AGEOD

[lordhoff]

It seems that AGEOD has a hard time explaining how to actually play their games. I've managed to learn a few but some, the tutorials are terrible and the manuals, while detailed, mainly show what information is available and precious little on how to actually do something. An example of a few turns of game play would go a long way (although, that is what a tutorial should do). A prime example is Great Invasions - I tried playing that game about a dozen times and since it seemed to borrow heavily from the board game (and one that I liked quite a bit) Britannia (Monarch/Avalon Hill), I was very excited to play it. I spent a lot of time staring at a screen with no idea what I should be doing despite reading the manual and trying the tutorial (which is just a short version of the game void of instructions). Pretty much ditto with Pride of Nations - lots of cool charts, very detailed, it looked like it was to be a fun time (and also reminded me somewhat of an old favorite, "Pax Britannia" by Victory Games) but, "available builds" showed what could be built, costs, etc but I never did figure out how to actually build something. Again, a tutorial that is nothing more then an abridged version of the manual, ie, doesn't lead through a few turns step by step, is less then useless. I hit "next turn" and read through all the info; apparently some tribes somewhere attacked me and clicking on the message took me to the vicinity of Armenia but nothing was there other then an Ottoman army in a nearby area so again, "am I supposed to do something or was the message just color" is all that came to mind. They have what appears to be some really interesting games but it'd be nice if one could actually play them. I even looked for walkthroughs and "let's plays" but nothing really and a lot of it was prior to AGEOD getting the game back and renaming it.

Well, I got some oldies I in my backlog that I really should get to playing like "War Plan Orange", "Pacific War", and "World War I Gold" before MATRIX decides to stop supporting them. I've got "The Rise of Prussia" too - hope that one is playable.

[loki100]

for a couple of their games there is a problem that the design is really a board game recoded. Great Invasions is one and WW1 Gold another. I have the latter and tried really hard to like it - clearly somewhere in there is the definitive computer simulation of the First World War - but gave up completely. I even tried to work out what was going on using the old rules for the original boardgame.

Those two are unusual and the rest of the series are pretty accessible. They games are spread over two generations. The first group includes Wars in America, Rise of Prussia, Revolution under Siege, Alea Jacta Est (and its components) and Pride of Nations. The second is the games they have put out more recently from Civil War II up to Wars of Napoleon.

The second set gain from an improved engine - some is aesthetic such as the map scrolls easier etc, and some affects the underlying game engine (its just a lot faster at processing things).

Beyond this, they all share things in common. Issues such as movement, stack formation, combat, supply etc use varying subsets of much the same rules. There are some very good tutorial AARs available but unfortunately they are scattered around the place - in part as for a time AGEOD were (badly mis)managed by Paradox. I've noted below where the AARs can be found P - is on the Paradox boards (access from here), some on the AGEOD boards and a few here (not many as most of the active AGEOD commentary is on their own boards at the moment).

Some worth looking up are 'Learning from Prussia' (RoP) by Narwhal and Baris (P); 'Hero, Traitor and Barbarian' (AJE) by Narwhal and myself (P); 'Mightiest Empires Fall' (RoP) by Narwhal and myself; 'Wars in America - a How to AAR' (WiA) by Narwhal and myself; 'Manufacturing Italy' (PoN) by myself (A).

All these have sections just on game play rather than presenting the flow of the AAR. So you can dip in and dip out of those parts and skip the rest. Other resources include both a short lets play (using the Franco-Prussian war) and some videos on parts of the Pride of Nations system (on the AGEOD boards). A number of posts in the AJE section of the AGEOD boards on combat mechanics in detail (these can be applied to any game) by Narwhal and I've put up a set of posts translating this basic info into Wars of Napoleon on the matrix boards.

Reason for this long reply is that I personally think Great Invasions and WW1 Gold give a badly flawed introduction to the AGEOD series. Their own games share enough in common that picking up the basics in one game allows you to get started on another. Its a real pity to miss out on the only game company that puts out scenarios on warfare in N America in the mid-seventeenth century and has a game system that is ideal for any pre-modern era.

[demyansk]

Agree, I think they have some great topics but getting to play the game for me is not working. I think they should include a bunch of tutorials like DC3. I think those tutorials are the best out there. A few turns on the screen on how to do things would be of great help. Until then, I look but don't buy any AGeod games.

[RodyMetal]

To be honest their games worth the time spending to try to learn and understand, I still do not get many small details, but the more I know the more I love their game, and many of their newer games share most of the mechanism, so learning once will get you to play many easily. The thing why I am saying that is cause AGEOD games are the best Wargaming strategy on operation level of pre 20th century warfare, the details of supply, movement, army, and combat are unmatched comparing to other games, keep in mind I am not including PON here, it was very ambitious project that did not work, I am glad the Philip focusing in operational wargame rather politic/ economic mix, even in the AGEOD upcoming engine.

[wings7]

Here is a Pride of Nations video expose on You Tube that looks pretty good (I have not spent a lot of time with it)...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-ExBUmiHMQ

[wodin]

World War 1 Gold if your really stick with it is easy the best WW1 Grand Strat game out there.

[lordhoff]

I did manage both Birth of Americas and and the Blue and the Gray but that was a long time ago so I don't remember much.

I'll take a look at the aids you mentioned - I really want to play PoN in a big way. Thanks.

