PDA

View Full Version : The Good, the Bad and the Ugly



wolfetone
8th Jun 2005, 22:59
What's been your overall experience with IG so far? What do you like, not like, feel could use improvement or just your impression thus far?

Skirmisher
8th Jun 2005, 23:05
This has been an extremely good effort at creating a realistic game based on the most complex and diverse period of military history. With a few tweaks the battles, both land and sea, will rival and perhaps surpass the TW games. Best yet "Risk" style campaign, with great diplomacy.

Yes, there's a few niggles and little bugs, but overall, a top "first effort" at taking on an established series at it's own game!

wolfetone
9th Jun 2005, 00:44
I've decided to put together a "How To" Manual. It would answer basic questions like changing leader names, healing units, etc., it would address certain strategy issues/questions and also incoporate answers to modding questions (like those so ably addressed by Yorkie and others.) SO, if you'd like to contribute to it or advise me on what should be included.... please let me know. Thanks!

Queeg
9th Jun 2005, 00:51
Love the game! My favorite in quite some time.

The campaign is very good - basically a game in itself.

The tactical battles have totally won me over now that I've played a few and learned the capabilities and limitations of the units.

I do wish combat resolution was a bit slower. The weapons seem too lethal to me.

Celestial
9th Jun 2005, 15:09
I really like your game. The battles are really good, and the campaign map even better. When you play your game, you really have the 19th century feeling.

But I have a few minor things I wanted to inform you of. First: it would be nice to make Batavia have the capitol Amsterdam, not Brussels. Belgium was Austrian in that time, so it should be a part of Austria. Rotterdam should then become the wharf in Batavia.The eastern border of Batavia is also incorrect.

My second point: I think Russia should consist of more provinces than 5. Modern day Italy has six, while Russia is much bigger. Suggestions for other provinces: Crimea, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuana. Also, there is a province called "Eastern Prussia". I believe this region was called Pommerania.
The last thing I would like to say, is that it would be great if the Ottoman Empire also became a playable empire. If this could be done, they should of course have more regions. Anatolia coudl be divided in the real Anatolia(modern-day Turkey), Syria, Lebanon, etc.

I would appreciate it if you woudl consider this when you are making a patch.

YaquiKnow
9th Jun 2005, 15:27
I hate this game! I sit down for one turn lose track of time and go to bed @ 5AM. I go to work dead tired. Go home - do the family thing - get the kids to bed - Repeat the process.

I need sleep! ;)

Cpt.HooK
9th Jun 2005, 15:47
I really like this game now,at first i was put off by all the negative stuff but i bought it anyway and like it alot more than TW.
There are a few things that i don't like the ship controls seem very tricky to me and the fact there is no Comander on the field when you go into battle.
Other than that i think it is a very nice looking game with a great campagn mode

Webrider
9th Jun 2005, 23:43
The Good,

Great Graphics, naval battles, tech tree, Diplomacy, Leader promotion

The Bad,

No pause to give orders,
No speed slider to move into battle quickly then slow down for battle to enjoy graphics.
Poor moral effects in land combat
units too lethal and prone to melee piles
No leaders in combat
No automatic mode for ships in naval battles.
No boarder around Naval battles
Ships get out of control and leave battle and if you lose all is lost
Diplomacy can be exploited into easy peaceful annexation
Tech tree with military hospital much more powerful then other branch

The ugly,
Artillery vs Cav
Game documentation, global vs provincial effects
This board when you post negatives or compare IG to RTW :eek:

Broadside
10th Jun 2005, 01:26
Good - Superb and deep diplomacy (the ability to annex peacefully is a totally new concept), uncluttered strategy map, great graphics, first Napoleonic strategy game with any depth and the ability to command armies in 3D, overall concept.

Bad - Naval battles (nice to see them, but they are appallingly implemented - get rid of the "edge of the world" limitation), small size of battle map armies, limited range of playable nations, repetitive battlefield locations, lack of sieges and fortifications on battle maps in general.

Picotrain
11th Jun 2005, 02:22
Good - Superb and deep diplomacy (the ability to annex peacefully is a totally new concept), uncluttered strategy map, great graphics, first Napoleonic strategy game with any depth and the ability to command armies in 3D, overall concept.

Bad - Naval battles (nice to see them, but they are appallingly implemented - get rid of the "edge of the world" limitation), small size of battle map armies, limited range of playable nations, repetitive battlefield locations, lack of sieges and fortifications on battle maps in general.

Well, I've seen peaceful annexation at least once before in a game called "Europa Universalis II" by Paradox. If you like Risk, then I'm sure you'll like that game, the diplomacy system in it is fairly advanced.

wolfetone
11th Jun 2005, 20:57
You know, I've said this before but I really love this game. So it's said to say that I have finally reached the point where I'm going to put it away until a good patch comes out. Why? Well, all of its good points are offset by the numerous problems in AI, game mechanics, etc. I don't want to repeat what so many other people have already said but here's a sampling of what I'm talking about.

