Wars of Succession first screenshots!

[Daniele]

Today we are ready to share a couple of screenshots taken from the current version of Wars of Succession, the upcoming wargame developed by Ageod!

The screenshots feature the political division of Europe at the beginning of the XVIII century, and an historical event allows a key alliance with Bavaria!

Please note that the screenshots show an alpha version of the game

Get more information about Wars of Succession from its official product page

[Marshal Villars]

Great looking game! It's about time. And I am sure that this game cannot find a better home than AGEOD. There is simply no one who will do it better.

I can tell you now that, looking at the map, it is missing many, many major fortresses, making it appear that many of these "provinces" (areas for movement in the AGEOD system) had no serious defenses in them at all -- when that was definitely not the case. This would lead to "blitz" war when it just wasn't possible in this region, unless you "nerfed" other aspects of warfare to compensate for this. Something I am sure that your players don't want to have happen. Please see my comment in your other thread about the problem with "Superstar Fortresses".

Here is my map of the region for a game system which had larger "spaces" for units to be in. Because of that, those fortresses with lines under the numbers represent TWO or even THREE major and minor fortresses. I have a map of all of Europe with this much detail. I have a complete database for the fortresses, so that a game with a more detailed display can show them all.

After a cursory look, I can see that on the WOS map, many fortresses are missing along the Rhine, Danube, and Po river valleys and other parts of Northern Italy as well as the Spanish side of the Pyrennes. Bavaria, Southwestern Germany, Switzerland, Austria, and Italy look completely and a-historically open to invasion. Which means that I am sure that Spain and Portugal will be horribly under fortified as well (because those were especially hard to find in my research -- and there is always a serious "Superstar Fortress" effect that I discussed in my other post in this WOS forum I have noticed in these regions).

Again, these were real barriers to warfare. And IF one leaves them out, one will have to fudge on other aspects of campaigning to slow armies down to their historical rates. If there is a space with a fortress, it should be represented. Now, it may be easy to take, or fall quickly because you just won a major battle in the area (happened a lot), or may not have a serious garrison. Or you can mask them (needs about 10,000 men). But they SHOULD be in the game.

The reason I have only shared a small portion of my map here is because I am not sharing my hundreds of hours of research here. I can tell you that I have never seen a 1700s game come even close to an accurate representation of the fortress density of Europe. And THAT is a serious problem -- again, unless you want to fudge other aspects of warfare to slow things down. But who wants that?

[Marshal Villars]

Just take Breisach as an example. This fortification is clearly missing from the Wars of Succession map as shown. But should a fortress like this be missing? This image: 1644

[Marshal Villars]

1728

[Marshal Villars]

1638 - the Battle of Breisach - shown with significant fortifications at the time. And through 1735 - so we know during the Wars of Succession, the walls were there. But for some reason, this massive fortification, with serious logistical ramifications to any army deciding to leave it in its rear area of operations unmasked is not on the shown "Wars of Succession" map, along with many many others.

[Marshal Villars]

There is another problem. IF these fortresses have been eliminated to allow for "ease of conquest" and more movement in the game (something I would disagree with doing because it would mean that the mechanics of the game dealing with fortresses are off), then France should also have her fortresses removed. After reviewing the map/screenshot for fortresses, it was obvious to me that the fortresses of France are well represented and its borders are adequately protected because Vauban was the period's most famous designer of fortifications. This leads to the "Superstar Fortress" effect, meaning that because his fortresses are easy to find in research, they get included in the game.

But was France the only country to defend its borders so thoroughly? No. France has 90%+ of its border fortresses in the regions of the Wars of Succession map I can see. But the neighbouring Germany, Switzerland, Northern Italy, Bavaria, Wurttemberg only have 20% or so of them. So, IF the argument is that the game should strip fortresses to make it "better to play" then France should lose hers too. However, of course, one would not remove 80% of fortresses from a World War 1 game to make it "better to play". One would leave the fortresses in and adjust the mechanics.

It also appears that France has its southern fortresses to defend against Spain. But the lesser known Spanish fortresses appear to be missing. This sends the entirely wrong idea about the period and how nations fought and dealt with war.

[zakblood]

Please note that the screenshots show an alpha version of the game

in other words, work in progress, so maybe more will be added later[;)]

[Bellasarah50]

Fortresses and sieges in general constituted a major facet of early 18th century warfare. To not have fortresses represented as per their historical levels in attempting to recreate a war in which the outcome of that war heavily depended on them is in my opinion, inexcusable. And for what? For simplicity of play? The War of the Spanish Succession was for all intended purposes a war OF sieges, while its Great Northern War counterpart featured far more maneuvering. This needs to be better represented.

[Lobster]

ORIGINAL: zakblood

Please note that the screenshots show an alpha version of the game

in other words, work in progress, so maybe more will be added later[;)]

Or not. Best to point out the flaws now instead of guessing they will add something later only to find they did not.