The Seven Years War

[19 Delta]

Has there ever been any discussion of the Seven Years War being covered by John Tiller Software ?

[-72-]

Has there ever been any discussion of the Seven Years War being covered by John Tiller Software ?

Yes. ;)   Stay tuned.

[19 Delta]

Fantastic..

[Xaver]

The question is if there is something specific or simple a plan.

I allways think that a mix of Nap engine with EAW engine could provide a good base for XVIII titles with more focus in linear combat because with this you skip the "blitkrieg" problem in Nap serie (at least until Nap serie adapt the REN solution of block VS column).

I dont know what i like more if start a new XVIII serie with 7YW or start it in early 1700 with Poltava and other battles of the period in a title closer to REN style focus in battles and not it campagins.

Lets see, i still wait the 3rd title for FWW serie and first title of "Armored battles" hehehe.

[19 Delta]

Haven't played any Nap titles, played around with the Waterloo demo a bit ( not much interest in the era) . I have played through 3 of the EAW titles and just kicked off the F&IW this weekend which got me wondering ...... ... ..John Tillers World War Zero !

[Xaver]

Nap engine advantage over EAW engine is in the continuous support that help fix problems (not all them) and the continuous release of new titles (EAW is over as serie unless they move to South America liberation wars).

In Waterloo demo, if i dont remember bad only cover a part of the battle, you are not going to notice a lot the blitzkrieg problem because you are in a predefined battle, but when you are in a more open fight with room to move and try surprise enemy the ability to assault in column without need change formation kills a lot the nap feeling because speed a lot action and punish defender to much (as bonus if you have enough points to move into the ZOC area of the infantry you can enter without problem, for me enter in a ZOC needs more points than is needed now, this expose more infantry in attack to enemy fire and give a reaction turn for defender).

I allways think that from REN we can use block formation as "assault column" and leave the normal column only to move units with 0 ability VS assault units.

In a pre nap period you are not going to find this problem because you simple can leave line as combat formation (fire, assault) with square as complement VS cavalry (units in line with no friendly units in the flank have a penaly VS cavalry attacks for example) and column only to move units with no use in combat, oposite, catch a column means destroy it.

EAW engine is for me very versatile as pre and post napoleonic engine and even when could be improved to adapt better it.

But in the end i dont expect see something new soon outside PzB and Nap titles, a lot less a full new serie.

EDIT: the last 2 nap titles, Marengo and RBR are very good, better compared with Waterloo if you come from EAW, and of course is Leipzig or Bautzen with a lot of content.

[DunstonHaas]

Nice! Going to check that out as well.

[-72-]

Personally I don't understand the Waterloo comments that get lobbed around semi-frequently; I was listening to the Grogcast from a couple of weeks ago, and it didn't hurt that it also coincided with my starting a campaign -I don't know of any game of this scale that starts the French south of the Sambre.

I am also not sold on automatically having cavalry broken down into squadrons, as to me it seems highly prone to abuse, and force clutter that simply wouldn't be happening in the context of a major battle.

[19 Delta]

The question is if there is something specific or simple a plan.

I allways think that a mix of Nap engine with EAW engine could provide a good base for XVIII titles with more focus in linear combat because with this you skip the "blitkrieg" problem in Nap serie (at least until Nap serie adapt the REN solution of block VS column).

I dont know what i like more if start a new XVIII serie with 7YW or start it in early 1700 with Poltava and other battles of the period in a title closer to REN style focus in battles and not it campagins.

Lets see, i still wait the 3rd title for FWW serie and first title of "Armored battles" hehehe.

I think I agree ,

 Honestly I have no idea what differentiates the engine from series to series. But that being said I'm puzzled by the ability to assault in column in EAWs , I don't think that's a historically correct tactic and have self imposed it as a house rule . But due to the inherit low quality units in the Early American titles this makes it quite risky to deploy any "blitz" tactics anyhow . But I have seen what your describing in Nap AARs  ...