Persistent AP's

This exciting new release is a faithful adaptation of the renowned Conflict of Heroes board game that won the Origins Historical Game of the Year, Charles Roberts Wargame of the Year and the James F. Dunnigan Design Elegance Award, as well as many others!

Designed and developed in cooperation with Uwe Eickert, the original designer of Conflict of Heroes, and Western Civlization Software, the award-winning computer wargame studio, no effort has been spared to bring the outstanding Conflict of Heroes gameplay to the computer. Conflict of Heroes includes an AI opponent as well as full multiplayer support with an integrated forum and game lobby. To remain true to the core gameplay of the board game, the PC version is designed to be fun, fast and easy to play, though hard to master. The game design is also historically accurate and teaches and rewards platoon and company-level combined arms tactics without overwhelming the player with rules.

Moderator: MOD_WestCiv

KEYSTONE07950
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2006 6:05 pm

Persistent AP's

Post by KEYSTONE07950 »

On boardgame geek there is talk that the AP's are now "persistent"; meaning if you have an active unit "A" and it is more advantageous for you to activate another unit "B", you can activate "B" perform actions with it and then go back to unit "A" and use it's remaing AP's.

I would hope that we can have the option to use AP's as in the boardgame or use "persistent" AP's.

Any comments?
I support the right to arm bears!
KEYSTONE07950
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2006 6:05 pm

RE: Persistent AP's

Post by KEYSTONE07950 »

delete double post.
I support the right to arm bears!
User avatar
e_barkmann
Posts: 1292
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Adelaide, Australia

RE: Persistent AP's

Post by e_barkmann »

If you're referring to Shared Activations (ie multiple current active units but all sharing the same AP pool) then they should be part of the PC game as they are in the latest version of the boardgame rules and are non-optional.

edit ah you're referring to this thread:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/8574358#8574358

Hmm what other deviations from the board game are we going to discover.
Scourge of War multiplayer group

http://steamcommunity.com/groups/sowwaterloo
KEYSTONE07950
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2006 6:05 pm

RE: Persistent AP's

Post by KEYSTONE07950 »

ORIGINAL: Chris Merchant
Hmm what other deviations from the board game are we going to discover.

I am also wondering what other changes were made. This is not a minor change. It changes the complexion of the game.
I support the right to arm bears!
User avatar
Erik Rutins
Posts: 39324
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:00 pm
Location: Vermont, USA
Contact:

RE: Persistent AP's

Post by Erik Rutins »

Hi Keystone,

We actually made this change originally at the suggestion of the original designer. We've found that it works quite well and does not detract from the design, which making it a lot friendlier to new players. With that said, adding an option to have APs be non-persistent is something we'd like to support as well, but it would be an option to add post-release.

I have to say that personally I prefer this variant.

Regards,

- Erik
Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC


Image

For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.
User avatar
Erik Rutins
Posts: 39324
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:00 pm
Location: Vermont, USA
Contact:

RE: Persistent AP's

Post by Erik Rutins »

Just to add, this is Conflict of Heroes - it is not a new or different game. As Uwe was part of the original design process, he did work along with us to implement a few changes or improvements, but I don't think there's anything else in the same ballpark as the persistent APs when it comes to rules variants.

Regards,

- Erik
Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC


Image

For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.
ioticus
Posts: 192
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 4:26 pm

RE: Persistent AP's

Post by ioticus »

Very disappointed to hear about the change. I have a feeling they did it because the AI couldn't play well otherwise.
User avatar
Erik Rutins
Posts: 39324
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:00 pm
Location: Vermont, USA
Contact:

RE: Persistent AP's

Post by Erik Rutins »

Hi Ioticus,

Have you tried playing with this option? This change was not driven by the AI.

Regards,

- Erik
Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC


Image

For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.
ioticus
Posts: 192
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 4:26 pm

RE: Persistent AP's

Post by ioticus »

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Hi Ioticus,

Have you tried playing with this option? This change was not driven by the AI.

Regards,

- Erik

Sorry, I posted before reading your above comments, which sound good. I have not tried the persistent variant, but if it has the blessing of the designer then I feel more optimistic about the change.
KEYSTONE07950
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2006 6:05 pm

RE: Persistent AP's

Post by KEYSTONE07950 »

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Hi Keystone,

We actually made this change originally at the suggestion of the original designer. We've found that it works quite well and does not detract from the design, which making it a lot friendlier to new players. With that said, adding an option to have APs be non-persistent is something we'd like to support as well, but it would be an option to add post-release.

I have to say that personally I prefer this variant.

Regards,

- Erik

If this design change has Uwe's blessings I am more inclined to try the PC game. I will play several AtB & SoS scenarios with this change and see how it plays.
I support the right to arm bears!
User avatar
Gil R.
Posts: 10820
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 4:22 am

RE: Persistent AP's

Post by Gil R. »

At this point, I'll just echo what Erik wrote.

