Matrix Games Forums

It will be worth waiting for if it only gets close to the original game!

[:)]

I would say that it might be worth waiting for if it was BETTER than the original.

Novel concept.

ORIGINAL: John Umber

It will be worth waiting for if it only gets close to the original game!

[:)]

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

Le Tondu:

Realize that my example was a battle between Spain and Portugal. A minor detail is the fact that France became the sponsoring major power of Portugal when Spain declared war on Portugal at which point Portugal became a French Freestate (Notice the forces are Spanish and Portugese). Wasn't meant to be historical in any sense BUT merely and example of what a battle might look like.

Thank you

There is no argument here --or criticism of you Marshall. None at all. [:)]

I simply thought that it would be natural to compare your example to historical OOBs. (I even checked Digby Smith's Napoleonic Wars Data Book.)

Since the use of miniatures with EiA is now a selling point for the game, my hope was to see how that works out.

Again, I use a Battalion level rule set for my miniatures and I am still hoping to find out if it can interface somehow with EiA.

Is there any historical example that we can use to see if it is possible? (BTW, it doesn't have to anything big.) Since the boardgame begins in 1805, maybe that would be a nice place to start?

I dunno. If you think that I am being unreasonable, just let me know and I will go away.

Merci
[:)]

It isn't dependent upon how many figures are present as long as each side uses the same basing system. It tracks Battalion strengths by the number of men present , Artillery companies in men and guns, and cavalry by assuming all men have horses. (I use 6mm figures with each company having 6 figures, each section of artillery having one gun figure and each squadron with 4 mounted figures.)

I think it's tough to build a system into the 'parent' game that will accomodate all possible minature rules people might waant to use. To add into the game the ability to track individual battalions would be very resource intensive. Remember, attition losses would have to be allocated between battalions, and the rules are plenty detailed about how these must be allocated so you can't simply pro-rate all attrition. All detachments into garrisons would have to be tracked, as would all corps reorganizations. Those are involved circumstances that most likely happen every single turn. On a less frequent basis you'll have reinforcement and the occasional assault of a city.

It seems to me that the more sensible approach would be to assume that forces are overall at some percentage of full strength with a variation around that average. You could then have this single parameter for each corps, and track that through attrition, reinforcement, detachment and so on. You'd still have to have a way to deal with garrisons, but it might work.

It's a nasty problem, and I can see why they don't want to tackle it yet.

Although having the huge OOB database in the game sounds great, I also think that in the long run, there is no need to go into too much detail (keeping track of each battalion) if it would make the game run more slowly or make the PBEM save files bigger.

In addition, option to play out EiA engagements with miniatures is among the community for long time, and it just needs to enhance the simple die rolls on the CRT table. So, any way the players agree to do the conversion is good.

Roads and pfnognoff,

You guys totally misunderstand me.

I think that there can be more than one way to do the conversion. Why should it be only one way? We the players would make the conversions with our own equations that fit our rule sets and our tastes. The game developers don't have do anything more for heaven's sake.

I'm just curious to see how computer EiA looks at the French, Austrian, or Russian forces at the beginning of the game (in 1805) ---so I can develope my own way if it is possible to do so.

[/quote]

Q>I want to play out my battles in a popular miniature combat system?

A>Enable the external combat system option in the options menu. Now, each time you move forces into an area for combat, you will be prompted to either generate a battle file, play the combat on the PC or to cancel. If you choose to create the combat file then a text file will be created with the name of the battle, location, terrain, random weather (based on season and location), morale of corps units, corps unit breakdowns in troops and leaders. When you have completed the battle then simply indicate a winner in the file, update the corps strengths and load it back into the game which will load the results and apply retreats, PP cost, etc.

Thanks for adding this feature [:)]. It will enhance my enjoyment of the game as it should be an excellent battle generator for the miniatures club I belong to. In addition I will get to see if I can convince the others to play the computer game and fight the battles with miniatures [;)]. There is at least one die hard that I think I can convince.

Le Tondu:

You're not being unreasonable! Keep creating! No offense was taken ... in fact I apologize that the example was a bit misleading (France sponsoring Potugal, etc.)

Thank you

ORIGINAL: Mark Breed

Le Tondu,

For many years (perhaps a decade or more), miniature players have been using Empires in Arms as a basis for campaign play. I think that they will be able to figure out how to make their specific miniature rules work with the system again.

Instead of trying to change a game that you have no knowledge about and those that do love, try waiting for it to be produced, or better yet, get involved in the boardgame version, and find out why it is such a popular game. I would dare say that the vast majority of players that will end up buying it are ones that are familiar with the boardgame and are looking to get back involved with a great game system. I know that I am one of them.

The only down side to the original game was getting seven players together on a regular basis. This is because as we grow older, life begins to supercede our ability to play games as often. A computer version of Empire in Arms is a dream come true for players like me.

Regards,
Mark

Yes, I have to agree with Mark here. Le Tondu has obviously never played the boardgame yet is making input after input after input. Tondu, go play the game a couple hundred times before criticizing it so much and trying to convince Matrix to alter it greatly.

Some people wish that Matrix had just made a Nap. Wargame that was an original. Me Too. That way I wouldn't have to see EiA get butchered by people who have never even played the game.

ORIGINAL: NeverMan


Yes, I have to agree with Mark here. Le Tondu has obviously never played the boardgame yet is making input after input after input. Tondu, go play the game a couple hundred times before criticizing it so much and trying to convince Matrix to alter it greatly.

Some people wish that Matrix had just made a Nap. Wargame that was an original. Me Too. That way I wouldn't have to see EiA get butchered by people who have never even played the game.

