Excellent

[JudgeDredd]

It seems I'll have to pony up the do for this now as it's now a computerised version of the boardgame.

Well done ericbabe. It looks great and the demo played great.

A few questions about multiplayer please

• are people playing this RT?
• is the multiplayer interface good?
• are the servers regularly populated?
• are people playing it with the original rules or the new computerised rules?

[hugi]

Yes, the game system is very good.

Now with the last updates we have two systems:
1) the original boardgame rules (non persistence AP)
2) the persistence AP rules (computer version)

The most people play with the second mode. I thinks its faster and also nicer. You have more possibilities. The reason the boardgame has not this rules is the limitation of a physical boardgame vs. a computer game.

But you can decide which version you like and play you preferred rules.

The game is not RT, it is round based. But after every action the player can change (old rules) or change (new rules). So it feels really active for both players for the complete time. Similar to chess or even faster.

The multiplayer interface is the same as the normal singleplayer interface. Of course you can chat with your opponent. I like the look of the interface and the hole game (ok the menus are bad designed, but the most time you are ingame [;)]).

The game has many players and a wide fanbase. But they come from all of the world and playing at different times. So normally we use this forum or facebook the find a opponent. Of course you can also wait in the lobby. But most times the lobby is empty.

See you!

Greetings
hugi

[JudgeDredd]

Thx hugi.

[IronFist00]

Hi JudgeDredd and welcome to the game and the forums.

I agree with everything hugi said except his statement, "The most people play with the second mode. I thinks its faster and also nicer. You have more possibilities. The reason the boardgame has not this rules is the limitation of a physical boardgame vs. a computer game." While most people playing the PC game might use Persistent AP mode, I feel Classic AP mode (the board game version) is superior when it comes to tactics and strategy execution.

There reasons I stated in another thread on these forums so instead of rewriting them, here's my introduction on why I feel Classic AP is superior and then the link to the rest of my response. When my buds play the PC game with me, we use Classic AP mode. Definitely try both modes and realize Classic APs will take a little more digging/learning to get down but imo, the rewards are greater for doing so. Have fun!

"Classic AP mode versus Persistent AP mode is an interesting question. I know in the BoardGameGeek forum where they cover the board game (obviously), people are biased towards the Classic AP system as one would expect. Both have merits and I've played with both systems extensively. I feel at the end of the day , Classic AP is a more tactical system and rewards long term planning. You have to be thinking ahead and what you want to accomplish and then execute that plan. When something unforeseen happens, you have to decide the best way to deal with it and there are many, many options (most with pros and cons). With Persistent AP mode, you really don't have to deal with this since it has absolute flexibility and there is rarely if any, repercussions to switching on and off units."

More at: fb.asp?m=3237156

[e_barkmann]

I had constructed a long post about hugi's comment as well

In the end, it's good that we have alternatives to try and I applaud Eric for persisting with adding in the original 'Classic' boardgame rules.

cheers

[IronFist00]

Chris, I completely agree and I do play both depending on my opponent's preferences. However I have found some people find the learning curve for Classic APs daunting until I showed them the ropes. Most of the time afterward, they preferred Classic. I just didn't want JD to be put off on the effort. [8D]

[JudgeDredd]

Thank you all.

I probably should have mentioned I love the boardgame and actually helped for quite some time to beta test this game but dropped out because without the real boardgame rules in place and with the 3D look, it simply didn't feel like Conflict of Heroes to me. I apologised to eric - but I just wasn't getting the boardgame feel...to me it was just another 3D tactical game.

So finding out eric has added the classic APs and the boardgame look has pleased me no end. I always said I'd buy it if such changes were made - and it seems like I don't have any excuses now.

[ericbabe]

Now is the period in which we see whether the months of extra work spent on adding these features are generating sufficient additional interest to have been worth while.

[genehaynes]

I agree with VR's assessment. While the non-persistent AP system may seem more realistic, I think you lose a lot of "tactical thinking" that the Classic AP system requires. With persistent APs ALL of your units start with 7 APs (unless you chose the varable AP option). Therefore you can jump between units as required without to much penalty.

For example, with persistent AP system, if you want to fire at an approaching infantry unit with your LMG go right ahead, you can then select a different unit and come back to the LMG with no penalty. However, with Classic AP system, after firing the LMG (i.e. the active unit), the only way for you to select a different unit (and keep the LMG active) is opportunity fire or CAP usage. I like this type of tactical decision making the Classic AP system forces you to use.

The great thing about the game (and its latest patch) is you're free to use whichever system appeals to you.

[Missouri_Rebel]

ORIGINAL: ericbabe

Now is the period in which we see whether the months of extra work spent on adding these features are generating sufficient additional interest to have been worth while.

I would suggest updating the product page with the new maps. Show them baby's off.

As far as the Classic rules. I need to play with them to fully understand because MCoH was my first experience with the system and Persistent is something I have grown accustomed to.

mo reb

[Ratzki]

ORIGINAL: Missouri_Rebel

ORIGINAL: ericbabe

Now is the period in which we see whether the months of extra work spent on adding these features are generating sufficient additional interest to have been worth while.

I would suggest updating the product page with the new maps. Show them baby's off.

...

Yes, an update of the product page would help, I think. There has been a fare bit of change since those screen shots were taken.

[JudgeDredd]

Bought.

I had no excuse and the fact you made a great game even better by listening to gamers just made not buying it ridiculous.

Thanks eric. [&o]

[JudgeDredd]

Glad I bought it Eric - you've made it look and play fantastic. Old boardgame look and feel when playing. Well done. [&o]