Matrix Games Forums

I've read mixed reviews on this game, but how exactly are the battles depicted? I see screens for casualties after the battle, but is there anything that indicates your troops are actively engaging the enemy? If so, is it some type of graphical abstract like HOI, or more like EU2, or neither?

Yeah there is some sort of battle-o-meter than flashes briefly on the screen during the strategic turn (well, most of the time?)...but is up and gone so quickly it's not all that informative (even if I knew what the tilting arrow meant...which I don't).
 
The after-battle casualty screen you mention is the way battles are really re-lived in this game, for better or worse.

the battle report can pop up after each battle, during hosting (you have an option for that). It is akin to what you see in the Paradox serie, but with perhaps more details, the full list of companies engaged and a nice graphical layout.

Mixed reviews? Most of our reviews are strongly positives: http://www.ageod.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=79
On average, for the 30+ reviews listed, we are hovering between 70% and 95% (notable exception being the Wargamer, everybody can make an error from time to time [:D] )

I understand the after action report, but one (Wargamer) criticism of this game was that the player doesn't even know when his units are actually engaging the enemy.

If I understand jimwinsor, battle progress is depicted with a pointer similar to the meter in the top window margin of EU2.

Another criticism was that the AI was not aggressive enough and simply barricaded its forces in towns. Is there an AI aggression setting like EU/HOI, i.e., normal, aggressive, etc.

This game sounds like a well-crafted version of the American Dream scenarion in EU2. Is this a fair comparison?

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

I understand the after action report, but one (Wargamer) criticism of this game was that the player doesn't even know when his units are actually engaging the enemy.

If I understand jimwinsor, battle progress is depicted with a pointer similar to the meter in the top window margin of EU2.

A bit puzzled by all this. Maybe that critic thought he should be playing something else? You don't need to know "battle progress". Unlike EU2, BoA is turn based, and combat is resolved simply as part of the end-of-turn resolution. There is an indicator that that is happening during turn resolution (and a few superfluous sound effects) but it isn't necessary. You need to know if a fight(s) took place, who won, and what damage was taken. BoA tells you... or at least if you take the trouble to review the messages it does. The information can be looked at as often as necessary during the subsequent turn.

BoA is a very cleverly designed game of strategic manoeuvre... it got that second place in that Usenet Wargame of the Year poll for a reason. But it needs a tactical battle system about as much as it does a technology tree and city building - i.e, not at all.

Is there an AI aggression setting like EU/HOI, i.e., normal, aggressive, etc.

Yes, there are three aggressiveness settings, independent of the four difficulty settings.

See what happens when you hand out reviews to rookies?  [;)] I like BoA very much but never reviewed it.  One of my dreams is to do a comparitive piece on BoA and FL!

Thanks: I finally realized that in a turn-based system there's no need to follow battle progress as there's nothing you can do about it until the next turn!

And I will also assume that this is not just a well-crafted, turn-based version of the American Dream scenario in EU2.

I never played that scenario in EU2, but know BoA and EU2. Really, they are two totally different games with little common ground to do a meaningful comparison.

EU2 focuses on history/ahistory multiple-dimensions of nation versus nation play. BOA is primarily a wargame which focuses on two specific conflicts that involved the forces of France, England, native Americans, and American colonists.

Comparisons between BOA and FL are much more interesting as both games address similar content and history, but approach the matter quite differently.

I hope that helps.

---

Jim,

I have some great screenshots of your FL review for the Armchair General with very large Matrix/BOA banner ads all around it! Let me know if you want a copy ... it was quite amusing.

ORIGINAL: Joe D.
I understand the after action report, but one (Wargamer) criticism of this game was that the player doesn't even know when his units are actually engaging the enemy.

????

