Another renaissance title. Was Thirty Year War any good? Does it suit the engine?
http://www.matrixgames.com/products/683/details/EnglishCivilWar
Thirty Years War is my favorite Ageod game, so I have high hopes for the ECW.
Here is a link to a mod for it:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4103936&mpage=1&key=�
Quote from: jomni on February 15, 2017, 04:38:52 PM
Another renaissance title. Was Thirty Year War any good? Does it suit the engine?
http://www.matrixgames.com/products/683/details/EnglishCivilWar
I'm always hopeful about AGEOD games. So far Rise of Prussia and The Russian Civil war one were extremely good. The rest -- not so much -- The English Civil War might work well, but as with 30 years war (very bad ) and Espana 1936 (also bad), the actual historical dynamics do matter in getting the game to function -- which is a good thing if the historical analysis is well done and a mess if not well done.
I'm playing TYW right now as the Catholic faction and really enjoying it. That setting really fits the Ageod game engine.
This new game will be a must buy for me!
Quote from: jomni on February 15, 2017, 04:38:52 PM
Another renaissance title. Was Thirty Year War any good? Does it suit the engine?
http://www.matrixgames.com/products/683/details/EnglishCivilWar
I don't know if any engine can deal with the english civil war! I played a board game; Unhappy King Charles which did a really good job of the strategic feel, albeit without capturing The Rupertine twattery on the battlefield.
Wars In America was really good at tying units to areas and evaporating them at the end of every year, having leaders who are unable to move, hopefully they will put the same effort into this title.
I'm a bit disappointed it ends in '46, most of my favourite bits happen during the second phase of the war.
Quote from: jomni on February 15, 2017, 04:38:52 PM
Another renaissance title. Was Thirty Year War any good? Does it suit the engine?
http://www.matrixgames.com/products/683/details/EnglishCivilWar
This is really what the AGE engine was designed for. Wars with no true fronts where armies rely on forage or basic depots and no diplomacy.
Thirty years war is the most polished and well done AGEOD game to date. It's not my favorite but the time period and nature of warfare in the early-mid 17th century suits it.
Edit: Mengjao, why do you think the Thirty Years War game is "very bad"? I find the AI to be as good as any other AGEOD games, it's very stable and the AI usually doesn't go stupi lad like in ACW2 when it sends Stonewall Jackson and 2 divisions to take Pittsburg
I really wish they would work on a new game engine.
Quote from: bbmike on February 15, 2017, 09:29:41 PM
I really wish they would work on a new game engine.
Agreed. I havent even heard the Devi mention it.
Having played the crap out of Thirty Years War and beta testing the next offering (out soon), I can promise you that the engine performs exceptionally well in the right wars. Rome or warfare from 1500-1792, where fortresses and sieges were paramount and armies were used to take locations and cities or controlling specific territory. Also, limited diplomacy and a more streamlined supply consisting of scavaging and wagons carrying supplies obtained at depots built along the way (instead of the push/pull system in ACW2) make the AI far superior in its ability to wage war.
AGEODs decision to return to BOAII simplicity as opposed to the absurdly complex Wats of Napleon or End all wars will show that the engine is still very good at simulating operational and strategic warfare
Yes BOA type warfare is best. Not sure about Napoloenic to Industrial era.
Quote from: bbmike on February 15, 2017, 09:29:41 PM
I really wish they would work on a new game engine.
They supposedly are.
James: Rumor has it that you plan to replace the AGE engine. Is this true? If so, what will the replacement be?
AGEOD: More than a rumor, as it was announced in the Home of Wargamers 2015, which is the Slitherine Convention! Indeed, there is a new engine in the making that we are developing in-house with several Slitherine developers located in Canada. It will be a turn based (WEGO) engine that strives to be the best of both worlds, between having modern graphics while keeping the innovative gameplay of Ageod.
Interview with Ageod (http://www.wargamer.com/news/an-interview-with-ageod/)
The only ageod game I like is RUS. THE small and scattered forced rushing everywhere by rail really suits the UI
I own all the AGEOD games and like them all. The best are the Birth of America formula ones...Thirty Years War, Alea Jacta Este, Wars in America, Revolution Under Siege, Rise of Prussia, Espana 1936, Napoleon's Campaigns, etc.
