the HQ, The depot, and the other little thing though.

denisonh -> RE: February Update (2/15/2005 4:08:18 AM)
Blast from the past. I remember having that one. The first two that got the most play from me were Midway and D-Day, although the FIRST wargame that I ever got into was AH's 1914. My dad bought it but put it away as too complex. I found it and the facination began. quote: ORIGINAL: carnifex yamma lol i used to have that game, first time i have ever heard it mentioned since 1982, when my idiot clumsy friend waltzed all over the board and crushed the little plastic tanks [image]http://www.bggfiles.com/bggimages/pic10524.jpg[/image]

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.640137