A question for RBS & chums...

[Bombax]

I've spent a fair bit of time playing FoG Empires, and my experience has reinforced the fact that FoG Empires is an entirely different beast from FoG II, and certainly can't be used as a "campaign module" for FoG II itself. I believe this is the position originally set out by RBS and the Empires developers too - i.e. don't expect to be able to use Empires as a "shell" for managing FoG II battles.

There are different views of FoGE, which is pretty much the standard "marmite" reaction to AGEOD products. While I've enjoyed the games I've played, my personal opinion is that there is too much micro management for my own taste, and that the standard game takes far too long to play. OTOH I totally get why, for some people, Empires is just what they have been waiting for.

My question for RBS - and it seems more appropriate to post it here, after giving the matter some thought, rather than on the FoGE forum - is whether there is any realistic possibility of some sort of "stripped down" version of FoGE being developed in the future; a stripped down version that would in effect provide a useable, mid-level complexity campaign shell for FoG II battles? I know it's a big ask, but IMHO such a development would propel FoG II into the realms of the all-time classic games. It would massively expand its appeal and its longevity.

Now, I get that mine may be a minority view. And I also get that the answer will likely depend not just on the synergy between Richard and AGEOD (which I believe is good), but also on the sheer practicability of coding such a hybrid. But I thought it might at least be worth asking the question...

Cheers,
Jay

[Latro]

+1
Would love to see that.

[rbodleyscott]

I think it is unlikely that it will ever be possible to create a grand strategy + tactical game that will tick all the boxes for everyone, since there is such a huge range of preferences.

That does not mean that we won't continue to get closer to that with the FOGE/FOG2 linkup. As for a separate map driven strategic layer for FOG2 itself, the linkup with FOGE was intended to scratch that itch.

But who knows how things will develop.

[Bombax]

I agree that it would be impossible to produce something that meets everyone's preferences. But for me at least FOGE is a monster of a game that is both way too complex and requires far too great an investment of time to scratch that particular itch. A cut-down version would be fantastic, but it sounds like that definitely isn't on the cards?
Thanks for taking the time to answer though Richard

[nyczar]

I've been playing FOGE when I am in the mood for some empire building and single player action mode. I have not explored MP in FOGE so my wish may be available but I don't think so from the top line review I did.

So, my take is that FOGE only allows battle using the FOGE battle mechanics. My specific wish would be to have a two player option to fight for map control using the FOG battles engine. Maybe some local contest, control of Italy, British isles or what not; something that would allow for resource building and fights where two people could agree to play it out even though it might take months of real time to finish given a FOG battle can take some time to complete. I would bye that in a heartbeat as I am sure i could find someone to fight a campaign with me.

[loki100]

well there is no reason why smaller scenarios can't be designed within the Empires set up. But I get the impression that the existing Pyrrhus one isn't widely used - now that was designed as an intro etc but there is a problem with overall scale. A lot of the 'interesting' possible scenarios - say the Pelopenessian war - take place in just a few regions. That was an issue with the older AJE, the Birth of Rome scenarios didn't really work (scale) and that had far more regions than Empires does.

what could work - but would be much harder to do - is to take the underlying game engine and design an operational game from scratch.

[Latro]

.

what could work - but would be much harder to do - is to take the underlying game engine and design an operational game from scratch.

You mean remove all the empire building stuff?
Just have a smaller map, consisting of regions with a set amount of units that can be recruited there, like the aor in TotalWar.

That should be doable, no?

[loki100]

yes, I think the game engine would support a much more pruned down version, but you'd have to work from the archon engine up rather than simplify Empires as I would want to look at issues like region scale and time scale. I'm guessing here as it may be feasible to increase the regions/reduce elapsed time by modding Empires with the goal of generating a more operational game. Something like, heres Ceasar's army in Gaul what happens now?

[MVP7]

Personally I have no interest in a Strategy mode and would rather not see the devs sink time into something like that.

Interesting tactical battles are usually a result of bad strategy and good strategy tends to produce nothing but one sided battles that are decided before they are fought. Especially "light" strategy causes gameplay where both sides are just doing a Benny Hill chase around the map depending on which side has managed to amass more units into their one army.

[Tresantes]

What the OP is suggesting sounds a bit like the Empire game within the Lost Battles boardgame (for those who know it). That would be interesting.

[Latro]

Personally I have no interest in a Strategy mode and would rather not see the devs sink time into something like that.

Interesting tactical battles are usually a result of bad strategy and good strategy tends to produce nothing but one sided battles that are decided before they are fought. Especially "light" strategy causes gameplay where both sides are just doing a Benny Hill chase around the map depending on which side has managed to amass more units into their one army.

Not if you are still limited to the value points.
Loser of a battle retreats to another region and recruits back up to max value.
It would just be a graphical representation of how the campaign system works now.

[Bombax]

What I'm thinking of is something that uses FoGE as the starting point for a strategy layer within which FoGII battles could be given a wider context - but in a way that is more graphic than text driven, and which allows a higher degree of player initiative and choice than we currently have in FoGII. There would be many ways to approach that, as per some of the suggestions given above, e.g. by producing a roster of cut-down scenarios like the Pyrrhus one, by focusing on smaller geographic areas or periods of time, or simply by stripping out some of the detail and complexity. I agree with Latro's comment that a points-based system would not be totally divorced from what we currently have (while I get MPV7's point about good/bad strategy, I do think he's overstating it somewhat).

My main point here is that we already have a wonderful representation of pretty much the whole ancient world in FoGE, so why not use it to produce a simplified strategy game that would function primarily as a context provider for FoGII battles? I think there's a real opportunity here for AGEOD in partnership with RBS and his developers to produce something which would reach far beyond the usual audience for AGEOD games, which is pretty hardcore, and deliver a combined gaming experience that would create a real wargaming 'classic' with greater popular appeal. Er...IMHO!

[76mm]

This is something I'd also be interested in...but for me, such a "simplified" game would still need to include some kind of basic economy/production and diplomacy, so I'm not sure how simple it would end up being.

[jomni]

What you guys are looking for is something like Tides of Conquest. Have you tried it?

[Bombax]

For some reason I'd completely missed Tides of Conquest. So no, I haven't tried it. But I will now! Thanks for the tip Jomni.

[Bombax]

...although it looks as if this is still at the development/testing stage, with a new version in the pipeline?

[Nijis]

Hi Bombax - there's a new version in the pipeline, though the current one should certainly be playable. If you have any questions about installing it or gameplay, I'd be happy to try to answer!

[Bombax]

Hi Bombax - there's a new version in the pipeline, though the current one should certainly be playable. If you have any questions about installing it or gameplay, I'd be happy to try to answer!

Thanks! Very good to hear that.
Is the current version and/or the new one suitable for single player, or are they mainly geared towards multiplayer?

[Nijis]

The current version and the new version are both designed for single-player and multiplayer. There is an AI that does nonplayer factions. There's a manual here which I need to update but should run you through the basics: http://www.mediafire.com/file/0c1bxdt68 ... 8.rtf/file

[Latro]

Hi Bombax - there's a new version in the pipeline, though the current one should certainly be playable. If you have any questions about installing it or gameplay, I'd be happy to try to answer!

This is indeed the kind of thing I was thinking of!