Re: [eia] what's our status ?

["Kyle H" <menexenus@xxxxxxx>]

    That's a shame about the AI.  We spoke to the designer at Origins, and 
he seemed knowledgeable about the game.  So I'm surprised that the AI is so 
hare-brained.  And since the release date had been pushed back for 3 years, 
they definitely had time to do it right...  Bummer.

kdh

P.S.  The designer did talk about the potential release of updates/patches. 
Mel, maybe you could send the company your playtest notes and ask them to 
patch the AI to make it play more rationally.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mel Chin" <mrchin@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "public list for an Empires in Arms game" <eia@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, July 11, 2008 9:49 PM
Subject: Re: [eia] what's our status ?


> I've played a couple games so far and here is my take on it:
>
> 1. AI is far too easy to beat. The difficultly levels only allows the PC 
> to
> "cheat" by providing them extra $ and manpower during the econ phase.
> The AI does some really stupid tactical things that makes them either
> reckless to the point of suicide or passively sitting in their capital 
> turn
> after turn with no actions.
>
> 2. Rules - the game is much more Empires in Harm than regular EIA. If 
> you're
> expecting to play classic EIA, think again.
>    a) The naval system is totally EiH with heavy ships, light ships and
> transports.
>    b) The Russian infantry corps lose all their cavalry components.
>    c) Many of the current minor countries have been split into smaller
> components (Hesse, Wurttemburg, Saxony, Hanover, etc).
>    d) There are only three new political combinations (Poland, Ottomans,
> CotR) and none of the others (Italy, Bavaria, Westphalia, Naples).
>    e) There are no combined moves: instead, allies lend their corps for
> their allies to use.
>    f)  Insurrection corps can appear/move anywhere in Austria.
>    g) No achieving/losing dominent power status.
>
> 3. AI tends not to surrender unless its capital is taken (and most of the
> rest of the country) and it's army is wiped out.
>
> 4. There is diplomacy with minors in the game: you can influence and ally
> with minor countries through diplomacy and $ can be spent to improve
> chances.
>
> 5. AI usually makes little sense with its DOWs. For example, Prussia will
> DOW Austria, Spain, Turkey and Britian for absolutely no reason in 1805.
> The AI players will usually NOT get together and gang up on the stronger 
> MPs
> (like France, Russia or Britian).
>
>
> This is just a brief summary. There's probably more that I left out.
>
> Mel
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Kyle H" <menexenus@xxxxxxx>
> To: "public list for an Empires in Arms game" <eia@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2008 1:10 PM
> Subject: Re: [eia] what's our status ?
>
>
>>    During this lull, let me take the opportunity to advertise the new
>> Empires in Arms computer game that was released recently by Matrix Games.
>> JJ and I have been waiting for this game to be released for about 3 
>> years,
>> so we're excited to finally get our hands on it.  I haven't really had
>> time
>> to test it out yet, but here's what I can tell you.  It supports hotseat
>> and
>> PBEM games (but not LAN/network games).  It is a blend of Empires in Arms
>> and the online variant "Empires in Harm".  You can play any country you
>> like
>> and set any number of countries to computer AI at three different levels
>> of
>> ability (Easy, Medium, Hard).  Unfortunately, it does not seem to have
>> pop-up tutorials for new players.  So learning the interface might take a
>> bit of trial-and-error plus thumbing through the bulky rulebook.
>>    JJ and I each paid $60 for it at Origins.  We were told that customers
>> could order a physical copy or simply pay to download the game directly
>> from
>> their website.  I believe the website is www.matrixgames.com (but if not,
>> a
>> Google search should come up with it pretty quickly).
>>    Again, I haven't really had time to playtest it, so I can't vouch for
>> the quality of the game.  But since you're all veteran EIA players, I
>> thought you might be interested in hearing about it.  (JJ and I have had
>> our
>> eyes on the game for a while, and even we didn't know it was available
>> until
>> we saw it at the convention.)
>>
>> FYI,
>>
>> kdh
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Joel Uckelman" <uckelman@xxxxxxxxx>
>> To: "public list for an Empires in Arms game" <eia@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2008 9:09 AM
>> Subject: Re: [eia] what's our status ?
>>
>>
>>> Thus spake "Mel Chin":
>>>> I think just Turkey
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'll try to get my turn out before I leave for Chicago in the morning.
>>> -- 
>>> J.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> eia mailing list
>>> eia@xxxxxxxxx
>>> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/eia
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> eia mailing list
>> eia@xxxxxxxxx
>> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/eia
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> eia mailing list
> eia@xxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/eia 

_______________________________________________
eia mailing list
eia@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/eia