"After orders are given by both sides, these are simultaneously resolved during a resolution phase. Conflicts occur during the resolution phase when units of opposing allegiances engage each other in the same area. While the month is being resolved, battles are only represented by a meter indicating which side is winning. When the resolution phase is over, the player can check a battle report list for more details. This shows the units involved, casualties, and factors affecting the battle." (The Wargamer, page 2)

ORIGINAL: Joe D.
Another criticism was that the AI was not aggressive enough and simply barricaded its forces in towns. Is there an AI aggression setting like EU/HOI, i.e., normal, aggressive, etc.

????

This what Leo Farell wrote in the Wargamer review about BoA's AI:

"Artificial Intelligence
Birth of America provides four settings for artificial intelligence. I only used the default medium setting playing though the campaigns and scenarios since the difficulty for each varied widely. The AI seemed solid, pouncing on openings, not exposing itself too easily, and attacking objectives that were necessary for its criteria to win." (The Wargamer, page 3)


Joe, are you sure you actually read the Wargamer review?

Yorktown is right, my bad! The review I read was one of several player reviews from gamespot and other websites.

When Pocus said that most reviews of BoA were favorable except the "Wargamer," I made the wrong mental connection.
Again, my apologies.

The rated player reviews I read were either very low or high; apparently you either strongly disliked or liked BoA.

What did Bismark say re handing out reviews to rookies?

Looks like I'll just buy BoA and find out for myself!

The Wargamer review is not unfavorable really, it is less enthousiastic that most others 'professional' ones, but everybody is entitled his opinion. Except perhaps some of the players posting on gamespot, that clearly prefers FPS and just want to trash wargames and strategy games . I still recall the plead someone made in the gamespot (or was it Steam?) forum: "why these guys are still doing turn based game? They would have sold ten time by making a FPS on American Revolution".

When I read this kind of remark, I feel like an old timer barely understandable by young people.

ORIGINAL: Pocus

... I still recall the plead someone made in the gamespot (or was it Steam?) forum: "why these guys are still doing turn based game? They would have sold ten time by making a FPS on American Revolution".

When I read this kind of remark, I feel like an old timer barely understandable by young people.

The best part of this is that, soon after release, these FPSers would be looking for M-16 and bazooka mods, quick reload mod, unlimited ammo, aim-bots, etc. Ack....

ORIGINAL: stevel40831

ORIGINAL: Pocus

... I still recall the plead someone made in the gamespot (or was it Steam?) forum: "why these guys are still doing turn based game? They would have sold ten time by making a FPS on American Revolution".

When I read this kind of remark, I feel like an old timer barely understandable by young people.

The best part of this is that, soon after release, these FPSers would be looking for M-16 and bazooka mods, quick reload mod, unlimited ammo, aim-bots, etc. Ack....

Well if I want to then I should be allowed to camp out in the Old North Church tower with my M-60 and rocket launchers with unlimited ammo and take out the British as they "come by sea". What's so wrong with that? [8|]

Pocus, enthusiastic or not, Wargamer was much kinder than some of the player reviews I read on Gamespot; apparently these guys were expecting some type of tactical/1st person shooter.

The Civ game series is still turn-based, and so are Grisby's WW II Pacific games, CDV's Combat Mission anthology, and so on. Pausable real-time is also playable, but I tend to stop thinking while I'm clicking.

So you feel like an old timer playing turn-based games? I am a 50-year-old Desert Storm/Bosnia vet who sometimes writes for VFW magazine. I am so old-time that I've had to buy a Dell desktop because my Gateway laptop couldn't handle 3D graphics, and most strategy games today -- to include BoA -- require good graphics cards.

Appearance wise, BoA has a great look to it, but I still have to understand Euro-English to read the manual.

I for one thank you for developing this game. I think its a gem. There are plenty of fps and most are ahistorical. Some are fun to play but I wanted both fun and history. I can go to hasting and get a market game anytime(great graphics but no strategy or heart to the game) just a throw away, with great graphics with great sounds.[X(] Games like BOA,WITP and FOF are really like a historical work of art and fun to play.[:D]

ORIGINAL: Pocus

The Wargamer review is not unfavorable really, it is less enthousiastic that most others 'professional' ones, but everybody is entitled his opinion. Except perhaps some of the players posting on gamespot, that clearly prefers FPS and just want to trash wargames and strategy games . I still recall the plead someone made in the gamespot (or was it Steam?) forum: "why these guys are still doing turn based game? They would have sold ten time by making a FPS on American Revolution".

