New AAR - France vs. Austria

[Erik Rutins]

For those of you that may have missed it, we have a new "pocket AAR" up covering some action between France and Austria. You can read through it here:

http://www.matrixgames.com/features/eia ... _page1.asp

[eg0master]

If I could wish for an AAR only a few days before release... I would like to see how PBeM works. I guess lots of stuff have been simplified in order to reduce the number of emails that need to be sent between the players during combat for example.

[von Curow]

ORIGINAL: eg0master

If I could wish for an AAR only a few days before release... I would like to see how PBeM works. I guess lots of stuff have been simplified in order to reduce the number of emails that need to be sent between the players during combat for example.

Yes, I would like to second that. Still, the AARs have sold me on the game. I will enjoy tinkering against the AI, I think. But long-term, this has to be viable for PBEM.

[bresh]

"repeat post warning"

Im bit puzzled by the new AAR-Ralegh !

What new rules allows the Austrian Insurrection corps out of the restricted zones ???

Regards
Bresh

[Monadman]

It’s a programming restriction. EiANW is a combination of EiA, parts of EiH (OOB, map and some rules), and a boatload of deviations. For EiA veterans: whenever you come across what appears to be a contradiction to the EiA rules, check the EiANW rules to see if it is a deviation, chances are that it is a deviation.

Richard

[Ralegh]

All 'deviations' from a combination of EIA and EIH 3.0 are documented.
 
Most of the deviations are to permit PBEM to work - situations where in a boardgame a non-phasing player would make a decision or take an action have to automated somehow to allow the game to proceed.  For example, fleets have a "setting" on where they will intercept or not (intercept all, intercept invasion forces, intercept weaker, dont intercept // also all sea areas or only current sea area) instead of needing te non-phasing player to do something.  With the insurrection corps, we felt that the necessary simplification reduced the usefullness of the corps by too much, so we improved their usefulness a litte to compensate: allowing them to operate in (I think) all Austrian territory.

[Ralegh]

ORIGINAL: eg0master

If I could wish for an AAR only a few days before release... I would like to see how PBeM works. I guess lots of stuff have been simplified in order to reduce the number of emails that need to be sent between the players during combat for example.

Sob. I guess I missed the chance to do that. Sorry.

(FWIW, the main game testers are all playing a PBEM against each other at the moment - not testing: having fun!)

[Monadman]

ORIGINAL: Ralegh
With the insurrection corps, we felt that the necessary simplification reduced the usefullness of the corps by too much, so we improved their usefulness a litte to compensate: allowing them to operate in (I think) all Austrian territory.

Yeah, that was the delivery Marshall gave the test team at the time. This deviation (unlike most that are currently in use) is really is an old “EiA-like” design left over that was foraged by programming restrictions at the time. With any luck (prioritization dependent) this will be change and the Austrian player will gain some control over the Insurrection Corps placement when triggered and be restricted in movement outside of those designated provinces (currently, they have full access to all Austrian provinces).

Richard

[JavaJoe]

ORIGINAL: Ralegh

ORIGINAL: eg0master

If I could wish for an AAR only a few days before release... I would like to see how PBeM works. I guess lots of stuff have been simplified in order to reduce the number of emails that need to be sent between the players during combat for example.

Sob. I guess I missed the chance to do that. Sorry.

(FWIW, the main game testers are all playing a PBEM against each other at the moment - not testing: having fun!)

Currently testing as we speak