D2 vs Aow:SM
 

Can anyone who has played both comment on the main differences between the two game systems? I intend to d/l the D2 demo but I'm interested in what people who have played the full D2 think about it vs AoW:SM. Tried a search or two but didn't find any in-depth comparison. Thanks.

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

So there are two differences mentioned so far:

No diplomacy with the AI in D2.
No control of tactical combat in D2.

One similarity:

Weak AI.

Anyone else have something for comparison to help me decide whether to get D2 or not?

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">What you mentioned earlier was with spells. I was referring to the AI opponents using 'Assassins'... as I have never seen stealthy units used for assassinations. Magic attacks are different types of attacks in my book.

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

I personally couldn't stand the tactical combat in Shadow Magic....or any other tbs game that has it...I get much more enjoyment out of setting up my units with orders (and spells....what mages should use what spell first) than moving each individual unit move by move. To be honest, unless a Total War type design for tactical combat was used....that would RUIN the game. The largest battle I have participated in was upwards to 400 units....imagine trying to move each individual unit on the field...scary.

Diplomacy....I would like to see. BUT, at the same time, it seems not as important to me as I would have thought it would be...

As far as the AI goes....it really isn't even as bad as some of the ppl are making it out to be. Sure, there can be improvements. BUT, I have seen 110+ armies plowing through my provinces, and these armies have included summoned creatures, Heavy Infantry, Cavalry of different types, and other race-specific monsters. The AI does better on larger maps, with more AI's involved....The AI seems to not be able to handle what ppl call Super Combatants (a unit, usually a God, that is so overpowered with items, magic, ect ect, that nothing can stop him). There is an EASY player made fix for that though, just don't use Super Combatants. For a person to complain about how Super Combatants ruin the SP function of the game, but continues to use them, baffles me. The AI will not "build" Super Combatants....so, if you don't want an unfair advantage, don't you use it either.

I know I am probably going to end up getting flamed for this next statement, but who cares?

Dominions cries out to be played MP....be it network or Play By Email....This is where the game truly shines...and to be honest, what the developers had in mind from the very beginning (Dominions I, designed for them and their friends to play and have fun). Seeing that the main basic design hasn't changed from Dom1 to Dom2, I wouldn't think their main mindset would change either.

Now, I had Shadow Magic....but Dominions completely removed that game from any desire to play. Dominions has an...Epic feeling to it....It literally reminds me of Tolkiens Lord of the Rings in epic scope...There are SO many options just in creating your Pretender-God....not to mention nations. 17 different nations, and many of these nations has different themes within that nation (which gives you different available units). Different types of Fortresses to build, different units. Each nation is different and unique, with its own strengths and weaknesses. Sure, one nation may seem to be overpowered, but somewhere, there is a weakness....and a nation elswhere would be able to latch onto that weakness.

Dominions II looks really good too, I think. The maps really do remind me of some of the maps I have seen of Tolkiens Middle-Earth. They have a real "middle-age/fantasy" appearance.

I know in Shadow Magic, you have very limited amount of units to use, and even in those limits, there are even more limits. Some of the units are simply unusable (or, they were...could have been fixed via patches i guess). Dominions, I really don't get that feeling. Even Light Infantry has its usage (along with the free Militia you get sometimes in events....free patrollers, I would think).

Shadow Magic **might** be the prettier game....but Dominions, in my humble opinion, IS the better game.

I know this was a long post, but I tried to hit the things that ppl have commented on....and tried to compare the game to Shadow Magic. Just for reference, more ppl compare it to Master of Magic (although, I have never played that one...missed out on it)

[ November 25, 2003, 13:35: Message edited by: cpbeller ]

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

AOW:SM is closer to being MoM2 than D2 is. AOW:SM is better in the areas of RPG and SoloPlay.

