Matrix Games Forums

I imagine this has all been said before.

I imagine that the developers have all of this in mind.

I imagine that there are also a lot of "gamers" that like the notion of EiA but never played it much or revamped it totally because they could not stand it. Such players would love to see 101 revisions in the PC version.

I just want to go on record as being one (of perhaps few -- though I personally know many) who played EiA with little variation, quite pleased with the format (as most of us really loved the diplomacy element and so any flaws in the combat system were less of an issue).

I am, in fact, a most voracious PC gamer.

And yet I gladly toss aside my keyboard if I hear word of a local game of EiA that's forming. I love to spend hours plotting out my turn. Plotting out the politics. The game really sucks me in and I love it!

The notion that there is/will be a PC version of EiA is just short of a miracle to me.

But then I read all of the posts (I know, they are posts from non-Matrix staff) about all the neat different things everyone can do to the game to make it something (at least in my opinion) totally different -- and therefore far less desirable.

Another example -- Civil War by Victory Games. One of those "drop everything else and play" kind of games.

I have searched the world for a PC duplicate (or close match). I have one (can't remember the whole title) that comes close but is so buggy that I grew tired of it.

I guess I have no plea -- just wanted to go on record as a (partial??) EiA purist who thinks the game is the most awesome one out there -- as is.

Happy Thanksgiving!!

I'm with you Reknoy. Please keep the game as close as possible to the original. Or at least include options that allow us to play a traditional game.

Hoche,

I sympathise with what you say but you have to be aware that if the game has AI then the game will be designed for the standard features. Some options are easy to fit into this but not all. For example a different combat, movement or VP system might greatly affect the AI and not be possible. While extra leaders or different leader values would be possible. Hence it is not always possible to please everyone by just making things optional.

Unlike yourself and Reknoy I thought EiA had some fairly serious problems which I won't bore you all with here , but I still liked the game. I would still buy this game even if they just do a straight port of the board game as long as there is an OK and rational AI (not a Civ like 'lets all gang up on the Human player' one - great for Civ as it makes it challenging - not great for a Napoleonics game though). But I hope they make some changes.

EiA was designed as a boardgame. There are certain things a computer can do easily that would spoil a boardgame. The morale system was quite complicated in the boardgame but could easily be improved by using the computers power. For example why are veteran troops after half a dozen battles still the same as raw recruits? Tracking strength point experience would be a nightmare in the boardgame as would considering the affects of having the recruits mixed with veterans or in their own formations. But for a computer it's easy and would not even complicate the game for the user. All he really needs to do is look at his corps morale and maybe be cautious about where his new recruits are sent.

As for Victory games's Civil War game I like that to but have not played it enough to master it (only one proper game!). I thought the code for the computer game very similar Adnacs ACW is now freely available to download in a modified for HERE I believe most of the bugs have now gone. It has a great hidden leader skills system and a presteige value making bad leaders hard to get rid of. I hope something similar is used in EiA, but relax, I'm fairly sure that could be made as just an option

I have ACW -- I'll check out that link.

I also understand your points. I agree that EiA has a number of flaws, and many (if not most) are easily remedied without changing the overall "feel" of the game.