Design and coding games

Posted: December 31, 2011 in Wargaming

On a  discussion board, someone has stated recently games should be designed before being coded.


For my own, I remain convinced the real point is to design games you may code, even for AI.


I’m not coding. I just play with a scripting language, but that’s indeed how I plan the change: may I implement this feature with the current scripting tools, AND will the AI be able to cope with, or at least will it be not challenged by this new feature.

  1. ruskolnikov says:


    Is there a database (excel spreadsheet would be nice) where the parameters and characteristics of units in the game can be seen and compared?

    Also, I am curious why there are variances in the offensive fire and defensive fire values. Would, for example, a unit with a higher defensive fire value have 1.heavier equipment better suited to defensive operations (more machine guns) 2. perhaps more basic training. If you get time I would appreciate your comments.

    • Clovis says:

      The advantage to be on duty on New year…Time to reply.

      For the second question, the difference between offensive and defensive values is shared by almost all units, and in any AGE game. For what it’s worth, I bellieve this initial decision to be right, as it simply point out the superiority of defense on attack between 1860 to 1918. Now, for more advanced study, you may look at the batlle log in the RUS/logs directory, detailing each battle during a turn.

      For the first…can of worms. AGEOD stresses endlessly scenario creeation and modding may be done only with xls files and you will find the RUS files for the 1.03 version on the official in the modding section, whose the models sheet containing the infos you’re looking for.

      But this sheet isn’t containing changes made in FY, and FY hasn’t xls.It doesn’t contain even the changes made for the official 1.04 patch. I don’t share the xls idolatry of AGEOD and I mod the text files directly for many reasons. BUT I would have prefered to use xls for units as it is a much more convenient way. However, AGEOD doesn’t release the xls files so often and in januaryn 2010 they weren’t available.

      Some will say it’s an unique case. But as far I know, the xls files for PON haven’t yet been released. Funny.

  2. ruskolnikov says:


    Many thanks for your comments and time.

    I hope you have a great 2012



  3. Baris says:

    ROP was nearly perfect about rules,design and the capacity of AI to cope with it. But other Ageod games are more dynamic and fast especially in RUS it should be way harder to programme it well.

    • Clovis says:

      For me, the way options are designed in ROP is about the contrary waht I want in a wargame. Most are just mandatory ones you will play as sson you will have spared the EPs needed ( replacements bieng the most obvious example). There are no brainer and regularly I forget to play them as soon as possible. A decision in a game must be a real one, with risks and chances. That’s the way I design options in RUS, with side effects to take into account.

      • Baris says:

        Yes the replacement system is not good and still game breaking, there is none real diplomatic, political choice. Russian supply is also very problematic. But what I mean is that game is less dynamic and have slower pace and which is good for AI(As there no railroads have more difficult terrain than RUS) . Playing Prussian against Austrian AI regardless of difficult level, is very enjoyable still. IMHO one big plus of Rise of Prussia is leadership and troop quality of Prussians and VP changes in later stages(İf any one played until the end in Pbem:) ) of the game somehow in plausable balanced against numerical Austria. But unfortunately even if The OOB in scenarios are good,the replacements system is very much undermining game. And NM shifts in battles.

        AFter it is written in the forum I also reliased that battle casualties are really high in RUS and PON regardless of posture. It was not a problem for WIA and ROP that much.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s