Five facts about Aggressors...

[AlbertoC]

Aggressors: Ancient Rome is a new 4x strategy game developed by Kubat Software. It is currently into beta (click here to apply) and we recently started to publish dev diaries about it. We want to provide as much as information about the game as possible since it is a deep game and many of its mechanics work subtly underneath the surface.

Today we decided to highlight five specific features of the game, facts that all strategy players should find really interesting!





In Aggressors you can decide to rewatch the full history of your empire at any time you want. You can't imagine how satisfying it is to conquer Italy as Carthage and rewatching it, savouring your triumph!





The game displays all sorts of useful stats and info in very handy ledgers and graphs, so you can take educated strategic decisions.





The in-game editor lets you create and customize your own world. You have complete freedom!





You are not restricted to play as Rome, or as a major Empire. You can decide to play as a minor tribe, and get a completely different gameplay experience!





Not only you can rewatch the history of your units at any time, and know what battles they fought, where and how they fared, but their personal history deeply affects their effectiveness in specific circumstances!

[Capitaine]

This game looks almost too good to be true.

[DonCzirr]

Sounds good.

It would be great if the victory conditions were like the old Empires in Arms board game - where different victory conditions were applied for the player nations.

i.e. - You don't expect Turkey to attain as many victory points as France or Britain - but if they get a score that is considered good for them - they can win.

[pavelk]

It would be great if the victory conditions were like the old Empires in Arms board game - where different victory conditions were applied for the player nations.

i.e. - You don't expect Turkey to attain as many victory points as France or Britain - but if they get a score that is considered good for them - they can win.

It is entirely possible to have different victory conditions for each player but due to enormous number of options it is currently disabled.

On the other hand, one of the victory conditions called "winning points" have a different so called "winning points map" for each player. I.e. For Roman Empire conquering Sicily brings much more winning points than for Ptolemaic empire and contrarily Cyprus brings much more points to Ptolemaic empire than to Roman Empire.

[Lobster]

Gallaeci Tribes? That would be like trying to get all of your relatives to agree on what kind of pizza to order at the same time. [:D]

They did know how to get together and fight a common enemy other than each other. [;)]

It looks like a pretty game.

[pavelk]

Gallaeci Tribes? That would be like trying to get all of your relatives to agree on what kind of pizza to order at the same time. [:D]
They did know how to get together and fight a common enemy other than each other. [;)]

Agreed but you can change all that and create alternative history. You can be like "Arminius of Gallaeci Tribes", unite them and lead your nation to victory!:)

[DonCzirr]

ORIGINAL: pavelk

It would be great if the victory conditions were like the old Empires in Arms board game - where different victory conditions were applied for the player nations.

i.e. - You don't expect Turkey to attain as many victory points as France or Britain - but if they get a score that is considered good for them - they can win.

It is entirely possible to have different victory conditions for each player but due to enormous number of options it is currently disabled.

On the other hand, one of the victory conditions called "winning points" have a different so called "winning points map" for each player. I.e. For Roman Empire conquering Sicily brings much more winning points than for Ptolemaic empire and contrarily Cyprus brings much more points to Ptolemaic empire than to Roman Empire.

That sounds logical for the "big guys" but does not sound all that helpful for the minor or lesser Powers of the day.


If not enabled from Release, I'd like to see that feature added in the future.

I think there was another board game - Pax Britania that also had a scaled victory system ... so lesser powers could win perhaps with a minor province acquisition or if they were really one of the "sick men"

just favorable / good status of original territory at end of game could still put them in contention.

[pavelk]

That sounds logical for the "big guys" but does not sound all that helpful for the minor or lesser Powers of the day.

That is what I am saying. Every nation has a different winning points map and so do the tribes have. Their winning points map is smaller and just around the territories where they started

[DonCzirr]

ORIGINAL: pavelk

That sounds logical for the "big guys" but does not sound all that helpful for the minor or lesser Powers of the day.

That is what I am saying. Every nation has a different winning points map and so do the tribes have. Their winning points map is smaller and just around the territories where they started

Ah - thanks for the clarification.

Therefore - I am still interested in purchase upon release. [:)]

[Alan Sharif]

This looks like a really great game.

[zakblood]

pavelk is one of the developers everyone also, just in case those who didn't know and replied to him[;)]

[Rosseau]

This looks really wonderful. Congrats and best wishes on the beta phase. Had no idea something like this was in the works, so nice surprise.