Forgive me for not jenuflecting when I came here. I never knew that playing the EiA boardgame qualified one as a Napoleonic expert. LOL!

To the point --I am trying to butcher nothing. [:-]

Look at my post that is several above yours and read it -if you can. You will see that I am not asking Matrix to change anything. LOL!

Read ALL of my posts in this thread and you will see the same thing.

I just wanted to know how computer EiA uses miniatures --and if it will work with my favorite rule set. I think that maybe it can. Is it really too much to ask to see a computer EiA OOB (of say at the beginning of the game in 1805), so I can compare it to a histiorical OOB ---and therefore have some sort of formula to use my miniatures with? I have offered to share what I learn with all.

Is that REALLY so bad? AND whether I have played the "boardgame" or not is absolutely irrelevent to the issue at hand. LOL! [X(][8|][X(][8|][X(]

I wasn't refering to just this thread, however, all of the EiA threads that you have been involved with. I wasn't trying to insult, sorry if you took it that way, just to tell you that maybe you might want to check out the boardgame SINCE THAT IS WHAT THIS NAP. WARGAME WILL BE BASED ON (OR SHOULD BE THE SAME THING BUT IT WON'T BE).

Second, when I said "butcher" I was refering to Matrix, not you.

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

I wasn't refering to just this thread, however, all of the EiA threads that you have been involved with. I wasn't trying to insult, sorry if you took it that way, just to tell you that maybe you might want to check out the boardgame SINCE THAT IS WHAT THIS NAP. WARGAME WILL BE BASED ON (OR SHOULD BE THE SAME THING BUT IT WON'T BE).

Second, when I said "butcher" I was refering to Matrix, not you.

How can you possibly know ALL of the posts and threads that I have been in??? Hmmm, let's see. You joined this board 2/23/2004 while I joined 10/2/2001 with 385 posts. That's 2 years and 4 months difference.

Maybe you have done a lot of reading, but wait a minute. Weren't all the posts from years ago lost due to hackers???? So, you couldn't have read them. You simply cannot know what you are talking about when you talk about ME.

I freely admit that I haven't played the boardgame and I do not pretend to know the rules. You won't hear me say anything about it. I have however, been wargaming for 30+ years with Napoleonics as my focus and I do think that I know a just little bit about it. That is why I felt that I could lobby for a more realistic Napoleonic wargame ---like I tried to do, in my opinion.

You see, this game was originally presented by Matrix as a Strategic level Napoleonic wargame and not EiA. That was how it started, but then again, that was before you arrived here.

You are just expressing sour grapes Neverman, because you cannot get what you want (a stock version of EiA on the computer.) If you really have read all of my posts, you would know that was what I have lobbied for too. I wanted two versions. The stock EiA and an enhanced version of EiH. Ah, but that is life.

I, on the other hand, have completely accepted that what I lobbied for (an increased form of FOW) won't exist. Passionate as I may have been, I feel great that I gave it my best ---and I have accepted the end result.

As a friendly suggestion, you might want to give that a try. Life suddenly seems to get better when that happens.

ORIGINAL: Yohan

Marshall,

Any odds of getting some AARs from the Beta testers? WaW has them going and they are drawing excekkent attention and interest.

I wish we could get more than just selective replies in this forum. This post has been up for a week and ignored. Again, if you go over the the WaW forum you will see they reply to almost every post. What gives??

What gives is perhaps, unlike WaW, this game may not be as far along as people have presumed.......

ORIGINAL: Le Tondu

Is it really too much to ask to see a computer EiA OOB (of say at the beginning of the game in 1805), so I can compare it to a histiorical OOB ---and therefore have some sort of formula to use my miniatures with? I have offered to share what I learn with all.

Austria: 75i 7gd 15c
France: 135i 5gd 17c
G.Britain: 19i 1gd 4c
Prussia: 80i 3gd 17c
Russia: 75i 5gd 10c
Spain: 41i 1gd 6c
Turkey: 35i -gd 7c

i - infantry gd - guard c - cavalry

1 factor is roughly 1000 - 2000 men

ORIGINAL: Le Tondu

I, on the other hand, have completely accepted that what I lobbied for (an increased form of FOW) won't exist. Passionate as I may have been, I feel great that I gave it my best ---and I have accepted the end result.

I have also noticed a slight change of tone in your posts prior and after you have "accepted the result". I'm not saying that I have read all your posts, but that is my opinion. I hope you will like the EiA game as much as we who played the original do.

ORIGINAL: pfnognoff

Austria: 75i 7gd 15c
France: 135i 5gd 17c
G.Britain: 19i 1gd 4c
Prussia: 80i 3gd 17c
Russia: 75i 5gd 10c
Spain: 41i 1gd 6c
Turkey: 35i -gd 7c

i - infantry gd - guard c - cavalry

1 factor is roughly 1000 - 2000 men

Wow. Many thanks to you pfnognoff. Many thanks. [:)][:)][:)]

ORIGINAL: pfnognoff

I have also noticed a slight change of tone in your posts prior and after you have "accepted the result". I'm not saying that I have read all your posts, but that is my opinion. I hope you will like the EiA game as much as we who played the original do.

I'm keeping an open mind and hoping for the best. [:)]

Tondu,

I did not mean to offend you, as I have obviuosly done. I just don't see the point of putting EiA name on something that is obviously not EiA. By doing this it ruins any other developers/publishers chance of creating a real EiA port. Matrix is just using the name to sell the game they have created.

Also, is it possible that I had another account prior to this one? I guess thinking that would take some foresight. Yes I DID have another account which I closed, was gone awhile, and now I am back. I was here BEFORE it was EiA.

.