AGEOD

[Captain_Orso]

I think if you want to hear the roar of cannons, ripping of massed rifle volleys, and the thunder of cavalry charges, this is not the game for you. You don't play the battlefield commander, down on the field, watching the progress of advances, guiding reinforcements, ordering the charge. Your position is far from the field, behind a desk, listening for the telegraph to clatter out the words of generals, spattered with mud and worse, many miles distant across mountains and forests, rivers and fields, reporting of loss or victory.

You do however get to decide where these generals will struggle with a wily and determined opponent. You get to build the armies, plan where to leverage strength and mask weakness. Your hands steer the resources of a nation toward victory or defeat.

You decide whether to push down the Mississippi with all strength, or to pull your forces together in the East and push for Richmond or Washington; and the amount you can influence movements toward a strategic goal is not small. But you don't get the cry Charge!!

Back in the AGEOD forums CharlesOnMission put an entire series of tutorials together: Video Tutorials and Let's Play!. If you're interested in not just learning the rules, but how to use them, this may help you.

Aside from that, drop by the forum and ask any questions pertaining to the game. There are always people willing to shed some light onto dark corners of the game and very happy to help others on their journey to learning a game we've grown to hold in very high esteem.

Looking forward to seeing you there.

Best regards

Captain_Orso aka on the AGEOD forums, Captain_Orso, because I'm so divers [;)]

[wings7]

ORIGINAL: Captain_Orso

I think if you want to hear the roar of cannons, ripping of massed rifle volleys, and the thunder of cavalry charges, this is not the game for you. You don't play the battlefield commander, down on the field, watching the progress of advances, guiding reinforcements, ordering the charge. Your position is far from the field, behind a desk, listening for the telegraph to clatter out the words of generals, spattered with mud and worse, many miles distant across mountains and forests, rivers and fields, reporting of loss or victory.

You do however get to decide where these generals will struggle with a wily and determined opponent. You get to build the armies, plan where to leverage strength and mask weakness. Your hands steer the resources of a nation toward victory or defeat.

You decide whether to push down the Mississippi with all strength, or to pull your forces together in the East and push for Richmond or Washington; and the amount you can influence movements toward a strategic goal is not small. But you don't get the cry Charge!!

Back in the AGEOD forums CharlesOnMission put an entire series of tutorials together: Video Tutorials and Let's Play!. If you're interested in not just learning the rules, but how to use them, this may help you.

Aside from that, drop by the forum and ask any questions pertaining to the game. There are always people willing to shed some light onto dark corners of the game and very happy to help others on their journey to learning a game we've grown to hold in very high esteem.

Looking forward to seeing you there.

Best regards

Captain_Orso aka on the AGEOD forums, Captain_Orso, because I'm so divers [;)]

Thanks for the info and link! [:)]

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: H Gilmer

ORIGINAL: aaatoysandmore

One thing I never liked about Ageod games is the combat system and that next turn results screen. I don't feel like a part of the combat I just feel I'm moving units around piecemeal and not getting any satisfaction out of the combat results.

I like games like "Forge of Freedom" over Civil War I or II by Ageod. I get to see the results and get to play out the combat in tactical battles. I also like command and control games like Panzer Command and Norbsoft's Civil War series where I get to be part of the battles not just "read" about them. That is so 60's stuff.

Basically their games are so boring and put the player outside of the game I just don't care for them. Even Hoplite is more fun to play than an Ageod game.

I've never played the tactical part of Forge of Freedom. I'd rather be the higher up general moving my troops around and expecting the generals to carry out my orders and win the war.

It really is personal feelings on what people like. There are games here that people drool over and I'm just ambivalent to, like the SPWAW or whatever it is. I had that game a long time ago in its first incarnation and it was OK, but it wasn't anything I felt like returning to.

I never played the tactical part either for the same reasons.

[Qwixt]

https://www.bundlestars.com/en/bundle/g ... ter-bundle

[:)]

[vicberg]

AGEOD games are entirely unique, but they have a lot of depth. They are closer to War in the Pacific. Both sides do their turns and the engine resolves them. What that does is create an accurate fog of war in which troops can suddenly show up unexpectedly and it favors those that send out scouts, etc., to determine where the enemy is. Then it's a guessing game as to what they are going to do. This is where PBEM games with AGEOD absolutely shine. Against a human opponent, there's so many choices. Form fronts and utilize MTSG. Stack up and try to smash or chase them down.

