Seems so from my reading of the Paradox website.
I hope we don't lose the gorgeous map and get the horrible EU3 straight lines.
And an end to WEGO?
-
Taillebois
- General of the Army
- Posts: 601
- Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 8:09 pm
- Location: Nr GCHQ Cheltenham
We all share your concerns. But have you seen the CKII map screenshots? The NCP1 map is a unique work of art, but I think we can live with something as attractive as the CKII map.
A good way to think about pausable real time is that the "turn" ends when you press the "pause button." This is an arbitrary break in the action that is no more arbitrary than a fixed interval such as turn length. You can take as long as you like to plan, give orders, check status, requisition replacements, etc...
There is enormous potential. For instance battles may become more dynamic, as you don't have to wait 15 days to respond to the situation. Just hit pause. Pursuit after battle may become even more important (greater fidelity regarding the period). Better plan on having a large body of cavalry under someone like Murat to pursue and harass the enemy retreat, cause additional casualties and morale loss, and prevent them reforming. Set their course and unpause. The lengthy pursuit may very well finally assume the significance it had then. In 1805, you will sweep the enemy stragglers before you; in 1813 you will wish you still had the cavalry to do so, and will miss achieving the decisive ending to your battles. Often you will plan for the pursuit phase of your operation on the fly taking advantage of opportunities as they arise. Fleshing out the role of cavalry better that depicted in NCP1 is a possibility, no?
How about reconnaissance? Better have that picket line of cavalry out another space to prevent being crushed before you have time to react to a sudden enemy presence. Hit pause and get the scouts out. Better understand where the avenues of approach are and make sure you maintain eyes on them at all times. Better rotate the scouts before they go down for fatigue or lack of supply. Hit pause, check them and adjust. When you want to, when you must. Your decision. Continuous operations demand maximum flexibility and organization. Another layer of uncertainty is added--more friction.
Of course you can do much of this in NCP1 right now. Why should we believe that we won't be able to do the same in NCP2? NCP2 gives us an additional opportunity to explore aspects of the period that may receive better treatment under a slightly different wargaming paradigm.
NCP1 is a jewel in its own right, a benchmark for Napoleonic computer wargaming. You would not know that by reading the many hastily made and ill considered comments about it after its release. Go back and look. We're just lucky that they even considered doing NCP2 after all that. Don't think some of that negativity cost them some sales? Guess again. Napoleonics aficionados are a very hard if not impossible lot to please and highly critical. To the casual observer it would appear that they hate what they love.
I've been wargaming this period for a very long time now. Encountered my first wargame almost 40 years ago. From painted lead figures to paper counters (Avalon Hill's War & Peace, especially) to almost every Napoleonic computer wargame ever published. I've read scads of books (Chandler's The Campaigns of Napoleon, best and most definitive) on the period. Yeah, I'm a Napoleonics freak. You are too, most likely, or you wouldn't be concerned. Nobody has ever done a more historically faithful, more playable depiction of Napoleonic warfare at the operational level than AGEOD. Try to name one. Of course, it ain't perfect, but...what is?
Guess what? They're using a different engine, but they're at it again. They will try and do it right, don't you think? We have seen what the AGEOD team can do. They're the best around at combining historical fidelity with playability. I don't think anyone else exists who can do it at all, let alone do it better. Let's use the time until release to give them our support, encouragement, and ideas about how to improve the best of NCP1 and add to it. That is, after all, their stated intention.
Innovation means change, that it won't be the same as before. We must live with that reality. It need not be troublesome. Highly gifted and capable people are working on this project. They deserve our confidence. Am I just a fanboy, maybe. But one would be blind not to see that the AGEOD team is something special. They're the best we've got at what they do.
A good way to think about pausable real time is that the "turn" ends when you press the "pause button." This is an arbitrary break in the action that is no more arbitrary than a fixed interval such as turn length. You can take as long as you like to plan, give orders, check status, requisition replacements, etc...
