How is PBEM in this game going to be implemented? There are seven playable sides in the game IIRC, will there be any "teams" or shall we have 7 separate PBEM players in the game, each controlling his side?
O.
PBEM question
Moderator: MOD_EIA
RE: PBEM question
Each country can be controlled by an AI or human so you can pretty much pick and choose how you want to play it Oleg.
-
Oleg Mastruko
- Posts: 4534
- Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2000 8:00 am
RE: PBEM question
Yes but is it like in WAW [:D] where WA and SU are allies and can be controlled by one player, or two (whatever is more suitable)?
I get the impression this won't be possible in EIA, since empires switched alliances, changed sides etc. during the period covered by this game. So if we want to play EIA PBEM seriously, we'll have to do it with 7 players, or, perhaps, 3 human players with 4 less attractive sides set on AI control? Am I right? Will anyone want to play this as Spain? I guess Spain will be equivalent of China in WAW [:D]
Also, I guess it depends on a scenario. If scenario covers only year or two, then some stable alliances may be formed, ie. it should be realistic to have 2-3 allied sides controlled by one player, yes? Now there's a question of scenarios... will there be separate, smaller scenarios, or just one big campaign? Now that I mentioned it - what period will be covered by "Big Campaign"? And how long does it take to play one turn in this system?
I've never played the board version of EIA so have that in mind... I'm newbie when it comes to Napoleonic strategy games (played some tactical Nappy games though)
O.
I get the impression this won't be possible in EIA, since empires switched alliances, changed sides etc. during the period covered by this game. So if we want to play EIA PBEM seriously, we'll have to do it with 7 players, or, perhaps, 3 human players with 4 less attractive sides set on AI control? Am I right? Will anyone want to play this as Spain? I guess Spain will be equivalent of China in WAW [:D]
Also, I guess it depends on a scenario. If scenario covers only year or two, then some stable alliances may be formed, ie. it should be realistic to have 2-3 allied sides controlled by one player, yes? Now there's a question of scenarios... will there be separate, smaller scenarios, or just one big campaign? Now that I mentioned it - what period will be covered by "Big Campaign"? And how long does it take to play one turn in this system?
I've never played the board version of EIA so have that in mind... I'm newbie when it comes to Napoleonic strategy games (played some tactical Nappy games though)
O.
RE: PBEM question
The board game actually had rules for UMPs (Uncontrolled Major Powers) that made for a weak 2-player Campaign game in my opinion, but did pretty well beyond that. Not sure what the devs are doing on scenarios but again, the board game included these too, and there were basically the French, the anti-French alliance, and neutrals in each scenario, making for an easier 2-player game. The Grand Campaign game is 1805-1815 in EiA. Several scenarios (2-player games) and Campaign Games (multiplayer) exist in the board game: 1805 Scenario Sep 1805 - Dec 1805 (Tutorial Game); 1809 Scenario (Danube Campaign) Apr 1809 - Jul 1809; 1812 Scenario (Russian Campaign) Jun 1812 - Feb 1813; 1813-4 Scenario (Der Befreiungskreig) Apr 1813 - Apr 1814; 1808-1814 (Penninsular War) Jun 1808 - Apr 1814; 1805-7 Campaign Game Jan 1805 - Dec 1807; 1812-5 Campaign Game Jun 1812 - Dec 1815; 1813-5 Campaign Game Apr 1813 - Dec 1815; and the grand Campaign Game 1805 - 1815 Jan 1805 - Dec 1815.
There are MANY alternate war rules out their too, including the War of Austrian Succession, the War of Spanish Succession, Thirty Years War (have not seen this one in a while and never played it - I was sort of iffy on it being done), French Revolution 1792-1805 (one of my favorite variations) and a few others that I have not played. EiH that is mentioned here is an alternate set of rules mostly increasing naval engagements and adding leaders that a lot of people like (and for some reason seem to think it unfairly adjusts against whatever country they happen to be playing - I have heard players say Britain's navy is stronger here and then had Britain players say there were being made even weaker - I think they are stronger in the long run but initially face a harder time recasting Trafalgar).
I got a full set of rules online (including erratta) from here: http://eia.xnetz.com/
Empires in Harm is here: http://www.empiresinharm.com/
There are MANY alternate war rules out their too, including the War of Austrian Succession, the War of Spanish Succession, Thirty Years War (have not seen this one in a while and never played it - I was sort of iffy on it being done), French Revolution 1792-1805 (one of my favorite variations) and a few others that I have not played. EiH that is mentioned here is an alternate set of rules mostly increasing naval engagements and adding leaders that a lot of people like (and for some reason seem to think it unfairly adjusts against whatever country they happen to be playing - I have heard players say Britain's navy is stronger here and then had Britain players say there were being made even weaker - I think they are stronger in the long run but initially face a harder time recasting Trafalgar).