The depth comes in once you get the basic mechanics. It's really a simple drag and drop type of game at heart. But then forming up divisions and knowing your command structures have huge impacts. A corp command can only have a few divisions under command. An army commander impacts all corps assigned to the army up to a range. Leadership traits have huge impacts at all levels (division up to army). Military control and loyalty of provinces have major impact on your supply system and production system. Throw in regional decisions and it's a very deep game engine with ample replay ability Always plays out different. Massive choices on what to do, especially with Civil War or WON.

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: vicberg
The depth comes in once you get the basic mechanics. It's really a simple drag and drop type of game at heart. But then forming up divisions and knowing your command structures have huge impacts. A corp command can only have a few divisions under command. An army commander impacts all corps assigned to the army up to a range. Leadership traits have huge impacts at all levels (division up to army). Military control and loyalty of provinces have major impact on your supply system and production system. Throw in regional decisions and it's a very deep game engine with ample replay ability Always plays out different. Massive choices on what to do, especially with Civil War or WON.

This is exactly the type of thing that sounds interesting to me...but for some reason I've just never gotten sucked in with any of the AGEOD games. Maybe I'll try again with WON once the weather turns cold again...

[loki100]

ORIGINAL: 76mm

ORIGINAL: vicberg
The depth comes in once you get the basic mechanics. It's really a simple drag and drop type of game at heart. But then forming up divisions and knowing your command structures have huge impacts. A corp command can only have a few divisions under command. An army commander impacts all corps assigned to the army up to a range. Leadership traits have huge impacts at all levels (division up to army). Military control and loyalty of provinces have major impact on your supply system and production system. Throw in regional decisions and it's a very deep game engine with ample replay ability Always plays out different. Massive choices on what to do, especially with Civil War or WON.

This is exactly the type of thing that sounds interesting to me...but for some reason I've just never gotten sucked in with any of the AGEOD games. Maybe I'll try again with WON once the weather turns cold again...

one of the deeper bits is a degree of force tailoring. Less so in the bigger games on the main theatres but its not always a good idea to use your 'best' (ie most effective in combat) generals for a particular mission. If you want to outflank your enemy through poor terrain someone who is a 'fast mover' or has the ability to live off the land (perhaps leading light units) is by far a better choice.

Also weak units, in the right stack or situation can become battle winners where your well trained guards are left looking bemused.

[nicwb]

I picked up the ageod package on bundle stars- I have to admit I had been really struggling with the game mechanics from an earlier game I had. The tutorial for 30 Years War was much improved. There is still room for improvement but at least they cover things like sieges - a topic not well explained before.

Like them or not ageod at least covers a lot of areas generally ignored by other developers.

[Recognition]

AGEOD games are very good and Im happy that the developers continue to produce these periods.
It can be daunting at first, even second time to get a handle on the mechanics and interface...but all will fall into place with patience and a look at gameplays on youtube [;)]

I play CW2 and TEAW PBEM, and PBEM is the way to go Imho...Just play against the AI first to get the feel of the game.

Hard to imagine gaming life without AGEOD.

[VPaulus]

bump

[Alan Sharif]

Well, I NEVER expected to be posting this. I too invested in the 'Bundlestars' offer, it was just too good to let pass by. After false starts, and hours spent watching you tube, I think I have finally cracked it. I am really enjoying Alea Jacta Est. Yes, I do not understand it entirely, but I am winning, against an AI that I have set as 'easy' but 'aggressive', but most importantly, I am having FUN whilst learning some Roman History. Looks like I'm converted to Ageod.

[zakblood]

there you go, if only others tried the first one and worked there way up, by the time they got to the civil war, they would maybe be a lot better and appreciate them more, as this is what i've done and it worked for me, i'm never too proud to start or play anything on easy until i've learnt how to play, this way it doesn't or can't overwhelm you and you stop playing etc after being hammered game after game

[Crimguy]

Me either, and I played the heck out of FoF. The tactical was too slow-moving for me.

Someone asked if WitP was better at conveying information on battles than the Ageod titles. It is and it isn't. Problem with WitP was that the battle report screens, like the intel screens etc, were static and didn't contain hyperlinks. You had to use an external java app to see where the battles took place (something GG fixed when he did WitE).

