Where is everyone???? (Full Version)

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



Message

donkuchi19 -> Where is everyone???? (4/15/2005 4:32:23 AM)

Nobody has posted on this forum for 10 days!!!! I hope all of the announcements for new Napoleonic games doesn't kill this forum. I am still really looking forward to this game.


BTW: Where are the AAR's?

Need to keep the interest going people!



sol_invictus -> RE: Where is everyone???? (4/15/2005 6:33:33 AM)

I'm just waiting for the good word.[;)]



Barbu -> RE: Where is everyone???? (4/15/2005 7:51:30 AM)

Still waiting here :)



ardilla -> RE: Where is everyone???? (4/15/2005 11:51:51 AM)

We are on it donkuchi, now testing a pbem game and Marshall working on it and minor bugs.

Regards.

P.S. For the unbelivers, its looking great!



John Umber -> RE: Where is everyone???? (4/15/2005 12:25:15 PM)

Gentlemen, please tease us further...




NeverMan -> RE: Where is everyone???? (4/15/2005 7:15:25 PM)

John, no one ever expects this game to be released so no one is bothering with this message board anymore. Maybe that is what Matrix wants, I guess, who knows.



Marshall Ellis -> RE: Where is everyone???? (4/15/2005 7:41:37 PM)

Guys:

We're still here and we're testing the PBEM game. Guys, I'm trying as hard as I can to work as fast as I can and because of this my posts frequency will suffer but if you've been on this forum long enough then you know I've not left and I do read the posts so hang in there a while longer...

Thank you






Hanal -> RE: Where is everyone???? (4/15/2005 7:57:14 PM)

I'm sure it will be well worth the wait.....some people have a case of the "Christmas Syndrome" that's all.....[:D]



Sonny -> RE: Where is everyone???? (4/15/2005 10:44:04 PM)

quote:

"Christmas Syndrome"


What's that? Does that mean we want the game before Christmas? If so then I have a bad case of the Christmas Syndrome.



1LTRambo -> RE: Where is everyone???? (4/16/2005 5:26:02 AM)

I'm still here. I'm just patiently watching and waiting.



donkuchi19 -> RE: Where is everyone???? (4/16/2005 5:08:25 PM)

Thanks Marshall!!!

Thanks Beta Testers!!!

I was just wondering because this forum is usually so active. With the announcement of all the other games, I don't want this one to die.



crenfrow -> RE: Where is everyone???? (4/17/2005 7:38:05 AM)

I dont mean to be to negative but the reason people arent here any more is probably because it is always the same. Every month its "testing and retesting" and "we are getting there". I have been following this game for over a year now which is relatively new compared to many people and its just that. The same phrases with the occasional medium to large problem that pops up which results in more of the same encouraging words that sound like what I read in April of last year. I am sorry to vent on the board. I do appreciate everyones work, especially you Marshall. Im just getting a little depressed as summer approaches and no game in sight. Good Luck to the crew. Keep plugging away. Thanks for letting me whine like a little girl. [8|]



coregames -> RE: Where is everyone???? (4/17/2005 9:55:23 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: crenfrow
... the reason people arent here any more is probably because it is always the same.


I think this game is much closer than you realize. They were close to a working product, and then, among the minor bugs being revealed in beta testing they discovered the issue of TMR. This is important, because Britain is too powerful without it. Wouldn't you rather the game be napoleonic wars and not wellingtonian wars? The game needed some revisement beyond just beta bugs, and we will all be glad they took the time to do it right when we see the final product.



Pippin -> RE: Where is everyone???? (4/17/2005 10:03:19 AM)

quote:

This is important, because Britain is too powerful without it.


I am not so sure on that.



Forward_March -> RE: Where is everyone???? (4/17/2005 10:08:33 AM)

I've just been sitting about occasionally cruising the forums looking for something new and encouraging. More interesting games keep popping up...which I also have to wait for. I haven't done any Napoleonic gaming since I wore out the games from the Battleground series.

Those were fun games for micromanagers with one drawback. Skirmishers! Not that there's anything wrong with skirmishers, mind you. There was just no way to overrun them with infantry, or make them draw back. Just 25 of them sitting in the open could stop a battalion of 700 with 2/3 of it's movement allowance to spare.

