To End All Wars released today

[Queeg]

You are conducting diplomacy via Regional Decisions. If you do not have Diplomat Regional Decisions to send to the Diplomacy track, all the Diplomacy information on that track is doing is giving you information on the diplomatic state of the various countries, and I don't think we should disable that for Russia.

I would argue that having diplomatic efforts concentrated in one hand is better, especially since the Western Entente WAS the real driving force behind the diplomatic efforts portrayed in the game. So I am not seeing the issue, really.

The diplomacy model while might seem simple as it is pretty easy to handle (drag and dop diplomats to the target countries), it does take several historical factors into account. Beside the diplomatic efforts, countries drift toward their "stance", so either neutral, pro-CP, or pro-Entente, while there is a big number of events and decisions influencing the diplomacy level of countries, including the joining of their rivals to any of the factions. Plus this whole system allows for a-historical outcomes (eg. Bulgaria joining the Entente).

On the other strategical fronts we have tech research, blockade and submarine warfare, and production/economy, plus national politics with a national morale level and options to influence it.  Hardly "strategy lite"  ;)

Posted this over on the. Matrix forums in response to the same rationalization:

Russia had it's own strategic aspirations and diplomatic goals - there was no universal strategy. Yes, each of the Entente nations shared the common goal of winning the war. But each had very different ideas about what victory would achieve.

Russia actually had significant diplomatic success early in the war. For example, despite the fact that Britain and France had both strenuously opposed the Russian goal of gaining access to the Bosporus and the Dardanelles throughout the 19th Century (even fighting the Crimean War over it), both agreed in the spring of 1915 to Russia's postwar acquisition of them, the city of Constantinople, and the adjacent littoral.

While those goals are difficult to translate into game terms, they illustrate that the goals of a Russian-focused diplomacy might look very different from a more western-focused one. For example, would Russia benefit most from the USA or Romania entering the war? From Belgium or Bulgaria remaining neutral? And who's to say Russia would not have had greater diplomatic success later in the war had they had better success on the battlefield?

If the decision was truly one of game design, then it's a poor one - removing options is never the best idea for gameplay. More likely it was made for coding reasons - too much work to do it right - and the explanation now is just rationalization. As it stands now, you can play the WE and kinda play the EE. Hard to argue that makes it a better game. 

The point is that (1) an EE player reasonably might want to emphasize different diplomatic objectives than a WE player and (2) even if you assume both would do exactly the same thing, it's more fun and a much better game if you let the actual human - you know, the guy who bought the game from you - be the one who gets to play the game.  Surely you can see the difference?

You said over on the AGEOD boards that you want EAW to be the best WWI strategy/wargame on the market.  Good.  But these sorts of shortcuts won't get you there. 

[Tamas]

It is not a shortcut. There was nothing stopping us from dividing up the diplomats among the two Entente factions. It was a deliberate design decision. I am sorry it is not to your liking, but we found it to be more realistic than having Russia with the same say in Entente diplomacy as the West.

[Queeg]

It is not a shortcut. There was nothing stopping us from dividing up the diplomats among the two Entente factions. It was a deliberate design decision. I am sorry it is not to your liking, but we found it to be more realistic than having Russia with the same say in Entente diplomacy as the West.

Thanks for the explanation.  So you consciously decided to design the game to give the player fewer choices than, say, your other WWI game (WWI Gold).   Hence my description of EAW as "strategy lite." 

[Tamas]

On the spectrum of the available games on the Great War, I would most definitely not put TEAW on the "lite" section. :) And applying historical limits (ie. keeping the historical balance between CP and Entente diplomacy) is not the same as limiting options.

[mikeck]

I guess it depends on what you like. AGEOD games have always been about operations. Basically unit organization, supply, campaign planning, etc. They have never really been strategy games which rely on production, diplomacy, etc.  It's not to say that EAW doesn't have those things, just that-to me- it's natural that it won't do them as well as a game like WW1 gold.

On the other hand, army organization, supplies, all of the factors going into combat, etc are "lighter" in WW1 gold. So I agree that EAW is "strategy life" because it is concentrating on operations. Other games do strategic decisions like diplomacy better.  But what the AGE engine does do...it does it better than any other game as far as I am concerned and that's organization of campaign operations.

If you are looking for deep diplomacy, production choices, etc, that's not what these games are. They do that stuff well enough for me, but maybe not for others.

Just as Queeg is a proponent of WW1G (which I like very much), I am for AGE engine games.

Queeg, on another note, I DID buy WW1CE before it got pulled but have not tried it. Will steam let me run it if I already bought it?

[tgb]

I can tell you that having started as Russia, I have no interest in continuing if I don't have the same range of options as other factions.  I understand your point from an historical standpoint, but at the very lease you could have put it into the descriptions when choosing which faction to play.

[Queeg]

On the spectrum of the available games on the Great War, I would most definitely not put TEAW on the "lite" section. :) And applying historical limits (ie. keeping the historical balance between CP and Entente diplomacy) is not the same as limiting options.

