Grand Ages Medieval

[JasonPratt]

No one likes it?? Should I even bother installing it on my when it arrives? Dammit all to hell.  :'(

I like it a lot (for my limited playtime so far), but see previous posts about what the game is actually doing.

[undercovergeek]

its this or blood bowl 2 - im still researching

[Rayfer]

I think anyone playing the game needs to be thinking along two lines, in a mixture.

1.) There's a strong Civ/MasterofMagic vibe: you start with a small city in a giant fog, and you send out a scout to find cities and to find small resource nodes which you can raid with some small armies, and you're building up your city (except without walls, which is inane, but whatever), and so forth...

...mixed with...

2.) Sid Meir's Pirates. This game is a DIRECT DESCENDANT to Pirates, via Kalypso's ambitions to constantly remake and update that game to include city management. Your trader == the initial fleet of a small ship, sailing around from port to port buying and selling things. Kalypso married that with city building; and have now married that with more Civvie mechanics (except in real time).

Also, I suspect the campaign is mandatory for learning how to play effectively.

Sid Meier's Pirates....I would have never thought there to be a connection between this new game and that old one. I've been on the fence with this game and after reading your post, I am still firmly affixed there. Thanks for the honest assessment!

[Greybriar]

I wish I hadn't pre-ordered it and instead bought it when it and its DLC was on sale for 80% off.

[sandman2575]

Eh, my interest in this was growing up til launch, but amid very lukewarm reactions I decided to just fire up a new game of Crusader Kings II instead -- only to be reminded once again of how incredibly freakin' amazing CKII is.

[undercovergeek]

ok watched Quills set of vids instead - a lot more informative and entertaining - in almost every comment on all the GAM players video threads there is a multitude of players advising them they are not setting up trade routes right - although the game bears no comparison i feel theres a correlation to Banished here - if you got it wrong, you were going to die slowly or quickly it didnt matter - if you got it right you were golden until the next challenge

its got trade, its got medieval in it, castles and axemen - i should love it, after watching Quill i do more than yesterday - i just feel im trying to convince myself to like it, and im sure, deep down thats not right

[Huw the Poo]

I've seen some people comment that there are clear holes in content where DLCs will be aimed.

Not that I've played it myself however, so I can't comment.

[W8taminute]

Well I'm taking this one off my wishlist. 

[tgb]

From what I've seen I'd pick it up on sale for $15-$20 or less.  Certainly not $40.

[salazarus]

The game is focused around creating trade routs, but the economic model is to simple for a long run. It feels like simpler Patrician IV. Combat is meh, and bandits and animals are annoying. At first glance game looks fine, but after  a while you get disappointed, because it lacks content in every department. 

[DennisS]

A small, but vocal minority on the steam forums demanded walls. Not for any effect on gameplay, just because.

I just do not understand the hate here. It is a very good game, very deep, polished, and with interesting game dynamics.

I heartily recommend this to anyone that wants to spend 100+ hours on micro-managing a massive empire, fighting against AI opponents that have three times as many cities, and ten times as many army units. This is on normal mode. I hesitate to see what gameplay advantages they get on hard.

Biggest word of advice is to guard your pocketbook very, very carefully, and really think about your expenditures. Also..you can buy sympathy, and eventually annex the nearby neutral towns...but wait for the sympathy values to increase over time, due to your trade. BIG money sink there, that can be better utilized to build up your own empire. Good stuff!!

[DennisS]

ok watched Quills set of vids instead - a lot more informative and entertaining - in almost every comment on all the GAM players video threads there is a multitude of players advising them they are not setting up trade routes right - although the game bears no comparison i feel theres a correlation to Banished here - if you got it wrong, you were going to die slowly or quickly it didnt matter - if you got it right you were golden until the next challenge

its got trade, its got medieval in it, castles and axemen - i should love it, after watching Quill i do more than yesterday - i just feel im trying to convince myself to like it, and im sure, deep down thats not right

The trade routes they are referring to are those where you establish maximum and minimum prices. The automatic trader does quite well, and I have no issues with it.

What I find myself doing is to put all traders on automatic, except one, and use that one manual trader to bring specific resources to specific towns, for specific reasons. Building a new granary and need wood? Manually get the wood, and take it where it is needed. The computer may eventually spread out your resources to where it is needed..but if there are intervening stops between your resource and need that ALSO need it...the critical resources may be intercepted and sold off to a neutral city.

This game is very similar to Rise of Venice, at least for the trading. After that, the city settlement aspect is pure gold. RoV coupled with Civ V is a winner.

[Gusington]

What kind of holes have people said are there for future DLC? Are walls on of them?

[undercovergeek]

I just do not understand the hate here. It is a very good game, very deep, polished, and with interesting game dynamics.

reading through as much feedback as possible i get the distinct impression, however much faith i had in humanity, that a lot of people bought it because it looked like Total War with an economic DLC - ive read a review where a guy genuinely expected it to be ALL Medieval 2 but with a massive economic engine bolted on, some bought it because the pictures (yeah, pictures!!) looked like total war with a logistics bent - who in their right fkng mind buys a game today because the 'pictures' looked like XXXX and the you 'thought' it would be like ZZZZ?!?!?

[Greybriar]

....I just do not understand the hate here....

Although I do not hate Grand Ages: Medieval, I believe there are games that are much more fun to play than it is. The keys cannot be remapped to my liking. The manual leaves a lot to be desired and the tech tree .pdf poster is practically impossible to be viewed, therefore gameplay is guesswork and planning is impossible. I simply refuse to view hours' worth of YouTube videos to learn how to play a game that should be easy to learn had the documentation provided with the game been adequately presented.