This was not the case of someone (i.e., Uwe) just selling a license and wiping his hands of the matter: Uwe has been in regular contact with WCS and Matrix, and has most certainly had a say in the computer version's development.
Michael Jordan plays ball. Charles Manson kills people. I torment eager potential customers by not sharing screenshots of "Brother Against Brother." Everyone has a talent.
User avatar
wodin
Posts: 10709
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 3:13 am
Location: England
Contact:

RE: Persistent AP's

Post by wodin »

Gil R..I bet your proud of this baby!
KEYSTONE07950
Posts: 176
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2006 6:05 pm

Persistent AP's

Post by KEYSTONE07950 »

The game's designer, (Uwe) developed AP usage for a particular design reason. Why is that reason no longer valid for the PC game? The boardgame rulebook contains copious design notes. I would like to see the design notes which rationalize the change in AP handling.

I tested several scenarios from AtB, SoS, and PoH with my understanding of the Persistent AP usage, and decisions as to which units to activate in which order is no longer present (as you can go from activated unit to activated unit as long as the 7 AP's have not been consumed) - a step backwards in design to my mind.

Please convince me I am wrong.
I support the right to arm bears!
ioticus
Posts: 192
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 4:26 pm

RE: Persistent AP's

Post by ioticus »

I'm worried about the same lack of decision making, Keystone. I hope they at least include an option to play without persistent APs in a patch.
User avatar
e_barkmann
Posts: 1292
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Adelaide, Australia

RE: Persistent AP's

Post by e_barkmann »

the more I read the new posts in the BGG thread, the more I worry about this board game port.

The AP system is the essence of the game - I am really hoping that Matrix and WCS consider adding in the option to play by the original activation rules as soon as practicable, even if it means that it is only available as a multi-player option, thus avoiding AI complications.

I will give the PC game a go nevertheless, as I am very happy to support companies that put time and effort into producing quality strategy games.
Scourge of War multiplayer group

http://steamcommunity.com/groups/sowwaterloo
User avatar
wodin
Posts: 10709
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 3:13 am
Location: England
Contact:

RE: Persistent AP's

Post by wodin »

Listen, if there is a slightest change in the design from the boardgames then you can bet your life the boardgames will be up in arms bemoaning the whole game and saying it's a failure.

I'd take it with a pinch of salt. I have no worries at all. It will either be great or it wont. I really couldn't care less if it has some changes that are different to the boardgame. I mean there is Vassal out there. Seriously no fan of the boardgames is going to put me off.

If the AI is good and i has a historical feel then I'm happy.
User avatar
e_barkmann
Posts: 1292
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Adelaide, Australia

RE: Persistent AP's

Post by e_barkmann »


sure Wodin, I understand how to filter out noise from useful comments.

However when comments come from core developers of this boardgame system I take notice.

James Palmer is credited with rules development for the series, and expresses concern.

Jesse leBreton is credited with help in development for the series and expresses balanced concern.

cheers
Scourge of War multiplayer group

http://steamcommunity.com/groups/sowwaterloo
User avatar
Lebatron
Posts: 1625
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 4:27 pm
Location: Upper Michigan

RE: Persistent AP's

Post by Lebatron »

Wodin does have a point. It is true that sometimes when people love something the slightest change causes them to scream sacrilege. Let me point out that what I dubbed the persistent AP system is a perfectly fine way to play the game. Most will like it just fine. It does change the gameplay from the boardgame, but for the most part it still is CoH at it's core. The costs to fire and move etc are all still the same.

But my opinion is that the original activation system had a charm to it that I miss in the PC version. Also it created very interesting tactics. So yes, everyone knows where I stand. But this is just one man's opinion, so leave it at that. Most will be happy with persistent AP I think. If the original activation ever gets patched in, then that would be a nice bonus. Then everyone will be pleased. Both crowds could play the game under whichever system they like best.
Jesse LeBreton, AKA Lebatron
Development team- GG's WAW A World Divided
User avatar
wodin
Posts: 10709
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 3:13 am
Location: England
Contact:

RE: Persistent AP's

Post by wodin »

James and Jesse may also not like their baby being altered. I'm sure the beta testers have balanced the scenarios. Thankfully I haven't played the board version so I'm non the wiser. For me it will all be down to the AI. No point having a certain way of playing and the AI stinks. Then it would only be fit for multiplayer, and there is VASSAL for that so it would make the game pretty pointless.
User avatar
PirateJock
Posts: 467
Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 8:59 pm
Location: North West, UK

RE: Persistent AP's

Post by PirateJock »

For me it will all be down to the AI.

+1

There may be changes in the game mechanics but as long as the game is enjoyable I'm OK with that. I need to play it to decide. And if I crave non-persistent APs, break out the boardgame or fire up Vassal.

Cheers
Combat Command Matrix Edition Company, The Forgotten Few
Post Reply

Return to “Conflict of Heroes Series”