D2 is better for multiplayer and strategy. D2 is going to be the better choice for player community (player done docs, maps, mods, sites) and basically have a longer "shelf life" keeping it re-playable and on my computer longer

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">In Dom2 the player can give his commanders a limited number of combat formation and tactical orders prior to a battle. I find this far more realistic than AoW: SM's hands on tactical battles where the player controls every troop's action in the heat of battle; no commander has ever had that much control in any field engagement. I also appreciate how this limited battle control speeds up gameflow and reduces tedium.
<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">The quality of the AI between the two are far apart IMO. I have logged over a hundred hours of playtime with SM and have a difficult time recalling a battle I have lost, even at Emperor difficulty level; I know have never lost an entire game. In Dom2, playing with default settings at Normal difficulty and configuring my game to the recommended number of AI opponents for a given map losing a battle is commonplace, and loss of a game is not a shock either http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif .

I rank Dom2 within the top10 most challenging solo turnbased games I have ever played. I wish SM provided as much of a challenge.
<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Graphically, SM is far superior to Dom2. It has excellent 2D graphics; Dom2 graphics are minimalist. I have friends who have been unable to get beyond the graphics and appreciate the gameplay depth.

SM is a great 'beer and pretzel' fantasy wargame. I've had a lot of fun with it. Dom2 is also a lot of fun, but in a more cerebral way. Often I need to take a break from Dom2 to relax; it can get that involving and complex. Many gamers play for relaxation, so this can be a negative. SM is a lighter gaming experience and may compare favorably in this light.

As its been stated elsewhere in this thread, SM and Dom2 are vastly different games, both fun in their way. Personally though, I prefer Dom2 because I find it more challenging and complex.

[ November 25, 2003, 14:43: Message edited by: Altus ]

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Gandalf, you are more likely right....I have never played MoM....but i did have the unfortunate opportunity to play Shadow Magic http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

I always heard though, that MoM was more like fantasy Civ....and there has been comparisons with Dominions and what an actual fantasy civ would be like....

[ November 25, 2003, 13:46: Message edited by: cpbeller ]

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

Thanks to Gandalf and cpbeller. I'm mostly interested in D2 for MP with a long time gaming buddy. Sounds like combat is quite different in D2. I don't think we ever fought a battle in Aow:SM with more than 24 units on a side. If there are potentially hundreds of units then I can see why you don't fight that out manually in D2. I assume you do get to watch the fight though?

Is there a simultaneous movement choice in D2 or is it strictly turn based?

Not being able to influence the AI empires with diplomacy is a disappointment. That was a big part of AoW:SM for us as we were constantly trying to ally with AI's and turn them against the other person. You could also trade spells with allies and you didn't suffer from nasty area type spells your ally cast. Is there anything like that in D2?

Thanks again.

[ November 25, 2003, 13:59: Message edited by: Elmo ]

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I do not think this is a good comparison. They are both 4x games but have little more in common.

City building is a core part of Civ, while it's simplified a lot in Dom. Battles in Civ are a joke because of the huge abstraction & weird results like spearmen killing battleships, battles are one of the core elements of Dominions & have been treated with great care.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Disagree. The AI doesn't do worse that the AIs from similar games, and I have played most of them.

Half of the thread you are referring to consist of 4 or so posters quoting each other's post entirely to add 'I agree' (deep thoughts indeed) & say how much they rock the AI.

Yet I have never faced any of them in MP to gauge how much of that is real skill & how much of it is ego stroking or taking advantage of extreme designs+tailored settings to get an easy win.

Others have said it previously, but I will do it also...
Dom II has 2 big strenghts: It's depth & its replayability: the game promised hours & hours of gameplay because it's without challenge the deepest game in the genre: Over 1,000 units, hudreds of spells, 17 nations...all of them different with their particular background & mythologically/historically inspired (instead of stock elves & orcs).

The game accounts for fatigue in battle, supplies, morale, experience, battle aflictions...the scope is epic with battles of even 1,000+ troopers and the way the tactical engine receives orders first & fights the battle on its own afterwards allows for this to be manageable.

If you want a prettier game, a game for the masses you should try AoW.

If you want a better game, a game for hardcore gamers that have played tons of different comp/board/miniatures games & know quality when they see it, then go for Dom II.

