Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

OOB

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars of 1805 - 1815 >> OOB Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
OOB - 2/1/2008 9:36:11 PM   
Grimrod42

 

Posts: 92
Joined: 1/10/2008
Status: offline 		Would it be possible to implement the OoB of the original game?
Post #: 1
RE: OOB - 2/1/2008 10:47:11 PM   
bresh

 

Posts: 936
Joined: 8/8/2005
Status: offline 		Please help me here OoB is short for ?

Regards
Bresh

(in reply to Grimrod42)
Post #: 2
RE: OOB - 2/1/2008 10:47:50 PM   
Grollub


Posts: 6674
Joined: 10/9/2005
From: Lulea, Sweden
Status: offline 		Order of Battle

_____________________________

“Not mastering metaphores is like cooking pasta when the train is delayed"

(in reply to bresh)
Post #: 3
RE: OOB - 2/1/2008 10:59:09 PM   
Grimrod42

 

Posts: 92
Joined: 1/10/2008
Status: offline 		EiANw deviates from the original game and I believe it should go back to it.

(in reply to Grollub)
Post #: 4
RE: OOB - 2/1/2008 11:00:22 PM   
Grimrod42

 

Posts: 92
Joined: 1/10/2008
Status: offline 		examples
- Spanish militia corps
- no cav in Russian corps
- infantry in Austrian gaurd corps

(in reply to Grimrod42)
Post #: 5
RE: OOB - 2/1/2008 11:49:58 PM   
AresMars

 

Posts: 234
Joined: 12/13/2007
Status: offline 		An order of battle (often abbreviated as ORBAT, OOB, O/B, or OB) is an organizational tool used by military intelligence to list and analyze enemy military units.

The term is also used by historians and war gamers to list the organization and unit structure of both sides in a battle.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_battle

(in reply to Grimrod42)
Post #: 6
RE: OOB - 2/2/2008 5:49:16 PM   
Ted1066


Posts: 214
Joined: 12/10/2007
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Status: offline 		This has my support - I've read the Harm rules, but never really felt that they offered enough to deviate from the original rules set. I'd like to further this request by asking to go back to the original map (without the errors, mind you : ). Call me a purist.

Cheers,

Ted

(in reply to AresMars)
Post #: 7
RE: OOB - 2/2/2008 10:21:00 PM   
Soapy Frog

 

Posts: 282
Joined: 7/16/2005
Status: offline 		I would agree. Not too happy about the changes overall.

(in reply to Ted1066)
Post #: 8
RE: OOB - 2/2/2008 11:22:41 PM   
NeverMan

 

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ted1066

This has my support - I've read the Harm rules, but never really felt that they offered enough to deviate from the original rules set. I'd like to further this request by asking to go back to the original map (without the errors, mind you : ). Call me a purist.

Cheers,

Ted


Personally, I never really understood why people got so excited about EiH, outside of the Advanced Naval rules (which I believe were published in General, the Magazine) I didn't care much for it.

(in reply to Ted1066)
Post #: 9
RE: OOB - 2/2/2008 11:37:43 PM   
Murat


Posts: 803
Joined: 9/17/2003
From: South Carolina
Status: offline 		1792. You know you love it. Add it. Play it. You will no longer care about the current OOBs

(in reply to NeverMan)
Post #: 10
RE: OOB - 2/3/2008 3:29:22 AM   
NeverMan

 

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Murat

1792. You know you love it. Add it. Play it. You will no longer care about the current OOBs


Ok, so the revolution campaign was a whole lot of fun. True. But down with the other stuff.

(in reply to Murat)
Post #: 11
RE: OOB - 2/3/2008 4:20:00 AM   
ecn1

 

Posts: 132
Joined: 4/9/2007
Status: offline

Or another possibility, if the OOB was based on EiH 3.0, use the more recent version (4.0) that is more like EiA and fix things like not having cav in russian corps, not the OOB from EiH from 4-5 years ago..

(in reply to NeverMan)
Post #: 12
RE: OOB - 2/4/2008 1:16:37 AM   
zaquex


Posts: 368
Joined: 11/30/2007
From: Vastervik, Sweden
Status: offline 		I still would want to know the rational behind choosing EiH 3.0 OOB when its arguably the most criticised OOB thats been in use in some sort of semi official capacity.

(in reply to ecn1)
Post #: 13
RE: OOB - 2/4/2008 1:46:08 AM   
pzgndr

 

Posts: 3170
Joined: 3/18/2004
From: Maryland
Status: offline 		I would expect with the editor we will see "official" EiA OOBs, or "official" EiH variants based on different versions, or whatever.

(in reply to Grimrod42)
Post #: 14
RE: OOB - 2/4/2008 4:15:59 PM   
Grimrod42

 

Posts: 92
Joined: 1/10/2008
Status: offline 		This should be fixed next Patch not waiting for an editor...
I've played with Michael Treasure Eia and he had not issue with us not using EiH so I don't see why they pc game should either

(in reply to pzgndr)
Post #: 15
RE: OOB - 2/4/2008 4:48:30 PM   
AresMars

 

Posts: 234
Joined: 12/13/2007
Status: offline 		As EIANW is a mix of both EiA and EiH v3.0 there should be no surprise about the OOB changes.