The larger ones seem to get bogged down and overload the AI...Civil War 2, Wars of Napoleon, To End All Wars, etc.
It is fun to learn about a new period by reading and then play the game. CV Wedgewood's book on the Thirty Year War is excellent...really helps to make the game fun...
They are good games...they're operational...not tactical...and they explore new periods...
This will be day one purchase for me. Simply because:
1. I like AGEOD games and
2. I'm a Brit.
Quote from: rwenstrup on February 16, 2017, 07:26:23 AM
I own all the AGEOD games and like them all. The best are the Birth of America formula ones...Thirty Years War, Alea Jacta Este, Wars in America, Revolution Under Siege, Rise of Prussia, Espana 1936, Napoleon's Campaigns, etc.
The larger ones seem to get bogged down and overload the AI...Civil War 2, Wars of Napoleon, To End All Wars, etc.
It is fun to learn about a new period by reading and then play the game. CV Wedgewood's book on the Thirty Year War is excellent...really helps to make the game fun...
They are good games...they're operational...not tactical...and they explore new periods...
Exactly this!
This does sound interesting. I like the more subtle colours and design of the map graphics too (unit counters not as much). I'm also keen to see how Wars of Succession turns out and may eventually pick both up if gamers' impressions are favourable.
I already own several AGEOD games, from Wars in America to Espana & many in between. However, I find the month long turns in many games unwieldy - giving you little opportunity to react - any chance of AGEOD allowing a "2 week turn" option on their games (or even an IgoUgo)? I've tweaked several; WIA2 scenarios to have 2 week turns but its time consuming & I don't fancy doing it for all games.
That said - looking forward to ECW - I'll definitely be on the regicide-side!
Quote from: mikeck on February 15, 2017, 09:18:08 PM
Quote from: jomni on February 15, 2017, 04:38:52 PM
Another renaissance title. Was Thirty Year War any good? Does it suit the engine?
http://www.matrixgames.com/products/683/details/EnglishCivilWar
This is really what the AGE engine was designed for. Wars with no true fronts where armies rely on forage or basic depots and no diplomacy.
Thirty years war is the most polished and well done AGEOD game to date. It's not my favorite but the time period and nature of warfare in the early-mid 17th century suits it.
Edit: Mengjao, why do you think the Thirty Years War game is "very bad"? I find the AI to be as good as any other AGEOD games, it's very stable and the AI usually doesn't go stupi lad like in ACW2 when it sends Stonewall Jackson and 2 divisions to take Pittsburg
I think the real problem with the AGEOD thirty-years war is at the basic level of historical analysis. The real dynamics of the war were that the constitutional problems in Germany + the Hapsburgs of various kinds trying to build order out of what looked like a fast slide toward chaos sucked almost all of Europe (including the Turks, Hungarians, Poland, Transylvania etc.) into a very chaotic process of progressive dissolution. The war has to include France -- anyway to get it to work you'd have to do it completely differently than how the game does it. The smaller scenarios are okay, but even they simplify far too much to fit the time period very well. I'm more hopeful of the English Civil war (up to 1646) for this engine since it is relatively limited and the dynamics are fairly well understood. For the 30-years war the only good analysis I've seen is Peter Wilson's book:
http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674062313
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/5940172/Europes-Tragedy-by-Peter-H-Wilson-review.html
http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/866
And this gives a very different analysis than the traditional one put forward by Wedgewood for example.
OK, but the things you were talking about are more grand strategy. The game is meant to simulate the operational aspects of the military and war fighting. I think it does a good job of simulating that. I mean specifically how armies are moved, what their comprised of, the supply system, how little they fought versus Laying siege, the importance of fortresses etc.
So, will the "English Civil War" simulate the politics of the parliamentarians versus the loyalists? Will it simulate the different alliances and political machinations? No. But what it will do is what it did in "30 years war" in that it will do a good job of simulating military operations once the war has started. And that simulation will likely closely follow how the real war was fought.