-edit grammar

[ November 25, 2003, 14:02: Message edited by: Wendigo ]

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">LOL!

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I do not think this is a good comparison. They are both 4x games but have little more in common.

City building is a core part of Civ, while it's simplified a lot in Dom. Battles in Civ are a joke because of the huge abstraction & weird results like spearmen killing battleships, battles are one of the core elements of Dominions & have been treated with great care.

Quote:

second: the artificial intelligence of computer opponents makes it easy to predict some army movement actions. I also have yet to see the AI opponents to try and assassinate one of my commanders. The largest topic on this forum is about improving the AI... but that's the way it is with most strategy games.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Disagree. The AI doesn't do worse that the AIs from similar games, and I have played most of them.

Half of the thread you are referring to consist of 4 or so posters quoting each other's post entirely to add 'I agree' (deep thoughts indeed) & say how much they rock the AI.

Yet I have never faced any of them in MP to gauge how much of that is real skill & how much of it is ego stroking or taking advantage of extreme designs+tailored settings to get an easy win.

Others have said it previously, but I will do it also...
Dom II has 2 big strenghts: It's depth & its replayability: the game promised hours & hours of gameplay because it's without challenge the deepest game in the genre: Over 1,000 units, hudreds of spells, 17 nations...all of them different with their particular background & mythologically/historically inspired (instead of stock elves & orcs).

The game accounts for fatigue in battle, supplies, morale, experience, battle aflictions...the scope is epic with battles of even 1,000+ troopers and the way the tactical engine receives orders first & fights the battle on its own afterwards allows for this to be manageable.

If you want a prettier game, a game for the masses you should try AoW.

If you want a better game, a game for hardcore gamers that have played tons of different comp/board/miniatures games & know quality when they see it, then go for Dom II.

-edit grammar [/QB]</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I agree (just joking, but I really do agree).

But, to clarify, there are actually 17 nations (you said 14)....but, also, there are many of the nations with different "themes", which I guess could in a way make there be more?

At any rate, I do agree....

oh, and Elmo, if you are wanting it primarily for MP purposes...I really don't think you can go wrong with a purchase of Dom2....contrary to popular belief, Dom is a game made for MP....

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

Heh, yeah old habits...editted the 14 also while checking my lousy grammar. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Do you truly get the impression those are different people? A couple of them tend to use the same tactics for keeping the thread alive, and the same insulting way of referring to their opinions as fact, or general opinion, or things needing fixed. (which appears to be achieving the direct oppossite by the way)

Quote:

If you want a prettier game, a game for the masses you should try AoW. If you want a better game, a game for hardcore gamers that have played tons of different comp/board/miniatures games & know quality when they see it, then go for Dom II.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">EXCELLENT breakdown. I think you have it right there.

[ November 25, 2003, 14:10: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

Hum this is weird. I asked like 20 ppl about dominions 2, and all of them said that what the **** is this piece of ****! I don't agree with them of course..

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

I had that same feeling at times Gandalf, but without any proof I decided to just point to the obvious: that inflating a thread by quoting 30 lines & adding 'me too' can hardly be weighted in evaluating the worth of said thread.

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Particle, you are one strange duck....I really cannot follow you. You have said (in other Posts) about all the things that sucks in this game (mainly your opinion of the AI), but then in the very next breath (and, same post), you say how much you love the game.

Are you a glutton for self-inflicted punishment, or just simply confused?

A strange duck indeed....

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

Thanks for the feedback folks. I have the demo and will give it a whirl as it sounds like most of you prefer D2 to AoW:SM.

PS - How are the manuals in the commercial Version?

[ November 25, 2003, 14:27: Message edited by: Elmo ]

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I think the manual is well-done, especially for today's standards....134 pages....i think about 30 pages is about game mechanics....the rest is every magic item and spell in the game....