It'd have been a great game for WEGO. AS it was, you had to mail 4 times just to finish one turn.

Anyway...I'll return to the waiting room and grab another stale magazine.



coregames -> RE: Where is everyone???? (4/17/2005 5:25:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Pippin

quote:

This is important, because Britain is too powerful without it.


I am not so sure on that.


In the boardgame, the quality of English forces is offset by their difficulty in leading large forces.



ioticus -> RE: Where is everyone???? (4/17/2005 6:20:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: coregames


I think this game is much closer than you realize. They were close to a working product, and then, among the minor bugs being revealed in beta testing they discovered the issue of TMR. This is important, because Britain is too powerful without it. Wouldn't you rather the game be napoleonic wars and not wellingtonian wars? The game needed some revisement beyond just beta bugs, and we will all be glad they took the time to do it right when we see the final product.


I don't see how you can just "discover" an issue like TMR. If this important concept was not part of the original design then it doesn't bode well for the game as a whole, especially the artificial intelligence.



Pippin -> RE: Where is everyone???? (4/17/2005 7:35:24 PM)

quote:


In the boardgame, the quality of English forces is offset by their difficulty in leading large forces.


I do not consider them as having much of a large force to lead in the first place. And as for quality, well it could be worse. But they don't even have a guards unit. Two factors? What's the point, they can not even commit.





ktotwf -> RE: Where is everyone???? (4/17/2005 8:08:37 PM)

Bitch Bitch Bitch.



ASHBERY76 -> RE: Where is everyone???? (4/17/2005 8:36:18 PM)

There all at the "Crown of Glory" forum, where your tend to get usefull info,screenshots and soon AAR's.



NeverMan -> RE: Where is everyone???? (4/17/2005 10:22:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ioticus
I don't see how you can just "discover" an issue like TMR. If this important concept was not part of the original design then it doesn't bode well for the game as a whole, especially the artificial intelligence.


I tend to agree.

Personally, I think that without TMR, Wellington DOES become too powerful. It's not just the Brits army (the awesome 4.5 morale) but take 2 Brit corp, 2 Au Corp and 2 Pr Corp and that's one badass unit under Wellington's control without any penalties to the leader. The main advantage of having Napoleon is that he is 5.5.6 not a 5.5.3 or a 4.4.6 or a 5.4.3 or whatever. Nap is great and can be great even with a large army. Wellington never really had the practice due to Brit's small army and therefore should go down a notch when commaning more than 3 corps.



Pippin -> RE: Where is everyone???? (4/17/2005 11:16:05 PM)

It is not often I see Britain, Prussia, and Austria mixing corps to share under one leader. Though I have seen naval units mix stacks many times.



NeverMan -> RE: Where is everyone???? (4/18/2005 3:36:57 AM)

Interesting. I see Au, GB, and Pr mixing corp all the time in a coalition against France.

This is the best part about a possible EiA Computer release: playing with many different people. That is what I am most looking forward to. Usually when I played, it was always 7 people drawn from the same 20 person group. I sure hope this game becomes a reality before I die.



ktotwf -> RE: Where is everyone???? (4/18/2005 6:36:56 AM)

I say, wait. This game WILL eventually come out. If you can't find another focus for your life until then, than maybe you shouldn't even worry about this game.



sol_invictus -> RE: Where is everyone???? (4/18/2005 6:41:43 AM)

We've waited this long; what's a few more months?



Pippin -> RE: Where is everyone???? (4/18/2005 6:54:50 AM)

quote:

I see Au, GB, and Pr mixing corp all the time in a coalition against France.


I think it is much more stronger to operate independant for corps depending on the angle you look at it. Too many problems arise when they are mixed. I also don't like the fact how I am restricted to who I can declare war on because that person just happens to have a corps of two factors left on my door-step, etc.

A lot less restrictions regarding naval stacks. I have no problems with stacking the Spain and sometimes even Russian ships with my French in the channel. Great way to knock out Britain early in the game if he is known to be a trouble maker for all.




coregames -> RE: Where is everyone???? (4/18/2005 11:21:32 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ioticus
I don't see how you can just "discover" an issue like TMR. If this important concept was not part of the original design then it doesn't bode well for the game as a whole, especially the artificial intelligence.

