First (Real) Victory

[06 Maestro]

I have finally completed a game and won. Played the 1792 (victory in Dec 1798) campaign as France with advance economy and 1500 target Glory. I had to give up conducting detailed battles for most of the engagements, but still ran some important/close battles myself. It seems you can get burned by the "instant battle" if you clearly don't have a huge superiority. I seems the battle odds at the top of the screen have a fitting name.[;)]

I can honestly say this was a blast. The AI kept me constantly on guard. It had some good treaty momentum going against me (France)-it seemed as if it was doing its thinking from London.

I avoided surrendering even one time, but was able to keep ahead on the "upgrades". I was very tempted to surrender a couple of times, but that would have put France into a trailing position that would have bee very difficult to overcome. At one point I thought Paris was doomed-there were nearly 1/2 million enemy soldiers pressing on Frances borders. Fortunately, the Turks made up over 200k of that total. I found that with the unit and general advantage that I could beat them easily even if outnumbered 2.5 to 1. Eventually the Russians, Austrians, and Turks all called it quits. Spain refused to surrender even after the capture of Madrid (which, I know, is not a problem)and, of course, those nasty Brits were still landing here and there being a nuisance.

This was really a challenging game-at times with some real intense and logical pressure on my little republic. It certainly has that "just one more turn" quality. I was still playing past midnight when I had to be up at 5am-I'm not prone to get carried away like that (although it has happened a few times before[;)]).

Although I seem to be having some difficulties in the treaty area, I am starting to see how this whole thing comes together-and I have to say that this is really a very well designed game and very enjoyable.

[Hard Sarge]

Great glad you enjoyed it (what Diff levels did you go with ?)

the AI can be pretty slick at times, other times, oh well, but still

[Anthropoid]

One of the real beauties of the game that I am just starting realize, having now tried out Russia a bit, is genius of the advanced economic system. Congrats on another fine episode of one-more-turn syndrome!

[aprezto]

I also am really enjoying it. I want to have a crack at the advanced economy as I haven't broached that yet, then try my hand at a PBEM - they do sound good if you can get a good group. I don't expect to be too much competition but the learning curve is always overcome better against breathing opponents.

[06 Maestro]

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

Great glad you enjoyed it (what Diff levels did you go with ?)

I left it on normal difficulty w/o any glory penalties and Advanced Econ.

the AI can be pretty slick at times, other times, oh well, but still

I will up the ante a little on my next effort. I don't recall reading how the settings affect the AI except the AI counties get more resources-I wonder about combat and treaty effects.

[06 Maestro]

ORIGINAL: Anthropoid

One of the real beauties of the game that I am just starting realize, having now tried out Russia a bit, is genius of the advanced economic system. Congrats on another fine episode of one-more-turn syndrome!

Yes, the advanced economy adds some real interesting strategic dilemmas-especially with Russia. Each nation has a unique situation and thus strategy has to be very different from the other nations. This is really a great aspect to this game.

I can't help but to wonder about how the various production levels for each province were arrived at. This must have been a big job even if only trying to get it half right. The production improvements are are a neat twist in all this also. After seeing how it is done ne might think it would be too easy to double everything in a short time which would be a little unrealistic. However, the actual restraints (wars, losses, labor, money and resources) to such a program are more than enough to keep a player from getting a little too gamey with the game. At the same time, if a player ignores efforts to increase production he will fall behind the antagonists-a great system with lots of re-playability.

[steveh11Matrix]

I don't want to 'put a downer' on the good mood, but I'm getting a different feeling from the game.

Specifically, I'm not getting that "One-More-Turn" syndrome. I'm finding the strategic level game interesting, at least interesting enough to want to persevere with it. But it just doesn't grab me, make me want to play 'just a little more'. As for the tactical game - for me, it's a bust. I appreciate that it's 'in the eye of the beholder' and I wouldn't for a moment criticise those who love it, but... I hate, hate, hate the way the program decides what I can move and when I can move it. Playing with Instant Battles all the time, knowing that there's a tactical system there, feels like playing half a game.

The first patch is out, I've downloaded but not yet run with it. I'll see how that affects things.

Steve.