Quote from: mikeck on February 16, 2017, 07:06:38 PM
OK, but the things you were talking about are more grand strategy. The game is meant to simulate the operational aspects of the military and war fighting. I think it does a good job of simulating that. I mean specifically how armies are moved, what their comprised of, the supply system, how little they fought versus Laying siege, the importance of fortresses etc.
So, will the "English Civil War" simulate the politics of the parliamentarians versus the loyalists? Will it simulate the different alliances and political machinations? No. But what it will do is what it did in "30 years war" in that it will do a good job of simulating military operations once the war has started. And that simulation will likely closely follow how the real war was fought.
You don't have to go into the internal politics, but I think for AGEOD you do have to get some overall dynamics working via the events triggers and so on. That certainly didn't work at all in Espana 1936. I think it will work for the English Civil war where the overall dynamics are well-understood. To give another instance of how the AGEOD version of the 30-years war doesn't work: by the late war, armies were much smaller and had much more cavalry: Campaigns aimed deep and sieges were not as important. So maybe the 30-years war fails in the AGEOD system because it went on for so long and so many things changed. For the English Civil war (1642-1646) not as much time passes and the changes can probably be simulated in the game fairly well.
Quote from: MengJiao on February 16, 2017, 08:47:22 PM
That certainly didn't work at all in Espana 1936. I think it will work for the English Civil war where the overall dynamics are well-understood.
They are? Better than the Spanish Civil War?
It takes only a slightly cursory glance to see the complexity of the civil war, not only in shifting alliances and deep mistrust among allies, but in the widely varied forms of fighting. From set piece battles to sieges and independent guerilla warfare from strong points.
All of that of course ignores Ireland where three sides opposed and allied with one another, sometimes differently at the local and national level, and whose events drove the larger scale alliances fighting in England and Scotland.
I think AGEOD will do it justice because its a short war - significantly shorter than any phase of the 30 years war, but hardly understood or driven by easily simulated mechanics.
Quote from: MengJiao on February 16, 2017, 06:39:10 PM
For the 30-years war the only good analysis I've seen is Peter Wilson's book.
A terrific book. I read it just before starting to play TYW.
Quote from: dinsdale on February 16, 2017, 09:12:14 PM
Quote from: MengJiao on February 16, 2017, 08:47:22 PM
That certainly didn't work at all in Espana 1936. I think it will work for the English Civil war where the overall dynamics are well-understood.
They are? Better than the Spanish Civil War?
It takes only a slightly cursory glance to see the complexity of the civil war, not only in shifting alliances and deep mistrust among allies, but in the widely varied forms of fighting. From set piece battles to sieges and independent guerilla warfare from strong points.
All of that of course ignores Ireland where three sides opposed and allied with one another, sometimes differently at the local and national level, and whose events drove the larger scale alliances fighting in England and Scotland.
I think AGEOD will do it justice because its a short war - significantly shorter than any phase of the 30 years war, but hardly understood or driven by easily simulated mechanics.
For the military dynamics of the English Civil war, in England, I think the traditional historical analysis is pretty solid and you can probably get it to work in the game. for example, you don't get the New Model Army unless you have the Eastern Association up and running. When I played Espana 1936, roughly similar dependencies didn't seem to be functioning at all in the way the game was set up by the developer. The 30-years war seemed to have a similar problem with dependencies (ie in both games "historical" events just happened -- they weren't modified by events in the game)
Release date 11 May.
And it's out!
It's too much! I have too many games!!! :D
Quote from: bbmike on May 11, 2017, 10:19:31 AM
It's too much! I have too many games!!! :D
Solution: stop playing the other games. By this game. Play this game.
^That's good logic! Bought!
Bought. First few turns fly past. Smaller map than other AGEOD games. Maybe this is the perfect scale for this engine. Not unit-heavy so far but we'll see in later turns.
I'm really on the fence for this one.
On one hand, the ECW is an interesting and highly underused setting.
On the other, I never had much luck with AGEOD's games.
Quote from: Ian C on May 13, 2017, 04:23:43 AM
Bought. First few turns fly past. Smaller map than other AGEOD games. Maybe this is the perfect scale for this engine. Not unit-heavy so far but we'll see in later turns.
Lower unit count in the beginning would make since since, at the outbreak of the war, England had no standing army.
