Why am I not getting into Ageod games?

[DicedT]

I have Espana 1936, Civil War II, and other Ageod games. They are well-made, cover interesting topics and display plenty of historical research.

And yet I'm not getting into them. I can usually get a feel for how a game should flow, but not with them. I don't have a good sense of how a campaign should proceed, and I don't have a good sense of how different units behave in movement and combat, not to mention supply. The mix-and-match system of moving combat units into and out of container formations is interesting, but a bit clunky.

One aspect I find difficult is the graphics. I would love if they had NATO symbols with combat and movement valued prominently displayed. The leader portraits I find peculiar, and more appropriate for a Napoleonic game than a 20th Century war.

Is it just me? I feel like that as a grog, I should be into these games. Am I a wargaming Philistine who can't appreciate aesthetics?

Michael

[Tuna]

I think AGEOD is like Slim Jims.. some people like em, some people don't.. But there is also the group, that just has to keep trying till they 'get it'.. and then they turn to the side of people that like em!.. Thing is.. don't want to waste too much time or money if you're not going to get into it.

[Rayfer]

I share your feelings DicedT....I'm working on ACW2 right now, I like it better than the first but it is still has a steep learning curve.

[PanzersEast]

I think they go a great job with their games, however they are very abstract and it takes effort and time to dig down and see what is going on and get feedback......  and it really slows down gameplay.  I think their games appeal to more of board game players than any other (I am not a board gamer).  The UI is not stream lined and it takes more time to manage each represented unit on the map, and with AJE it is a very large map and turns can take a while before moving.... although this is not necessarily a bad thing, it makes you think more strategically...... their games come and go in spurts for me.


PE

[MengJiao]

I have Espana 1936, Civil War II, and other Ageod games. They are well-made, cover interesting topics and display plenty of historical research.

And yet I'm not getting into them. I can usually get a feel for how a game should flow, but not with them. I don't have a good sense of how a campaign should proceed, and I don't have a good sense of how different units behave in movement and combat, not to mention supply. The mix-and-match system of moving combat units into and out of container formations is interesting, but a bit clunky.

One aspect I find difficult is the graphics. I would love if they had NATO symbols with combat and movement valued prominently displayed. The leader portraits I find peculiar, and more appropriate for a Napoleonic game than a 20th Century war.

Is it just me? I feel like that as a grog, I should be into these games. Am I a wargaming Philistine who can't appreciate aesthetics?

Michael

  I can sympathize.  I think I've gotten every AGEOD game and I've only really liked RUS and RoP.  RUS was the first one I actually managed to get to work from my point of view and RoP was the first one I managed to win.

  The graphics -- well they are cranky, though sometimes in a good way.  I won't go into what I don't like about the games because -- well -- that would take days -- BUT what I came to enjoy about RoP (and to some degree RUS) was the kind of twisted thinking it takes to beat the AI.  Ordinarily one attritions an AI to a critical point in a place where it should just run away -- don't try that with the AGEOD AI.  Here's what I ended up doing in RoP.  I would attack on one axis (with "sloppy support") and "pretend" to leave some supply lines open to attack just before winter.  The AI would kill itself trying to cut me off in some esoteric way.  Almost all of the Austrian (AI) army died of cold and starvation in the hills of Bohemia trying to make me starve in Prague.  I was probably lucky that winter came early and of course the AI almost crushed me before I managed this tricky event -- But notice how different this is from your average AI -- it plays the attrition game but only to a point -- it would rather obliterate you without attrition -- WHICH (and notice this is different from most games) IS POSSIBLE.
  Also notice the AGEOD AI can analyze your supply network and wait until the moment when winter is coming and then try to wipe you out completely.  I've never seen an AI that sneaky.  But once you know how sneaky the AGEOD AI is, then you can work out ways to use that against it by constructing a supply network that only seems to have a weak point, for example -- I'm sure there are other ways the AI pushes you to do some deep strategic thinking.
  Anyway, good luck with AGEOD.  I'm resigned to playing them all, but I can understand a strong impulse to skip them.

[Grimnirsson]

Same here, I like what I see but I always have the feeling that what I do is not enough, that I don't realize all the possibilities. It's just clicking units here and there or so it seems and I am a board wargamer ;)

Still, I don't give up :)

[Jarhead0331]

I think Ageod games can be criticized from several different perspectives.  However, unit graphics is one that I have not heard.  Ageod games are generally praised for the artistic quality of the unit cards and map.

I too have had some trouble getting into some of the more complex Ageod titles, such as the first ACW and the Napoleonic title...however, the smaller more manageable titles have really captured me...especially both Birth and War in America titles. Just spectacular games there.

