AGEOD Forums

My apologies, Syt, for borrowing your thread title idea, but I thought it was a good one! (I heard somewhere that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.)
I thought that I'd create a thread to pose questions about stuff that I can't find in the manual, or with forum search tools. Hopefully, it'll help other people, too.

First of all, I've got to say that when I downloaded the demo, I kinda expected crippleware... but I'm really happy to discover that it's the full game, with a time limit! YAAAAAY! What a smart idea!

My husband was kind enough to take the PDF to Kinko's, and so now I've got a great big manual to study the game with! I've been dragging it all over the house, trying to figure stuff out. It's got a heck of a steep learning curve, let me tell ya! It's kinda like I'm back in college, taking some sort of upper level course:
[INDENT]"Exegesis of Calvinus: An Introduction". 4.0 hrs.
Prerequisites: Rocket Science 399 [/INDENT]

I'm not a rocket scientist like most of the rest of you guys are, so, it's only natural that I've got a couple of questions, and I'm hoping that maybe some of you guys who are smarter than me can help me out!

My biggest question right now is about battles. You've got your "committed" area, and then the "deployed" area, and then the "rear". What I haven't been able to figure out is the purpose of the "deployed" area. I've noticed that when a unit gets flipped, it drops out of the line and into the "deployed" area. But is there any point to putting your units there first, before the battle starts? Or is it kinda like a staging area for units that have been wounded? It seems to me that it would kinda be good to avoid putting units there, if you can, since it lets the other guy see what you've got.

So if anybody can tell me all about using the battle window the way its supposed to be used, I'd appreciate it! [SIZE="1"](I might even give you a smooch...)[/size]


Havley

your are supposed to be limited in how many units you can move from the rear to the deploy area.

in the 1st round you can put some or all the units from the rear into deployment. after that your supposed to be limited to one corps a round from reserves to either side of battle. moving it 1st to the rear and then to either deployment area.

in a small battle its not really important. but in a large two flank battle it becomes critical. if you put to many corps to one flank, you can only transfer one corp a round from one flank to the other, moving 1st to the rear. or you can bring one corps at a time from reserves. in a nutshell after the 1st round you can only move one corp a round from the rear to either flank. you can get in trouble fast if both deployment areas are running low on troops.

there is a bug where you can bypass the one corp restriction by moving units straight fom reservers bypassing the rear and going straight to deployment or battle. if i recall correctly you can also bypass the limit by moving corps directly from one frontline spot to the other.

if you take advantage of these bugs then your taking away all meaning to having separate deployment areas.

hope this helps.

A chick playing complicated wargames, that's an exception that always amazes me

Syagrius wrote:A chick playing complicated wargames, that's an exception that always amazes me

That's a lucky husband!

Same for me

And she's even used one of my favorite words: exegesis. Never thought I would see that word used outside of a theological context!

Chaplain Lovejoy wrote:And she's even used one of my favorite words: exegesis. Never thought I would see that word used outside of a theological context!

Exegesis...much better than one of my favourite words 'eisegesis' which I believe is the opposite of exegesis.

Chaplin Lovejoy wrote:And she's even used one of my favorite words: exegesis. Never thought I would see that word used outside of a theological context!

Well, it's kinda a psuedo-theological context, you hafta admit! Think about it: Calvinus is the law-giver of "Le Grande Guerre", and the text of the rules is the definitive tome to turn to; and it definitely needs interpretative work to make sense of all the nuances and complexities and exceptions and all of that kind of stuff. All that we need now are the game's equivalents of the Essene texts: all of those charts and tables that the manual refer to, that "have yet to be discovered". (At least, by me. Where is the "diplomacy table", anyway?)

And if all of that isn't enough, then Calvinus has given the game a Calvinistic quality, you hafta admit: with the depravity of man (unrestricted submarine warfare and combat gas), and predestination too! (e.g. You know that when the AI plays the Central Powers, it's going to lose!)

Le Ricain wrote:Exegesis...much better than one of my favourite words 'eisegesis' which I believe is the opposite of exegesis.

Thanks for the new word, Le Ricain! It fills a gap in my vocabulary that desperately needed filling. Now, instead of screaming "you're clueless!" and slamming the door in the face of fundamentalist Southern bible-thumpers who come to proselytize me here at home, I can coolly look them in the eye and calmly say, "your flawed eisegesis holds no interest for me"...
...and then slam the door in their face!

On a more serious note... thanks for the reference to For the Fallen which you made in the historical discussion thread, Le Ricain. I've never encountered this, before. When I checked it out online, I was quite touched... so much so, that I wept a bit. Like usual, your thoughtful posts have enriched my life.

Smooches to all who want to be smooched ,
Havely

Because having done a game about warfare and also for being Italian, Calvinus is maybe more related to the bellicist Roman Consul than John Calvin. But who knows exactly ?

