Slitherine

How does this game compare to Commader Europe at War? Better/worse AI? Better/worse multiplayer?

Batavian wrote:How does this game compare to Commader Europe at War? Better/worse AI? Better/worse multiplayer?

It's a completely different level of detail, ToF being much more advanced and thus requiring more time spent. That said - the AI is actually much better, the ability to play any country makes for better long MP games, but still CEAW wins in quick MP matches...

CEAW Gold with the (free) Grand Strategy Mod is something to consider. I really disliked the original CEAW - way to simple - but it's come a long way. But ToF would be my first choice, if I had to make one.

ToF has a better AI

Borsook wrote:

Batavian wrote:How does this game compare to Commader Europe at War? Better/worse AI? Better/worse multiplayer?

It's a completely different level of detail, ToF being much more advanced and thus requiring more time spent. That said - the AI is actually much better, the ability to play any country makes for better long MP games, but still CEAW wins in quick MP matches...

I agree. I have mentioned this potential problem with MP to developers before game was finished. To finish Grand Campaign Scenario in MP with 400 and more turns is impossible mission. Even Tom Cruise can’t do it . They need more short scenarios for MP (and PBEM++). If is possible, I would like to see Grand Campaign Scenario adjusted for MP (and PBEM++) with much less turns, of course.
TOF is a good game for singleplayer; AI is a little better, game is much bigger, more detailed, more time consuming. But CEAW would have been my first choice if it had had PBEM++ option.

vveedd wrote:But CEAW would have been my first choice if it had had PBEM++ option.

I agree with this. CEaW play versus human's was too easy to cheat.

FYI the developers are working on a smaller and shorter version of ToF specifically aimed at PBEM.

Monthly turns, thus 50 turns for a full length game as opposed to 450. Smaller map, Berlin to Warsaw 6 hexes.

Will be free as part of a patch when done.

Above info from http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2991675 on the Matrix site.

That's pretty exciting Wolfe. I'm looking forward to your developments.

Not my developments, I'm just someone like yourself who owns the game, spotted the above post on the Matrix forum and thought it may be of interest given the posts about PBEM in this thread.

Doomtrader is the chap you should be thanking.

I'm making this scenario from a scratch.
It should take some time as the map is completely new and needs a lot of setup, the same as scenario itself.
Most probably I'll release it in beta stage.

Seriously, I'd charge $5 for it like they are doing for Panzer Corps.

Rosseau wrote:Seriously, I'd charge $5 for it like they are doing for Panzer Corps.

Panzer Corps is smart. Offer the game cheap and charge for DLC. Builds a solid base of users first.

doomtrader wrote:I'm making this scenario from a scratch.
It should take some time as the map is completely new and needs a lot of setup, the same as scenario itself.
Most probably I'll release it in beta stage.

Happy New Year!
I will not say – I told you, but I told you . I told you before game were released and if someone doesn’t believe me, here is the link viewtopic.php?t=22496&highlight=

I am looking forward to this small scenario but be careful; you must change many things except map size. One of most important thing is supply rule and out of supply effects. These two things are close related to turn duration. I have suggested automatic elimination of unsupplied units in many variations on this forum and I still suggesting the same. If you need more help while you making this scenario I will gladly help.

My current concern is on different issue but before I am saying anything I would like answer on my question: On what circumstances Vichy France event is available?

vveedd wrote:

doomtrader wrote:I'm making this scenario from a scratch.
It should take some time as the map is completely new and needs a lot of setup, the same as scenario itself.
Most probably I'll release it in beta stage.

Happy New Year!
I will not say – I told you, but I told you . I told you before game were released and if someone doesn’t believe me, here is the link viewtopic.php?t=22496&highlight=

I am looking forward to this small scenario but be careful; you must change many things except map size. One of most important thing is supply rule and out of supply effects. These two things are close related to turn duration. I have suggested automatic elimination of unsupplied units in many variations on this forum and I still suggesting the same. If you need more help while you making this scenario I will gladly help.

My current concern is on different issue but before I am saying anything I would like answer on my question: On what circumstances Vichy France event is available?

Currently in the 1.00 version to trigger Vichy Event you have to get:
Paris, Metz, Reims, Nantes and Tours
or
Paris, Metz, Reims, Nantes and Caens
or
Paris, Lille, Reims, Nantes and Tours
or
Paris, Lille, Reims, Nantes and Caens
or
Paris, Metz, Lille, Nantes and Tours
or
Paris, Metz, Lille, Nantes and Caens

IIRC this scenario in Time of Fury will be smaller that the map in Commander: Europe at War.