When I read this kind of remark, I feel like an old timer barely understandable by young people.

ORIGINAL: Joe D.
Pocus, enthusiastic or not, Wargamer was much kinder than some of the player reviews I read on Gamespot; apparently these guys were expecting some type of tactical/1st person shooter.

Pessimistic, aren't you? [;)]

The 5 Gamespot Users reviews:

8.7 great
"Immersive"
It's a game for the history wargame lovers, pure and simple Continue »

8.9 great
"Underappreciated"
Thinker's game, not a click-fest. Be careful tho, you might actually learn something while doing something you enjoy! Continue »

8.9 great
"Old-school"
strategists and histiricists must / arcadists nightmare Continue »

1.0 Abysmal
"Disappointing"
A History Turn Based,is it worth your money? Continue »

3.3 bad
"Disappointing"
Very disappointing. Not many strategic options, bad interface. Continue »

Well, 2 bad reviews from guys who were expecting some kind of RTS click-fest, and 3 gorgeous reviews from experienced wargamers. That's ok for us! [8D]

The Gamespot review is... well, you know... Gamespot like! but if you read the conclusion, it says:
" Ageod made only a handful of concessions in what is essentially just another hardcore military wargame made for genre enthusiasts. Birth of America has all the necessary elements working under its hood, including a terrific implementation of weather and terrain and a hearty AI that keeps you on your toes."

From a wargamer point of view, it could have been worse... [8|]

Appearance wise, BoA has a great look to it, but I still have to understand Euro-English to read the manual.

The first manual had been written by a bunch of mad frogs but where did you buy your copy? The manual was fixed monthes ago by our US betatesters and publishers. (You can also get an updated version of the manual from the AGEOD website).

Best,

Korrigan

Do you have a link to the updated manual? I would like to give it a look before I purchase this game.

EDIT: Disregard, found it.

Korrigan, as I said, some of the Gamespot player reviews were negative; apparently you either love or hate this game.

As for my opinion of BoA, I'm still trying to master the tutorial. BoA has the fine, hand-crafted look of an oil painting, much like EU1/2. However, I've quickly discovered that you need good hand-to-eye coordination to get your units inside of cities (or click that "enter structure" icon before you move the unit ?). You know your units are inside after you see the numerical indication (for the number of units stationed) to the left of the town. This is confirmed when the unit icon disapears after you right click. Tricky.

I recently bought BoA at a local Electronics Boutique, v.1.08d. I was able to update to v.1.10 at the strategyfirst.com site.

I assume the new manual you're referring to at the AGEOD site is the same pdf file under this site's essential links, which I will eventually download.

I also assume that by "mad frogs" you are referring to the French. Odd that our nation -- which owes it's initial independence to France -- has such a love-hate relationship with it, i.e., from the French and Indian wars to Lafayette to "freedom fries."

N'est pas!

ORIGINAL: Joe D.
[...] However, I've quickly discovered that you need good hand-to-eye coordination to get your units inside of cities (or click that "enter structure" icon before you move the unit ?).

Yes, you should click the "enter structure" icon or the unit will only move into the region but not enter the city/fort.

From an old wargammer who started in the 1960's, BOA is a gem, elegant, and historical, pure military strategy with loads of atmosphere. As soon as possible after the short tutorial, play a French and Indian War campaign, which is easily manageable with tiny forces maneuvering and fighting over the strategic objectives of the vast northeast of North America. Wonderful.

I think it's historically accurate; anyway it plays just like the histories read. More important to me, is that it's as immersive (spelling?) as can be. I play a little period music (revolutionary era and other 18th Century) continuously in the background and I am there !