Now, if you are going to check out the demo, also take a look through these threads:

http://www.shrapnelgames.com/cgi-bin...;f=74;t=000172

http://www.shrapnelgames.com/cgi-bin...;f=74;t=000388

That should get you started....also, the demo is limited to 7 nations (17 total in the full Version), Level 4 in all schools of magic (I think there is 9 levels in each school in full Version), and only to turn 40.

If you have any questions, just simply ask....you should get a responce from someone....lots of good ppl here. Oh, and don't entirely base your opinions of the AI on the 40 turn demo...you will be disappointed in that aspect, 40 turns doesn't give the AI enough time to really build and grow

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Just to offer a contrasting opinion http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

I think the manual is average at best. The game mechanics section is light and not very illuminating, though in fairness most of the info is in these forums or others, and the community is typically ready to help new players with their questions. You don't see many RTFMs here, mostly cuz... well the manual isn't that good...

The rest of the manual (the spell lists and magic items lists) are fine, but not well organized or referenced, still the information is there even if it is more annoying than it should be to extract. Then again, no one is buying this game for the manual, so I wouldn't worry about it, and some people seem to really like the manual, maybe you'll fall into that group.

As to which is better SM or Dom2... well its entirely a matter of personal opinion, and I don't think that that main divider between them is 'better gameplay' for Dom2 and 'prettier gfx' for SM. If you are playing MP mostly than SM stands up quite well for a certain type of game play. Also the longevity of SM will be longer than what alot of people here have pointed out, the origonal and AoW2 both had scads of user made maps and senerios (20 times more than what I've seen for Dom anyway), though in fairness the gameplay of any of the AoWs was more dependant on how the map was made than it is for Dom, that's one reason why the random map maker for SM is average at best.

I think you'll get more SP replayability out of Dom2 though, and certainly more SP challenge, the AI isn't as bad as some people make it out to be, and it is capeable of assassinations, global enchantments, and a variety of other 'higher level' strategies. It's not as good as a human of course (hense the desire to play MP), but it's far better than most people assumed it would be from the Demo.

Here's the thing about SP in Dom2 and its challenges. You'll only be as challenged as you allow yourself to be. If you chose settings that inherently favor the human player, yeah it'll be easy. If you choose balanced settings (or try to handicap yourself somehow) then the AI will be strong. Seemingly the AI has some problems with early aggression, but on a big enough map with enough opponents, even if you are able to take out 2 neighbors by turn 40, there will likely be one or two other AIs that have done a similar manuver and who will be ready to face you in the midgame. Ermor is particularly nasty about growing a huge hoard of troops and visiting smackdowns on anyone unfortunate to be next to them.

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

I agree that the Dom2 manual could really use an index for the spell and item descriptions because they're not well organized.

They are organized by magic Category but not alphabetically within magic Category and level. Also, some of the categories of the various spells are not intuitive. Not to say they should be reordered...just that they are hard to look up even if you know the spell name.

For instance, someone says XXXXX is a great overland spell. You have no idea where to find out what it does in the manual.

(The SM manual is better. It contains some inaccuracies but it really explains game mechanics, and the organization of the manual makes more sense. All the death spells are together, for instance. In fairness to Dominions, however, SM has no two-types-required spells and hence had an easier time organizing their manual by type of magic. Dominions would have to use two entries for numerous spells in the event that they organized the manual in this manner. I still wish they had. Or that they would supplement us with spell listings by magic type with reference to the page of the manual that the spell is on. This would particularly help newbies like me decide what magic path to research next, but I guess you can do it from the research screen.)

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

[quote]Originally posted by licker:

Quote:

Originally posted by Elmo: ....and visiting smackdowns on anyone unfortunate to be next to them.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">LOL....wrestling fan?

I I just bought Smackdown: Here Comes the Pain Last week....

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

Heh, I'm a fan of it in passing, I do enjoy some of the lingo though, it entertains me to no end http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Though without cable, and with my wife booking up the TV on Thursdays I rarely if ever watch, and it's been a long time since I had my descrambler to watch any of the PPV stuff http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

I do kinda like the WWE vidio games, though I never play them, stupid Best Buy never has them on their display units anymore, its all that Soul Caliber crap http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">A lot of people talk about beer and pretzel strategy games. What does that mean? What's the origin? Is it more fun playing Dominions II while consuming beer and pretzels? I don't think I've ever ingested them together.

