RE: Wish List

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Wish List

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Forge of Freedom: The American Civil War 1861-1865 >> RE: Wish List

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Wish List - 12/3/2006 2:37:40 AM

ericbabe

Posts: 11927
Joined: 3/23/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gil R.
Thanks for some very good suggestions so far.

I'm not sure if it's necessary to state this, but we're definitely paying attention to these, even if I/we do not respond to each particular one. Keep 'em coming.

Gil is right. Even if there are suggestions that are too ambitious for us to work them into FOF, we might use them in future sequels. There were many COG suggestions that we used when modifying the engine for FOF.

(in reply to Gil R.)

Post #: 31

RE: Wish List - 12/3/2006 2:37:45 AM

ericbabe

Posts: 11927
Joined: 3/23/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AU Tiger
Don't know if it possible already, but I would like to be able to substitute MP3's into the music library. Bobby Horton's music would be perfect background for the game.

It's possible to substitute music. Go in the Music subdirectory. Replace msc###.wmv files with files that you prefer, for strategic music; replace hw###.wmv files to replace detailed combat music. Unfortunately you can't replace music beyond the numbers used in the files. So the "msc" files run from 1 to 32; adding an msc33.wmv file wouldn't do anything.

(in reply to Gil R.)

Post #: 32

RE: Wish List - 12/3/2006 2:37:51 AM

ericbabe

Posts: 11927
Joined: 3/23/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ElGuapo

How about allowing Armies to assault forts or at least enter the same provinces of forts. It's a bit strange when your army can't even enter a province because there is a fort there. I can't imagine not being able to enter Annapolis just because it has some forts inside it! Entering a territory should not be considered the same as taking the territory over! At least give attackers the option of assaulting forts.

Forts don't prevent units from entering a province, so the move may have failed for another reason (winter?). Forts do prevent units from moving from the fort territory into another enemy territory.

(in reply to ElGuapo)

Post #: 33

RE: Wish List - 12/3/2006 2:37:55 AM

ericbabe

Posts: 11927
Joined: 3/23/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: briny_norman
Perhaps the unit 'jumping' could be a little less random and based on your army organisation - next unit is always from the same division etc... That would also encourage realistic battlefield manouvering, ie. keeping divisions together etc...
And maybe you could make so the you don't jump to the next unit before the animations of the current unit has been played through...

It should be the case that units in the same military group (directly attached...) move on the same initiative segment. This way military groups can move together.

(in reply to moose1999)

Post #: 34

RE: Wish List - 12/3/2006 4:39:58 AM

ElGuapo

Posts: 30
Joined: 11/26/2006
Status: offline

How about implementing a feature that tells you the outcome of a battle immediately after you choose "instant battle" instead of having to wait until the whole turn is over and sorting through the end report?

(in reply to ericbabe)

Post #: 35

RE: Wish List - 12/3/2006 6:48:09 AM

histgamer

Posts: 1455
Joined: 11/30/2006
Status: offline

Bounty I agreed or suggested that idea though you would need alot better relations with europe or the UK or w/e to get ships than rifles. (ie as the war progressed the UK refused to make more ships for the south, also they didnt make frigates only raiders, i suggested that raiders be added to the game with the idea of them performing like partisans on land though they can only destroy not capture.

(in reply to Williamb)

Post #: 36

RE: Wish List - 12/3/2006 9:19:39 AM

bountyhunter

Posts: 53
Joined: 11/25/2006
From: Wherever Uncle Sam sends me
Status: offline

Well a few "ocean going ironclads" which would be closer to a frigate... were laid down - the Laird Rams and the Stonewall for example , but they were seized/didn't arrive in time which leads me back to the potential argument.

(in reply to histgamer)

Post #: 37

RE: Wish List - 12/3/2006 10:00:20 AM

Sytass

Posts: 53
Joined: 7/25/2004
Status: offline

Currently I only have one wish:
Allow 1280x1024 screen resolution for us TFT users out there. It would also have the advantage of letting you see a bigge part of the map. :)

(in reply to bountyhunter)

Post #: 38

RE: Wish List - 12/3/2006 2:24:07 PM

elmo3

Posts: 5820
Joined: 1/22/2002
Status: offline

Flags:

I love them! Great eye candy. Could the flag lists be sorted alphabetically? Not a big deal as the lists aren't that long but it would make finding a praticular flag easier.

< Message edited by elmo3 -- 12/3/2006 2:28:10 PM >

(in reply to Sytass)

Post #: 39

RE: Wish List - 12/3/2006 7:26:36 PM

Brausepaul

Posts: 484
Joined: 8/11/2004
From: Braunschweig, Deutschland
Status: offline

The one of the reports lists which regiments gets new weapons, for example. This report lists BOTH sides, I don't think that this is appropriate. Maybe reports about the oponent should be moved to the rumor page and randomized.

(in reply to elmo3)

Post #: 40

RE: Wish List - 12/3/2006 9:30:48 PM

Hard Sarge

Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brausepaul

The one of the reports lists which regiments gets new weapons, for example. This report lists BOTH sides, I don't think that this is appropriate. Maybe reports about the oponent should be moved to the rumor page and randomized.

it does ? hmm, I never seen that report ?

or are you talking about the battle report when one side is dropping weapons ??

