Request and thoughts.

[wodin]

(Already wrote all this out once but forum times out..aaahhh)

Would like to have a Grand Campaign where you just control Germany and friendly AI controls Austria, similar to WW1Gold campaign option.

Please give a pop up warning before a unit merges. Keep merging units by mistake. Also hate the auto name changing. Maybe we can be shown a list of historical Army names or an option to keep it's original name. Having my 1st Army suddenly becoming called Kluck or something was a little annoying.

Not sure why but game feels less complex than AJE and other Ageod games I've played. Diplomacy and research feel abit tacked on some how.

Still have my doubts about how the game handles Static warfare.

Would love to see abit more creative fluff\writing in the reports.

Would like to see terrain slowly deteriorate when heavy arty is used, however if left for awhile grass slowly grows over it. Unless it's winter and it stays and you see a water logged cratered landscape. Constant fighting over the same ground should make the landscape that bad it gives a movement modifier ( One of the big issues during grand offensives was the terrain was so bad not only did it hinder up coming reserves as the units pushed on but it became impossible to move up Arty units which meant the offensive will stall and eventually stop) So lets see it degrade and effect gameplay.

Would love to see mining operations somehow in game. Think of the destructive power of Vimy Ridge which probably won the allies that operation that day as it instantly took out approx 5000 German troops. Also in areas where mining is taking place increase attrition and make it more difficult for moral to improve. Certain regions shouldn't have any mining i.e the Belgium lowlands and the Swiss mountains etc etc.

Germans became experts in defensive trench warfare this needs to be shown in game. Maybe Generals gain defensive point as the War goes on when it's static. This would represent the way the Germans would empty their front line which took a pounding and then launch fast decisive counter attacks and their own Arty would box areas in or stop the allies retreating. They also master of the pill box and defensive MG emplacements with interlocking fire and positioned where they new the allied Army joined another taking advantage or poor communication between army groups and they drift apart leaving the MG's to fire into the flanks.

Would be cool if the game simulated the effect bombardments had on communications.

Would be great if on the division cards it showed how many enemy it had destroyed and captured also a tab showing battle honors which include dates of battles it was involved in any enemy regiments it had destroyed (maybe if research is done you could have the actual regiment flag showing). Same goes for the Leader cards, battles he was in, men killed and lost. Equipment captured.

Finally would like to see a nations highest award be in game. I reckon for alot of the War the winning of the highest award improved moral. SO during a battle there is a percentage chance an award will be given for each division (this percentage could depend on how the battle went and things like if a unit was excellently led). The game will choose the regiment and could even bring up a random name (picks a first and last name randomly from a list)and rank of the soldier. This also can be shown on the battle honor tab of the division. The award will the have a chance of increasing division moral and army moral. Now if a pilot is awarded it then it can increase national Moral but if he later gets killed NM will drop.

[Gizuria]

Why don't you post this over on the AGEOD boards? the developers will be more receptive to your concerns over there and the community there is the best I've seen anywhere.

BTW, you can disable auto-merging of stacks if you're making that mistake [;)]

It feels less complex than AJE? Really? [:D] I like AJE a lot too but I'd rate it, at least on the surface, as one of AGEOD's entry-level games even if the real depth is revealed later.

TBH, I'd think that getting this game out in August was the best move because of all the centennial hype on the tv and in the media. Just like when we were teenagers, we'd be out playing tennis when Wimbledon was on the telly but almost never at any other time of the year. After this month, that boat has sailed and so if I were a game designer releasing a WW1 game this year, I'd do my absolute damned hardest to get the game out in August, finished or not. AGEOD is just a small game company and they've already proved that they'll do their best to get the game into shape. They're good guys and deserve our support.

[zakblood]

if the games released here, then it should be supported here by staff from there tbh and comments good or bad should be answered / replied to[;)]

or why have it here? [;)]

[Gizuria]

ORIGINAL: zakblood

if the games released here, then it should be supported here by staff from there tbh and comments good or bad should be answered / replied to[;)]

or why have it here? [;)]

Oh, I won't argue that point with you.[:)] Just observing that there is a great deal of activity on AGEOD's own boards about this game and not much over here. It's your choice where to have your discussion. [;)]

[zakblood]

well if i join any more forums, i think my gf would kill me, thats all[8|]

[Gizuria]

well if i join any more forums, i think my gf would kill me, thats all

I suspect that this wouldn't be an issue for the OP to whom I was replying [:D]

[Queeg]

ORIGINAL: Fascist Dog

Why don't you post this over on the AGEOD boards? the developers will be more receptive to your concerns over there and the community there is the best I've seen anywhere.