-Cherry

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">A lot of people talk about beer and pretzel strategy games. What does that mean? What's the origin? Is it more fun playing Dominions II while consuming beer and pretzels? I don't think I've ever ingested them together.

-Cherry </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">AFAIK, the term describes a game that you can play casually, without much mental effort, and finish in a short time span. I've seen it mentioned a lot on the Underdogs site.

[ November 25, 2003, 20:55: Message edited by: HJ ]

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

I own Doms and Doms II. I've played AoW, but only the demo, because one game of the AoW demo was enough to enjoy what it had to offer and become pretty sick of it. Others have different tastes, though.

AoW is very derivative of MoM. Doms has tons of original ideas.

Doms has massive quality of play advantages over AoW, as far as I'm concerned. But different people have different tastes, and they are very different games, so try the demos and decide for yourself.

PvK

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

I think they mean that SM is more relaxing.

If you drank too much beer while playing dominions, you'd probably make a mistake and lose. SM gets predictable after a point, such that you can have beer, eat some pretzels as a snack, and beat the computer opponents at a leisurely pace.

I like Dominions. It's a very deep game and quite challenging. I'm not a fan of the downward ecomonic spiral or the extreme disaster luck events (which lack positive counterparts), but overall the game is spectacular.

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

If you want an Illwinterian Beer n' Pretzel game, try Conquest of Elysium.

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Who did you ask? Barbie: Fashion Designer fans? Or even worse, Final Fantasy 7+ fans? The former tend to be mindless (or at least feebleminded, or possibly just very young) while the latter tend to value graphics, cutscenes, dumb plots, and bad music over gameplay, coolness, good plots, and good music (or else they'd be playing Square's good games). Or perhaps you asked Warcraft 3 fans, who don't necessarily understand the concept of a strategy game.

I know a lot of people reacted the way you describe to Doms I, but I have not seen that reaction to Doms II in the forums I frequent=)

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

I think that the main difference is in the amount of options you have. Once I explore all the options and get a hang of most of the tricks in the game, it loses much of its appeal. In AoW, it was pretty easy to do. The main tactics become apparent very soon, and the variety is very limited. All the battles play out the same way, and start to look the same fairly soon. In other words, after about 10 days, there was nothing else to do, and nothing new to discover. In Dominions, the amount of options and their combinations is vast. There is always something new to try, especially if you're not just sticking to the optimality recipes, and I don't see the game getting stale any time soon. To achieve this, a game doesn't necessarily have to have 1000 unit types (chess doesn't), but it can help nevertheless.
Plus, there is a notable difference in design intention. In Dominions, some things are there just because they would be cool if they are (at least that's how it seems; you can always find a way to use them), while in most big-studio games no effort is put into anything that is not immediately and overly useful and gives good returns while at the same time being easy to grasp. This again means reduced variety, and reduced replayability, and I don't really consider myself as target audience for those games, even though I buy them from time to time. I guess I could boil it down to market requirements vs. ars gratia artis.
SP experience of Dominions II is still great, and I hope it's going to be even better in the future, and production values, even though not as high as something like Morrowind, are still more than satisfactory. There are some things that I'm not exactly fond of in Dominions, and some that I would create differently if it was my design, but that's true about every game that exists, since we are all different. In the end, it all depends on what you want to see in your games. Do you want just another product, or do you want something to really boggle your mind when you explore it. And no, Civilisation games are not a good example of the latter.

ps.
Yes, the manual could be better in explaining gameplay nuances. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ November 25, 2003, 21:27: Message edited by: HJ ]

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

I definitely like Dom2 better...it got pretty tedious having my super stack need to be led through the proper abusive tatics to beat the enemy ai large Groups of level 1 troops *again*

Dominions has a better combat system and a larger scale game with troops that feel more different. AoW seemed to consist of red swordsmen swinging ineffectively at blue swordsmen again and again until one hit and killed the other pretty fast. It seemed like MoM, but without the epic scale and fun...no armageddon, no great wasting, no zombie mastery? Instead lame spells like fire mastery. How sad...
Dominions might not have those exact spells, but burden of time, haunted forest, etc., still have the impressive power that global enchantments should, and the national mages give each race alot more flavor despite at least as similar infantry as AoW in a lot of cases.