I got a full set of rules online (including erratta) from here: http://eia.xnetz.com/
Empires in Harm is here: http://www.empiresinharm.com/
-
MarshallEllis
- Posts: 5632
- Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 3:00 pm
- Location: Dallas
RE: PBEM question
Hey guys:
Our PBEM system will allow for many combos.
The AI can assume any of the major powers so you could play with 2-7 humans. AS Oleg mentioned, alliances were cheap in the early 1800s and often changed. Alliances back then were almost never permanent. This fact prevents a permanent team from assuming control of multiple major powers.
Thank you
Our PBEM system will allow for many combos.
The AI can assume any of the major powers so you could play with 2-7 humans. AS Oleg mentioned, alliances were cheap in the early 1800s and often changed. Alliances back then were almost never permanent. This fact prevents a permanent team from assuming control of multiple major powers.
Thank you
RE: PBEM question
But could you not just decide among the players to split the countries up? I mean who is to stop me from playing England and Russia while someone else plays Spain and Prussia?
-
Oleg Mastruko
- Posts: 4534
- Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2000 8:00 am
RE: PBEM question
Ellis, Yohan brought up a good question - will there be any "conflict of interests" between, say, Spain and Turkey in the long run? Also, you didn't say anything as regards the available scenarios? Is the list given by Murat for board game, accurate for PC game as well?
IIRC, this game has one month turns, so if "big campaign" covers 1805-1815, thats ~120 turns. 7 dedicated players doing 120 turns - seems quite doable, for someone who comes from the world of WITP (1500+ turns for The Capmaign [:D])
O.
IIRC, this game has one month turns, so if "big campaign" covers 1805-1815, thats ~120 turns. 7 dedicated players doing 120 turns - seems quite doable, for someone who comes from the world of WITP (1500+ turns for The Capmaign [:D])
O.
RE: PBEM question
No doubt[:D]
ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko
[snip]
IIRC, this game has one month turns, so if "big campaign" covers 1805-1815, thats ~120 turns. 7 dedicated players doing 120 turns - seems quite doable, for someone who comes from the world of WITP (1500+ turns for The Capmaign [:D])
O.
"Life is tough, it's even tougher when you're stupid" -SGT John M. Stryker, USMC
RE: PBEM question
ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko
IIRC, this game has one month turns, so if "big campaign" covers 1805-1815, thats ~120 turns. 7 dedicated players doing 120 turns - seems quite doable, for someone who comes from the world of WITP (1500+ turns for The Capmaign [:D])
O.
Well, the length of the game was a killer in many EiA boardgame version campaigns with seven people having very hard time trying to adjust their schedules for the gaming sessions. This in part is why we EiA fanatics are looking so much forward to the release of PBEM computer version, hoping it will speed things up a bit and games won't get broken before the end.
As far as the alliances not being stable, from your previous question, the whole idea behind EiA is diplomacy and shakey alliances. That is the fun part!
RE: PBEM question
Our problem was we had only 3-4 players and hated the UMPs (Uncontrolled Major Powers) rules. We ended up divying up pairs of countries just to make a better game but it does suck compared to getting 7 players going.
Count me in as one person who is hoping the PBEM version solves this!
Count me in as one person who is hoping the PBEM version solves this!
-
MarshallEllis
- Posts: 5632
- Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 3:00 pm
- Location: Dallas
RE: PBEM question
Hey guys:
There is nothing physically stopping the same player taking Great Britain and France (Other than a few of your smarter friends). Let the AI take the countries you cannot play and then Yohan, you can play at a good pace AND you can still ask AI allies for money or ask them to help you by attacking / defending an objective.
Hope this helps...
Thank you
There is nothing physically stopping the same player taking Great Britain and France (Other than a few of your smarter friends). Let the AI take the countries you cannot play and then Yohan, you can play at a good pace AND you can still ask AI allies for money or ask them to help you by attacking / defending an objective.
Hope this helps...
Thank you
RE: PBEM question
Thanks Marshall,
This is absolutely how I hope it will work with the computer version. Playing more than one country sucked but was better than the UMPs in the board game.
If the AI is strong enough it will solve that issue.
Rob
P.S. umm, any release date...
This is absolutely how I hope it will work with the computer version. Playing more than one country sucked but was better than the UMPs in the board game.
If the AI is strong enough it will solve that issue.
Rob
P.S. umm, any release date...
-
Oleg Mastruko
- Posts: 4534
- Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2000 8:00 am
RE: PBEM question
Screw the AI, we should be forming PBEM teams and Country Fanboy Clubs (a la WITP) right away [:D][:D]
I'll take Austria or Russia in PBEM [:D] Since I am total EIA beginner, I suggest you take any country those two might be in war with [:D]
O.