The AGEOD community typically is very good. But for some reason, they are very defensive over there about this particular game, especially among a few of the beta testers. Pretty much any suggestion that the game might offer more strategic options is met with insistence that history couldn't possibly have turned out any differently than it did and rationalizations that the game couldn't possibly function any differently than it does. They seem unusually sensitive about criticism of this particular game for some reason.

[Gizuria]

The AGEOD community typically is very good. But for some reason, they are very defensive over there about this particular game, especially among a few of the beta testers.

Beta testers usually are. [:D]

[Queeg]

ORIGINAL: Fascist Dog

The AGEOD community typically is very good. But for some reason, they are very defensive over there about this particular game, especially among a few of the beta testers.

Beta testers usually are. [:D]

True, but some of these guys are so emotionally invested that they've become defenders, not just of the game, but of the conversation about it. They literally will defend almost any outcome the game generates, no matter how ridiculous. I've just come from posting in a discussion over a combat result where one side lost 12,000 men and the other side lost zero - despite having the support of 204 artillery pieces. It's clearly an aberration and not representative of the results the game usually produces, but instead of just acknowledging that, they insist, "Well, the attacker was attacking across a river and up hill...." Please. The job of a beta tester is to recognize bugs, not try to rationalize them away.

[Reiryc]

I'd say it has everything to do with their personalities and little to do with them being beta testers.

[Reiryc]

ORIGINAL: wodin

(Already wrote all this out once but forum times out..aaahhh)

Would like to have a Grand Campaign where you just control Germany and friendly AI controls Austria, similar to WW1Gold campaign option.

I would as well, but don't see it as a possibility to be honest. This isn't because it's not a good idea, but rather the time required to program in such a change and all the AI behaviors would probably be much more than such an investment could financially merit. Maybe if they ever release an eaw 2?

Please give a pop up warning before a unit merges. Keep merging units by mistake. Also hate the auto name changing. Maybe we can be shown a list of historical Army names or an option to keep it's original name. Having my 1st Army suddenly becoming called Kluck or something was a little annoying.

Probably not a bad idea. Personally I wouldn't use it as the idea of more clicking just makes my wrist start hurting!

For what it's worth, there is an icon that appears at your mouse cursor that shows you are ordering your units to merge when you move units.

Not sure why but game feels less complex than AJE and other Ageod games I've played. Diplomacy and research feel abit tacked on some how.

Understood... to each their own. I think aje and it's expansions are much less complex but no less fun.

Still have my doubts about how the game handles Static warfare.

I wish it would do a better job of handling static warfare. It's more of a hold over of how the game system works with a static front due to too much strength on the opposing side to break through as opposed to working how trench warfare really worked. Reserves shouldn't being moving laterally from one zone to another in my opinion. There should be a way to designate certain units within a corps/army as front line and other units as reserve so that the units wouldn't mtsg from other territories but rather units in reserve move to front line status.

Given the limitations of the game system, it does a fairly decent job of holding a line though (with the current beta patch) and so the lines feel more static but it's still not quite like what I read the war to have been like.

Would love to see abit more creative fluff\writing in the reports.

Same... more events, even just fluff ones will probably be added over time and with more detailed text.

Would love to see mining operations somehow in game. Think of the destructive power of Vimy Ridge which probably won the allies that operation that day as it instantly took out approx 5000 German troops. Also in areas where mining is taking place increase attrition and make it more difficult for moral to improve. Certain regions shouldn't have any mining i.e the Belgium lowlands and the Swiss mountains etc etc.

hard to say if this would get in, but if it did, I'd see it being done through the use of an regional decision.

[Queeg]

ORIGINAL: Reiryc

I'd say it has everything to do with their personalities and little to do with them being beta testers.

Probably true. They just seem to be out in force with this game.

[Reiryc]

ORIGINAL: Queeg

ORIGINAL: Reiryc

I'd say it has everything to do with their personalities and little to do with them being beta testers.

Probably true. They just seem to be out in force with this game.

There are 2 in particular that are a bit more... 'dedicated' shall we say lol.