There you go again - you agreed earlier that you could have achieved the proper historical balance while still giving the EE player something to do.   Instead you decided to let the AI have all the fun.  When you remove a player choice - let the AI have the fun instead of the poor human slob who paid for the game - then you really need to have very good reason for it. That's the difference between a game and a program.  I know you can see the difference. 

We'll agree to disagree. 

[Queeg]

Queeg, on another note, I DID buy WW1CE before it got pulled but have not tried it. Will steam let me run it if I already bought it?

If it shows up in your library, you can download it.   I did it just last night (after borking my files by modding run amok). 

[panzerde]

I'm not sure that I'm ready to throw in the towel on this game yet, because from a graphics and UI perspective it is clearly AGEOD's best effort to date, but...the East Prussian campaign is a disaster historically. Due to how the game mobilizes the German Army and handles Von Prittwitz's replacement by Paul von Hindenburg, it is impossible to do anything with the German army in the first turn of the campaign. This means you can not fight the initial frontier battles, and worse, are forced to commit 8.Armee piecemeal rather than a unified whole.

Some of this is due to the two week turn duration. If the German army were mobilized at the start of the first turn, as the Russians are, you could follow history. I'm not sure why this wasn't done, but even at the beginning of the second turn, after Hindenburg takes command, the entire 8.Armee is still not mobilized. It's only a seven turn scenario, for crying out loud.

Granted that I'm a bit focused on this right now because I'm reading about this campaign and playing out a good bit of it via Tiller's East Prussia '14. Unfortunately the way this campaign is set up robs me of any desire to play it. I guess I'll give the larger "historical" campaign a try in the hope that the compromises are a bit less distracting.

[Queeg]

I'm not sure that I'm ready to throw in the towel on this game yet, because from a graphics and UI perspective it is clearly AGEOD's best effort to date, but...the East Prussian campaign is a disaster historically. Due to how the game mobilizes the German Army and handles Von Prittwitz's replacement by Paul von Hindenburg, it is impossible to do anything with the German army in the first turn of the campaign. This means you can not fight the initial frontier battles, and worse, are forced to commit 8.Armee piecemeal rather than a unified whole.

Some of this is due to the two week turn duration. If the German army were mobilized at the start of the first turn, as the Russians are, you could follow history. I'm not sure why this wasn't done, but even at the beginning of the second turn, after Hindenburg takes command, the entire 8.Armee is still not mobilized. It's only a seven turn scenario, for crying out loud.

Granted that I'm a bit focused on this right now because I'm reading about this campaign and playing out a good bit of it via Tiller's East Prussia '14. Unfortunately the way this campaign is set up robs my of any desire to play it. I guess I'll give the larger "historical" campaign a try in the hope that the compromises are a bit less distracting.

Agreed.  The Tannenberg scenario in WWI Gold was set up the same way.  My suspicion is that they copied that setup here.

Using the railroad to shuttle Hindenburg's army to engage the Russian 1st and 2nd Armies, in sequence, on the same turn (as explained in the tutorial) helps.  That's a nice feature actually. 

[panzerde]

Yes, that strategy from the tutorial works. I'm just put off that the deployments and mobilization for the campaign are so inaccurate.

[Sir Slash]

And did I see Scheer as admiral of the High Seas Fleet in 1914? Maybe only a minor point.

[mikeck]

Just FYI, the new patch is nearing the end of beta (it's in build 7). It included a lot of changes but the biggest are below. I think these will address the problems of trench loss and MTSG issues expressed here:

"Gameplay (4 entries)
Grand Headquarter can have more armies.
TrenchLevel memory: If you have at least 50% military control, you can get the previous trenches of the region!
Improved supply in-stack distribution
Stacks helping others through MTSG will be placed back in their original region, even if in retreat. Posture will be defensive, not passive.
RC7: Stacks assaulting a structure and ordered to retreat will simply stop the attack."

[Nefaro]

Just FYI, the new patch is nearing the end of beta (it's in build 7). It included a lot of changes but the biggest are below. I think these will address the problems of trench loss and MTSG issues expressed here:

"Gameplay (4 entries)
Grand Headquarter can have more armies.
TrenchLevel memory: If you have at least 50% military control, you can get the previous trenches of the region!
Improved supply in-stack distribution
Stacks helping others through MTSG will be placed back in their original region, even if in retreat. Posture will be defensive, not passive.
RC7: Stacks assaulting a structure and ordered to retreat will simply stop the attack."

Excellent.

The trench retention & MtSG stuff was much needed.

[mikeck]

New patch released:
Fixes the "leaving trenches" issue

Following the release of To End All Wars last summer, the biggest Great War strategy game gets a huge update today! Thanks you the great feedbacks on the game, we have been able dig into the code to create a much improved overall experience for this already solid game. The patch includes a great number of fixes, such as some of the strange naval movements in the Atlantic Ocean, as well as balance changes, including the artillery rework. Further changes include the addition of new generals (with historical pictures!) as well as various AI logic improvements. All of this underlines the developers' continued support for To End All Wars in cooperation with the great community!