[nicwb]

Got to agree- I got TEAW some time ago and gave really struggled with it.

I recently picked up Revoloutin under siege gold, mainly in the hope that the airliner game might be a bit easier to understand and that I could use that as a platform to understand the more recent game. Still struggling [8|]

Part of the problem I think is that English is not the decs first language. But I think they could really benefit from a few walk through videos. It found it really worked for me in Command Operations. And it certainly a plus in Gary Grigsby's War in the West.

It's a pity though as ageod covers history topics that aren't well covered elsewhere.

[76mm]

I also struggled with this issue and have largely given up on AGEOD games; given that basically all of their games are based on the same engine, it sure seems that by now they would have tweaked the manual to near perfection, but that does not seem to be the case.

[Freyr Oakenshield]

Aren't there any home-made tutorials or play-throughs on YouTube or Twitch...?

[balto]

Civ War 1 and 2. Not into trashing Matrix type developers but AGEOD to me is really really bad. You can read the manual all you want (which I had done for both) and when you play you find that the game is not like the manual except the buttons they show you. Then you go to the forums and you find that for every basic question, you will have 20-30 stone cold AGEOD veterans and each one has a different twist. And after you read these different twists, you know that is not how it worked for you. For example, Marching to the Sound of Guns is important, read up on that.., freaking fiasco on the forums. AGEOD needs to hang it up, if a new-comer to Matrix tries to play one of the Matrix quality thinking games and accidentally buys AGEOD, they will never come back.

[Alan Sharif]

Must confess I have never managed to actually play an AGEOD games and will be in no hurry to buy another.

[Toby42]

ORIGINAL: Alan Sharif

Must confess I have never managed to actually play an AGEOD games and will be in no hurry to buy another.

Same here. I've bought several and won't buy anymore!

[Qwixt]

and here I thought I was the only one with this issue. It basically turns greek to me, and then I lose interest in trying to learn more.

[AlessandroD]

Ageod's games are nice, when you learn to play one of them, essentially you learn them all.
The bad thing is that system is the same for all titles (with improvements game by game but still), just pick up your favorite era.

[Rosseau]

I can't imagine most wargamers having a problem with the Alea Jacta Est series though. Much easier to learn than a whole slew of popular games sold here.

Also, once you learn it, it's done. Graviteam killed me by changing Mius Front interface, just after I "mastered" Operation Star. [;)]

[Zorch]

ORIGINAL: AlessandroD

Ageod's games are nice, when you learn to play one of them, essentially you learn them all.
The bad thing is that system is the same for all titles (with improvements game by game but still), just pick up your favorite era.

+1
Their system adapts well to unusual conflicts like the Russian Civil War and the 30 Years War. Not so well to WWI.

[Gilmer]

Well, Ageod games have some good and bad. If you ever manage to figure out how to play them, they can be real gems. But I agree with some of the posters about not knowing what to do.

Most wargames you have a Front-line and it is made up with the familiar hexes. And your guys are on one side and the bad guy is on the other side. Like War in the East. Ageod games don't have it exactly like that. Their games are more maneuver and control. I bought the first Civil War and sat for hours looking at it and thinking, "I have no idea what to do." That is EXACTLY what I thought. I then got Rise of Prussia.

And honestly, I did not play any of them, truly. I played Rise of Prussia but at the time, because of a bug, I had this overpowered cavalry unit that could wipe out any formation on the map, so I won.

I did not really learn how to play the games until To End All Wars. I really enjoyed that title and did an AAR on the Ageod forums of it. I liked doing the AAR so much I started doing Let's Plays of them. I have kind of graduated into doing a Let's Play of War in the East, and my channel isn't that good. My earlier let's plays kind of sucked. I'm getting better.

My point really is, Ageod games are the kind of games that you are going to like and you'll end up working on it to get better. Or you will just not like them and think they suck. I've never really seen anyone on the fence about them, except maybe people very new to them.

[Poopyhead]

I've been playing war games since the '70's and I am retired Army. I played only Ageod American Civil War and Civil War 2 from Ageod. I read every single post on the Ageod forum for those games. I had no problems playing these. Those "stone cold Veterans" were also a lot of help as they are a great bunch of guys. I can't speak for the rest of their games, but the CW2 crowd is the best I've seen anywhere. The developers are still posting in the CW2 forum and some of my comments have been added to the game. Can anyone else say that for Matrix or Paradox? The game has a lot of depth and if you're not the kind to get past that, then just post a question. To the best of my knowledge, we have never not answered a question on the CW2 forum...ever.

[Toby42]

ORIGINAL: Poopyhead

I've been playing war games since the '70's and I am retired Army. I played only Ageod American Civil War and Civil War 2 from Ageod. I read every single post on the Ageod forum for those games. I had no problems playing these. Those "stone cold Veterans" were also a lot of help as they are a great bunch of guys. I can't speak for the rest of their games, but the CW2 crowd is the best I've seen anywhere. The developers are still posting in the CW2 forum and some of my comments have been added to the game. Can anyone else say that for Matrix or Paradox? The game has a lot of depth and if you're not the kind to get past that, then just post a question. To the best of my knowledge, we have never not answered a question on the CW2 forum...ever.

Well, you must be lot more intelligent than I am! I generally cannot make any sense of them. I've been playing since the 70's also! First computer game was a Midway game for the Amiga!