[Hiimori]

And I thought it was only me  :P

I'm currently trying to play AJE, but I always get the feeling that I'm missing 3/4 of my opportunities in a given situation.

I'm moving units here and there, conducting attacks or sieges, but I'm never under the impression that I have control over the game, that I know exactly what I'm doing or what I could do in a given situation. So almost no planning in advance and never playing to my full potential.

Oh, and I'm a board gamer as well, I even play Imperium Romanum II, which is a true monster.

[DicedT]

The graphics are quite attractive, Jarhead. Just not very functional. There are lots of tiny symbols that aren't clear.

What I would really like to do is just glance at the map and be able to assess the situation. "Ah, there is a strong enemy army there. Oh, my strongest division is here."

Perhaps the word I'm looking for is "situational awareness"?

Michael

[Nefaro]

The graphics are quite attractive, Jarhead. Just not very functional. There are lots of tiny symbols that aren't clear.

What I would really like to do is just glance at the map and be able to assess the situation. "Ah, there is a strong enemy army there. Oh, my strongest division is here."

Perhaps the word I'm looking for is "situational awareness"?

Michael

The size of the maps, combined with the issue of occasionally having multiple stacks of military units in the same region on top of one another, has always been something to struggle with.  Even for the experienced players who know what they're doing, IMO. 

I know how to play the game and most of the little hidden details that helps you make well-informed decisions.  However, getting a good overview of the whole picture is nigh impossible and cycling through all the units to make sure you haven't forgotten anyone can be very time consuming each turn.  I spend far more time cycling through the scattered individual ones and giving them orders than I do with my fewer larger armies. 

These issues grow the larger the scenarios playable map area is.  These are the only complaints I have regarding how they play out, and it's mostly due to all the extra time spent.  The large map overview which shows colored dots for your troops can help overall orientation, to some extent, but not all titles have them and they still don't indicate relative combat strength between each one.

Nevertheless, my enjoyment of the AGE games grew tremendously after I had figured the system out.  Luckily I did that long ago with the original ACW game and the mechanics are mostly the same between them all (with some specific changes such as supply rules). 

[jomni]

I get tired playing ageod games once my attack of doom keeps retreating (due to lack of readiness). The Ai on the other hand is always ready. Do they cheat in this aspect?

[BigBlueFleet]

I'm conservative in my purchases but I'm really itching to pull the trigger on Espana 1936.  Looks like a well made title.

[Nefaro]

I get tired playing ageod games once my attack of doom keeps retreating (due to lack of readiness). The Ai on the other hand is always ready. Do they cheat in this aspect?

Don't march for two weeks straight into a battle.  Try to give your little digital soldiers a breather for a few days, on occasion.  Especially before moving into a region with an enemy army in it. 

I try to keep each turn's moves a few days under the 15 days so there is always a little rest time on the end to get back some readiness.  Once the stack's readiness bar approaches about half-filled, I'll let them just sit for a turn to get back to full readiness.  Even drop them inside a friendly-owned city there if I don't need to defend that region at the moment, if that stack is really worn down. 

Check the tooltip on one of the depleted unit's counters or divisions, in the bottom info bar.  It will tell you how many Readiness points it will regain at it's current location and ROE settings (if it isn't at full).  That will give you an idea how much they will regain over a whole turn of rest and you can adjust ROE (or drop in a city) as needed.  If it's really bad and there are no enemies anywhere near (you ARE sending out cavalry to scout, right?) you can set ROE to 'Passive' and it will give you the highest Readiness regeneration per day while out in the open.  However, you don't want to be in a fight on Passive so use it only when you're in an unthreatened location.

tl;dr - Do not enter an enemy occupied region while your Readiness is low!  Rest them first.  ;)

[tgb]

Ageod's games always sound like they would be right up my alley, and I've bought most of them, but I get bored after a week or two of play and rarely go back.

[spelk]

Ageod's games always sound like they would be right up my alley, and I've bought most of them, but I get bored after a week or two of play and rarely go back.

I think you have to have a burning love for the theme of the game to eek out as much enjoyment as you can. If you're just mildly interested the titles often require much more effort put into them, than perhaps your enthusiam will allow, and they end up as very dry unit shufflers that take a long time to simulatenously resolve, and the battle reports are quite stats and icons heavy with little emotional or visual flavour. If you're invested in a subject, then they should simply enable you to wallow in the pleasure of it all. Or at least thats what I've found personally.

At first I couldn't grasp the concepts, but I forced a few days of intense learning on mechanics, and finally come round to the issues in play and really enjoyed playing ACW. I must say thought that I often shy away from large scenarios, I just can't maintain momentum. I usually do the small more manageable stuff.