However the main purpose of creating this scenario is to give possibility to play PBEM games in a reasonable amount of time and to present how different can be the game experience when playing small and large campaign.

doomtrader wrote: Currently in the 1.00 version to trigger Vichy Event you have to get:
Paris, Metz, Reims, Nantes and Tours
or
Paris, Metz, Reims, Nantes and Caens
or
Paris, Lille, Reims, Nantes and Tours
or
Paris, Lille, Reims, Nantes and Caens
or
Paris, Metz, Lille, Nantes and Tours
or
Paris, Metz, Lille, Nantes and Caens

Ok. My concern is then unnecessary. I have thought that you have related Vichy event to certain date or time period. This would have been disaster for the game.
Still, this rule seem to me illogical also; first - if I am correct, not all of these cities have victory points and second - with this rule you have more or less straight forward path for conquering France. My suggestion is that you use current cities with VP’s and determine VP threshold when Vichy event will appear. For instance, VP threshold is 15 VP’s. So player can conquer Paris with 10 VP’s, if I am not mistaken, and five more cities with 1 VP at his choice. With this you will enable much more player strategies and variations for conquering France.

vveedd wrote:

doomtrader wrote: Currently in the 1.00 version to trigger Vichy Event you have to get:
Paris, Metz, Reims, Nantes and Tours
or
Paris, Metz, Reims, Nantes and Caens
or
Paris, Lille, Reims, Nantes and Tours
or
Paris, Lille, Reims, Nantes and Caens
or
Paris, Metz, Lille, Nantes and Tours
or
Paris, Metz, Lille, Nantes and Caens

Ok. My concern is then unnecessary. I have thought that you have related Vichy event to certain date or time period. This would have been disaster for the game.
Still, this rule seem to me illogical also; first - if I am correct, not all of these cities have victory points and second - with this rule you have more or less straight forward path for conquering France. My suggestion is that you use current cities with VP’s and determine VP threshold when Vichy event will appear. For instance, VP threshold is 15 VP’s. So player can conquer Paris with 10 VP’s, if I am not mistaken, and five more cities with 1 VP at his choice. With this you will enable much more player strategies and variations for conquering France.

I am in Turn 14 of Fall Gelb (Axis v AI) and the French have just offered the armistice, which I accepted, I didn't take Nantes, but did achieve two encirclements which have removed most of the BEF and all the French mobile units, got as far as Tours, Le Mans and Dijon, so there is no hope for France. Early Soviet entry happened in Turn 4, moving into Romania and Eastern Poland, so I have been moving units East throughout the French campaign (I left the AI to fight Romania which did quite well at first, but is now starting to collapse). Tried to get Hungary involved earlier with coup attempt which failed, now using diplomatic pressure to get them to join the Axis, I need transit through Hungary to save the oil wells at Ploesti.

So far a very interesting game with a good feel, never had to fight East and West Front before in 1940, some problems over the supply system and the air war, losses in fighters against Tac bombers, but I am sure these thing will be dealt with in patches and mods.

Overall impression is good, having a whole lot of fun with this game.

Rasputitsa wrote:
I am in Turn 14 of Fall Gelb (Axis v AI) and the French have just offered the armistice, which I accepted, I didn't take Nantes, but did achieve two encirclements which have removed most of the BEF and all the French mobile units, got as far as Tours, Le Mans and Dijon, so there is no hope for France. Early Soviet entry happened in Turn 4, moving into Romania and Eastern Poland, so I have been moving units East throughout the French campaign (I left the AI to fight Romania which did quite well at first, but is now starting to collapse). Tried to get Hungary involved earlier with coup attempt which failed, now using diplomatic pressure to get them to join the Axis, I need transit through Hungary to save the oil wells at Ploesti.

So far a very interesting game with a good feel, never had to fight East and West Front before in 1940, some problems over the supply system and the air war, losses in fighters against Tac bombers, but I am sure these thing will be dealt with in patches and mods.

Overall impression is good, having a whole lot of fun with this game.

Early USSR entry because of Bessarabia war is a bug. You have somewhere on this forum link for hotfix from doomtrader. Game is good but as I always say – There is no AI like human AI, so we are waiting doomtrader’s short campaign scenario for PBEM to have real fun

vveedd wrote: Early USSR entry because of Bessarabia war is a bug. You have somewhere on this forum link for hotfix from doomtrader. Game is good but as I always say – There is no AI like human AI, so we are waiting doomtrader’s short campaign scenario for PBEM to have real fun

I know about the fix, but the early Soviet entry has made for a very interesting game, so I will not apply it just yet. I have just encountered the large fleet of Allies CVs in the Med which is hammering the Italians and a German TAC air unit I moved into Sicily. I see from another thread that this is a problem others have had, the game is not perfect, I think the supply system needs some work, but despite these items it's still been a lot of fun.

Out of the games I have bought recently, this is the game I am finding it difficult to leave, it's certainly not boring, you just want the see what's going to happen next.

Rasputitsa wrote:
I know about the fix, but the early Soviet entry has made for a very interesting game, so I will not apply it just yet. I have just encountered the large fleet of Allies CVs in the Med which is hammering the Italians and a German TAC air unit I moved into Sicily. I see from another thread that this is a problem others have had, the game is not perfect, I think the supply system needs some work, but despite these items it's still been a lot of fun.

Out of the games I have bought recently, this is the game I am finding it difficult to leave, it's certainly not boring, you just want the see what's going to happen next.

I don’t want to spoil your fun but my first and second game with this bug went in same direction and I have had the similar thoughts as you but the main problem with this bug is that USSR has entered to war against Axis unprepared and too weakened so I have had no problems to conquer USSR major cities and then game was not fun anymore .