Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Classic Scenario

 
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 >> RE: Classic Scenario Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Classic Scenario - 8/27/2008 9:51:03 PM   
NeverMan

 

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

1. Loaned corps PP is fixed in 1.03. NOT combined movement.
2. Gotit!
3. Good!
4. Will do.
5. I don't get paid to post here as well! Looking for work?





1. Combined movement would be nice, but for PBEM I think it's not possible/probable.
2. Good deal.
3. Right on!
4. Good. I do have a question regarding this: Is it possible to remove a province from a Kingdom? If you read that thread I really had issue with the way the Polish creation automatically sucked up my home provinces.
5. Always looking for work. I'm a poor PhD student! :)

(in reply to Marshall Ellis)
Post #: 31
RE: Classic Scenario - 8/28/2008 12:43:17 PM   
Marshall Ellis


Posts: 5630
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: Dallas
Status: offline
There is another thread (???) where it was mentioned to me that there was an errata listing and that when an MP conquers a minor that could be a part of an exisiting kingdom then it must become a prt of the kingdom. Point being that the MP has no choice on what gets added.



_____________________________

Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games



(in reply to NeverMan)
Post #: 32
RE: Classic Scenario - 8/28/2008 2:59:39 PM   
j-s

 

Posts: 76
Joined: 3/18/2003
From: Finland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis


quote:

ORIGINAL: NeverMan


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jimmer

Gotta be careful with this one. Many people think that "get back to EiA" is the way to "fix" this game. But, that can never happen. A large portion of EiA play is diplomatic, and is greatly dependent upon turn orders inside of the diplomacy phase. EiANW has one diplo phase for each player. So, it will absolutely NOT play like EiA. Putting all of the other features back in won't correct this, which is more fundamental than any other aspect other than combined movement. Unless players are willing to put up with six-part diplo phases, making the rest of the game look like EiA won't help.

There certainly are some things that could be good play changes. But, it would be unwise to think of EiA as a panacea.


I agree with much of this Jimmer. The Classic scenario would really only get us back to the std map, std counters. The naval changes here alone would be a big step back to the old EiA. This is not to fix anything but basically to fill the need of the folks that want the std map and counters (And there are alot of you)!







I really don't agree with Jimmer because there are a TON of things that can be changed with this game to get back to EiA without having to split up the Dip phase.

1. Combined Movement/PP
2. Naval Rules
3. Map/Counters/Fleets
4. Kingdom Creation done right
5. The list goes on, I don't have the time.

BUT, if you REALLY want to get back to Empires in Arms then I think we all know the answer: IP PLAY!!!!!!!!!!!

IP PLAY allows for every little step to be put back in without sacrificing any time. Imagine that with that great thing called the internet.......it's really amazing kids you should check it out.



LOL!

Dude, It's the 19th century! We don't need no stinking Internet! We just need more accurate muskets!

1. We already have combined PP?
2. What naval rules? (Evasion?)
3. Yep, Agreed.
4. What is wrong with the Kingdom creation now?
5. I do.





2. Evasion and just one kind of naval unit, as in original game (30 ships in fleet)

(in reply to Marshall Ellis)
Post #: 33
RE: Classic Scenario - 8/28/2008 4:18:11 PM   
Marshall Ellis


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: j-s


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis


quote:

ORIGINAL: NeverMan


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jimmer

Gotta be careful with this one. Many people think that "get back to EiA" is the way to "fix" this game. But, that can never happen. A large portion of EiA play is diplomatic, and is greatly dependent upon turn orders inside of the diplomacy phase. EiANW has one diplo phase for each player. So, it will absolutely NOT play like EiA. Putting all of the other features back in won't correct this, which is more fundamental than any other aspect other than combined movement. Unless players are willing to put up with six-part diplo phases, making the rest of the game look like EiA won't help.

There certainly are some things that could be good play changes. But, it would be unwise to think of EiA as a panacea.


I agree with much of this Jimmer. The Classic scenario would really only get us back to the std map, std counters. The naval changes here alone would be a big step back to the old EiA. This is not to fix anything but basically to fill the need of the folks that want the std map and counters (And there are alot of you)!







I really don't agree with Jimmer because there are a TON of things that can be changed with this game to get back to EiA without having to split up the Dip phase.

1. Combined Movement/PP
2. Naval Rules
3. Map/Counters/Fleets
4. Kingdom Creation done right
5. The list goes on, I don't have the time.

BUT, if you REALLY want to get back to Empires in Arms then I think we all know the answer: IP PLAY!!!!!!!!!!!

IP PLAY allows for every little step to be put back in without sacrificing any time. Imagine that with that great thing called the internet.......it's really amazing kids you should check it out.



LOL!

Dude, It's the 19th century! We don't need no stinking Internet! We just need more accurate muskets!

1. We already have combined PP?
2. What naval rules? (Evasion?)
3. Yep, Agreed.
4. What is wrong with the Kingdom creation now?
5. I do.





2. Evasion and just one kind of naval unit, as in original game (30 ships in fleet)


That would be the plan BUT evasion would also be available in EiANW.




_____________________________

Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games



(in reply to j-s)
Post #: 34
RE: Classic Scenario - 8/28/2008 4:56:16 PM   
NeverMan

 

Posts: 1722
Joined: 2/24/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

There is another thread (???) where it was mentioned to me that there was an errata listing and that when an MP conquers a minor that could be a part of an exisiting kingdom then it must become a prt of the kingdom. Point being that the MP has no choice on what gets added.




Actually, it was pointed out that this was NOT the case for a few kingdoms, such as Poland. For Poland, you should be able to pick and choose which provinces to add at creation time and which to add later.

(in reply to Marshall Ellis)
Post #: 35
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Napoleonics] >> Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars of 1805 - 1815 >> RE: Classic Scenario Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
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

0.152