_____________________________

(in reply to Brausepaul)

Post #: 41

RE: Wish List - 12/3/2006 9:39:52 PM

histgamer

Posts: 1455
Joined: 11/30/2006
Status: offline

The ironclads made in England were started however as CSA diplo prestige declined the british government siezed them and became much more strict on the issues of neutrality.

(in reply to Hard Sarge)

Post #: 42

RE: Wish List - 12/4/2006 3:51:24 AM

moose1999

Posts: 788
Joined: 10/26/2006
Status: offline

It would be nice if the honor scroll of a brigade contained a bit more information instead of just date, place and outcome of each battle.
For example it could also list how many men the brigade lost during the battle, how many of the enemy they killed, how many and which enemy units they routed and other stuff like that.
If it's possible to keep track of these things (maybe the engine does it already to some extent?) it would be really cool to add it to the honor scroll.
Would be a very immersive feature, in my opinion.

(in reply to histgamer)

Post #: 43

RE: Wish List - 12/4/2006 3:55:23 AM

histgamer

Posts: 1455
Joined: 11/30/2006
Status: offline

Would be nice for a tally to be kept of killed men for the whole war. So all the men lost get added to this list, then at the end of the game you find out how many you lost and how many the CSA lost along with the result.

(in reply to moose1999)

Post #: 44

RE: Wish List - 12/4/2006 3:55:40 AM

slybelle

Posts: 193
Joined: 10/16/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: briny_norman

It would be�nice if the honor�scroll of a brigade contained a bit more information instead of just date, place and outcome of each battle.
For example it could also list how many men the brigade lost during the battle, how many of the enemy they killed, how many and which enemy units they routed and other stuff like that.
If it's possible to keep track of these things (maybe the engine does it already to some extent?) it would be really cool to add it to the honor scroll.
Would be a very immersive feature, in my opinion.

I think that would make it better. Almost like reading a history lesson. Hope they consider.

(in reply to moose1999)

Post #: 45

RE: Wish List - 12/4/2006 4:39:26 AM

histgamer

Posts: 1455
Joined: 11/30/2006
Status: offline

Work on the casulty figures to get more realistic numbers.

(in reply to slybelle)

Post #: 46

RE: Wish List - 12/4/2006 5:30:55 AM

Mike Scholl

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline

Something I'd like to see in a patched version is a "link" from the "All Cities" screen entries to the "Individual Cities Screen" that would bring up a list of "improvements" built there. So I don't have to "scroll through" them all individually to find the ones with a University to get the bonus for other "research" buildings. Being able to "build" from this screen is great..., but more useful information would be nicer still. As it stands now, I'm making notes on a legal pad.

(in reply to histgamer)

Post #: 47

RE: Wish List - 12/4/2006 7:54:26 AM

Hard Sarge

Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: flanyboy

Work on the casulty figures to get more realistic numbers.

Still say, you got to take the player out of the game then, once the player is part of the battle, the numbers are not going to be realistic

_____________________________

(in reply to histgamer)

Post #: 48

RE: Wish List - 12/4/2006 8:07:52 AM

histgamer

Posts: 1455
Joined: 11/30/2006
Status: offline

They still should be realistic in a ratio sense.

IE its just plan bull to have one side lose 5 times the other when 2-1 rarely ever even occured.

(in reply to Hard Sarge)

Post #: 49

RE: Wish List - 12/4/2006 9:31:40 AM

Gil R.

Posts: 10821
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: flanyboy

They still should be realistic in a ratio sense.

IE its just plan bull to have one side lose 5 times the other when 2-1 rarely ever even occured.

As is discussed elsewhere in the forum, those battle "casualties" reflect by how many an army has been diminished after a battle -- not casualties suffered during the battle alone. So, they include pursuit losses, march attrition, etc.

(in reply to histgamer)

Post #: 50

RE: Wish List - 12/4/2006 9:32:42 AM

histgamer

Posts: 1455
Joined: 11/30/2006
Status: offline

I realize that but even all those numbers taken into account sides didnt suffer 5 times the enamy.

(in reply to Gil R.)

Post #: 51

RE: Wish List - 12/4/2006 9:35:01 AM

Gil R.

Posts: 10821
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: flanyboy

I realize that but even all those numbers taken into account sides didnt suffer 5 times the enamy.

I was just making sure that you understood what the numbers represented. Battle casualties can be tweaked, and this would indeed be the thread to request it...

(in reply to histgamer)

Post #: 52

RE: Wish List - 12/4/2006 10:07:00 AM

histgamer

Posts: 1455
Joined: 11/30/2006
Status: offline

I would request a mod or do it within a patch (though I suppose someone who knows more about computers than I could make a mod) to make losses (including the aspects you mentioned) in an appropriate ratio.

(in reply to Gil R.)