The information in WitP after battles is terrific. Few other games gave me the satisfaction of pulling off a successful carrier attack, or invasion.

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

ORIGINAL: H Gilmer

ORIGINAL: aaatoysandmore

One thing I never liked about Ageod games is the combat system and that next turn results screen. I don't feel like a part of the combat I just feel I'm moving units around piecemeal and not getting any satisfaction out of the combat results.

I like games like "Forge of Freedom" over Civil War I or II by Ageod. I get to see the results and get to play out the combat in tactical battles. I also like command and control games like Panzer Command and Norbsoft's Civil War series where I get to be part of the battles not just "read" about them. That is so 60's stuff.

Basically their games are so boring and put the player outside of the game I just don't care for them. Even Hoplite is more fun to play than an Ageod game.

I've never played the tactical part of Forge of Freedom. I'd rather be the higher up general moving my troops around and expecting the generals to carry out my orders and win the war.

It really is personal feelings on what people like. There are games here that people drool over and I'm just ambivalent to, like the SPWAW or whatever it is. I had that game a long time ago in its first incarnation and it was OK, but it wasn't anything I felt like returning to.

I never played the tactical part either for the same reasons.

[redcoat]

ORIGINAL: Alan Sharif

Well, I NEVER expected to be posting this. I too invested in the 'Bundlestars' offer, it was just too good to let pass by. After false starts, and hours spent watching you tube, I think I have finally cracked it. I am really enjoying Alea Jacta Est. Yes, I do not understand it entirely, but I am winning, against an AI that I have set as 'easy' but 'aggressive', but most importantly, I am having FUN whilst learning some Roman History.

I bought the Ageod bundle too. I didn’t have the games and they were going for a song. The first one I tried was Rise of Prussia. It was difficult to get the hang of the Ageod game system at first. I got used to it eventually after a couple of short scenarios and numerous references to the game manual. I'm now playing Revolution under Siege. I’ve found that RUS has been easy to play after learning the basics about the Ageod system in ROP. My main problem with the bundle now is deciding which game to try next.

[Alan Sharif]

I am thinking of playing Rise Of Prussia next, but this will be some time away.

[NavalNewZ]

.

[altipueri]

ORIGINAL: NavalNewZ

.

?

[Zorch]

ORIGINAL: altipueri

ORIGINAL: NavalNewZ

.

?

"." - pe•ri•od (ˈpɪər i əd)

n.
1. an extent of time that is meaningful in the life of a person, in history, etc.: a period of illness; a period of social unrest.
2. a specific division or portion of time: the postwar period.
3. a round of time, esp. as marked by the recurrence of some phenomenon: the rainy period.
4. any of the parts of equal length into which a particular thing, as a sports contest, is divided.
5. the time during which something is completed or runs its course: the gestation period.
6. the point or character (.) used esp. to mark the end of a declarative sentence or to indicate an abbreviation; full stop.
7. a full pause, as is made at the end of a complete sentence; full stop.
8. a sentence, esp. a well-balanced, impressive sentence.
9. periodic sentence.
10.
a. an occurrence of menstruation.
b. a time of the month during which menstruation occurs.
11. the basic unit of geologic time, during which a standard rock system is formed: comprising two or more epochs and included with other periods in an era.
12. Physics. the duration of one complete cycle of a wave or oscillation; the reciprocal of the frequency.
13. a division of a musical composition commonly consisting of two or more contrasted or complementary phrases ending with a cadence.
14. Astron.
a. the time in which a body rotates once on its axis.
b. the time in which a planet or satellite revolves once about its primary.
15. (in classical prosody) a group of two or more cola.
adj.
16. noting or pertaining to a historical period.
interj.
17. (used to indicate that a decision is final): I forbid you to go, period.
[1375–1425; < Middle French < Medieval Latin periodus, Latin < Greek períodos circuit, period of time, period in rhetoric]

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Full+s ... nctuation)

[NavalNewZ]

lol, I wanted to delete the post, but you can't do that on these forums, so I chose the next bext option,'.'

[Zorch]

ORIGINAL: NavalNewZ

lol, I wanted to delete the post, but you can't do that on these forums, so I chose the next bext option,'.'

You could have told us to disregard it...we've been down that road before. [;)]