To End All Wars - Breaking the Deadlock

Jarhead0331 · February 24, 2015, 07:45:29 PM

First DLC is here...priced a little higher then I expected. $19.99. Seems a bit steep for just adding 5 scenarios...

Anyone going to pick this up?

Boggit · February 24, 2015, 08:03:18 PM

I might do in a sale, but I do agree with you - it seems a lot for 5 scenarios.

To be honest, I wish they had added a Grand Campaign with this so that you could play both the Eastern, and Western side of the Entente at the same time. OK, I get the idea of keeping them separate, but I'd still like the ability to play as the whole of the Entente. They have some interesting scenarios, like the Palestine one.

Jarhead0331 · February 24, 2015, 08:07:57 PM

Quote from: Boggit on February 24, 2015, 08:03:18 PM
I might do in a sale, but I do agree with you - it seems a lot for 5 scenarios.

To be honest, I wish they had added a Grand Campaign with this so that you could play both the Eastern, and Western side of the Entente at the same time. OK, I get the idea of keeping them separate, but I'd still like the ability to play as the whole of the Entente. They have some interesting scenarios, like the Palestine one.

There is a grand campaign that starts in 1916 with this DLC.

Philippe · February 24, 2015, 08:14:57 PM

I suspect that this game is even more expensive than in looks. This release doesn't seem to include the very interesting German and Allied offensives of 1918, another two to five or six scenarios, depending on how you organize them. And did I miss something or is the Brusilov offensive missing in action? That means you could probably add two or three East front scenarios to the next release as filler.

Can't say I'm pleased with Matrix/Ageod's pricing model.

panzerde · February 24, 2015, 08:35:14 PM

I haven't found the last couple of AGEOD games all that compelling. Civil War II leaves me cold and I've been really disappointed in To End All Wars - and I love me some WWI. Since I sprang for the original game I might pick this up if it ever goes on sale, but that's about it.

Boggit · February 24, 2015, 08:35:50 PM

Quote from: Jarhead0331 on February 24, 2015, 08:07:57 PM
Quote from: Boggit on February 24, 2015, 08:03:18 PM
I might do in a sale, but I do agree with you - it seems a lot for 5 scenarios.

To be honest, I wish they had added a Grand Campaign with this so that you could play both the Eastern, and Western side of the Entente at the same time. OK, I get the idea of keeping them separate, but I'd still like the ability to play as the whole of the Entente. They have some interesting scenarios, like the Palestine one.

There is a grand campaign that starts in 1916 with this DLC.

That's good, but does it place you in command of all the Entente - or are you stuck with playing either the Western or Eastern Entente as with the base game grand campaigns?

BTW, just been on Steam and there is a new v1.02 update (it doesn't deal with this issue though :() .

MengJiao · February 24, 2015, 08:42:41 PM

I haven't looked at the 1916 scenario. I did buy the DLC, but mostly for smaller scenarios. I put a screenshot of the start of the Roumanian campaign where the the Central Powers under Falkenhyen made pretty short work of Roumania.

mikeck · February 24, 2015, 08:47:53 PM

I love AGEOD games but I think the engine has run its course. Like a sherman tank, there are only so many upgrades and improvements you can add and none can make up for its deficiencies. I think they need to develope a new engine with the same overall concepts. They just can't seem to fix the deep raiding in the Civil 2

Personally, I like the pricing model of this and other games with DLC, cafeteria style. I dont want these scenarios so I won't buy them and I'm glad I didn't have to pay $19 more for the game if they had been included in the original. The base game had a good selection of scenarios so it wasn't incomplete

MengJiao · February 24, 2015, 10:09:14 PM

Quote from: mikeck on February 24, 2015, 08:47:53 PM
I love AGEOD games but I think the engine has run its course. Like a sherman tank, there are only so many upgrades and improvements you can add and none can make up for its deficiencies. I think they need to develope a new engine with the same overall concepts. They just can't seem to fix the deep raiding in the Civil 2