The patch will be downloaded automatically as soon as it is available via your Steam client.

Change History v1.01:

Gameplay
•   Grand Headquarter can have more armies.
•   TrenchLevel memory: If you have at least 50% military control, you can get the previous trenches of the region!
•   Improved supply in-stack distribution
•   Stacks helping others through MTSG will be placed back in their original region, even if in retreat. Posture will be defensive, not passive.
•   Stacks assaulting a structure and ordered to retreat will simply stop the attack.

Interface & engine
•   Decision cost added instantly to interface.
•   Fixed negative display loss in resources.
•   Fixed reversed battle plans effect display
•   Fixed bullets display in cityscape
•   Message panel opens on scenario start (allows seeing first red pop up)
•   Fixed resources costs display issue (gui game options)
•   Fixed crash in stack panel
•   Added back random variation in display loss
•   Commander in Chief indicator shown in Stack panel (in yellow and in tooltip on unit)
•   Music sound volume can now be tweaked (yeah!) - need editing a file though:
•   you can alter music volume by adding a value between 20 and 100 in UserInterface.opt
•   inoMusicVolume = 60 // music volume, default is 60
•   Tooltips are shown in hosting if battle report or planner visible
•   Can see up to 20 nation tags in recruit panel
•   Regions list show ammo amounts only in the supply column
•   Supply filter (2) improved
•   Fixed railpool value disappearing if at the low level
•   Flag shown during an ongoing battle will be the one of the Commander in chief.
•   Fixed a display glitch in message panel
•   Battle planner improvements:
o   Day of battle shown
o   Colored, more detailed battle plans description with advice
o   Terrain tooltip shown on terrain icon
•   Up to 3 leaders (the most important ones) per side shown, with tooltip indicating their command
•   % of your troops (and number of elements) in infantry, cavalry, artillery, tank. Same for the enemy.
•   Most preeminent posture shown for you and enemy. If low cohesion, special indicator.
•   In Ledger, Unit List, units under construction are now shown as fixed.
•   Enlarged Event window for better readability
•   New option (Main Menu/Options/Media Tab) to get back the old postures/ROE buttons
•   Equipment captured during battle traced in turn history
•   Can't enter anymore (and erroneously) in structures not designed to handle sieges
•   When doing drag&drop, name of over region appears
•   Added 2 moddings options for script command AlterCuSubUnit : SetSupplyPerc & SetAmmoPerc
•   Can open saved game folder in Load Game Window, if doing a ctrl-click on the game icon
•   Fixed a display bug in region list leading to false infos
•   Ammo trains gauge now displays ... ammos!
•   Innate supply production of a region is now shown in the first structure tooltip when checking structures by ctrl-click.
•   Also corrected supply and assets production not taking into account loyalty/alignment
•   Tooltip background rectangle can have color and opacity changed by modding

Historical setting, data and events
•   Fix for weird off map naval moves in the Atlantic Ocean
•   Events to cover arrival of US forces in France.
•   Added AI events for key landings (Basra, Dardanelles, Riga Gulf, Finland)
•   Exported 2 new scenarios (West 1914, East 1914) for further testing – please provide feedback
•   Spanish translation included: many thanks to Picaron and Haplo for their precious help
•   German translation included: many thanks to Dominic and Gerd for their precious help
•   More ammos on units, revised artillery usage and power
•   Reintroduced the Baltic Shipping box as a shipping/commerce offmap box, for supplies and trade
•   17 new Russian generals (with their pictures) added + fix to 5 other Russian generals
•   Fixed missing RR links in southern Finland (Helsinki-Lovisa-Kotka)
•   Added Events for Japanese siege and assault on Tsingtau (only if Japan joins the entente)
•   Added Events for heavy warships 1914 under construction (GER, FRA, RUS and AUS)
•   Fixed double generals (Artamonov at start, Sarrail when Salonika option taken)
•   All 3*** leaders CombatDeathChance set back to 0, to avoid losing a GHQ commander from a stray bullet...
•   NavalBase / TradePort: SupplyWant & AmmoWant level increased (3 to 8)
•   Islands and off-map regions local supplies increased, should help fix Singapore or Helgoland issues
•   Army_GER_Riemann : file named erroneous, now fixed (added correctly named file)
•   Leader Savov (BUL) missing pictures added + Fixed errors in other portraits
•   Added more corps names for factions to avoid blank names when exceeding the 100 mark.

AI
•   SplitLargeStacks anti doomstack algorithm
•   AI better at buying replacements and units
•   AI Agents will be less predictable
•   Tweaked AI so that commerce ships stay much more in commerce box
•   AI less prone in retreating into structures in regions part of the front.
•   Initial AI agents removed after 4 turns
•   AI Agent infos on stack tooltip (debug mode only)
•   Less recombination per turn
•   AI help to construction of Anzac and Indian troops to Egypt
•   AI will focus less on Antwerp
•   AI will calculate fronts faster