Opinions on “Crown of Glory” PLEASE!!!!

[jjax]

Hi all, I’m clueless on whether I should get this game or not. I’m hoping you peeps can give me your pros and cons about the game.

Thanks

[Mynok]

I'm sure you get lots of pros and cons. One thing I can guarantee: despite any quirks and foibles of the game, it is dern fun to play.

[Terminus]

I think it's going to need a patch or two to realise it's full potential.

[Hanal]

First off, it has the potential to be a great game and I am confident that the first patch will address most of the major issues which we are experiencing.....so the question really is when, and not if, you should purchase it......if you have the patience, I would await the first patch....waiting would be the best move but if you want the game now, do what I did, play Sweden so you can learn the game until the patch comes out... playing Sweden is sort of a side show, but it allows you to pick up on the game easily and you save playing the heavy hitters until later....either way, you cannot go wrong....

[Alaric_31]

hello and welcome, Crown of Glory is a great game and a great napoleonic wargame, agree with all other that need patch to adress initial issues in version 1.0 but ver. 1.0 is already playable and very enjoyable at this time.

with best regards,

alaric.

[jjax]

Thanks for the input, i get the idea that it needs a patch!!!!!! Can any one tell me games that are similar to COG, that way i can get a idea what its like. (DEMOS = [:D])(NO DEMOS = [:@])

thanks

[Alaric_31]

hi, take care about "imperial Glory" it's another napoleonic wargame, but i like much more "crown of Glory" must say, Demo is available in the page...

http://www.imperialglory.com/


with best regards,

alaric.

[plasticpanzers]

If your looking for a historical Napolonic game then
this is not it unless some changes are made. Its a
very detailed version of Risk. Unfortunatly with its
shortcomings unless you like a game that has alot of
play value and not game value then try this one. at
that level it works.
Tim (plasticpanzers)

[YohanTM2]

very detailed version of Risk? I think not!!

This game has some serious complexities and the variables are huge. This does mean that a few patches will be required, but that is the reality of any complex game.

Take for example War in Europe from SPI. This is one of the origianal great monster games but still has some flaws that Decision Games is looking to address in a new release. Optional rules are also a good way to add additions to meet the needs of specific groups of gamers.

[plasticpanzers]

Sorry Yohan, just my opinion. From a historical view
its a free for all game taking place in the Napoleonic
War period. Its a great and playable game but is not
a true simulation of the period. I have played SPI
War in Europe (and others) and although COG is more detailed and very colorful its a game where anything
can happen. In making it "playable" by sacrificing
realism is usually a mistake in my opinion. Using
real history is always more fun. Truth is always more
amazing than fiction (using an old quote). Don't get
me wrong tho, i love to play it but as the general said
watching the charge of the Light Brigade: "Magnificent!
But it this is not war!".
Tim

[ahauschild]

Ok, for all its worth, here is my summation.

Crown of Glory attempts to simulate the Napoleanic Area struggle on several levels, from Grand scale diplomatics, economics and such down to Divisional level tactical combat.

It succeds to some degree on these levels, but as with all new releases nowadays does have its share of bugs and compromises for balance and scale. The most blatend bugs, such as the random crashes and similar are promised to be adressed in a patch in that is supposed to be released in the next few days, possibly as early as Monday. Other items that cause contreversy is the decision to enact the battles on a Division scale. Some fudging and abstract thinking had to go into it in order to make this happen. Napoleanic warfare is in most cases best played on a Brigade or Batallion level, as the troop types ussually can not be simulated well on divisional levels.

Example. A division of Jager, as given in the game did not exist. Most Division may have had at most 20 to 30 percent of their division made up of jager, less ussualy. This is something that Crown of Glory fudges allot on, and should have taken a lesson from other games, such as Victoria. In victoria you have also divisions, but they are in basicly 2 groups for the most part. Infantry and Cavalry (ok, cav has cav has huss, drag, and such at later levels) but they add the flavor for the special units by method of attachement. So you may be able to build a Infantry Division plain, but, if you posses the technology can also build them with artillery, cav, guard and such as attachments. This would have been a better way of depicting the Divisional level, but ok, it still works, if you dont try to get to deep into it.

The grand campain for the most part is not bad, you build up your pronvinces, you perform diplomatic actions, you build troops, pending on your tech level (baracks) and such. the concept is overall fun, with some quirks here and there. Some bugs do exist on that game level but again, they will most likley be fixed in this or upcomming other patches.

For combat you have two choices.

Quick Combat, with some limited placement options on a general front layout. This one is ussualy bloody to both sides and guarantie of winning seems to be allot more random.

Detailed Combat, here you place your divisons and manuver them on a hex map. You can change formations and Cav, Art and Inf are present. Weather playes a roll and overall the tactical can combat can last several days (15 mins to 2 hours game time). But currently the AI on the tactical level is very weak. Once you have played a few battles you can get consistendly results that are very questionable, such as 1000 guys dead on your side and 45000 guys dead on the other side. They are in the process of tweaking this.

The campain AI overall is also in need of some improvements, as it does some pretty stupid things from time to time. But for the first few games you will not notice this. It will only become apperant once you have played a few campaigns.

Overall I have enjoyed the game, in a large part because I am very intrigued by the Napoleanic period. The different countries gave plenty of variet.

Would I buy the game again or recomend it, YES. I can only recommend it, even with its current shortfalls. The game is bound to become a classic in for Napoleanic Period Games. Could it have been better, Of course, many aspects of the game could have been done better, such as the economy, it is currently somewhat a mystery to most players what actually happens with the economic model, and in order to prevent total domination it seems some dehancers have been coded, meaning the better you do with your economy, the worth you actualy do with it. Hard to explain, but thats about the jest of it.

I personaly would like to have seen the tactical combat for divisional level done different, but everybody has their own opinion on that.

Anyway, I hope this helps some.

[jjax]

Thanks all for your opinion. Ahauschild post was very helpful [:D]!!!!!!. I think ill wait for first patch. I have some patience.......................... i think.....................

[Mynok]

Using real history is always more fun.

It uses real history. It just doesn't hold to your personal standards of accuracy, nor does it claim to be a "simluation".

What it is....is fun, which is all a game is required to be.

[plasticpanzers]

Mynok my friend, any Napoleonic game that has the French destroy a 40,000 man Russian army AND capture
the Tzar and then have Russia continue to fight on
without him (a Vice-Czar took over?! LOL!) is not
real history. This is a fun game but it USES history
but is NOT based on history. It IS a fun game but it
is not a true simulation of the Napoleonic wars anymore
than a WW2 game where the US uses massed kamakaze air
units or Russia declares war on Brazil.
Tim

PS: I do not dislike the game! nor am i attacking it.
I just think it could have been so much more with some
more work. realism and playability can mix pretty well.

[jchastain]

In the design of any game, there has to be a balance between historical reality and playability/fun. I actually think this game strikes a reasonable balance between the two. It definitely is not a historical simulation by any stretch of the imagination. But it is a fun game that captures a lot of the "feel" and macro-environment of the napoleonic period.

Ahauschild's comments are pretty accurate in my mind. And I agree, I too would recommend this game as I have found it to be quite addictive and a whole lot of fun.