Personally, I like the pricing model of this and other games with DLC, cafeteria style. I dont want these scenarios so I won't buy them and I'm glad I didn't have to pay $19 more for the game if they had been included in the original. The base game had a good selection of scenarios so it wasn't incomplete

I pretty much agree. I think it worked for the Rise of Prussia, but not really very well since then.

bbmike · February 25, 2015, 06:35:40 AM

Quote from: mikeck on February 24, 2015, 08:47:53 PM
I love AGEOD games but I think the engine has run its course. Like a sherman tank, there are only so many upgrades and improvements you can add and none can make up for its deficiencies. I think they need to develope a new engine with the same overall concepts. They just can't seem to fix the deep raiding in the Civil 2

Personally, I like the pricing model of this and other games with DLC, cafeteria style. I dont want these scenarios so I won't buy them and I'm glad I didn't have to pay $19 more for the game if they had been included in the original. The base game had a good selection of scenarios so it wasn't incomplete

I also love AGEOD games but agree, it's way past time for a new game engine.

Nefaro · February 25, 2015, 11:47:01 AM

Would be nice to have a powerful new multi-threaded engine that could handle big complex systems like PON much more quickly. *hint*

Emir Agic · February 26, 2015, 04:36:23 PM

Quote from: mikeck on February 24, 2015, 08:47:53 PM
I love AGEOD games but I think the engine has run its course. Like a sherman tank, there are only so many upgrades and improvements you can add and none can make up for its deficiencies. I think they need to develope a new engine with the same overall concepts. They just can't seem to fix the deep raiding in the Civil 2

Exactly my thoughts. AGEOD games are my favorite games. I even started to like 18th and 19th century warfare period because of AGEOD. :)

However, I agree, current engine run its course. When playing TAEW and CWII I constantly have feeling it is on the verge of breaking apart. Maybe it is because of new interface (which I think is step backward in functionality) or because larger maps (which are pretty memory hungry) or because random crashes here and there or because bugs (it is not uncommon that new patch fix one thing but screws something other). Patching process is slow. Fortunately, Pocus (lead Ageod programmer) is a great guy and he listens player's feedback. But there is a limit how many things one guy can handle in growing portfolio of different products where inside each product there is several huge scenarios, and in each scenario there is hundreds of different, often mutually related, scripted events. In such circumstances probability for broken events or game stopping bugs is high. Also, compared to some other titles (e.g. War in the East, Flashpoint Campaigns...) there is much less activity on Ageod's forums. I have feeling no much new blood pours in Ageod gaming camp which is sad (maybe I'm wrong but that is my impression).

IMO, Ageod needs refreshment in form of new, more robust, engine with the same overall concepts, just as mikeck said. That could shake things more in Ageod favor, perhaps bringing new players and more resources to developer.

WallysWorld · February 26, 2015, 05:17:47 PM

I just bought Civil War II and I just started my first campaign and I'm enjoying it. I think the engine still have some life even if now aging.

I didn't get TEAW due to the comments I heard about the long turn times like PoN has.

Now Ageod is working on a new Napoleon game with a grand campaign. If they can avoid the long turn times like TEAW and PoN has, then I'll definitely be interested.

Jarhead0331 · February 26, 2015, 05:23:58 PM

I have Civil War II, but I have not jumped into it yet. Still, its been hailed by many around here as one of the greatest grand strategy games covering the US Civil War. This is the first time I'm seeing the AGE engine criticized for being old. Not saying the criticism is not valid, just not something I've seen discussed.

mikeck · February 26, 2015, 05:36:07 PM

It is the best civil war game...but there are problems (like deep raiding) that have never really been resolved. Also, the AI seems to have problems organizing organized offensives. I love the games but I think the engine has run its course. With modern processors I would imagine that the AI child be approved and such. PRON had showed the limitations. I love RoP, CW2 and AJE so I'm not banging on it. I just think that company could do wonderful things with a new generation of the engine more optimized for multi cores and such.

As much as I love it, I often just sigh and quit when, as the Union, I find that I have easily destroyed a full Corp of confederates because General Jackson decided to moce his corp up to Harrisonburg PA and sit there.