Right. They were all sitting-down. Except for the ones laying down. ;D Typical English. I'm very interested in hearing Grog-opinions on this one.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on May 13, 2017, 08:20:43 AM
Quote from: Ian C on May 13, 2017, 04:23:43 AM
Bought. First few turns fly past. Smaller map than other AGEOD games. Maybe this is the perfect scale for this engine. Not unit-heavy so far but we'll see in later turns.
Lower unit count in the beginning would make since since, at the outbreak of the war, England had no standing army.
You are correct, there is none. I was referring to the background tasks and AI calculations the game engine makes between turns.
I've decided that since I've got enough games right now, I'll reconsider it at a later day.
And since today I received my 6th year anniversary coupon from Matrix/Slitherine, which is only valid for 30 days...
Any good old grog here wants a free 35% off coupon for the Slitherine/Matrix store? :)
(First come first serve)
Quote from: Tpek on May 13, 2017, 07:55:54 AM
I'm really on the fence for this one.
On one hand, the ECW is an interesting and highly underused setting.
On the other, I never had much luck with AGEOD's games.
I think this is the new "BOA 2 wars in America"...meaning the game for those who haven't played AGEODgames. Very few units for the first dozen turns, simple supply a la' "Thirty years war" and a somewhat familiar map.
Hard to say how well I like it since I'm only on the first ten turns or so. Few decisions and recruiting options.
AGEOD has really found themselves again recently. With "Thirty years war", "Wars of Secession" and "English Civil war" they have put the engine in conflicts it does well and gotten rid of a lot of complexities that served only to stress the engine.
You guys are going to love "Wars of Secession" (Great Northern war and the War of te Spanish Secession)
I'm looking forward to it (WoS). Is it due out soon?
Quote from: IronX on May 13, 2017, 01:16:53 PM
I'm looking forward to it (WoS). Is it due out soon?
Hard to say. We haven't had a new beta version in some time...maybe busy with this game. Who knows. Frankly, I think WoS is quite playable and enjoyable now but is still being refined.
Hi. I just want to say hello and thanks for your support.
I hope you will enjoy ECW. I will try to be around here to answer any question or whatever.
Nice to see a visit from the game's designer!
Absolutely! Hope you do find that time, Miguel!
Is there a Hotseat option in the game?
If my fading memory is still working correctly, Ageod games don't have an explicit hotseat function, but it's there implicitly because every time you save you're saving a separate file for each side, and if you go into Load and click on a save from the other side, you can start playing as that side.
But experiencing the feel of what's happening in an Ageod campaign with relatively few pieces is very dependent on not knowing exactly what your opponent is planning or thinking. So unless you're in the habit of writing three sets of general instructions and rolling a die to select one, you'll always know too much about what's going on in your opponents head.
I suppose you could always role play that neither side can keep a secret (which would probably happen in a civil war of this kind with everyone speaking the same language), but you'll have a hard time ambushing yourself unless your memory is as bad as mine.
I remember a board game about the Peloponnesian war where you played solitaire against a system which dictated your general strategy and all of your opponent's actions. Whenever you would start beating your opponent badly, the game would make you switch sides.
Quote from: Philippe on May 15, 2017, 02:53:06 PM
I remember a board game about the Peloponnesian war where you played solitaire against a system which dictated your general strategy and all of your opponent's actions. Whenever you would start beating your opponent badly, the game would make you switch sides.
That was Mark Herman's
Peloponnesian War From Victory Games. *Sigh* I missed that one. However there is a remake of sorts called Pericles.
How is combat handled/portrayed? I have 5 AGEOD games, but I have never been able to like any of them.
Quote from: solops on May 16, 2017, 06:53:22 PM
How is combat handled/portrayed? I have 5 AGEOD games, but I have never been able to like any of them.
More of the same I guess
Its exactly as in TYW, very similar to CWII, AJE,...
there are videos where you can see from the UI point of view.
The complexity of the Ageod combat system is long to explain, sometimes even the veterans dont understand it (me included) :tickedoff:
Basically your army will prevail if your leader is a good leader for his stack, your army is well suplied and rested, you have more guns, better troop quality, attack or defensive posture,..
