Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Natural alliance table

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Napoleonics] >> Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars of 1805 - 1815 >> Natural alliance table Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Natural alliance table - 5/18/2008 5:34:39 PM   
Marshall Ellis


Posts: 5630
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: Dallas
Status: offline
Hey guys:

Are theere any change settings in the natural alliance tables that you think would be more realistic?
I'm specially asking since I am still seeing that AU and PR are still not allying very much in my diplomacy rewrites??? This seems to be because their natual alliance setting is "-1"???!!!

_____________________________

Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games


Post #: 1
RE: Natural alliance table - 5/18/2008 5:36:41 PM   
NeverMan

 

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline
In most games I have played, Au and Pr have always had a strong alliance and a strong anti-France war pact. Combined movement has also always been a great way to fight the French.

Given a competent France, Au and Pr have little chance if they stand alone.

(in reply to Marshall Ellis)
Post #: 2
RE: Natural alliance table - 5/18/2008 5:39:42 PM   
Marshall Ellis


Posts: 5630
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: Dallas
Status: offline
Neverman:

No doubt that in every game I have seen, PR and AU need each other if they are to have a viable chance at winning which is why I was questioning the natural alliance table setting of "-1" which makes their default stance less than friendly???

_____________________________

Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games



(in reply to NeverMan)
Post #: 3
RE: Natural alliance table - 5/18/2008 5:41:22 PM   
NeverMan

 

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline
Maybe the "-1" is a historical indication; however, what does that mean in the game balance?

So, yes, maybe this should be changed to help game balance; otherwise, it's not going to matter how tactically good the AI is, France will take them down one at a time.

(in reply to Marshall Ellis)
Post #: 4
RE: Natural alliance table - 5/18/2008 5:50:13 PM   
Marshall Ellis


Posts: 5630
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: Dallas
Status: offline
Neverman:

You're right. It certainly keeps the balance off because they are hesitant to ally with each other which is a must.
I may change this and experiment (BEFORE adding to a release).


< Message edited by Marshall Ellis -- 5/18/2008 5:51:15 PM >


_____________________________

Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games



(in reply to NeverMan)
Post #: 5
RE: Natural alliance table - 5/18/2008 7:08:42 PM   
ndrose

 

Posts: 612
Joined: 10/13/2006
Status: offline
I think the -1 reflects the fact that Prussia and Austria are natural enemies; but in the 1805 campaign the overwhelming strength of France has to drive them together. If France is badly defeated, then I think that -1 is accurate.

So, if it's possible, I'd suggest leaving the -1 intact, but giving a big bonus in the alliance tables to countries near France when France is strong (which will be almost all the time in the 1805 campaign). If you ever add change of dominant status to the game, that could be linked to the alliance tables. (i.e. if France loses dominance, Prussia and Austria revert to -1; but while France is dominant there's a big bonus to their alliance table.)

Nathan

(in reply to Marshall Ellis)
Post #: 6
RE: Natural alliance table - 5/18/2008 8:30:24 PM   
pzgndr

 

Posts: 3027
Joined: 3/18/2004
From: Maryland
Status: offline
What about integrating the National Variants into the AI diplomacy model? DOWs, alliances, peace treaties, etc. should all have some weighting towards historical national interests. And Nathan's suggestion to factor in the dominant status is good; the natural alliance table could be more flexible. Who's at war with who, or under enforced peace, should also be considerations during AI diplomacy checks. It is all as interesting as it is complicated.

(in reply to ndrose)
Post #: 7
RE: Natural alliance table - 5/18/2008 8:43:33 PM   
NeverMan

 

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline
Personally, I don't play wargames so that I can continue to make the mistakes of the past, I play them to try and win and usually that means diverting from historical perspectives.

That said, ndrose nad pzgndr have some good ideas that should be considered, I certainly think the AI needs to rely on more than 1 table to make it's decisions. Things should be weighted and they should be dynamic.

(in reply to pzgndr)
Post #: 8
RE: Natural alliance table - 5/19/2008 2:56:27 PM   
Marshall Ellis


Posts: 5630
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: Dallas
Status: offline
Neverman:

It's not just one table to make a decison BUT this is a lot of weight!
I am just puzzled at the fact that Prussia's worst enemy is France then Austria per the natural alliance tables!?!?



_____________________________

Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games



(in reply to NeverMan)
Post #: 9
RE: Natural alliance table - 5/19/2008 3:38:25 PM   
NeverMan

 

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline
I guess historically they were ruled by inbred idiots?

(in reply to Marshall Ellis)
Post #: 10
RE: Natural alliance table - 5/19/2008 4:07:39 PM   
Marshall Ellis


Posts: 5630
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: Dallas
Status: offline
LMAO!
Historically, I think you're right!



_____________________________

Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games



(in reply to NeverMan)
Post #: 11
RE: Natural alliance table - 5/19/2008 6:11:21 PM   
Jimmer

 

Posts: 1968
Joined: 12/5/2007
Status: offline
I think that they really WERE enemies, at least much of the time. In 1805, Russia was an Austrian friend, but after getting spanked for helping them against Napoleon, they adopted a much more hostile attitude. As if it were Austria's fault that Napoleon was bloodthirsty.

They were frequently both an enemy and a friend of Prussia, depending on, well, more or less the phase of the moon (I exaggerate, but not much).

Prussia and Austria hated each other, but were eventually forced to get along to fight the French. But, that didn't happen until von Blucher came out of retirement (1813?).

Even Prussia and GB, for whom it is essential to be allies, were not exactly the best of friends. More of an "enemy of my enemy" kind of thing.

Bottom line: Historical relationships won't work for game purposes if one wants a more balanced game. But, if one wanted a HISTORICAL game, then, well gosh, Prussia and Austria are going to get their collective butts kicked for the first 6-8 years.

So, there really are more than one sets of national modifiers.

I suggest three strategies:

First, have the AI national mods be different depending on whether there is only one human player, or if there are more than one. Historical numbers work if there are, say, two players and five AIs.

Napoleon has to become a lesser leader, or France will crush all opposition through the game. It doesn't seem like much, but making Nappy a 5.4.6 leader has an ENORMOUS impact on the game. Instead of near automatic wins against most enemies, he becomes their equal. He still has higher morale and movement, but he is not the crushingly overpowering leader he is at 5.5.6.

Him becoming a 4.4.6 leader has a similar effect, but not quite as pronounced.

Third, impact the other major powers' decisions partially based upon how well they and their adversaries are doing. For this purpose, only victory points matters. I suggest something like a check done annually or quarterly, where the number changes downward slightly if the potential enemy scored more VP than the deciding nation did. Note that this change should only impact the numbers in one direction.

Finally, there's the ultimate non-change: Bid more. France should be able to defeat the AIs bidding as much as 100+ VP. Against humans his edge is a lot less, but still, 50 VP as a bid should be quite feasible. This is a built-in "handicap" that everybody is required to use. Of course, if everybody bids zero, ...

_____________________________

At LAST! The greatest campaign board game of all time is finally available for the PC. Can my old heart stand the strain?

(in reply to Marshall Ellis)
Post #: 12
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Napoleonics] >> Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars of 1805 - 1815 >> Natural alliance table Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.213