EiA was a workable, playable game as it was, however, Gamers being who they are always like to tinker...that lead to EiH.

It was often mentioned that EiH v3 was 'imperfect' and the 4.0 and beyond was much improved.....it was also mentioned that EiH 5.1 had _too much_ "chrome"!  (Is that possible....in a boardgame yes it can make the game unwieldy...in a computer game......not a bad thing IMHO)

Personally, I would like to see EIANW look and feel much more like the orginal EIA, but that decision remains with Matrix and their Programming team.

I like the 'chrome' that was added in EiH (more historical, more accurate, much more options, etc....) but it is NOT a requirement for enjoyment of EiA.

BTW, I have never played EiH.....but have read and enjoyed the various versions over the years....

In the end, EIANW is what it is.....We'll see where the future takes it....

NOTE: I noticed I did not indicate that I would like the EiA OOB. VOTE for EiA OOB.




< Message edited by AresMars -- 2/4/2008 7:40:54 PM >

(in reply to Grimrod42)
Post #: 16
RE: OOB - 2/4/2008 7:17:49 PM   
sw30

 

Posts: 410
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: San Francisco, CA
Status: offline 		Personally, I was surprised at the decision to use EiH 3.0, out of all the EiH versions, that was probably the least balanced one OOB...  I'd vote for EiH 4.0 just to avoid the 5.x chrome.)

_____________________________


(in reply to AresMars)
Post #: 17
RE: OOB - 2/4/2008 7:37:49 PM   
Soapy Frog

 

Posts: 282
Joined: 7/16/2005
Status: offline 		I'd vote for EiA, and then make the game moddable so that the EiH types can do their thing too. I'm all for modding. But you have to start somewhere.

(in reply to sw30)
Post #: 18
RE: OOB - 2/4/2008 10:04:38 PM   
Ted1066


Posts: 214
Joined: 12/10/2007
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Status: offline 		I think the EiH 3.0 rules were chosen because AT THE TIME they were the current set. Keep in mind these guys started developing this in 2002. Marshall et al. obviously stuck with the rules rather than update part way through development.

I'm hoping that into the future an editor is released that allows us to change OOBs (or Matrix just does it themselves). <fingers crossed>

Cheers,

Ted

(in reply to Soapy Frog)
Post #: 19
RE: OOB - 2/4/2008 10:23:20 PM   
Grimrod42

 

Posts: 92
Joined: 1/10/2008
Status: offline 		It should be an easy thing to fix - I am with Soapy on this

(in reply to Ted1066)
Post #: 20
RE: OOB - 2/5/2008 3:13:10 AM   
pzgndr

 

Posts: 3170
Joined: 3/18/2004
From: Maryland
Status: offline
quote:

I think the EiH 3.0 rules were chosen because AT THE TIME they were the current set. Keep in mind these guys started developing this in 2002.


With the new naval unit types and additional minor countries, maybe the more recent EiH v4.0 should be the OOB to shoot for as the EiANW defaults? Considering the changes in this adaptation, the "new" OOBs should be assessed for play balance on their own merits once all the bugs are fixed. Either which way, when Marshall starts filling in the OOBs for all the other scenarios he may as well be consistent - either use original OOBs or the updated EiH v4.0.

quote:

I'm hoping that into the future an editor is released that allows us to change OOBs


It won't be much of an editor if it doesn't. I have to agree with "In the end, EIANW is what it is....." Marshall should be allowed some creative license as the game developer to make whatever compromises he thinks appropriate. Everyone does not have to agree 100% right now, and can use the editor later to create an original EiA version or the various EiH versions or something completely different.

(in reply to Grimrod42)
Post #: 21
RE: OOB - 2/5/2008 7:56:26 AM   
tolstoy1812

 

Posts: 23
Joined: 10/8/2004
Status: offline 		Pardon me for jumping in with a question: I ask because I'm thinking of purchasing EiANW. What was EiH? I mean, what does it stand for, and was it a computer game or a board game? EiA I have played as a board game, so I think I know what you're referring to there.

And, do you mean that in the EiANW computer game, you cannot put Russian cavalry into a Russian Corps? In 1805, that's not strictly historical. But later, in 1812, it sounds right.

Anyway, I gather that the allocation of forces to corps is too restrictive for some veteran players of EiA? Is that the gist of this thread? How big a negative is that? Enough that I shouldn't buy the game?

Pardon all the questions, but the price is high for this game, and I don't want to be disappointed.