[Anthropoid]

Hey Steve sorry to hear that is not pleasing. Like you say: one mans award winner just might not do it for another guy. I first got introduced to this engine through Forge of Freedom. In some ways I still prefer that system: FoF has more info about units, they can gain more of those little squares with special abilities and what-not, there are more generals, and generals have more abilities, you can buy (indeed you MUST buy) weapons for your troops, Generals "train" units over time, you can play with General Stats hidden, and you can promote Generals expending political points or something. But apart from that and beign only two nations instead of so many, largely the same game. Oh yeah, the Advanced Econ is simpler in FoF . . . actually probably quite a few other differences too.
 
I know what you mean about the tactical battles. I had a rather allergic reaction when I first tried them: WHAT! I cannot decide which unit to move first!? It is just such a common theme in war games that the player is in the role of "God," it was not just a bit difficult to cope with initially, IIRC I initially hated it. In fact, I think I inquired on the forums about it--will have to see if that thread is still around--anyway to summarize, one of the Devs, Eric or Eric or somebody basically explained the intent of the tactical engine to me: limited command and control. Obviously, you cannot exactly simulate what it is like to be the main General in charge of a battle, and moreover, playing THAT role as well as national commander is clearly a breach of reality. But the intent of the initiative imposed order of action is to come a bit closer to simulating the limited command and control that a battlefield General would have had in real life.
 
Now that I think about it, it WAS quite a learning curve to cope with it. But it forced me to learn my units, both the brigades/divisions inside a container, the containers, and the Generals. In sum, the system forced me to learn the details of the army I was playing with, and to think in advance of each battle about how I would use each component part as portions of a whole and not just move each one individually. While I don't imagine that actually does much for me in real life [:D] once I made that realization of how the thing was intended, i.e., not just as a confusing and obscuring element to annoy me but a highly conscientious design element to make the game a better, and more challenging simulation of battlefield events, getting into that learning curve became a real source of one-more-turn syndrome.
 
To me, that is what is so compelling about strategy games: they make me think, remember, learn, plan, analyze, and in sum, figure out an ecological system. It may seem a bit crazy to think of military organizations, national production, battlefield terrain, etc., as "ecological" but they are. There is an environment, there are predators and prey, there are allies and neutrals, there is a flow of energy. The goal is to understand that "house" (Eco means house in Greek, so Ecology really just means "The House of Nature"), so that you can take control of the flow of energy, make yourself the top predator, and 'win.' To me, once I figure all that stuff out, the game is well on its way to being 'done,' i.e., rarely played anymore, and I find I have to move on to the next one.
 
Anyway, just in hopes that maybe it might help you look at it with a slightly different perspective, and help to maximize the enjoyment on your investment! [:D]

[Ursa MAior]

steve
I always disliked the total control of ALL kind of games (regardless tabletop, computer whatever). If you read after actions reports or descriptions of battles before say WWI you will notice how difficult it was to control any army. At first I disliked the initiative based system of the tac engine too now I simply love it. It feels like I am really there. There is (to be more precise was) not EVERYTHING you could do on a napoleonic battlefield. There was incompetent or lazy or even overzealous sub commander e.g. Look at Ney at Waterloo how he anulled Nappy's plans.

For me CoG EE is a sip of fresh air from helicopter view (yes even with fog of war) TOTAL control games.

Edit
One more thing. After your cavalry charged you never knew how long will it take to reform etc. I just cant stop wondering how historic, realistic yet unpredictable the outcome of tac battles are. If you are interested in bizarre or unusual battlées of that era read Die hard by Philip Haythornthwaite.

Yours truly

[Gil R.]

Thanks for all your comments. Great to see!

[steveh11Matrix]

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

Thanks for all your comments. Great to see!

Grin. ALL of them, Gil? [;)]

[06 Maestro]

ORIGINAL: steveh11Matrix

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

Thanks for all your comments. Great to see!

Grin. ALL of them, Gil? [;)]

I think he knows that he can't please everyone all the time. I do think he would settle for 85%-at least temporarily.[;)] Negative feed back is important too for a dev-so, I would just take him at his word.

[Gil R.]

ORIGINAL: steveh11Matrix

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

Thanks for all your comments. Great to see!

Grin. ALL of them, Gil? [;)]

Well, I liked yours because you said you'd give the game another shot now that the patch is out. Plus you are capable of recognizing that just because you don't like a game doesn't make it a bad game. The gaming world is full of players who can't distinguish between subjectivity and objectivity.

Do let us know if the patch changes your thinking.