Brother against brother

[Jarhead0331]

It really bums me out when new game discussions immediately devolve to price discussions.   :-\

...or DRM for that matter.

Simple fact is, if the game is good, it will sell. I don't really care about attracting new users on steam. Hardcore wargamers will buy it if given a reason to. I'm ready to purchase, I just want to hear some feedback first.

[GJK]

Man...if only this had Sharpsburg or 2nd Manassas even it would be an instant buy.  It seems very much to be a PC version of The Gamers "Line of Battle" series of games of which I'm delving in to now.  Eric, any early ideas on when additional maps/scenarios/campaigns will be added to the game and will those come as add-ons or as separate (and complete) games within themselves?

[Slick Wilhelm]

Of course I'm all in with this title. I've been waiting and testing for years to finally see this day arrive. I hope this series becomes wildly popular so that they can add more battles and scenarios. I doubt that it will ever grow into Forge of Freedom 2, but that's ok for now.

I will be playing BAB tonight, and will report back.

[bayonetbrant]

ahem....

http://grogheads.com/?p=7903

that is all ;)

[Slick Wilhelm]

ahem....

http://grogheads.com/?p=7903

that is all ;)

Very nice, bb. Yogi and I had a couple of really fun PBEM matches a few years ago before the lovely new maps arrived. The game was already a blast back then, and it looks even more polished now.  O0

[Tuna]

Will future battles be full games, or expansions?

[spelk]

A quick criticism from me, is that when combat resolves (no matter the zoom selected when planning) the game zooms out to a far view (presumably to get the whole combat on the screen at once), but it just makes appreciating the resolution of the combat a bit "squinty" and you're distanced from it all.

See this screenshot:



Approx 80% of the screen is superfluous to the resolution of the combat.

Overall, I like the plan/resolve cycle, and the command and leader complexity. The level of detail you can uncover about the combat and the modifiers is really outstanding. But the actual visual (and usually the exciting 'reveal' part of it all) is actually weakened by the distance its presented at.

I wonder if there is a setting (I couldn't find it), or perhaps a proposed setting to set the zoom level of the combat resolution?

Also, I'd put flags against the units names in the combat details window (they are there in the above Turn summary window - but in each individual combat resolution window - the names of the combatants are just written out in text), just so you don't have to pick out the units name from the text, and then work out what side its on from where it was formed. Obviously this could be more of an issue with a clueless limey. :)

I really enjoyed Erik's twitch stream intro to the game, it sort of got things moving without too much mithering in the manual.

[GJK]

It does seem backwards; I would think that it would zoom IN to the battle (the affected unit if not both the firer and target) and then zoom back OUT for the 'big picture' overview.

[JudgeDredd]

It really bums me out when new game discussions immediately devolve to price discussions.   :-\

First of all I apologise.

But the price is important to me. I felt compelled to inform the developers that I couldn't pay that price. I wasn't actually telling them to reduce it. I wasn't bitching. I was just informing them the reason I wouldn't be buying it yet.

I was already thinking about picking it up as there was an issue with the online store which showed the price was exclusive of tax and Erik pointed out the price now showed including tax.

I also apologised if I got that wrong - but that's what I recalled seeing.

[Gil R.]

Will future battles be full games, or expansions?

Each BAB title -- assuming this first release is popular enough for it to become a series! -- will be a stand-alone game, built around 1-2 major battles and 2-3 lesser ones.  I say a bit more in the FAQ thread:  http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2453818

[bbmike]

Will future battles be full games, or expansions?

Each BAB title -- assuming this first release is popular enough for it to become a series! -- will be a stand-alone game, built around 1-2 major battles and 2-3 lesser ones.  I say a bit more in the FAQ thread:  http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2453818

And in addition, Gil forgot to mention that Forge of Freedom 2 is in the works.  >:D ::)

[Gil R.]

Man...if only this had Sharpsburg or 2nd Manassas even it would be an instant buy.  It seems very much to be a PC version of The Gamers "Line of Battle" series of games of which I'm delving in to now.  Eric, any early ideas on when additional maps/scenarios/campaigns will be added to the game and will those come as add-ons or as separate (and complete) games within themselves?

Adding to what I just wrote to Tuna, we will begin serious work on BAB#2 this summer -- assuming sales suggest we should! -- so my hope is early next year to have it out.  That is not a promise, but an estimate.  We already have the 2nd Manassas map completed, since our artist and I made a super-giant map of the area that could be carved into a 1st Manassas map and 2nd Manassas map, and I've done a lot of the OOB work, but I still need to research and draw the Seven Days Battles maps, which are very large, and I doubt I'd finish that before autumn.   But early next year is possible.

As for new scenarios, we'll be releasing those regularly, and for free.  Probably next week I'll have time to start working on the next one.

[Gil R.]

...
With the exception of Bull Run these are fairly obscure battles that are unlikely to win much of a mass audience.  The only way to attract a mass audience for the series (if there ever is a series) is to price the games low enough so that the typical Steam user says 'what the heck, I've never heard of Wilson's Creek, but for twenty bucks it might be fun'.  Impulse buys happen at ten dollars or less, at twenty bucks you need to have some connection to something to attract new users.  There's not much of a connection here, and the price is a killer.
...

Philippe, there is a chance you are correct about price/sales, but it is my hope that, even if three of the battles are obscure, people become convinced that they are wrongly  obscure.  Each of the battles we chose has a very interesting back-story, and the battle itself is likewise interesting and compelling.  Moreover, putting aside the visual appeal of the maps, the four non-Manassas maps each have some very challenging terrain.  Even if someone has never heard of Beech Grove and the CSA encampment there, I'd think that one look at the map should make him think "I've never heard of Beech Grove, but I've got to try fighting out a battle there."  So even without the quality of the program, the detail of the OOB's and everything else that we hope will make BAB a hit, the individual battles and their battlefields are very much worth people's time (and money).

[Gil R.]

Of course I'm all in with this title. I've been waiting and testing for years to finally see this day arrive. I hope this series becomes wildly popular so that they can add more battles and scenarios. I doubt that it will ever grow into Forge of Freedom 2, but that's ok for now.

I will be playing BAB tonight, and will report back.

It's great to see this.  It is no understatement to say that BAB would not be as good without your countless hours of testing.

And no, BAB will not grow into a FOF2, but Eric and I would certainly like to make FOF2.  Not in the next few years, though -- too many other projects.

[Gil R.]

A quick criticism from me, is that when combat resolves (no matter the zoom selected when planning) the game zooms out to a far view (presumably to get the whole combat on the screen at once), but it just makes appreciating the resolution of the combat a bit "squinty" and you're distanced from it all.

See this screenshot:
...

Approx 80% of the screen is superfluous to the resolution of the combat.

Overall, I like the plan/resolve cycle, and the command and leader complexity. The level of detail you can uncover about the combat and the modifiers is really outstanding. But the actual visual (and usually the exciting 'reveal' part of it all) is actually weakened by the distance its presented at.

I wonder if there is a setting (I couldn't find it), or perhaps a proposed setting to set the zoom level of the combat resolution?

Also, I'd put flags against the units names in the combat details window (they are there in the above Turn summary window - but in each individual combat resolution window - the names of the combatants are just written out in text), just so you don't have to pick out the units name from the text, and then work out what side its on from where it was formed. Obviously this could be more of an issue with a clueless limey. :)

I really enjoyed Erik's twitch stream intro to the game, it sort of got things moving without too much mithering in the manual.

Thank you for your comments.  I've passed them along to our programmer.