Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Motomouse
One thing I do not understand quite well up to now. Why did you choose in COG and FOF a strict order of movement for the units. I always liked to decide myself the sequence of activation. You could even implement it in a way, where one player has a designated number of units to move and then the other to represent a different initiative. Perhaps it could be implemented as an option to FOF and COG 2.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ericbabe

The most important thing to figure out is what the best improvements might be.  The cold reality is that expansions like this only make a fraction of what the original product did, so we can't spend as much time on "COG2" as we did on the original.  I wish we'd make enough that we could spend a year or two on this, but we just can't afford to do it.  So perhaps more important than generating long wish-lists is to identify the 10 improvements that you'd most like to see.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jkBluesman

I think that most of us agree when it comes to waste. But regarding provinces: they are already "good" at something, may it be wool or wood. What you propose would remodel the simpler economy of FoF, where you can produce either iron or money etc.
I would not mind to loose prisoners or make them abstract, but I vote for keeping depots.

quote:

ORIGINAL: augustus

Responding to eric's post by identifying a few key improvements I'd like to see:

First of all, I think the economic model is fine. Go ahead and improve the UI if you can--otherwise, I think the only problem is that you need to create a good tutorial that shows how to work the economy. I figured it out by playing the game, and I think some people don't like doing it that way. But just reading it in the instruction manual is not good preparation.

Aside from that, I'd like to see most of the improvements focused on tactical gameplay. I mentioned a possibly model for completely redesigning tactical combat, but you can't really do that in an expansion (which is a shame, because that Napoleon: 1813 tac combat was a really cool idea in a really bad game). I'd like to see artillery handled differently, i.e. in units that can be stacked with other units. Armies sometimes did concentrate artillery on the battlefield (Nappy in particular), but having divisions of artillery moving around is not realistic. I'd also like to see something done with supply during battles. I don't know what, but I hate those supply units as they are. And of course everyone wants tactical naval battles, so I don't have to mention that, but I will mention another of my hopes for the "improved COG": GET THE POW's OFF THE MAP. I also mentioned this before. I'm tired of capturing a bunch of prisoners, only to have a lone cavalry division wander into my country (which would never have happened in real life) to liberate them, and instantly form a very large hostile army in my country where I have no forces. I can only think of a single instance where POW's ended up armed and fighting in the country where they were held prisoner, and it was over 100 years after the this game takes place. Prisoners should be kept track of on the diplomacy screen--exchanges should be allowed during wartime if both sides agree, in which case the troops exchanged can appear at their nation's capital in a certain number of months. Otherwise, prisoners are not released until peace is made (when they are released automatically.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jimwinsor

It's funny I can't recall a single instance in the Napoleonic Wars where the possibility of large scale prisoner rescues were present.

quote:

What does everybody else think of the colonial-boxes idea? The biggest work would be on the AI for these, and maybe the UI for moving units back and forth from them and the main map.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jimwinsor I can think of at least two such instances during the ACW, OTOH: Kilpatrick's raid on Richmond, and the emergency relocation of Andersonville after the fall of Atlanta. Yep, paradoxically, we have rescueable POWs in CoG, yet not in FoF! I'd just take POWs out of CoG2. Consider adding them to FoF2!

quote:

ORIGINAL: ericbabe

Detailed naval is definitely something we're working on.

What does everybody else think of the colonial-boxes idea?  The biggest work would be on the AI for these, and maybe the UI for moving units back and forth from them and the main map.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ericbabe



I'd like to add at least the major historical events as game events, both as a way to make the game even more replayable but also to add some additional historical flavor. We found a great book that's a sort of scholarly musing on Napoleonic era "what if's", and so we may take inspiration from this either to create some "what if" type scenarios or even events.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ericbabe

We're experimenting with creating a more detailed map -- We'll also work on at least two new scenarios (1803 and 1812, I think)

I'd like to add at least the major historical events as game events

I'd like to "script" the strategic AI a bit more, for instance, so that Turkey doesn't do much beyond fighting border wars with Austria and Russia, Spain doesn't launch an invasion of Russia, so Tunisian privateers stay in the Mediterranean, and perhaps hard-code the protectorate rules so that the Ottomans don't get, say, protectorates along the Rhineland

We want to make some change to the protectorate system

On the new map, we're going to experiment with adding five "colonial zones" along the left edge.  They'll have names like "Pacific Ocean Colonial Zone" and "Indian Ocean Colonial Zone."   If it works out, this will hopefully dovetail nicely with the enhanced naval rules, giving the smaller ships an enhanced role in the game.  I want to avoid putting too much emphasis on the colonies

I'd like to give generals a stronger role in the game and to add many more special abilities for generals

Special abilities for units is a strong candidate for the expansion as well, but we need to compile a proposed list before making a decision on this

Some enhancement to the upgrades system also is a strong candidate

quote:

ORIGINAL: Russian Guard

Kudo's on the suggested Protectorate changes - and it always bothered me seeing a Turkish Hesse or Mecklenburg

quote:

ORIGINAL: ericbabe

So far we're definitely working on the naval side of things, and will be adding a simplified economic mode for those who want it.

We're experimenting with creating a more detailed map -- once we finish our mockups maybe we can post our proposed new version and you all can comment on it.  We'll also work on at least two new scenarios (1803 and 1812, I think).

I'd like to add at least the major historical events as game events, both as a way to make the game even more replayable but also to add some additional historical flavor.  We found a great book that's a sort of scholarly musing on Napoleonic era "what if's", and so we may take inspiration from this either to create some "what if" type scenarios or even events.

I'd like to "script" the strategic AI a bit more, for instance, so that Turkey doesn't do much beyond fighting border wars with Austria and Russia, Spain doesn't launch an invasion of Russia, so Tunisian privateers stay in the Mediterranean, and perhaps hard-code the protectorate rules so that the Ottomans don't get, say, protectorates along the Rhineland.  Right now the AI just plays to try to win the game; I'd like to give the AI a little more of its historical personality/motivations.

We want to make some change to the protectorate system.  Capping their armies is a definite.  We may have to change the rules on conquering/freeing protectorates.  Possibly give diplomats one or two more options for dealing with protectorates.

On the new map, we're going to experiment with adding five "colonial zones" along the left edge.  They'll have names like "Pacific Ocean Colonial Zone" and "Indian Ocean Colonial Zone."  They'll be naval movement areas.  The idea is that you can move merchant ships, privateers, frigates, and maybe even ships-of-the-line into them in order to increase and interdict colonial income and to expand your colonial holdings.  If it works out, this will hopefully dovetail nicely with the enhanced naval rules, giving the smaller ships an enhanced role in the game.  I want to avoid putting too much emphasis on the colonies as I'm not sure too many people want to play out a Napoleonic game in which France regularly launches an invasion of British India (even though Napoleon actively planned to do just this thing.)

I'd like to give generals a stronger role in the game and to add many more special abilities for generals.

Special abilities for units is a strong candidate for the expansion as well, but we need to compile a proposed list before making a decision on this.

Some enhancement to the upgrades system also is a strong candidate.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ericbabe

You might have the impression that COG players love complexity, but we did get a lot of complaints about the complexity level of the economy, moreso when the game was first released.  I'd say this forum was nearly evenly split on the economy overall, but outside this forum I'd say that opinions are clearly tilted against the complexity of the economy.