[Templer_12]

ORIGINAL: zakblood

well if i join any more forums, i think my gf would kill me, thats all[8|]

We got that.
Well, stick her in a trench on the western front. [:D]

Seriously now.
Over there at AGEOD forum you will find much more experts to answer your questions or advise you.
In complex games such as 'To End All Wars' that's a big advantage, maybe a 'must'.

It frustrates very quickly if you do not know what to do and why to do it, and could kill the game for you very soon.

[Ace1_slith]

Speaking as a beta, I tried to be honest and listen to arguments:)

And you were very constructive at ageod's forums and made some good comments. Some of them can't be implemented, but you'll be happy to hear that reserve corps reaction will from now on return to their original province with their entrenchment intact regardless if the battle is lost or won. And when a region has reached certain amount of entrenchment, as long as you hold over 50% MC in the region, you 'll retain previous entrenchment value whenever you get back to that province. You don't have to do milita entrenchment spam like in CW2 title.

About specific battle casualties, it has been corrected in the beta patch. You won't see rounded casualties figures any more...

About 276 artillery pieces not inflicting any casualties, this is because of cohesion. Compared to CW2, cohesion of units is way lower (this creates more static fronts, any+d any breakthrough is more easily countered). So, if you ordered a unit over rugged terrain towards an enemy on more than 15 days march, your artillery cohesion can easily fall to 0 prior the battle. So, let's imagine those artillery pieces were stuck in mud and were not deployed to battle at all. I suspect they did not fire at all in the battle you were talking about.

Cheers...

[ETF]

ORIGINAL: zakblood

if the games released here, then it should be supported here by staff from there tbh and comments good or bad should be answered / replied to[;)]

or why have it here? [;)]

+1

[Queeg]

ORIGINAL: Ace1

Speaking as a beta, I tried to be honest and listen to arguments:)

I didn't mean to - and shouldn't have appeared to - lump all the beta testers together. You - and others - have been nothing but receptive and constructive. Hopefully, the patch will go a long way toward fixing both the game and the discussion.

[Gizuria]

ORIGINAL: Queeg

ORIGINAL: Fascist Dog

The AGEOD community typically is very good. But for some reason, they are very defensive over there about this particular game, especially among a few of the beta testers.

Beta testers usually are. [:D]

True, but some of these guys are so emotionally invested that they've become defenders, not just of the game, but of the conversation about it. They literally will defend almost any outcome the game generates, no matter how ridiculous. I've just come from posting in a discussion over a combat result where one side lost 12,000 men and the other side lost zero - despite having the support of 204 artillery pieces. It's clearly an aberration and not representative of the results the game usually produces, but instead of just acknowledging that, they insist, "Well, the attacker was attacking across a river and up hill...." Please. The job of a beta tester is to recognize bugs, not try to rationalize them away.

One possible reason for such defensiveness might be that they have been part of the team that put the game together for several months and have seen and appreciated first-hand the enormous effort that the developers have put in to making the game. And then, when the game is released, they see some players focus on the negative and they feel a lack of appreciation for the developers efforts to make a game for the community. Been there, done that, got the t-shirt.

Almost no game is more or less perfect on release nowadays and so the betas know that any bugs/features that are not working properly will get fixed in good time. I'd agree with folks who say that it would be better to wait until the first patch before trying to make any realistic judgement of what TEAW is going to be.

It's good to throw some positive stuff the way of a developer too. They're human and like to know that their work is appreciated.

[Tamas]

Hello Wodin,

Thank you for the list of suggestions.

I would definitely disagree with the game being less complex than AJE.

Things like terrain deterioration shown have both technical and scale limitations, ie. with the scale of the regions it probably would not make sense.

We will think about adding a confirmation window to stack-merging. My concern with that is once you have a bit of routine with it (and thus stop making accidental merges) it would slow the game down. But I will check with the team.

Adding mine warfare in as a Regional Decision might be a good idea, question again is the scale of the game compared to the effectiveness of those.

Logs of battles and results for units would be nice for flavour indeed, however it involves some very serious coding work I think to add it to the game. Right now we are concentrating on bug fixing and flashing out AI improvements, so we will revisit this once we are done with those.

[Tamas]

On the beta testers topic I must mention that we have had an excellent group of testers, who have shared our love for this game and have been working hard with us on improving balance and overall gameplay. We are grateful to have them around.