Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

1805 Campaign with beta patch

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Victory and Glory: Napoleon >> 1805 Campaign with beta patch Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
1805 Campaign with beta patch - 5/2/2016 7:39:08 PM   
Uncle_Joe


Posts: 1985
Joined: 8/26/2004
Status: offline
OK, so with the beta patch, I started a new campaign to test out the changes….1805, General difficulty. Final score 416 to 136 – ‘Epic victory’.

First, I have to say that the game feels MUCH better with this update. It still has a quite a few opportunities for improvement (which I’ll provide suggestion/ideas below) but compared to release, it required a lot more planning and execution. It was probably on par in difficulty with playing on Emperor before, but it was much more interesting to play out.

The battles were much more tense, but towards the end of the campaign they were becoming more and more lopsided as I adjusted to the new mechanics (and my troops improved). I still think something more has to be done with cavalry as their presence or absence seems to be much more the deciding factor than infantry and/or cannon. Perhaps it’s just that the French can still get too much of it (leading my back to my earlier post that there should be some sort of ‘recruitment restriction’ so that you MUST take infantry each year). I know historically Allied horsemen normally outnumbered the French but as time drags on in the game, my Cav ratio tends to INCREASE since I protect mine and mercilessly target enemy horse. I more jealously guard my Cav than I do my Imperial Guard infantry lol.

Some additional notes:

1) Early on, I had a battle vs Russia which I won and even though I only killed about half of their troops, ALL THREE of their leaders present were killed during the pursuit. This pretty much set them back to the point where they were only a nuisance for the rest of the game. This seemed like a bug to me (odds of killing the leaders are quite low) but as a failsafe, perhaps change it to a max of 1 leader per battle can be lost during pursuit?

2) Possibly due to the above, Russia was very active for my first war vs Austria/Prussia, but then just sat it out again for much of the rest of the game. There is little/no incentive to actually go invade Russia so I just left them be. Attacking Russia opens you up to losing your Elite and better units due to the random ‘attrition’ and there is no reason to risk that. IMO, better units should be less likely to be destroyed by attrition (they tend to be more coherent, less likely to panic, and higher on the supply priority). If such a change is made, then I could see adding some VP requirement to subdue Russia at some point. But as it stands now, it’s obviously possible to win an Epic victory without ever stepping foot into Russia.

3) UI Suggestion: Cards that are ‘Major Events’ that trigger VPs should be flagged as such. Cards that are repeatable should also be flagged. Players shouldn’t have to pick through the manual for that info.

4) Combat suggestion: Cavalry held in reserve should be able to cover the pursuit even if the army breaks in one flank. That’s the whole point of keeping them in reserve :) . And it would greatly help the AI because they tend to keep reserve Cav and they lose a LOT more battles than the player will.

5) Naval aspect: It still seems completely unnecessary/unwinnable without a MAJOR commitment (for which there is no payoff). Something here just doesn’t work. It’s too hard to do anything and there is no incentive to even try. MAYBE if they didn’t take activations, I would try but I just can’t see wasting yearly recruitment allotment on the fleets. The biggest problem is….why bother? Invading England is going to be difficult at best and again, unnecessary to win the game. Doing anything else ‘amphibiously’ is also unlikely to succeed and also unnecessary/unprofitable.

6) Territory: As I’ve mentioned in prior feedback, there is little reason to care about holding or taking territory (other than for ‘roleplaying’/historical purposes). The player doesn’t derive any direct benefit/penalty from gaining/losing territory (other than a nebulous and artificial and minor ‘score’ at the end of the game). British invasions that liberate a territory? So? Reaching to take Scandinavia or into Russia or anywhere else? Again, why? Somehow, some way, SOMETHING has to be built on the territory occupied in order for the player to value it. Income, cards, something has to be a reward. Either that or the score for territory has to be greatly increased. As it is now, winning Major battles and punching out the Majors is far more significant than territory lost or gained (heck even just standing pat and playing ‘Consolidate’ is almost worth 1 territory….). Potentially that is more ‘historically accurate’, but the ultimate goal of creating the ‘Empire’ was well….territory. The battles and surrender of enemies should be a means to that end. In fact, why is winning a major battle even worth points? I never lost one and I fought quite a few so that adds up to the majority of my score. I would think that territory could at least double in point and the scoring for major battles and capitulations halved. Then I might care about taking and holding more and more territory which might cause me to overextend. But the current scoring rewards staying centralized in powerful stack and punching enemy stacks for VPs and then forcing the surrender. You minimize risk to losing a Major battles (which cost you a lot of points) and you get the points for the Major’s surrendering more often. I think the VPs should more reward ‘reaching’ for territory which, in turn, would spread the troops a bit thinner to cover more area.

All of that said, as I mentioned at the top, the beta patch is a major step forward. It solves many of the tactical/operational level issues with the game. The overall ‘grand strategic’ level is where I think the game has the most opportunities. Yes, I know it’s meant to be ‘simple’, but many changes could be added that don’t increase the complexity at all. Heck just an overhaul of the scoring could go a long way to encouraging a different play style which would be more in line with history.

