Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: JaguarUSF

Some people will agree with my reviews and some won't

Figured you'd show up. [:@]

Reviewing is a thankless chore...

[;)]

Ray (alias Lava)

I do think that a forum like this one is pretty good at getting the word out.  It worked for me, anyway! 

I bought Uncommon Valour off the shelf on a whim one day - I didnt actually enjoy the game that much it has to be said, but it did direct me to this website. 

And the rest, as they say, is history...

ORIGINAL: captskillet

If he think thats micro-managing he aint seen WITP has he [;)] ?!?!?!?!

[:D]I was just going to write that, micromanagement....Pfffffffffftttttttttt[8|].

Yeah - try manually supplying allied bases in the pacific on a weekly basis and tell me about micromanaging [X(]

The info on this game is a bit weak.  Then I read the reviewer commenting that there are only 6 moves in each scenario!!!!!
 
Just what is the time scale on GoA?

There are some errors in the review.
 
There are more than 6 turns in a scenario. If you go from 1914-1919, you'll have significantly more. Each turn is 2 months, so each year will have 6 turns.  What the reviewer may not have noticed is that when the end of the year arrives and the victory screen is presented, it is only snapshot of where one stands with victory at that time.  The idea is that players select "continue" to fight until the end of the war.
 
Either side can also sway Italy with Diplomacy, meaning Diplomacy is not locked in as stated in the review.
 
HTH,
 
BH
 

Thanks BlackHorse6, was worried there for a bit [:)]

ORIGINAL: Akmatov

The info on this game is a bit weak. Then I read the reviewer commenting that there are only 6 moves in each scenario!!!!!

Just what is the time scale on GoA?

If would be unfortunate if anyone's purchasing decision for GoA would be significantly influenced by this review. This review is superficial in its analysis and misleading in its discription of GoA. Read the comments on this forum from those who have actually played this game in depth and who also have a good understanding of the history of WWI and therefore can better gauge how well GoA simulates the dynamics and the problems and challenges involved in making strategic decisions in that period.

Lascar

Furthermore two essential points in GOA are missing in the review.

First that moves are carried out simultaneously which opens up for a variety of tactics normally missing in most games. For example the possibility of caring out pincer movements when a hole in a front have been made. Then again your opponent may make a move you didn't anticipate [;)]

Second the paranoia - and i mean real paranoia which rules when playing the 1914 scenario. Complete freedom in setting up on both sides combined with FOG and limited intelligence makes this a nail biter - especially against a human player.

Here's my review....Damn good fun.


[/align]

ORIGINAL: PDiFolco

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

He gives it more than I give FPS's...[:D]

Clearly he's not a wargamer - and yet he still manages to give it 5/8....I'm impressed that he recognises some good points, and curious what as to what he thinks should be the sound effects for a grand strategy game.....

Untrue - he has played and reviewed all major and minor wargames out there since 2 years at OutOf8, and had played wargames since very long ago.

Doesn't make him a wargameer - I shoot arrows, and I'm no archer!!

It looks like he doesn't like much micromanaging hundreds of units, but neither do I and I'm also a wargamer...

No-one does much - but then this game doesn't actually have much of it, despite his review.

Personally I think the manual is the problem with the game, and that is referred to in the review. If the manual explained the game in more depth then you wouldn't find yourself spending time trying to figure out why certain things do/don't work (or get a few turns into the game and found you've made a mistake that means you might as well restart).

I don't think this is a 'micro-management' game, just pitched at the right level (IMO). Just think of some of those games with 100s of 'counters', that have to be moved one at a time. However, everyone has their own preference in this respect.

In fairness he did give TOAW 7 out of 8, and I dunno if I'd want to play TOAW, that looks like WITP on land.  [:D]

7/8 for FoF but he thinks - from comments here- that GoA has too much micro-management? Ohhh, puleeaasse[8|][8|]

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd




Here's my review....Damn good fun.


[/align]

Now that's an accurate review!

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd




Here's my review....Damn good fun.


[/align]

Ditto. How often do we get a strategic level game that's just plain fun to play? I found GGWAW just fun too. HOI, WITP, FOF are all great games IMO, they just take much more effort (and time). With a 3 year old time isn't something I have a lot of so this game fits right in for me.

Iv'e been a wargamer since 1968. GoA has captured the feeling of the classic boardgames of my youth. It plays like, and has the feel of, the best of the old AH and SPI games but has the advantage of computer assisted bookkeeping that used to be done with tracks and charts. Frank Hunter understands what it takes to make a game an historical simulation (wargame) and not just a strategy game with a bit of period chrome.

GoA has what it takes to become a classic.

Lascar

Ah, disappointing review but who really cares. I have long since learned that Wargames are judged on different merits than mainstream PC games.
The Wargamer has a review coming along soon. That one will carry a little more weight with me.

ORIGINAL: Bossy573

The Wargamer has a review coming along soon. That one will carry a little more weight with me.

I hope they wait until after the patch...

ORIGINAL: 06 Maestro


I hope they wait until after the patch...

I think I read in their forums that the author has already submitted the review and it is next up.