There is enormous potential. For instance battles may become more dynamic, as you don't have to wait 15 days to respond to the situation. Just hit pause. Pursuit after battle may become even more important (greater fidelity regarding the period). Better plan on having a large body of cavalry under someone like Murat to pursue and harass the enemy retreat, cause additional casualties and morale loss, and prevent them reforming. Set their course and unpause. The lengthy pursuit may very well finally assume the significance it had then. In 1805, you will sweep the enemy stragglers before you; in 1813 you will wish you still had the cavalry to do so, and will miss achieving the decisive ending to your battles. Often you will plan for the pursuit phase of your operation on the fly taking advantage of opportunities as they arise. Fleshing out the role of cavalry better that depicted in NCP1 is a possibility, no?
How about reconnaissance? Better have that picket line of cavalry out another space to prevent being crushed before you have time to react to a sudden enemy presence. Hit pause and get the scouts out. Better understand where the avenues of approach are and make sure you maintain eyes on them at all times. Better rotate the scouts before they go down for fatigue or lack of supply. Hit pause, check them and adjust. When you want to, when you must. Your decision. Continuous operations demand maximum flexibility and organization. Another layer of uncertainty is added--more friction.
Of course you can do much of this in NCP1 right now. Why should we believe that we won't be able to do the same in NCP2? NCP2 gives us an additional opportunity to explore aspects of the period that may receive better treatment under a slightly different wargaming paradigm.
NCP1 is a jewel in its own right, a benchmark for Napoleonic computer wargaming. You would not know that by reading the many hastily made and ill considered comments about it after its release. Go back and look. We're just lucky that they even considered doing NCP2 after all that. Don't think some of that negativity cost them some sales? Guess again. Napoleonics aficionados are a very hard if not impossible lot to please and highly critical. To the casual observer it would appear that they hate what they love.
I've been wargaming this period for a very long time now. Encountered my first wargame almost 40 years ago. From painted lead figures to paper counters (Avalon Hill's War & Peace, especially) to almost every Napoleonic computer wargame ever published. I've read scads of books (Chandler's The Campaigns of Napoleon, best and most definitive) on the period. Yeah, I'm a Napoleonics freak. You are too, most likely, or you wouldn't be concerned. Nobody has ever done a more historically faithful, more playable depiction of Napoleonic warfare at the operational level than AGEOD. Try to name one. Of course, it ain't perfect, but...what is?
Guess what? They're using a different engine, but they're at it again. They will try and do it right, don't you think? We have seen what the AGEOD team can do. They're the best around at combining historical fidelity with playability. I don't think anyone else exists who can do it at all, let alone do it better. Let's use the time until release to give them our support, encouragement, and ideas about how to improve the best of NCP1 and add to it. That is, after all, their stated intention.
Innovation means change, that it won't be the same as before. We must live with that reality. It need not be troublesome. Highly gifted and capable people are working on this project. They deserve our confidence. Am I just a fanboy, maybe. But one would be blind not to see that the AGEOD team is something special. They're the best we've got at what they do.
-
Bernadotte
- Lieutenant
- Posts: 120
- Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 7:34 pm
- Location: south of munich (germany)
How will/can this to be done in a PBEM game ?8thTnCav wrote:... the "turn" ends when you press the "pause button." This is an arbitrary break in the action that is no more arbitrary than a fixed interval such as turn length. You can take as long as you like to plan, give orders, check status, requisition replacements, etc...
I watched the CK2 - let's play youtube demos
and I am dismayed.
It is 1070 and King Phillip of France needs to call his troops to battle, so the player zooms out, boxes all of France, shift-clicks something and magically, immediately, levies rise from the earth and start marching toward some designated rally point.
First of all, it would be impossible for the King's call to arms to reach across his realm in a single instant
Second of all, it would take days for a Duke and all of his vassels to assemble, get supplies and such to begin the march to aid the King
Third, it appeared each levy marched independently toward the target provence - wouldn't Duke, summon his vassals to his home first and then the whole would march together in a show of force and prestige of the Duke instead of the Duke racing his underlings to get to a rally spot first?
Fourth, when the levies are rasied, you get immediate feedback on size and strength - how did King Phillip know this depth of information of the forces coming (and when they'd probably get there)?
CK2 is a very pretty game and interesting on some levels, but does not appear to be much of a game about actual warfare of the period.
If this is the battle model they are going to work from (as I have heard some things about using the CK2 flanks system - go watch the videos) - I did not see anything about command and control or maybe the demo game didn't have these 'features to come'.
and I am dismayed.