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

Dominions_II is like Civilization_III with fantasy elements but much more evolved. Dominions_II provides more control and direct influence for upcoming battles then Civilization. I really enjoy being able to place the location of my units before going into battle for Dominions_II. The computer then plays out the entire battle between you and your enemies since hundreds of units are involved. Dominions_II has two great weaknesses...
first: there is no diplomacy with computer opponents. Even if settings could be placed just between the computer opponents it would be nice for providing a greater challenge.
second: the artificial intelligence of computer opponents makes it easy to predict some army movement actions. I also have yet to see the AI opponents to try and assassinate one of my commanders. The largest topic on this forum is about improving the AI... but that's the way it is with most strategy games.

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

I have seen assasinations of my leaders. Both succesfull and otherwise.
I am only playing SP in the demo, so that is the AI attempting to kill off my leaders.
Once my butcher of a Moloch pretender with 80 kills was targeted by the nightmare spell (forgot exact name), that sends as many undead after the target as the target has killed. He was much too strong for them. The only problem was that he was cursed and had two afflictions already (Weakened and lost arm). Slowly they pulled him down, but he killed something like 70 of them first (and got MANY afflictions). This was not an assasination, but still a devious way of pulling down a warlike pretender.

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

They are so diffrent kind of games...

But i stopped playing AoW 2 when i found Dominions I, so http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif ...

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">A lot of people talk about beer and pretzel strategy games. What does that mean? What's the origin? Is it more fun playing Dominions II while consuming beer and pretzels? I don't think I've ever ingested them together.

-Cherry </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">AFAIK, the term describes a game that you can play casually, without much mental effort, and finish in a short time span. I've seen it mentioned a lot on the Underdogs site. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">It's a boardgaming term. It was used to differentiate between hardcore wargames that required your full attention during your turn, where you had to manipulate many stacks of counters, or constantly consult the rules, or both. A beer-and-pretzels game was one in which you and your opponent could shoot the breeze while playing and drinking beer and eating pretzels. Of course, you can always drink beer and eat preztels, but it referred also to the general atmosphere, less mental effort, etc. as HJ said. Shorter games with simpler rules were more social. As an example, War in the Pacific was a hardcore wargame, while its "beer & pretzels" counterpart was Victory in the Pacific (which, ironically, was the much better game).

The term doesn't make much sense as applied to computer games, except maybe in the general sense of "less complex rules." Still, computer games require a different kind of attention than boardgames. I wouldn't call Shadow Magic a "beer & pretzels" game at all. You need to pay really close attention to a lot of things, much as you would in a hardcore wargame. I've had players hand me my *** in m/p because I miscounted by one movement point.

Dominions 2 is, in my opinion, a far superior design to Shadow Magic. But neither one is a "beer & pretzels" game.

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

Lost my Last game of SM after misplacing an army by one hex. Ended up attacking with only half my force and lost both halves eventually. One thing I did not like about the game was the difficulty in seeing exactly which hex your units occupied. Even with the grid turned on it was tough sometimes.

I agree that SM is not beer and pretzels, at least not in MP mode.

Thanks again for all the feedback. I'm playing the demo with help from the walkthrough and so far it's a lot of fun, and a very different experience from SM.

[ November 26, 2003, 12:29: Message edited by: Elmo ]

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

After all the positive feedback and a run through the demo I ordered D2. Now all I have to do is convince my wife it's not going under the Christmas tree!