Thanks again for the update. I look forward to continued updates and hopefully this game can reach it’s full potential as a result (or at least in a DLC).


_____________________________

Post #: 1
RE: 1805 Campaign with beta patch - 5/2/2016 8:45:03 PM   
sage3

 

Posts: 10
Joined: 2/26/2016
Status: offline
I agree with all of this feedback. Great game, but it could definitely use some tweaks to the 'rules' that inform the gameplay itself.

(in reply to Uncle_Joe)
Post #: 2
RE: 1805 Campaign with beta patch - 5/2/2016 8:49:02 PM   
James Ward

 

Posts: 1183
Joined: 5/9/2000
From: Baltimore, Maryland, USA
Status: offline
I agree with number 6 a lot. There has to be a reason to take and hold territory. There does not seem to be any reason to ever even contemplate going to Russia or England. And I also agree that battles should not give you many, or even any, points. They should just be the means to gaining territory. Perhaps number 5 would also gain some value if territory played a more important role in determining victory. If holding Sweden at the end of the game got you 1/2 way to an epic victory I would sure try to find a way to get there!

(in reply to Uncle_Joe)
Post #: 3
RE: 1805 Campaign with beta patch - 5/12/2016 8:24:39 PM   
Uncle_Joe


Posts: 1985
Joined: 8/26/2004
Status: offline
Anyone else with Steam try the beta patch? If so, what are your impressions? Do they match my own?

_____________________________


(in reply to James Ward)
Post #: 4
RE: 1805 Campaign with beta patch - 5/13/2016 5:02:31 PM   
SeanS

 

Posts: 1
Joined: 5/13/2016
Status: offline
First, I'd like to say thanks to all those involved with the game for their efforts; it makes a significant difference!
Second, here are somethings I've noticed:
1) The British are very passive in the 1800 campaign, and unlike the 1805 campaign, easy to pick off their fleet piecemeal.
I can then breakdown what they have left in the English Channel with the storm card and usually drive off what remains.
With the 1805 campaign I place the French navy next to Egypt where I'm left alone.
This then gives me a chance to attack the British at my choosing; with some luck I pick them off in time too.
It seems the British like to have with more fleets in the English Channel than they usually need, which makes it easier for me.
2) I've seen the AI retreat when it should not.
At sea, the AI would retreat when they only had severely damaged fleets which were then captured by me.
It would be nice to be given the choice of scuttling your own ships, or captured enemy ships, to help prevent them from being captured.
On land, I had a large British army retreat at the first opportunity and then have no where to go; it was completely eliminated with no loss to me.
The AI should realize that retreat is sometimes not an option.
3) Late in a campaign I tried a tactic of placing nothing but artillery in two sections of a large battle.
I took out the enemy's artillery, then its cavalry, and then just kept picking off their infantry.
The AI never moved its forces up so that it could at least engage my artillery.
It seems the AI is aggressive in large battles only when it has the advantage of having more forces.
Thanks again,
Sean

(in reply to Uncle_Joe)
Post #: 5
RE: 1805 Campaign with beta patch - 5/18/2016 1:45:07 AM   
gdrover

 

Posts: 215
Joined: 12/4/2008
Status: offline
We have improved the Russian strategic AI and the overall tactical AI for the first update (coming next week!)

We will continue to fine-tune the AI for the coming DLC as well.

Our goal is have the AI act as much like a human opponent as possible.


(in reply to SeanS)
Post #: 6
RE: 1805 Campaign with beta patch - 5/18/2016 1:47:38 AM   
James Ward

 

Posts: 1183
Joined: 5/9/2000
From: Baltimore, Maryland, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: gdrover

We have improved the Russian strategic AI and the overall tactical AI for the first update (coming next week!)

We will continue to fine-tune the AI for the coming DLC as well.

Our goal is have the AI act as much like a human opponent as possible.




So you are going to make it as stupid as I am? :)

(in reply to gdrover)
Post #: 7
RE: 1805 Campaign with beta patch - 7/24/2016 5:28:17 PM   
kirk23


Posts: 2834
Joined: 10/15/2010
From: Fife Scotland
Status: offline
I would like to know why Spain is not a full ally, off France in 1805 Grand Campaign? From 1804 - 1808 Spain and France were allied against Britain.

Also why does the games diplomatic system, not allow France to gain full allies if they reach 10. From 2 - 0 Britain can influence Major Countries to go to war against France, surely logic dictates, that the opposite should also apply, in that France should be able to get other Major powers, declare war on Britain etc?

< Message edited by kirk23 -- 7/24/2016 5:32:54 PM >


_____________________________

Make it so!

(in reply to James Ward)
Post #: 8
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Victory and Glory: Napoleon >> 1805 Campaign with beta patch 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

0.176