I forgot the reason why I chose this nickname ten years ago!
Jokes aside, I'm not a theologist, and surely not a friend of Catholic Church. I can be defined as a militant atheist.

Edit: going back to the Rules matter... yes the WW1 Rules are a TOME. I never saw a game more complex than LGG, and I suffered enormous difficulties for coding this game. I started working on WW1 in December 2005 - January 2006. Today is March 2009.........

Hi, Calvinus! I'm honored that you posted in my little thread! While you're here, I was wondering: is there a supplement to the Tome that has the charts and tables that are mentioned? I'm interested in the diplomacy table, in particular, because I'd like to know what kind of diplomatic effort is required to effect change.

Speaking of diplomacy... I've noticed that different neutrals have different diplomatic ranges (-4 to 11; 11 to 24, for example). I'm kinda assuming that the higher the range, the more difficult it is to effect a change. Is this right?

Oh, one more thing. I noticed that both Sweden and Holland have a +1 to diplomatic status change "when a German Ambassador is present". Playing as the Central Powers, can I send a "0" Ambassador and reap the reward in relations, or does the Ambassador have to have a value of 1+?

Thanks for the massive effort you've made in bringing us this elegant simulation!

Havely

Aphrodite Mae wrote:Hi, Calvinus! I'm honored that you posted in my little thread! While you're here, I was wondering: is there a supplement to the Tome that has the charts and tables that are mentioned? I'm interested in the diplomacy table, in particular, because I'd like to know what kind of diplomatic effort is required to effect change.

Mmmh, why not? Make a list of all tables you wish to have in the tome, and we will allocate some time for that.

Aphrodite Mae wrote:Speaking of diplomacy... I've noticed that different neutrals have different diplomatic ranges (-4 to 11; 11 to 24, for example). I'm kinda assuming that the higher the range, the more difficult it is to effect a change. Is this right?

The wider is the range, the more efforts you have to put.

Aphrodite Mae wrote:Oh, one more thing. I noticed that both Sweden and Holland have a +1 to diplomatic status change "when a German Ambassador is present". Playing as the Central Powers, can I send a "0" Ambassador and reap the reward in relations, or does the Ambassador have to have a value of 1+?

No, zero-value ambassadors are simply decoys: useful to make your enemy think you're allocating AMBs there, while instead you are simply bluffing.

The +1 is on the die roll, not on the value of the AMB counter.

Aphrodite Mae wrote:
Thanks for the new word, Le Ricain! It fills a gap in my vocabulary that desperately needed filling. Now, instead of screaming "you're clueless!" and slamming the door in the face of fundamentalist Southern bible-thumpers who come to proselytize me here at home, I can coolly look them in the eye and calmly say, "your flawed eisegesis holds no interest for me"...
...and then slam the door in their face!

On a more serious note... thanks for the reference to For the Fallen which you made in the historical discussion thread, Le Ricain. I've never encountered this, before. When I checked it out online, I was quite touched... so much so, that I wept a bit. Like usual, your thoughtful posts have enriched my life.

Smooches to all who want to be smooched ,
Havely

Thanks for the comments.

The reason that 'eisegesis' is one of my favourite words is because of its pronunciation. It is pronounced 'I-see-Jesus' which I think fits well with your planned usage of this fine word.

I did not think that anyone would actually look up the Binyon reference. The fourth verse is frequently used in our Remembrance Sunday celebrations (Armistice Day):

"They shall grow not old, as we that are left grow old:
Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We will remember them. We will remember them"

Edward Elgar did set 'For the Fallen' together with two other Binyon poems to music - 'The Spirit of England op 80' composed in 1917.

calvinus wrote:Mmmh, why not? Make a list of all tables you wish to have in the tome, and we will allocate some time for that.

Thanks! You're a sweetie!

Actually, I think that two will probably suffice: a Combat Results Table, and the Diplomacy table. But if naval battles use a different CRT, that would be useful, too.

EDIT: I forgot that Grand Offensives use a different Combat results table... so I guess we should add that to the list, too.

YAAAAAAAY! ompom:

I bought the game!

OK, really, it was my husband who bought the game... but good ol' Scrooge finally loosened up the purse strings, dumped out the gold with a sigh, and now, Ebeneezer is poorer, and I'm much richer, 'cause I've got the game! Wheeeee!
(Bill...? You owe Pocus another 10 centi-Euros...!)

OK... the next step is getting Dixicrat (aka "Scrooge", aka "Bill", aka "my wonderful husband") interested in it! You see, his thing is AACW, which is fine and all that, but it doesn't have all of the stuff that I like, like this game does! Diplomacy and Politics and Naval line of battle tactics and Air Duals and all of that stuff! Why, I haven't been so wonderfully bewildered by a game since Squad Leader! ("wait... I think it says on page 647 that you can't throw a satchel charge from a bicycle...") (We spent more time bickering about the rules and flippin' pages than we did playing the game! Now that was truly a Tome!)