Post #: 53

RE: Wish List - 12/4/2006 2:57:33 PM

Mike Scholl

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

Something I'd like to see in a patched version is a "link" from the "All Cities" screen entries to the "Individual Cities Screen" that would bring up a list of "improvements" built there. So I don't have to "scroll through" them all individually to find the ones with a University to get the bonus for other "research" buildings. Being able to "build" from this screen is great..., but more useful information would be nicer still. As it stands now, I'm making notes on a legal pad.

And I still wish I could open up a "troop container" screen and bring up a list of my leaders and their stats inside it (like the buildings list in the single city screen---but including where and if they were assigned). Then be able to assign one to the container I'm in and have it "auto-join" that container.
Current system still seems backwards to me.

(in reply to Mike Scholl)

Post #: 54

RE: Wish List - 12/4/2006 3:07:06 PM

Mike Scholl

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

quote:

ORIGINAL: flanyboy

They still should be realistic in a ratio sense.

IE its just plan bull to have one side lose 5 times the other when 2-1 rarely ever even occured.

As is discussed elsewhere in the forum, those battle "casualties" reflect by how many an army has been diminished after a battle -- not casualties suffered during the battle alone. So, they include pursuit losses, march attrition, etc.

One question here, Gil. Are these losses "Morale Dependent"? The kind of straggling and desertion losses you are describing happened primarily in "green" forces. As the Armies on both sides became veterans it was much less noticable. By the time of Gettysburg, The South lost over 1/3rd of the Army's strength in battle casualties, and the Union over 1/4th---but neither lost any significant amount outside of the battle. Actually, the Union's "straggling" losses on the march to the battle were the only other noticable number.

(in reply to Gil R.)

Post #: 55

RE: Wish List - 12/4/2006 4:04:12 PM

TimoN

Posts: 162
Joined: 9/1/2006
From: Halikko, Finland
Status: offline

My wishes:

1. Increase fog of war: technology upgrades should be hidded from the enemy in the event report and hide enemy city incomes from the map. These are IMHO very important in PBEM games. I don't want the opposite to see what kind of technology strategy I have chosen. I would rather let them see it in the hard way aka losing battles.

2. Add more weapon slots for bigger forts, e.g. Fort I has one slot, Fort II two slots and Fort III three weapon slots. All can contain different artillery weapons and each can cause different salvo results.

< Message edited by TimoN -- 12/4/2006 4:13:36 PM >

(in reply to Mike Scholl)

Post #: 56

RE: Wish List - 12/4/2006 4:10:36 PM

rogeur

Posts: 37
Joined: 10/21/2003
Status: offline

I also like to see an option for 1280/1024 and a print screen that works please.
Furthermore a new Mustang and... oh, sorry , that's another list.
I settle for the first 2 options ty.

(in reply to TimoN)

Post #: 57

RE: Wish List - 12/4/2006 4:35:43 PM

Mike Scholl

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline

Might as well add this here too. Give the Union Navy it's proper weaponry at the start of the game. Take them one step up the ladder from "Improvised Weapons" so that the South isn't in a position to compete in this area. And it would still be nice to see "Ironclads" built as single powerful ships instead of in squadrons of 10. Add some flavor..., there weren't 10 "Virginias" or 10 "Monitors" at Hampton Roads.

(in reply to rogeur)

Post #: 58

RE: Wish List - 12/4/2006 6:22:47 PM

mlees

Posts: 2263
Joined: 9/20/2003
From: San Diego
Status: offline

1. "Undo" orders button.
Due to misclicks, I end up sending a unit somewhere I didn't want to, after I get done inspecting it. Is there a way to "cancel" orders? I haven't seen one.

(Amusing anectdote: due to me not realising I had the AoP selected, I watched it move from Anapolis to Harrisburg, then back again, by foot, one summer turn. Must have been time to go liberate the bordellos from the Rebs.)

2. Slightly modify the US Army container symbol.
When I right click and inspect the contents of a province, the northern Division and Army container symbols look alike. The Corps symbol has that triangle shaped portion cut out of it, so no problem there. It would be nice to differentiate the containers present at a glance. (Add something into the flag, like a golden wreath, to make it stand out from the division container graphic.)

I got the game last Thursday. For some reason, I found this game easier to learn (and more fun to play) than Crown of Glory. (Sorry, I can't put my finger on exactly why...) That means you gents did good. :) Two thumbs up.

(in reply to Mike Scholl)

Post #: 59

RE: Wish List - 12/4/2006 6:26:25 PM

Twotribes

Posts: 6929
Joined: 2/15/2002
From: Jacksonville NC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: flanyboy

Bounty I agreed or suggested that idea though you would need alot better relations with europe or the UK or w/e to get ships than rifles. (ie as the war progressed the UK refused to make more ships for the south, also they didnt make frigates only raiders, i suggested that raiders be added to the game with the idea of them performing like partisans on land though they can only destroy not capture.

Legally the English Goverment could not sell WARSHIPS to the CSA. They skirted the legal issue ( a mtter of their own laws not anything the US had done or threatened) by building the ships sans weapons and mounts and then provideing said armament at Sea where the ship was then outfitted as a warship.

(in reply to histgamer)

Post #: 60