Slitherine

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: christof139
Who in the heck are you suppossed be?? It is very unhistorical to have uber weapons in a game that were produced in a total quantity of SEVEN pieces and that were never used in combat. That is Sci-Fi to me.
....
And yes, only "historical' weapons should be used in a historical game, otherwise the game becomes a Turtledovish and Victorian Age Sci-Fi game.


See, we just disagree about this. I don't think it's science fiction to have a piece that was produced in 1864 to be produced in 1862 if the player chooses one upgrade instead of another and decides to spend funds in one way instead of another. Construction on the 20-inch Dahlgrens was, in fact, first ordered in 1862, though due to delays the first wasn't actually finished until 1864. To compare the inclusion of an 1864 weapon in a Civil War game with Harry Turtledove's novel which has AK-47's in the Civil War seems like an insulting exaggeration.


quote:


There are errors in the land weapons too, as I and others have pointed-out.


I have addressed any of these that have come to my attention. I believe that people were simply looking at other issues of the weapons than we were, or did not realize that for some weapons we were include aggregate statistics from several issues of that weapon type. We are planning to change two of the weapons' statistics in the patch, this will reflect different issues of the weapons and is mostly being done for the sake of game play balance. All of our weapon statistics are based on historical research -- there are different sources of data available, and we have opted to use what seem to be more realistic battlefield numbers for the ranges rather than the more theoretical numbers that come from firing range tests. But it is wrong to imply that our weapon data is not historical just because someone found a different statistic or two somewhere.


quote:


My whole point is that more people like a historically accurate ACW game rathr than a non-historical Victorian Age Sci-Fi game. Some things can be stretched or altered, such as moving your commanders around where they wern't etc., but to have weapons in a game that can affect a game's play and outcome greatly is maybe stretching it too far.


I can't imagine that the 20-inch Dahlgren alone would affect the outcome of the game -- as it is now, the weapon is priced so expensively that it is probably a poor game strategy to use many of them.


quote:


This is constructive criticism, as many others have given here.


I have to beg to differ; the title of your thread and the tone of several of your posts seem to me inflammatory. Your posts may be "constructive criticism" but they are not just that. When you call the historicity of the game "science fiction" and compare it to a Harry Turtledove novel you are not just being constructive, you are giving people who are here on the forum to learn about Forge of Freedom for the first time a poor impression of the game. We are more than happy to take constructive criticism, and the hundreds of changes we are making to the game in the upcoming update are, I hope, a testament to the fact that we take such criticism seriously. However, please understand that these forums are our primary way of showing off our game to the public and that rather than "improve the game" posts like yours seem more like attempts to smear our game and hurt our sales and reviews.