PS - Now when is that patch coming out? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ November 26, 2003, 15:42: Message edited by: Elmo ]

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

cool...welcome to the pack

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Thanks. Looks like I have a lot of reading to do in this forum while waiting for the game to arrive!

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">If you read this thread from the beginning and my post, instead of quoting out of context, you would know both pertain to a comparison of SM and Dom2's AI, not multiplayer. I stand by my statement that SM is a 'beer & pretzel' fantasy wargame. I could beat the AI handily sloshed, let alone while imbibing a few beers.

The reason you might have seen the term 'beer & pretzels' on Underdog is because it originated before there were live multiplayer PC games, with the older PC titles; at that time even PBEM was revolutionary and BBS games were a wonder.

It referred to PC games and the quality, or lack thereof, of the AI. Actually, to use the term to describe a multiplayer game, PC or board, would be an insult to the players involved. Human oppponents require more attention and respect. I have never seen anyone use 'beer & pretzel' to describe multiplayer gameplay before.

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">If you read this thread from the beginning and my post, instead of quoting out of context, you would know both pertain to a comparison of SM and Dom2's AI, not multiplayer. I stand by my statement that SM is a 'beer & pretzel' fantasy wargame. I could beat the AI handily sloshed, let alone while imbibing a few beers.

The reason you might have seen the term 'beer & pretzels' on Underdog is because it originated before there were live multiplayer PC games, with the older PC titles; at that time even PBEM was revolutionary and BBS games were a wonder.

It referred to PC games and the quality, or lack thereof, of the AI. Actually, to use the term to describe a multiplayer game, PC or board, would be an insult to the players involved. Human oppponents require more attention and respect. I have never seen anyone use 'beer & pretzel' to describe multiplayer gameplay before. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">LOL. "Beer and pretzels" predates any PC gaming (yes, even ADVENT). It was used to refer to "lightweight" board/tabletop games (those that are simpler and/or more chance based and therefore require less serious thought - note that it's not the opponents that make a game beer & pretzels, but the games themselves).

A lousy AI doesn't make a game beer and pretzels - it just makes it a game with a lousy AI.

I wouldn't consider AOWSM beer and pretzels, either. But it's a lot closer than Dom II.

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

I agree that the term came before computer games. Since I started playing beer and pretzels board games back in the 60's I feel somewhat qualified to post on the subject. IMO it referred more to the rules difficulty than anything else. Such games had easy to learn rules even if the play of the game wasn't always trivial. A game like Risk comes to mind as a good example. Very easy rules but it could still be a cutthroat game between skilled players.

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

Yep. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I did not mean to say the term was coined with PC games. I can recall it being thrown around in the old AH 'General' and Strategy & Tactics wargaming magazines. Yes, 'Beer & Pretzels' referred to the game itself and the general complexity of the game.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I believe AoW:SM is 'beer & pretzels' compared to DOM2, just as I believe the Disciples series is 'beer & pretzels' when compared to the AoW game series.

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I did not mean to say the term was coined with PC games. I can recall it being thrown around in the old AH 'General' and Strategy & Tactics wargaming magazines. Yes, 'Beer & Pretzels' referred to the game itself and the general complexity of the game.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">But below you just said it had to do with the quality of the AI? And as for being coined with PC games, that's what you seem to say right here:

"The reason you might have seen the term 'beer & pretzels' on Underdog is because it originated before there were live multiplayer PC games, with the older PC titles"

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I believe AoW:SM is 'beer & pretzels' compared to DOM2, just as I believe the Disciples series is 'beer & pretzels' when compared to the AoW game series. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Well, we disagree then. AOW2 is less complex than Dom2, but beer & pretzels is not a comparative term, as I would use it anyway. Some games are beer & pretzels, some games are not. Flat Top is less complex than War in the Pacific, but it's not "beer & pretzels." It's just less complex.

Re: D2 vs Aow:SM
 

Great news for me. My wife just called to say D2 arrived in the mail today. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif Guess I'll be finding out first hand what the differences are between D2 and SM starting tonight!

Suddenly I'm not feeling well, must leave work early today...