1. Graphics... Superb graphics and great attention to detail is made moot by the inability to actuially enjoy the battle. Sure, if all I want to do is click, click, click,click it's ok because then I'm not really interested in either the graphics or the tactical battlefield cahnges. However, I want to enjoy the battle. I want to see how my strategy plays out instead of this mass clicking fest where the game devolves into just sending everyone to the same point in the battlefield. It's bad enough that I can't turn my back for 10 seconds on one flank w/out having to switch back to other to prevent units runnning headlong into melee combat or getting overrun by cavalry because the AI won't automatically form squares for your units in those situations. (Unlike the AI will do for its own units.) And I don't want to argue the point some people make where it's not "realistic" to have a pause and command/speed slider in the game. It's a preference thing and I don't mind certain compromises to make the game both playable and fun (for example, though I would like variances in uniforms, grape shot, etc. I can tolerate certain abstractions.) But this is a MAJOR fault that really makes battles not that much fun (again, if your thrill comes from clicking here and clicking there and clicking everywhere.. there's no reason this would bother you). And the battles proceed WAY too fast. I spend more time setting up my order of battle then the actual battle takes. No again, most battles didn't end in 10 minutes. So this quick pace from beginning of combat to end is aggravating. Certainly seeing how I must micromanage every aspect of the battle. Units turning 45 degress (exposing my artillery/and or flanks) and then ahaving to realign them (which time they stop firing while receiving fire from the enemy) just to turn 45 degress when I move to the next unit (during which time a unit on my flank is getting decimated because (see illustrations above).

:mad:

Diplomacy - Interesting and promising but right now full of holes. Liberating countries.. no real reason to in the current game. And there's no logic to the alliances.. To see the Ottoman Empire get politically gobbled up by Austria, Prussia ???? Liberate them and what happens... two turns later they are either back in the Austrians camp or they've been annexed by someone else. Now, it wouldn't be so bad here and there...but it's the rule rather than the exception in the game. NOt that it shouldn't be a feature... just made a heck of a lot harder (and much much much more expensive) to do. Plus, you shouldn't get major boosts in sympathy JUST because you trade with someone. Granted, it should help...but not make a nation want to give up its independence because of it. I spent the last game (as a test) building up Sweden, Portugal, Piedmont and Naples with land taqken from England, Spain, France, Russia (and reduced those nations to only one province) and after building up sizeable armies, etc. in those Neutral states, they still gave up their independece to the same "weak" empires. WTF? I could go on with other issues: like the inability to "protect" neutrals with a "guarantee" or something, the inability to give certain land to players or grant independence to countries you've conquered (couldn't give Anatolia to Egypt for example), nations indicating on the trade menu that they have/want certain resources and when you try to trade (regardless of the amount requested or amount offered) they decline the trade and your sympathy declines also (e.g., offering a country 20000 gold for 100 food (when it indicates they are selling food). That's a give me.... who wouldn't accept that... then they get mad about.????? Hmnmmm

Province size.... I can't image that it takes as long to sail from the English Coast to Spain as it would to go on land from Brittany to Alejento (?) I would think that travel by boat would be significantly faster. Anatolia.. Good God, look at its size compared to say Brandenburg. But I can travel through both at the same rate.. Also, the micromanaging of units on the Strategic map (and not being able to route them to a final destination)??

Weather Effects... Invading Russia in Winter..... And my Army has no losses or difficulties due to it.???

Healing Units.. Nice concept (how if you merge units you avg the ranking betwenn the two...nicely reflects reall life situations) but its a clumsy process and you should be ableo refit units regardless of the gov't you have. Someone suggested a replacement pool where you could automatically pull replacements from to bring units back to full strength... interesting idea. Something needs to be done though. I made the point earlier that units (let's say you have a veteran unit but it only has 10 men left in it.... "healing it with fresh recruits should dilute its rankings regardless (unless the recruits are coming from a "pool" of veteran soldiers.)

Hmmm.. I'm starting my rant again. Anyway, there are so many wonderful things about this game. I guess that is what is so frustrating for me. And the replayability factor is dwindling. But maybe that's just me.

There are other wonderful points that others have made (and that I've made before) that I hope PYRO looks at addresses soon. Many of the changes being asked for are things that would not effect the "clickers" out there who want that aspect in the game (as many of the changes could be optional to the player... speed slider, etc.). The changes would just add the bit of historical "realism", etc. that a lot of other players out there want.

Webrider
14th Jun 2005, 23:03
RTW peaceful annexation... walk up to a town with a diplomat.. if they like you enough open negotions and spend gold to peacefully annex the city. The larger the city the more it cost in gold....

IG pay gold wait a couple of turns pay more gold ...after enough gold annex.. same costs for any size neutral country.

IG take hanover from France... liberate Hanover do not occupy... move out.. France takes Hanover back... repeat... after 2 or 3 times liberating a countries most countries are ready for peacful annexation just by dropping a consulate.. gold... in their capitol.

I'm not saying one system is better ... just that I have seen peacefull annexation before by whatever name. I think you can take cities that way in the Civilization series as well .. diplomate ... gold .... In which case that came before the TW series :)

bbushe
17th Jun 2005, 14:12
I hate this game! I sit down for one turn lose track of time and go to bed @ 5AM. I go to work dead tired. Go home - do the family thing - get the kids to bed - Repeat the process.

I need sleep! ;)

I have the same problem. Lucky you used the large font or my bleary vision woul dhave struggled :eek:

Capt. Hawkins
17th Jun 2005, 20:24
I hate this game! I sit down for one turn lose track of time and go to bed @ 5AM. I go to work dead tired. Go home - do the family thing - get the kids to bed - Repeat the process.

I need sleep! ;)


LMAO!!!!!!!!!!
Thought i was the ONLY one!!!!!! :o :thumbsup: :D