They actually had made a policy decision not to use TMR, and then feedback from this forum caused them to reconsider... their discovery was not the mechanic of TMR, but rather, the importance of the mechanic for play balance. Even then, there were voices in here arguing against including it.



coregames -> RE: Where is everyone???? (4/18/2005 11:30:13 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Pippin
I think it is much more stronger to operate independant for corps depending on the angle you look at it. Too many problems arise when they are mixed.

The English seem to do best when they find the right fight(s) to lend their strength to. One English leader with a small force can turn the tide of a conflict. Of course, the English can help without mixing forces, but in the thick of the action, forces sometimes need to operate together, after casualties have been inflicted on a key force for instance.



NeverMan -> RE: Where is everyone???? (4/18/2005 8:42:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Pippin

quote:

I see Au, GB, and Pr mixing corp all the time in a coalition against France.


I think it is much more stronger to operate independant for corps depending on the angle you look at it. Too many problems arise when they are mixed. I also don't like the fact how I am restricted to who I can declare war on because that person just happens to have a corps of two factors left on my door-step, etc.

A lot less restrictions regarding naval stacks. I have no problems with stacking the Spain and sometimes even Russian ships with my French in the channel. Great way to knock out Britain early in the game if he is known to be a trouble maker for all.




IMO, mixing corps is essential for attrition. Not factor attrition, but PP attrition. By splitting the PP losses, it doesn't allow France to focus on taking one country out of the coalition through massive PP loss.

Personally, I can't even see how the coalition could stand against France without mixing corps. If I was France I would focus all my energy on one country at a time and but them into the instability or fiasco zone VERY quickly.

If Prussia and/or Austria loses two or three large attacks (involving 4 or 6 corps) against France and suffers those 2 to 3 PPs for each against all on their own, they will not be able to continue to fight France, hence splitting the coalition and eventually destroying the coalition.

If you mix Corps (2 Br, 2 Au, 2 Pr) and you lose then it's only 1 PP for each person and the coalition can fight and continue to lose battles longer than they would otherwise.

I am surprised you don't do this considering how experienced you say you are at EiA.



Pippin -> RE: Where is everyone???? (4/18/2005 9:54:20 PM)

I agree that the PP issue is the biggest PRO for mixing corps. But I find it to have some big draw backs as well so I am not that much a fan of it. Different players have different styles of play in this mother of all Napoleon games, that is all well.

As for your situation of say, France targeting one player and trying to pound him ASAP. I understand, and sure it is a pretty valid strategy. But now you have me wondering why no one else is doing anything about it. Is the victim’s allies all incompetent? They only will fight if they mix units?

Even if a battle has totally gone wrong for me, the max points I will ever lose is 3. And that would mean I had to have 6 of my corps there. Considering the limited number of counters for all players, I doubt I am going to have to worry about going into the fiasco zone immediately (barring some very back luck previous incidences). It takes time.

If I know I can’t really do much aggressive attacks, then time to just stall him as much as possible. The allies should see the case and react to it as they see fit. So France is bashing Austria, no problem she will just have to deal with huge Prussian cav factors rushing in the gaps with minimal resistance. What is the point of winning a war vs Austria, when you have lost your homeland? Or, Prussia can also decide to run into the hot-seat and play mop-up after the previous two sides have weakened each other.

As a British player I prefer to keep my corps directly on the English channel crossing. It is my stack and my stack only. I have no restrictions due to technical or diplomatic issues. The French guy knows it, and there is not much he can do about that, except for guarding the channel (hard to do without a lot of help, or a half decent Brit opponent). He will very often decide to take a couple corps out of his battles and keep them on patrol at Lille. Even if I don’t attack anything, just the threat of me walking across is enough that I have taken two good counters out of his war without even me having lost a single factor. Not bad. Topple in the fact I also can do any amphib assaults, (no technical or diplomatic restrictions again).

One of my main worries with having a mixed ship stack is I give my future to be opponent a bonus. He can now have the opportunity to attack my stack even though technically and diplomatically we are NOT at war. But, any decent British player should be planning ahead on probability of this anyhow, instead of being caught out in the open in surprise.




Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
3.140625