Recommend
7 
 Thumb up
 Hide
26 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Commands & Colors: Ancients» Forums » General

Subject: Any more for any more rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
David Groves
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
While waiting patiently for CCN expansion 5 to arrive and the new tank expansion from The Great War, I decided to give CCA a whirl, once again. I'd played it up to the middled of expansion 3 and a few epic games from ex 5 and then stopped. I'd honestly forgotten how good CCA was and I've now completed ex 3 and will be moving on to ex 4 very soon.

So, although I still have two expansions to work through (4;6 and some epic stuff) I was wondering whether anyone knows if there are any plans for an expansion 7?

I'm guessing the answer is no because Richard Borg and his team seem to have plenty of other irons in the fire.

Dave
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Strattanville
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Rumor is Fantasy Flight is doing a KICK ASS version of the Byzantine Era!! WOOO HOOO
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Groves
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Luftwaffe Flak wrote:
I spoke to Richard himself last year at a fairly local con. He said he is working on two expansions. Biblical era with lots of chariots and Byzantine era. He seemed to think they were close to being put on P500, but they havent shown yet.
This is excellent news, particularly the Byzantine era expansion.

If another company rather than GMT is going to market them I sincerely hope that they do match up the components with the current line up rather than produce a second edition, like Battlelore.

7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Shawn Garbett
United States
Nashville
Tennessee
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Will Provide Statistics for Data
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
David Groves wrote:
If another company rather than GMT is going to market them I sincerely hope that they do match up the components with the current line up rather than produce a second edition, like Battlelore.
Agreed. What happened with Battlelore is terrible. The original game (v1) was great, and had huge potential for expansions in so many directions. Skeletons, Elves, Eagles, and so much more offered by the fantasy genre. So the miniatures were too expensive. Choice (a), get rid of the minis, and make it a block game, choice (b) gut the game rules to have fewer miniatures on a field and turn it into a skirmish scale game. Yep, FF chose (b), and the feel and flavor of it all has bene lost--and now the rights are tied up in contracts.

If FF is producing the Byzantine, I have serious doubts.
2 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Strattanville
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I was kidding! An FFG version is a true "FANTASY" of mine, Though I would be pumped for a GMT version of the Byzantine era! cool
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
brian
United States
Cedar Lake
Indiana
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmb
recon28501 wrote:
Luftwaffe Flak wrote:
I spoke to Richard himself last year at a fairly local con. He said he is working on two expansions. Biblical era with lots of chariots and Byzantine era. He seemed to think they were close to being put on P500, but they havent shown yet.
From GMT?
If he said "expansion" and "p500" - I would think it is to expand C&C:A and not a new game in the C&C Series.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Miguel [working on TENNISmind]
France
Caen
(from Valencia, Spain)
flag msg tools
designer
My next game: TENNISmind, a simple yet realistic tennis match on your table
badge
My best-rated game: TETRARCHIA, about the tetrarchy that saved Rome
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Luftwaffe Flak wrote:
I spoke to Richard himself last year at a fairly local con. He said he is working on two expansions. Biblical era with lots of chariots and Byzantine era. He seemed to think they were close to being put on P500, but they havent shown yet.
OK, expansions, that makes it clear enough!

At some point GMT were asking for Epic scenarios using the purple army, and when I suggested Catalaunian Fields (451) the answer was "No, we have a 'game' in the works that will cover that period and more (Byzantines)". But they suggested a different game, saying that the changes to the core game needed would be too important for an expansion. Same for Biblical.

Maybe with time they thought that the market was too crowded for still another version in the C&C series and that marketing them as CCA expansions is a better move. But I guess they will introduce more differences than the previous ones, I'm curious to see if they require new decks...
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark McG
Australia
Penshurst
NSW
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Byzantines...!!!zombie hadn't heard about that and would REALLY like to see that. All the way to Manzikert! Would need some changes to the cavalry rules, but BattleLore has precedents for these.

I think GMT have scaled back there P500 listings, and aim for 4 new games a month, or may be only 4 P500 listings. So it seems to me the bottleneck is there.

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tucker Taylor
Canada
Fort St James
British Columbia
flag msg tools
Is your score positive? You win! (Some players win more than others.)
badge
A woman needs a man like a fish needs a saxophone.
Avatar
Microbadge: BloggerMicrobadge: FeminismMicrobadge: PolyamorousMicrobadge: Tea drinkerMicrobadge: Every true 18xx fan knows you should use $20 chips
Minedog3 wrote:
I think GMT have scaled back there P500 listings, and aim for 4 new games a month, or may be only 4 P500 listings. So it seems to me the bottleneck is there.
If so it's all to the good; means they're only listing games that they might actually produce, and keeping their production schedule vaguely realistic.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Charles Heckman
United States
Clermont
FL
flag msg tools
badge
Mr. Yuk sez, "Play more games!"
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I have the good fortune to game with Richard's group occasionally at local Con's and a local FLGS.

I have heard the same Ancients expansion information from Richard.

As a general rule, I'd said Richard and his group are usually many expansions ahead of everything/anything that is officially produced and some of their system inevitably gets trimmed by the companies to reduce complexity or components.

