Replayability and price

[PJJ]

It's definitely not too hard. If I can beat the AI at the hardest difficulty level quite regularly (I do still lose sometimes), everybody can do it. But you will have to invest some time and energy into mastering the AI, it won't go down easily. I honestly think that when somebody says this game is too difficult, he or she is not trying hard enough. People are so used to easy games these days that encountering one that is actually challenging may come as a shock to them. Hard? Yes. Too lop-sided to be worth a look? Absolutely not!

[Johnus]

O.K. Beat the AI on introductory level. I think I was being too traditional-trying to keep a solid front and taking Italy piece after peace moving down the peninsula. I won by taking a few recruitment centers and denying same to the Romans. Keeping a solid front is not very important (although holding Genoa, as easy access to and from Spain is nice.) Take some recruitment centers and keep Hannibal strong and in the field. Looking forward to the next level.

[anarchyintheuk]

Not being able to force a battle makes things more difficult. Enjoy.

[NefariousKoel]

ORIGINAL: CLEVELAND

I read that out of eight review and it's too low imo.  His main beef is that it's too hard.  I've played about 12 games and won two (one on normal, one on hard) and I expect my wins to up dramatically now that I can put together a coherent strategy.  This is exactly the kind of challenge I'm looking for.  I'd give it at least a 6 and probably a 7.

Agreed about the challenge. Different tastes I suppose.

I've heard too many complain about single-player being too easy and AIs taking too many stupid actions. I'm convinced most actually want to win all the time while deceiving themselves into believing it was a desperate struggle the whole time. You don't often see low reviews for someone getting stomped in a winnable situation. [:D]

It's most obvious in MMOs where, if you fail, you can just go retry the same obstacle until you succeed. Of course, reviews are solely about one man's experiences. I've never agreed with all of one reviewer's game reviews and the Out Of Eight Reviews are definitely in that category.

[PJJ]

You hit the nail on the head, NefariousKoel. People hate losing, and if an AI manages to beat them repeatedly, they start thinking there must be something wrong with the game. The AI in Hannibal has kicked my butt more times than I can count, but with practice I've learned to defeat the Romans repeatedly even at the hardest difficulty level. And like I've said, I'm no special player. If I can learn it, everybody can. And even if I now win more often than lose, the game is always exciting and challenging. There are too many strategy games around that are not at all challenging when played against the computer. I think it's unfair that reviewers blame Hannibal for being too hard when it actually has an AI that *every* strategy game should have, ie. a computer opponent that actually fights back and is challenging, and not only a stupid practice opponent meant for players who are not yet ready to play against other people by PBEM or something.

I'm going to start a new game with the latest patch and see how things have changed. [;)]

[Erik Rutins]

PJJ,

Thanks, that's exactly what we were aiming for and I completely agree. Hey, perhaps you should use one of our new site features and write a "Customer Review" of Hannibal! [8D]

Regards,

- Erik

[PJJ]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

PJJ,

Thanks, that's exactly what we were aiming for and I completely agree. Hey, perhaps you should use one of our new site features and write a "Customer Review" of Hannibal! [8D]

Regards,

- Erik

Oh, I didn't know about that feature. I'm still learning to use the new improved site. It's definitely better than the old one.

[hondo1375]

ORIGINAL: CLEVELAND

I read that out of eight review and it's too low imo.  His main beef is that it's too hard.  I've played about 12 games and won two (one on normal, one on hard) and I expect my wins to up dramatically now that I can put together a coherent strategy.  This is exactly the kind of challenge I'm looking for.  I'd give it at least a 6 and probably a 7.

I was ready to give up on this game a couple of weeks ago. I was finding it very frustrating and couldn't win on the normal level. I've NEVER had that problem in a wargame before. However, once I understood what kind of strategies to use in the context of the game mechanics (thanks to the help I got on this board), I won. Even so, it wasn't a cake-walk, as you have to stay focussed otherwise the AI will get back into the game.

What makes it hard is the competent AI (I mean, probably one of the best wargame AIs ever done IMHO)and the "hill" the Carthaginians have to climb in their opening. I think the problem is with the difficulty levels. Personally, I think they should be redone something like this:

Easy: Easier than the current "easy" level (whatever it is called). This can be done by some combination of the following: start the game with the Cs already in control of all of CAGaul, with Gallic Aid in place, with a lot of choice cards, plenty of units, and with the Roman reinforcements and commands reduced.

Normal: The current normal is too hard IMHO, and getting beaten repeatedly on normal makes me feel stupid since I pwn on normal with most games (as I'm sure most of us do). It assumes a very good grasp of the game mechanics and the kind of strategies required to win, plus a good execution of them. The new "normal" should be the current "easy" (or perhaps even a little easier - not sure).

Hard:IMHO, the current "normal" should be "hard".

Very Hard:The current "hard".

[gdrover]

I play the hard setting and win almost every time now. Here is my 'standard opening':
Turn 1) Hannibal moves to Gaul with his starting army, and then moves to attack Turin. Assault Turin (Make sure to use mostly Spanish Infantry as they are better attackers than the Carthaginian Infantry). Hannibal then assaults and takes the other two 0/2 cities in Cisalpine Gaul. Play the Gaul Card, and get the 3 Gallic Reinforcements in Hannibal's army. Finally move Hannibal out of the city and have him camp in Cisalpine Gaul so that he can intercept any Roman armies trying to take back these cities.
Combine all your fleets in Carthage so that you can send more reinforcements.
Move Hasdrubal's Spanish army into New Carthage to await reinforcements.

Turn 2-3)Send reinforcements to Spain and stomp on the Roman army there and retake the other Spanish city. Have Hannibal wait in Cisalpine Gaul and get reinforcements until after he has defeated the main Roman army.

Turn 4-5) Reinforce Spain or North Africa (build a couple of fleets). Have Hannibal take Genoa. Move the Spanish army to Genoa and combine with Hannibal. Simultaneously land troops from Carthage in Genoa to make a huge Carthaginian army.

Turn 6 - 7) Siege Rome. When a Roman army comes to lift the siege, defend the siege if you have a marked superiority; if not, lift the siege and attack the main Roman army using Punic tricks. After defeating them, siege Rome again and stick to it like a bulldog while sending any reinforcements possible.

[nalivayko]

My two cents on the price of the game . I do think $40 is a bit too high for a game with one playable side out of total two functions. I could care less about multiplayer, but the lack of such should have brought the price down as well. It seems that all the reviews about the game mention these two points as the cons. To compare this game to another indie favorite of mine - Mount & Blade had cost me $15 for the original game and the game allowed for 100s of hours of play.

Having said that... I have bought the game yesterday having downloaded a demo two days ago. I simply couldn't wait for the better deal - the game is fresh, intoxicating and fun. I could find another hundred adjectives to describe it, but will spare you the agony of reading through them. I've spent that $40 without regret, please hear out my justifications for this wasteful act

1. I love this game and I love it's new (old in boardgames, but still new to me) and unique concept. I hope the developer will continue making games similar to it for I am hooked.

2. The best way to support the developer is with our money. If the price seems a bit too high, consider half of the payment a donation. I doubt there are many people out there who will appreciate the game as much as some of us (i.e. some enjoy the graphics more than the killer AI). Lowering the price would not net the developer and distributor more money. Keeping it at $40 could ensure decent profits and the development of the future games.

3. If the game becomes a success (a financial one, that is) I hope the developer's future games will 1) either iclude more content or 2) cost less ($15-30) to offset the lack of content. I also hope the developer and the distributor will offer those of us who did not shy away from paying $40 now an opportunity to buy the future games at discounted price.