It is 1070 and King Phillip of France needs to call his troops to battle, so the player zooms out, boxes all of France, shift-clicks something and magically, immediately, levies rise from the earth and start marching toward some designated rally point.
First of all, it would be impossible for the King's call to arms to reach across his realm in a single instant
Second of all, it would take days for a Duke and all of his vassels to assemble, get supplies and such to begin the march to aid the King
Third, it appeared each levy marched independently toward the target provence - wouldn't Duke, summon his vassals to his home first and then the whole would march together in a show of force and prestige of the Duke instead of the Duke racing his underlings to get to a rally spot first?
Fourth, when the levies are rasied, you get immediate feedback on size and strength - how did King Phillip know this depth of information of the forces coming (and when they'd probably get there)?
CK2 is a very pretty game and interesting on some levels, but does not appear to be much of a game about actual warfare of the period.
If this is the battle model they are going to work from (as I have heard some things about using the CK2 flanks system - go watch the videos) - I did not see anything about command and control or maybe the demo game didn't have these 'features to come'.
-
BelisariuS.F
- Civilian
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 8:55 pm
DanSez wrote:CK2 is a very pretty game and interesting on some levels, but does not appear to be much of a game about actual warfare of the period.
Well, OBVIOUSLY. It's a grand strategy game, not a wargame. It's funny how too many people have problems with distinguishing between different subgenres of strategy games.
Just because something is grand strategy doesn't mean it can throw attempting to model the mechanics of medieval operational warfare out the window. Too many games just show you moving some cardboard pieces or digital counters from one hex or area to another, without any consideration of what's going on beneath the surface. Raising forces, concentrating them, and keeping them in the field for a campaign was really weird in the middle ages, and should probably involve a flowchart of actions and inactions unlike anything that took place in any other period of history.
Given the scale I'm not sure that CK I and II can really be considered grand strategy. Is it mimicking computer game mechanics more than the underlying reality? Probably, but that doesn't bother me too much because the eugenics experiments are so much fun. What bothers me is an army of Fatimids conducting a private jihad on the coast of northern France. I really hope they put a stop to that kind of thing (blatantly unlikely and ahistorical behavior). I was also never comfortable with the game's crusading mechanics -- it felt more too much like Medieval Total War and not enough like real life. The crusading events probably need to be heavily scipted with complex triggers for variants (like the Fourth Crusade showing up in Northern Italy with enough money to pay for passage to Oultremer, avoiding the detour and sacking of Constantinople that was a seminal event in starting the Italian Renaissance).
Given the scale I'm not sure that CK I and II can really be considered grand strategy. Is it mimicking computer game mechanics more than the underlying reality? Probably, but that doesn't bother me too much because the eugenics experiments are so much fun. What bothers me is an army of Fatimids conducting a private jihad on the coast of northern France. I really hope they put a stop to that kind of thing (blatantly unlikely and ahistorical behavior). I was also never comfortable with the game's crusading mechanics -- it felt more too much like Medieval Total War and not enough like real life. The crusading events probably need to be heavily scipted with complex triggers for variants (like the Fourth Crusade showing up in Northern Italy with enough money to pay for passage to Oultremer, avoiding the detour and sacking of Constantinople that was a seminal event in starting the Italian Renaissance).
Philippe wrote:Probably, but that doesn't bother me too much because the eugenics experiments are so much fun. What bothers me is an army of Fatimids conducting a private jihad on the coast of northern France. I really hope they put a stop to that kind of thing (blatantly unlikely and ahistorical behavior). I was also never comfortable with the game's crusading mechanics -- it felt more too much like Medieval Total War and not enough like real life.
I think it's a big problem for a game that tries to simulate both war and peace. Peace is easy to make fun cause it's broad and intuitive, we all understand relations and economy. In Crusader Kings 2 there's very complex character relations mechanic ("I hate you cause you've tried to kill your wife, and also I'm proud but you're humble") but it's easy to understand cause you've lived a life and talked to people. Representing warfire with the same complex system means bringing supply, terrain, cavalry raids and all other mysterious things.
Return to “Napoleon's Campaigns”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests