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 >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Advanced Tactics Series >> RE: Wish List

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

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Wish List - 11/2/2007 10:31:37 PM

Banquet

Posts: 1184
Joined: 8/23/2002
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ravinhood

Many Empire games were won and lost at setup phase depending where you were and where the AI was. Can't do much when you have one city on a lone island and the AI gets to start on an island with 3 or more cities up for grabs. Does AT have islands in the random map setups? It's why I always play Pangea when I play the Civilization game that way everyone got an equal shot to the mainland goodies and not much sea action as I hate navy games anyways.

You can set the land percentage in the setup screen. Something a bit less than 100% will give you mostly land with what you might call some big lakes. Down to maybe 50% or less you start getting islands. You can certainly not have islands if you don't want them

_____________________________

http://i904.photobucket.com/albums/ac241/norfolktraveller/command-banner_zps8a55d0fa.jpg

(in reply to ravinhood)

Post #: 31

RE: Wish List - 11/2/2007 10:51:02 PM

bssybeep

Posts: 237
Joined: 6/5/2007
Status: offline

Continue tweaking and optimizing the AI

(in reply to ravinhood)

Post #: 32

RE: Wish List - 11/2/2007 10:58:33 PM

darrellb9

Posts: 147
Joined: 3/5/2006
Status: offline

quote:

Does AT have islands in the random map setups?

Oops, already answered I see

< Message edited by db99 -- 11/2/2007 11:00:44 PM >

(in reply to ravinhood)

Post #: 33

RE: Wish List - 11/2/2007 11:37:12 PM

Westheim

Posts: 570
Joined: 7/9/2007
From: Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ravinhood

Many Empire games were won and lost at setup phase depending where you were and where the AI was. Can't do much when you have one city on a lone island and the AI gets to start on an island with 3 or more cities up for grabs. Does AT have islands in the random map setups? It's why I always play Pangea when I play the Civilization game that way everyone got an equal shot to the mainland goodies and not much sea action as I hate navy games anyways.

Another CivIV Pangea map player ... classy!

You can also get islands with about 75% ... sort off ... happened to me yesterday. Two land masses divided by water ...

What I miss: the good ol' continent maps that PT created, with one hex of water all around the map ... didn't get one yet, because I want to play on land for now.

Something like there is in CivIV would be nice - something that somewhat predefines the kind of map you want to play on, be it a continent, islands, archipelago ...

(in reply to ravinhood)

Post #: 34

RE: Wish List - 11/3/2007 12:45:55 AM

seille

Posts: 2134
Joined: 6/19/2007
From: Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cougar_DK

I would like to be given the option of turning OFF the little fanfare played everytime its a new turn. It really gets on my nerves and I don't want to turn all the sound off.

A G R E E !!

_____________________________

(in reply to EagleMountainDK)

Post #: 35

RE: Wish List - 11/3/2007 1:01:29 AM

Banquet

Posts: 1184
Joined: 8/23/2002
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: seille

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cougar_DK

I would like to be given the option of turning OFF the little fanfare played everytime its a new turn. It really gets on my nerves and I don't want to turn all the sound off.

A G R E E !!

If you look in the folder 'Matrix Games\Advanced Tactics\bin\sound' for a file called 'startturn' and rename it (say 'remstartturn') that will get rid of the fanfare.

Instead you get a little ding (or whatever your windows sound is set to play, presumably when it is missing a file) So you still know when the turn is ready, but don't get the fanfare :)

_____________________________

http://i904.photobucket.com/albums/ac241/norfolktraveller/command-banner_zps8a55d0fa.jpg

(in reply to seille)

Post #: 36

RE: Wish List - 11/3/2007 1:44:01 AM

ravinhood

Posts: 3891
Joined: 10/23/2003
Status: offline

Wow then with a wave file you could have each turn play the Flight of the Valkyrye and have another file say "I love the smell of Napalm in the Mornings??? " ")

(in reply to Banquet)

Post #: 37

RE: Wish List - 11/3/2007 1:50:18 AM

ravinhood

Posts: 3891
Joined: 10/23/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Westheim

quote:

ORIGINAL: ravinhood

Many Empire games were won and lost at setup phase depending where you were and where the AI was. Can't do much when you have one city on a lone island and the AI gets to start on an island with 3 or more cities up for grabs. Does AT have islands in the random map setups? It's why I always play Pangea when I play the Civilization game that way everyone got an equal shot to the mainland goodies and not much sea action as I hate navy games anyways.

Another CivIV Pangea map player ... classy!

You can also get islands with about 75% ... sort off ... happened to me yesterday. Two land masses divided by water ...

What I miss: the good ol' continent maps that PT created, with one hex of water all around the map ... didn't get one yet, because I want to play on land for now.

Something like there is in CivIV would be nice - something that somewhat predefines the kind of map you want to play on, be it a continent, islands, archipelago ...

Yeah I'm a Pangea Civ Player really doesn't matter what sequel II III or IV. I also like large maps and lots of opponents so I modded an HUGE size map in CIV IV with 100x80 tiles and 12 players and the first 500 or so TURNS (1000 total) are up to when Chirst was born. Great fun mod for me as I love ancients. For hundreds of years just men with clubs rule the world. lol Some of those wars are hilarious and heaven forbid the first one to archers or axemen. ;)

But, anyways thanks for the info on AT about how random it can be. Sounds a lot like Civilization and Deluxe Empire as far as map sizes and what can be. I'm a big land mass guy as you can see. ;)

(in reply to Westheim)

Post #: 38

RE: Wish List - 11/6/2007 8:23:39 PM

darrellb9

Posts: 147
Joined: 3/5/2006
Status: offline

A button and/or hotkey that takes you straight to the OOB rather than having to go through the Statistics button would be nice.

Not sure what others do but I use the OOB a lot to locate units that need replacements at the end of my turn or to locate units that haven't moved, etc. A lot easier than scrolling all over the map. Having to click on the statistics button and then the OOB tab is a lot of extra clicking in larger scenarios.

Thanks for a great game Vic! I'm having more fun with this game than any I've bought in a long time.

Oh no. I feel the beginnings of.. fanboyism... NOooo!..... I can't... let it happen.... to me..... too many... have already fallen......

(in reply to pad152)

Post #: 39

RE: Wish List - 11/6/2007 10:02:47 PM

MrMox

Posts: 42
Joined: 6/7/2006
From: Denmark
Status: offline

Hotkeys for save and load. (Ctrl+S and Ctrl+L seems to be in fashion

)

Hotkey for production overview.

(in reply to darrellb9)

Post #: 40

RE: Wish List - 11/7/2007 12:33:26 AM

SMK-at-work

Posts: 3396
Joined: 8/28/2000
From: New Zealand
Status: offline

the ability to lock unit composition would be nice....so a division stays a division rather than having the ability to grow and shrink to anything from a company to an army corps!! :)

Link this to the ability to buy only pre-defined units, so all units in a particular scenario are essentially forced to maintain thse compositions. Allow composition change by expenditure of a relatively small number of PP's....maybe 2-3 or so to change the composition of any 1 unit type.

(in reply to MrMox)

Post #: 41

RE: Wish List - 11/7/2007 1:36:51 AM

rickier65

Posts: 14231
Joined: 4/20/2000
Status: offline

This would be an excellent feature, I'm not sure how you would do it, but being able to lock the units so that they remained "historical" would really be a great feature.

Thanks
Rick

(in reply to SMK-at-work)

Post #: 42

RE: Wish List - 11/7/2007 4:34:40 AM

wolflars

Posts: 184
Joined: 6/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

the ability to lock unit composition would be nice....so a division stays a division rather than having the ability to grow and shrink to anything from a company to an army corps!! :)

Link this to the ability to buy only pre-defined units, so all units in a particular scenario are essentially forced to maintain thse compositions.� Allow composition change by expenditure of a relatively small number of PP's....maybe�2-3 or so to change the composition of any 1 unit type.

I agree.

(in reply to SMK-at-work)

Post #: 43

RE: Wish List - 11/7/2007 4:51:47 AM

SlowHand

Posts: 126
Joined: 11/5/2000
From: Denver, CO
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work
--- snip --
Link this to the ability to buy only pre-defined units, so all units in a particular scenario are essentially forced to maintain these compositions.� Allow composition change by expenditure of a relatively small number of PP's....maybe�2-3 or so to change the composition of any 1 unit type.

I 3rd or 4th this idea !!! That would be a great option to have in the scenario editor for future scenarios.

(in reply to SMK-at-work)

Post #: 44

RE: Wish List - 11/7/2007 8:09:33 AM

Westheim

Posts: 570
Joined: 7/9/2007
From: Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

the ability to lock unit composition would be nice....so a division stays a division rather than having the ability to grow and shrink to anything from a company to an army corps!! :)

Link this to the ability to buy only pre-defined units, so all units in a particular scenario are essentially forced to maintain thse compositions.� Allow composition change by expenditure of a relatively small number of PP's....maybe�2-3 or so to change the composition of any 1 unit type.

Disagreeing, heavily. Just why do feel some people the crazy need to limit the possibilities of the game again and again?

(in reply to SMK-at-work)

Post #: 45

RE: Wish List - 11/7/2007 8:30:34 AM

wolflars

Posts: 184
Joined: 6/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Westheim

Disagreeing, heavily. Just why do feel some people the crazy need to limit the possibilities of the game again and again?

Maybe we don't have the same game...

....I purchased AT. It happens to have a very very powerful editor...this particular option would not "limit the possibilities of the game." Giving something more optional features does not "limit" something. It would however make some scenarios possible to design with more accuracy and historical flavor. Some people might like that, or they might not. The point is, however, that if this were an "option" (look up this word if you are unsure of its meaning), you would have the "option" not to play scenarios designed by the community. I do not mean to be glib but it strikes me that some people can make comments like this when they have probably not taken a good look at the games strongest features, such as the editor.

I hope I am not putting words into SMK's mouth, but it is my understanding he wants to see this as something available in the editor. Thus it would only affect scenarios designed with it in mind, not the stock versions.

< Message edited by wolflars -- 11/7/2007 8:32:45 AM >

(in reply to Westheim)

Post #: 46

RE: Wish List - 11/7/2007 8:41:30 AM

wolflars

Posts: 184
Joined: 6/8/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Westheim

quote:

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

Why do some people hate improvements?

They're not improvements when they change the game into some other game it's not meant to be.

Those ... are NOT improvements ...

This one was from earlier and it bugged so since I already threw my hat into the ring I am going to mention it...sigh, I know I am going to regret this...

@Westheim, what exactly is AT "meant to be?"

sure, I know, sequel to PT but according to Matrix, the second item listed under game features is:

A Wargame Construction Kit-like editor allowing you to make any wargame scenario you like.

So I ask you, how are some of these suggestions (many of which would be optional) preventing a designer/player from accomplishing a stated feature such as "allowing you to make any wargame scenario you like?"

(in reply to Westheim)

Post #: 47

RE: Wish List - 11/7/2007 2:04:47 PM

JaguarUSF

Posts: 261
Joined: 7/31/2003
From: Jacksonville, FL
Status: offline

1. The ability to import unit settings from scenario files without a master file for random games.
2. See #1.

(in reply to ravinhood)

Post #: 48

RE: Wish List - 11/7/2007 2:48:06 PM

PDiFolco

Posts: 1200
Joined: 10/11/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SlowHand

quote:

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work
--- snip --
Link this to the ability to buy only pre-defined units, so all units in a particular scenario are essentially forced to maintain these compositions.� Allow composition change by expenditure of a relatively small number of PP's....maybe�2-3 or so to change the composition of any 1 unit type.

I 3rd or 4th this idea !!! That would be a great option to have in the scenario editor for future scenarios.

I fifth it

!

How could it work ? We need something to be able to define named units "shells" (ie "Armored Div", "Arty Regt"), indicate the wanted composition (ie 3xLt Tanks, 5xInf, 2xMG and 2xTrucks, regardless of tech levels), store them somewhere, then to call them back to create real units that'll be automatically filled with available assets in HQ.

That's some work, but I'd like it !

(in reply to SlowHand)

Post #: 49

RE: Wish List - 11/7/2007 3:48:41 PM

Max 86

Posts: 699
Joined: 11/6/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wolflars

quote:

ORIGINAL: Westheim

Disagreeing, heavily. Just why do feel some people the crazy need to limit the possibilities of the game again and again?

Maybe we don't have the same game.......I purchased AT. It happens to have a very very powerful editor...this particular option would not "limit the possibilities of the game." Giving something more optional features does not "limit" something. It would however make some scenarios possible to design with more accuracy and historical flavor. Some people might like that, or they might not. The point is, however, that if this were an "option" (look up this word if you are unsure of its meaning), you would have the "option" not to play scenarios designed by the community. I do not mean to be glib but it strikes me that some people can make comments like this when they have probably not taken a good look at the games strongest features, such as the editor.

I hope I am not putting words into SMK's mouth, but it is my understanding he wants to see this as something available in the editor. Thus it would only affect scenarios designed with it in mind, not the stock versions.

It depends what you are using the game for. Having pre-defined units makes great sense if you are playing a historically based scenario but for the random games it is not necessary. There is no reason to limit the player's OOB/TO&E choices and I find this flexibility one of the game'sbest features.

Making it an option would be the best situation as long as it included the ability for the player to define what the units consist of and not pre-determined like in CS. If the player can adjust the armor/infantry/arty mix of a "Armored Division" then that would be ideal.

(in reply to wolflars)

Post #: 50

RE: Wish List - 11/7/2007 4:02:25 PM

Vic

Posts: 8262
Joined: 5/17/2004
Status: offline

Actually i tried to do this fixed units approach somewhere between alpha and beta, but i removed it again since the only thing it did was basicly adding an extra layer of administration on top of the game.

Maybe my next game will be unit based though.

(in reply to Max 86)

Post #: 51

RE: Wish List - 11/7/2007 4:31:43 PM

PDiFolco

Posts: 1200
Joined: 10/11/2004
Status: offline

Vic,
You're right from the developper's PoV (obviously)

, but from a player's perspective it's easier to manage a few "unit cadres" in this additional layer and duplicate them at will than having to manage individually all units composition...

(in reply to Vic)

Post #: 52

RE: Wish List - 11/7/2007 5:39:53 PM

JaguarUSF

Posts: 261
Joined: 7/31/2003
From: Jacksonville, FL
Status: offline

Oh, and team randomized games was my other desire. 2v2!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(in reply to PDiFolco)

Post #: 53

RE: Wish List - 11/7/2007 10:55:25 PM

SMK-at-work

Posts: 3396
Joined: 8/28/2000
From: New Zealand
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Westheim

quote:

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

the ability to lock unit composition would be nice....so a division stays a division rather than having the ability to grow and shrink to anything from a company to an army corps!! :)

Link this to the ability to buy only pre-defined units, so all units in a particular scenario are essentially forced to maintain thse compositions.� Allow composition change by expenditure of a relatively small number of PP's....maybe�2-3 or so to change the composition of any 1 unit type.

Disagreeing, heavily. Just why do feel some people the crazy need to limit the possibilities of the game again and again?

this option would allow a game designer to design a scenario in a way that is not possible now - how does that limit anything? It's not compulsory - it's an option - an additional feature - it expands the game!!

AT is a game design tool, so the more possibilities that it has available for scenario design the better IMO.

< Message edited by SMK-at-work -- 11/7/2007 10:58:58 PM >

(in reply to Westheim)

Post #: 54

RE: Wish List - 11/8/2007 1:23:51 AM

Xenomath

Posts: 49
Joined: 10/26/2007
Status: offline

Here is my wish for additional combat options:
- I would like to be able to tell specific front line sub formations to stay in the rear and not to attack to save them for later. This would be useful with scouts in a tank formation or machine guns on attack.
- I would like to be able to tell a unit to withdraw so I have some AP left, especially for artillery formations: move - fire - move back

(in reply to SMK-at-work)

Post #: 55

RE: Wish List - 11/8/2007 2:13:30 AM

rickier65

Posts: 14231
Joined: 4/20/2000
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Xenomath

Here is my wish for additional combat options:
- I would like to be able to tell specific front line sub formations to stay in the rear and not to attack to save them for later. This would be useful with scouts in a tank formation or machine guns on attack.
- I would like to be able to tell a unit to withdraw so I have some AP left, especially for artillery formations: move - fire - move back

could you do the last one by adjusting the retreat %?

Rick

(in reply to Xenomath)

Post #: 56

RE: Wish List - 11/8/2007 7:55:57 AM

SlowHand

Posts: 126
Joined: 11/5/2000
From: Denver, CO
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rick

quote:

ORIGINAL: Xenomath
--- snip ---
- I would like to be able to tell specific front line sub formations to stay in the rear and not to attack to save them for later. This would be useful scouts in a tank formation or machine guns on attack.
- I would like to be able to tell a unit to withdraw so I have some AP left, especially for artillery formations: move - fire - move back

could you do the last one by adjusting the retreat %?

Rick

In part, but any unit so ordered would suffer tough retreat penalties to Readiness and Morale. But Xeno's point (and just about all his points have been very good) about being able to retain APs (Action Points) so Arty can "shoot and scoot" would be a an extremely good tweak.

I also agree that being able to toggle certain unit types to "Frontline" or "Behind Front" depending on your End-of-Turn situation would be very useful ... a chance to preserve certain Unit Types for their optimal role in the event that their Parent Unit gets mauled during your opponent's turn.

But again, only if it's feasible for Victor. Maybe something for AT2?

< Message edited by SlowHand -- 11/8/2007 7:56:32 AM >

(in reply to rickier65)

Post #: 57

RE: Wish List - 11/13/2007 12:56:30 AM

SMK-at-work

Posts: 3396
Joined: 8/28/2000
From: New Zealand
Status: offline

An option to choose historical names & graphics for regimes in random games would be nice....sure we can edit them....but it's a bit of a hassle!

(in reply to SlowHand)

Post #: 58

RE: Wish List - 11/13/2007 2:09:27 AM

tweber

Posts: 1411
Joined: 6/27/2007
Status: offline

quote:

It depends what you are using the game for. Having pre-defined units makes great sense if you are playing a historically based scenario but for the random games it is not necessary. There is no reason to limit the player's OOB/TO&E choices and I find this flexibility one of the game'sbest features.

Making it an option would be the best situation as long as it included the ability for the player to define what the units consist of and not pre-determined like in CS. If the player can adjust the armor/infantry/arty mix of a "Armored Division" then that would be ideal.

I think this could be done with the current editor. Let's say you define an armored unit at 2 tanks and 10 infantry. Make a new sftype that move like a tank, costs more, weighs more, inflicts and takes more damage, and fights like a blend.

(in reply to SMK-at-work)

Post #: 59

RE: Wish List - 11/13/2007 2:22:41 AM

SMK-at-work

Posts: 3396
Joined: 8/28/2000
From: New Zealand
Status: offline

yes but it's a poor solution - you can't "weaken" it by killing off some sub-units, nor could you change the internal composition at some stage.

(in reply to tweber)

Post #: 60