Quote from: dinsdale on February 15, 2017, 08:43:11 PM
Quote from: jomni on February 15, 2017, 04:38:52 PM
Another renaissance title. Was Thirty Year War any good? Does it suit the engine?
http://www.matrixgames.com/products/683/details/EnglishCivilWar
I don't know if any engine can deal with the english civil war! I played a board game; Unhappy King Charles which did a really good job of the strategic feel, albeit without capturing The Rupertine twattery on the battlefield.
Wars In America was really good at tying units to areas and evaporating them at the end of every year, having leaders who are unable to move, hopefully they will put the same effort into this title.
I'm a bit disappointed it ends in '46, most of my favourite bits happen during the second phase of the war.
I hadn't realised they were doing only the first part of the war. The war in Scotland and Ireland is really interesting. Why did they only do part of the war?
There were three wars. Ageod's ECW game currently covers the first one. I'm sure if the game's a commercial success there will be DLC covering the rest of them.
Quote from: CJReich46 on May 15, 2017, 08:26:14 PM
Quote from: Philippe on May 15, 2017, 02:53:06 PM
I remember a board game about the Peloponnesian war where you played solitaire against a system which dictated your general strategy and all of your opponent's actions. Whenever you would start beating your opponent badly, the game would make you switch sides.
That was Mark Herman's Peloponnesian War From Victory Games. *Sigh* I missed that one. However there is a remake of sorts called Pericles.
I've seen praise of the old Peloponnesian War game, as a solitaire experience. Not familiar with it, myself.
Not sure how much Pericles shares with it. Isn't Pericles (http://www.gmtgames.com/p-587-pericles-the-peloponnesian-wars-460-400-bc.aspx) directly based on the much more recent Churchill (http://www.gmtgames.com/p-565-churchill-2nd-printing.aspx)'s system?
Quote from: Philippe on May 22, 2017, 06:47:44 PM
There were three wars. Ageod's ECW game currently covers the first one. I'm sure if the game's a commercial success there will be DLC covering the rest of them.
That's what I was thinking.
Quote from: Boggit on May 23, 2017, 08:23:23 PM
Quote from: Philippe on May 22, 2017, 06:47:44 PM
There were three wars. Ageod's ECW game currently covers the first one. I'm sure if the game's a commercial success there will be DLC covering the rest of them.
That's what I was thinking.
And this title has been priced quite low compared to TYW and the others.
Quote from: Philippe on May 22, 2017, 06:47:44 PM
There were three wars. Ageod's ECW game currently covers the first one.
Well hell. They could have put a 'Part One' on the title...I wondered why it was relatively inexpensive compared to their typical releases. I thought they'd restructured their price strategy and I was impressed as it seemed a perfect quality-to-price ratio. I thought I'd bought the whole deal. Sneaky bastards.
Fun game at a very reasonable price ...
Quote from: Nefaro on May 23, 2017, 01:27:10 AM
Quote from: CJReich46 on May 15, 2017, 08:26:14 PM
Quote from: Philippe on May 15, 2017, 02:53:06 PM
I remember a board game about the Peloponnesian war where you played solitaire against a system which dictated your general strategy and all of your opponent's actions. Whenever you would start beating your opponent badly, the game would make you switch sides.
That was Mark Herman's Peloponnesian War From Victory Games. *Sigh* I missed that one. However there is a remake of sorts called Pericles.
I've seen praise of the old Peloponnesian War game, as a solitaire experience. Not familiar with it, myself.
Not sure how much Pericles shares with it. Isn't Pericles (http://www.gmtgames.com/p-587-pericles-the-peloponnesian-wars-460-400-bc.aspx) directly based on the much more recent Churchill (http://www.gmtgames.com/p-565-churchill-2nd-printing.aspx)'s system?
Pericles is based on Churchill, for sure. I've got both, but haven't played Pericles yet. I started reading the rules a few weeks ago, and it seemed much more complicated than Churchill to me. I'll get back to it before long, but I'm still working my way through Falling Sky at the moment. Silly work keeps getting in the way.
Work is the curse of the gaming class. - George Bernard Shaw.