I'll take Austria or Russia in PBEM [:D] Since I am total EIA beginner, I suggest you take any country those two might be in war with [:D]
O.
RE: PBEM question
The fact that the AI is strong enough to allow one person to play one country in the game and function as if 6 other players are there is a fantastic feat in and of itself. But I really like what Marshall said about playing multiple countries. I thought about what would happen if England and France ended their war at the beginning of the game and tag teamed everybody else.[X(] Wouldn't that be crazy?
Matthew T. Rambo
RE: PBEM question
What is crazy about a certain victory? [8|]
24 hours in a day, 24 beers in a case. Coincidence? I think not.
RE: PBEM question
Nothing is crazy about a certian victory. But don't you get in a mood to just crush your enemies? Sometimes I do and will pull out "Axis and Allies" pc game (sorry I mention it), make the opponent AI very easy and just reek havoc on the enemy. Great Fun[:D]
By the way, will there be different skill levels in the pc version or will the AI just function as coded for each nation?[:'(]
By the way, will there be different skill levels in the pc version or will the AI just function as coded for each nation?[:'(]
Matthew T. Rambo
RE: PBEM question
ORIGINAL: 1LTRambo
Nothing is crazy about a certian victory. But don't you get in a mood to just crush your enemies? Sometimes I do and will pull out "Axis and Allies" pc game (sorry I mention it), make the opponent AI very easy and just reek havoc on the enemy. Great Fun[:D]
By the way, will there be different skill levels in the pc version or will the AI just function as coded for each nation?[:'(]
I'll get in that mood. You can have Turkey and Austria. I'll take France and Russia. See you in h@ll [:D]
RE: PBEM question
No I don't see the point in an easy Human vs AI game... It's like taking candy from children - It might taste good, but you get no satisfaction from it.
I'd rather play Prussia and Austria for a super tight alliance against the AI. At least there would be a chance I could loose.
I'd rather play Prussia and Austria for a super tight alliance against the AI. At least there would be a chance I could loose.
24 hours in a day, 24 beers in a case. Coincidence? I think not.
RE: PBEM question
ORIGINAL: 1LTRambo
The fact that the AI is strong enough to allow one person to play one country in the game and function as if 6 other players are there is a fantastic feat in and of itself. But I really like what Marshall said about playing multiple countries. I thought about what would happen if England and France ended their war at the beginning of the game and tag teamed everybody else.[X(] Wouldn't that be crazy?
in the original boardgame, GB and France are dominant powers, so they cannot make peace other than the very painly "inconditonnal surrender". if France surrenders, they lose the Napoleon leader, if GB surrenders, 2 fleets are wiped out. in fact, it's rare to see France or GB end the war, and even more rare to see them ally after that.
"Nous vaincrons parce que nous sommes les plus forts."
Paul Reynaud, 20/03/1940
Paul Reynaud, 20/03/1940
-
MarshallEllis
- Posts: 5632
- Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 3:00 pm
- Location: Dallas
RE: PBEM question
Hey guys:
The AI is trong enough to play you BUT I think most of you are seasoned enough to defeat it!
A few things that you need to be aware of...
The AI may surrender a little early for most of you. This is due to the fact that the AI estimates the PP cost a maintaining a war and often realizes that surrender is the cheaper way out and so it does.
It's all about the PP! You may see the AI attack a minor country and lay siege on a non capital??? Why does this happen? Look at the city and see if it is fortified (probably is). This is done so that the AI can get another PP out of its war against that minor.
AI is more gullible! It's easier to backstab the AI since they don't know much about you as an individual and how you play (BTW: I won't be offended at you backstabbing my AI). To compensate for this, I have made it a little more difficult to start and to maintain an alliance with the AI.
Bottom line ... yes, it can play BUT I realize that it may challenge some and dissappoint others! We will continue to strengthen the AI especially after we see mass patterns being developed after release.
Thank you
The AI is trong enough to play you BUT I think most of you are seasoned enough to defeat it!
A few things that you need to be aware of...
The AI may surrender a little early for most of you. This is due to the fact that the AI estimates the PP cost a maintaining a war and often realizes that surrender is the cheaper way out and so it does.
It's all about the PP! You may see the AI attack a minor country and lay siege on a non capital??? Why does this happen? Look at the city and see if it is fortified (probably is). This is done so that the AI can get another PP out of its war against that minor.
AI is more gullible! It's easier to backstab the AI since they don't know much about you as an individual and how you play (BTW: I won't be offended at you backstabbing my AI). To compensate for this, I have made it a little more difficult to start and to maintain an alliance with the AI.
Bottom line ... yes, it can play BUT I realize that it may challenge some and dissappoint others! We will continue to strengthen the AI especially after we see mass patterns being developed after release.
Thank you