(in reply to pzgndr)
Post #: 22
RE: OOB - 2/5/2008 8:15:11 AM   
AresMars

 

Posts: 234
Joined: 12/13/2007
Status: offline 		EiH is Empires in Harm, a variant of the Empires in Arms orginial. It was also a boardgame like EiA

You can learn more here http://ca.groups.yahoo.com/group/eih/ and more here http://ca.groups.yahoo.com/group/eih-files/

Yes, in EIANW you cannot have cavalry in an Infantry Corps so you need a Cavalry Corps.  ie. The Russian I Corps was 18 I/M, 2 C in EiA, it has no C in EIANW and is 16 I/M. (Smaller and no Cav)

Some veteran players are not pleased with this change, as it changes the concentration of force they may have been used to.

Negative is relative...would it bother you?  The game remains playable but EIANW is very different from the orginal EiA that you may have been use to.

I would suggest spending some time reading through to forums so that you can make a more informed choice - lots to read and learn!

(in reply to tolstoy1812)
Post #: 23
RE: OOB - 2/5/2008 5:41:31 PM   
NeverMan

 

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: AresMars

EiH is Empires in Harm, a variant of the Empires in Arms orginial. It was also a boardgame like EiA

You can learn more here http://ca.groups.yahoo.com/group/eih/ and more here http://ca.groups.yahoo.com/group/eih-files/

Yes, in EIANW you cannot have cavalry in an Infantry Corps so you need a Cavalry Corps.  ie. The Russian I Corps was 18 I/M, 2 C in EiA, it has no C in EIANW and is 16 I/M. (Smaller and no Cav)

Some veteran players are not pleased with this change, as it changes the concentration of force they may have been used to.

Negative is relative...would it bother you?  The game remains playable but EIANW is very different from the orginal EiA that you may have been use to.

I would suggest spending some time reading through to forums so that you can make a more informed choice - lots to read and learn!


I had no idea that they removed cavalry from corps, that just doesn't make any sense. Why would they do this? It couldn't have been difficult to implement and it totally changes things around.

So now, in order to not give up calvary superiority you need to bring an extra corps into the fight, which will bring down your factor count OR will decrease your leader rating.

Is MG planning on changing this anytime soon?

(in reply to AresMars)
Post #: 24
RE: OOB - 2/5/2008 5:52:32 PM   
pzgndr

 

Posts: 3170
Joined: 3/18/2004
From: Maryland
Status: offline
quote:

Yes, in EIANW you cannot have cavalry in an Infantry Corps so you need a Cavalry Corps.


Prussian infantry corps can have guards and cavalry. I don't fully understand the basis for all the OOBs, but obviously EiANW can allow mixed unit types. The editor should allow any OOB version to be implemented.

A more fundamental question for Marshall is whether he is willing to reconsider his default OOBs. I sense limited enthusiasm for EiH v3.0. Maybe the original EiA OOBs would be best, and then allow modders to implement EiH later.

(in reply to Grimrod42)
Post #: 25
RE: OOB - 2/5/2008 5:59:14 PM   
AresMars

 

Posts: 234
Joined: 12/13/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL:  pzgndr
quote:

A more fundamental question for Marshall is whether he is willing to reconsider his default OOBs.  I sense limited enthusiasm for EiH v3.0.  Maybe the original EiA OOBs would be best, and then allow modders to implement EiH later.


In the end, you can expect the Land OOB's to be adjusted by the players as soon as that becomes an option for players.

Then we will have a round of discussion/debate/arguements about what will be ACCEPTABLE OOB's for future games....happy times! 

Returning the Naval OOB to it's original EiA standard will be a different kettle of fish....I don't think that is ever going to happen.



(in reply to pzgndr)
Post #: 26
RE: OOB - 2/5/2008 9:40:58 PM   
Grimrod42

 

Posts: 92
Joined: 1/10/2008
Status: offline 		I think this should be fixed next patch
back to original EiA (ie the way it was meant to be)

and then when the editor comes out people can change it to their hearts desire
Till then will this be fixed soon...

(in reply to AresMars)
Post #: 27
RE: OOB - 2/5/2008 10:59:33 PM   
Grognot

 

Posts: 409
Joined: 12/7/2007
Status: offline 		There's nothing to be "fixed", since the OOB is essentially working as designed. 

(in reply to Grimrod42)
Post #: 28
RE: OOB - 2/5/2008 11:02:05 PM   
tolstoy1812

 

Posts: 23
Joined: 10/8/2004
Status: offline 		Thank you. As I am looking for a strategic game (that I don't have to keep up on the dining room table) to generate miniatures battles, the corps organization is not such a problem for me. I'm going to read more posts and threads and see if that's doable.

Thank you for your response.

(in reply to NeverMan)
Post #: 29
RE: OOB - 2/5/2008 11:18:06 PM   
zaquex


Posts: 368
Joined: 11/30/2007
From: Vastervik, Sweden
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Grognot

There's nothing to be "fixed", since the OOB is essentially working as designed. 


EiANW also essentially works as designed, maybe it doesnt need any fixes either.

< Message edited by zaquex -- 2/5/2008 11:19:35 PM >

(in reply to Grognot)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars of 1805 - 1815 >> OOB Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.406