So anyway... if you'll excuse me, I've got some gaming to do!

Havely

QUOTE:
"Now, instead of screaming "you're clueless!" and slamming the door in the face of fundamentalist Southern bible-thumpers who come to proselytize me here at home, I can coolly look them in the eye and calmly say, "your flawed eisegesis holds no interest for me"...
...and then slam the door in their face!"



good god, would you marry me?

you're already married huh......

dump that loser and marry me.....

he BOUGHT you La Grande Guerre?

do you have a sister?

Following the quotations of LGG boardgame, I see you are rich!

I keep my own personal copy, gently gifted by my friend Philippe, as a piece of GOLD!

Aphrodite Mae wrote: a Combat Results Table, and the Diplomacy table...

I've already told AM, but for benefit of those who don't know:
many of the tables can be found in spreadsheet form in the "Modding" subdirectory of the game's program folder on your hard drive. That should suffice until additional appendices can be added to the PDF.

Speaking of which...
for North American gamers who have access to a Fed-Ex/Kinkos print shop, the "tome of Calvinus" can be printed and bound in B&W for just under $20 US dollars... something on the order of five cents per page along with binding costs. Do not ask for a color copy! At a cost of fifty-nine cents per page, it will cost well over $100! Instead, I suggest that you browse through the manual and find those pages which need color for clarity, and specify that those, and only those, be printed in color.

igor7111 wrote:good god, would you marry me?

you're already married huh......

dump that loser and marry me.....

I'm afraid that you'll have to stand in line with the literally dozens of other guys who've been impatiently waiting for my "untimely demise". I suppose that with a wife as charming and delightful as Aphrodite Mae, it's a small wonder that I haven't been assassinated by one of her admirers, by now.

What's RoP in the profile of this charming couple ?

A new game from AGEOD that I don't know about ?

saintsup wrote:What's RoP in the profile of this charming couple ?

A new game from AGEOD that I don't know about ?

Frederick the Great: Rise of Prussia

See a screenshot and blurb by going to page 5.

Aphrodite Mae wrote:My apologies, Syt, for borrowing your thread title idea, but I thought it was a good one!

Didn't notice till now. Don't worry, plagiarize all you like.

I'm afraid that you'll have to stand in line with the literally dozens of other guys who've been impatiently waiting for my "untimely demise". I suppose that with a wife as charming and delightful as Aphrodite Mae, it's a small wonder that I haven't been assassinated by one of her admirers, by now.

Bloody hell, I didn't realize the "other half" was here as well.
You're a lucky man. And no worries about assassination.....
I haven't carried out an assassination in years......out of
form.

Aphrodite Mae wrote: I'm much richer, 'cause I've got the game!

Remember: the fact that you "got the game" doesn't necessarily mean that you "got game." Time will tell on the latter.

(With sincere apologies to those here who do not grasp the distinction because English is not their native language!)

Aphrodite Mae wrote:My apologies, Syt, for borrowing your thread title idea, but I thought it was a good one! (I heard somewhere that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.)

Syt wrote:Didn't notice till now. Don't worry, plagiarize all you like.

Don't worry, Syt! My plagiarizing days are over with, because the brutality and inhumanity of plagiarism stands in great contrast to what I had heard and read about as a girl, you know?! And you can quote me on that!

[SIZE="1"]On second thought, maybe you'd better not, OK?[/size]

Jayavarman wrote:Frederick the Great: Rise of Prussia

[/URL].

Great !!

After following this title for months at Matrix games I came here to take a further look to see how WW1 is progressing with the intent of a purchase. It does look like it has come a long way.

But, that has all changed after reading this thread. I refuse to give a nickel to a self-described MILITANT atheist. Keep your game. It has become a running joke around the wargame community anyway.

And yes, what a prize she must be, slamming the door in peoples faces that tirelessly help feed and shelter the poor and only wish to spread the love of a peace beyond all understanding. That'll show 'em!

What else? Do you throw water on Girl Scouts? Kick stray dogs? A lady would never slam the door on anyone, regardless of the reason for intrusion.

HonkryTonk wrote:After following this title for months at Matrix games I came here to take a further look to see how WW1 is progressing with the intent of a purchase. It does look like it has come a long way.

But, that has all changed after reading this thread. I refuse to give a nickel to a self-described MILITANT atheist. Keep your game. It has become a running joke around the wargame community anyway.

And yes, what a prize she must be, slamming the door in peoples faces that tirelessly help feed and shelter the poor and only wish to spread the love of a peace beyond all understanding. That'll show 'em!

What else? Do you throw water on Girl Scouts? Kick stray dogs? A lady would never slam the door on anyone, regardless of the reason for intrusion.

I think this thread is now a bit out of scope. Everybody is free to keep either or both his ideas and his money.

So I prefer to close this thread, in order to avoid stupid trolling escalations in religiour or even political matters.