- C

4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark McG
Australia
Penshurst
NSW
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Heckmac wrote:

As a general rule, I'd said Richard and his group are usually many expansions ahead of everything/anything that is officially produced and some of their system inevitably gets trimmed by the companies to reduce complexity or components.
One of the main reasons for the success of the C&C systems is the Florida playtesting group. Too many games seem to get produced with minimal playtesting in my view. There are very few C&C game mechanics that I think are poorly designed, and it seems to me that the playtesting is what brings them into line. The Guerrilla mechanic in CCN is the only one I really can point to. Some of the scenarios seem a bit lope-sided, but so were the battles! A handicap system can fix this.

That the game companies further edit the games seems to be working out.. though a bit more critical editing of the card text would help. No matter what you write, it can always be made clearer by a 2nd set of eyes.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Berg Asklev Hansen
Denmark
Vejle
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I never understood why the C&C scenarios (Nappy and/or Ancients) didnt come with a "recommended handicap" for players seeking a balanced contest.
I am pretty sure the people who tested them multiple times gained a pretty good idea of the balance, so I find it rather irritating to have to test scenarios repeatedly to check their balance (or level of unbalance), before I can play them with competition-minded opponents...

THis is my one and only beef with the C&C games.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark McG
Australia
Penshurst
NSW
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
dunno if this will help your balance concerns, but a Balance Bidding System seemed one way to go to me

http://www.commandsandcolors.net/napoleonics/forum-main/19-o...

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Berg Asklev Hansen
Denmark
Vejle
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It does, and I already do this sometimes but it obviously only works when playing a very familiar scenario as its otherwise hard to guess what a reasonable bid would be
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michal K
Poland
Warsaw
Mazowieckie
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
brian asklev aursen wrote:
It does, and I already do this sometimes but it obviously only works when playing a very familiar scenario as its otherwise hard to guess what a reasonable bid would be
Quick way to find if any bid is needed is to look at full scenario list:
http://www.commandsandcolors.net/ancients/maps/scenario-stat...

I would say any handicap is needed only for most unbalanced games - marked in red (80% and more of wins for one side).

On a side note, when playing CCA I always prefer to play weaker side with no handicap. Why? Because I have nothing to lose and my eventual success would be nice surprise, while defeat - expected failure. It also makes game very interesting for me - to find solution in situation which history - and recorded players games - proved to be very difficult.

Ok, enought digressions from main topic... Whether it wil be Byzantine or Biblic era, I am eagerly waiting for new CCA expansion
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Shawn Garbett
United States
Nashville
Tennessee
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Will Provide Statistics for Data
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Play battle, switch sides play battle again, total flags. Problem solved, twice the fun.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls

Minot
North Dakota
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
brian asklev aursen wrote:
I never understood why the C&C scenarios (Nappy and/or Ancients) didnt come with a "recommended handicap" for players seeking a balanced contest.
I am pretty sure the people who tested them multiple times gained a pretty good idea of the balance, so I find it rather irritating to have to test scenarios repeatedly to check their balance (or level of unbalance), before I can play them with competition-minded opponents...

THis is my one and only beef with the C&C games.
In fairness, the answer from RBorg & Co has always been to play the scenario twice flipping sides (that is mentioned in most, or all the game manuals). The short length of most scenarios does facilitate that.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Berg Asklev Hansen
Denmark
Vejle
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
For ancients it is a possibility as we can play all scenarios in an hour or less, but not for Napoleonics as it takes at least 2,5 hours to play anything but the smallest scenarios
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls

Minot
North Dakota
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Really? Most of the time, we can play Napoleonics in well under 2 hours.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Berg Asklev Hansen
Denmark
Vejle
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The need for maximising every move and constantly thinking planning ahead due to the lethality of fire combat means that our games of CC:Nappy generally have more than twice the number of turns compared to our games of CC:Ancients
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Russell InGA
United States
Johns Creek
Georgia
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
NimitsTexan wrote:
In fairness, the answer from RBrog(sic) & Co has always been to play the scenario twice flipping sides (that is mentioned in most, or all the game manuals). The short length of most scenarios does facilitate that.
I personally do not like the idea of playing twice and switching sides. The results of the first game can completely alter the way the second game gets played. I would much rather handicap the game if necessary. (If I win with the 20% win chance side, how is the other person going to feel knowing that he is basically done from the beginning.)
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark McG
Australia
Penshurst
NSW
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
rules_heretic wrote:

I personally do not like the idea of playing twice and switching sides. The results of the first game can completely alter the way the second game gets played. I would much rather handicap the game if necessary. (If I win with the 20% win chance side, how is the other person going to feel knowing that he is basically done from the beginning.)
Don't know if you are interested in playing on VASSAL, but in any case you may be interested in the VASSAL mini-tournament results.

http://www.commandsandcolors.net/ancients/articles/tournamen...

The Mini-Tournament principle is 2 teams, where two semi-finalists are chosen for each team. So the competitors as such are trying to better than each other in each scenario.

The alternative use is to look at the match results for those scenarios to try and form a view of balance and handicap.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   |