RE: Wish List (Full Version)

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



Message

Mike Scholl -> RE: Wish List (12/5/2006 2:03:00 PM)

Noticed that in the "Bull Run Start" the South begins the game with Cavalry and Field Artillery---while the North has neither. Both sides had these units available at First Manassas..., why "stick it" to the Union?
I could understand if the South had Cavalry in the game and the Union didn't..., their horsemen proved superior (at least in the East) to what the North could field. But the situation was exactly reversed in the matter of Artillery as the Union had the guns, the factories, and the technically trained people to use and maintain them. Giving the North Artillery and the South Cavalry wouldn't be exactly accurate..., but would at least have the right "flavor".

How about bringing in a dose of reality here? Give these units to both sides, or give one side one and it's opponant the other. What you have now is just plain silly...



Airborne82nd -> RE: Wish List (12/5/2006 2:33:29 PM)

I agree with Mike here.  Either take away from the South, or give it to them both. 



gunnergoz -> RE: Wish List (12/5/2006 6:09:02 PM)

I concur that a list of all the buildings in a city would be very useful, so that filter button in the city list sounds good!
As to my earlier request, I'd like to see an option for NATO symbols in the STRATEGIC map, thanks.




histgamer -> RE: Wish List (12/5/2006 6:42:27 PM)

Mike if you didn’t know (at least I believe this to be accurate) at the time of First Bull Run the South had more Field Guns than the north, that advantage didn’t last long obviously however when the war began the south did indeed have an advantage in field artillery. (Though I believe they were still outnumbered or roughly equal at the battle of Bull Run, and all the rebel guns with the exception of something like 3 batteries (or 12 guns) were smoothbores.



gunnergoz -> RE: Wish List (12/5/2006 6:45:40 PM)

Another thing I would appreciate is a unit level symbol (e.g. "XX" or "XXX" in a subordinate unit's container box when one is looking at a province's container box - this way I can tell if the sub-containers are corps or divisions. (Unless I'm missing something when I look at them, I have a hard time telling if my containers are either corps or divisions with any given army container.)



jimwinsor -> RE: Wish List (12/5/2006 6:48:37 PM)

Yeah...I tried to give the North at "Bull Run" it's historic levels of Cav and Arty...but in attribute form.  Brigade Arty represents the guns they had, Brig Cav for the cavalry...

http://www.civilwarhome.com/bullrunbattleorderunion.htm

Now, for the CSA, you notice they had their arty organized in a grand battery of sorts under Beauregard (at least on paper, anyways).  And Stuarts men and other cav units were "Not brigaded" so I felt very comfy giving them their own unit:

http://www.civilwarhome.com/bullrunbattleorderconfed.htm



regularbird -> RE: Wish List (12/5/2006 8:01:29 PM)

is there any way to drill down to the city detail screen from the city list screen?  if not that would be a nice feature.



gunnergoz -> RE: Wish List (12/5/2006 8:23:07 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: regularbird

is there any way to drill down to the city detail screen from the city list screen? if not that would be a nice feature.


I thought I once did that by clicking on the city name on the city list...[&:]



chris0827 -> RE: Wish List (12/5/2006 8:39:45 PM)

The stonewall brigade is in the wrong place. It was in the valley under Johnston not at manassas under Beauregard.



Sytass -> RE: Wish List (12/5/2006 8:53:39 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ryan Jackson

It's a minor thing, and it probably can't be done, but instead of mustered regiments being named 165th Infantry, 215th Infantry, so on, I would like them to be automatically named after the state of origin, like 1st Minnesota, or 12th New York.


I agree that that would be a rather cool touch. :)



gunnergoz -> RE: Wish List (12/5/2006 9:50:08 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sytass

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ryan Jackson

It's a minor thing, and it probably can't be done, but instead of mustered regiments being named 165th Infantry, 215th Infantry, so on, I would like them to be automatically named after the state of origin, like 1st Minnesota, or 12th New York.


I agree that that would be a rather cool touch. :)

A nice "fun" touch, but unrealistic considering that these are brigades of several regiments.



chris0827 -> RE: Wish List (12/5/2006 9:57:47 PM)

How about renaming Fredericksburg to Manassas? Fredericksburg being next to Shenandoah is just wrong.



elmo3 -> RE: Wish List (12/5/2006 10:54:50 PM)

In section 1.6.1 of the manual there are limits placed on the number of brigades each side can have in an Army. I don't believe these numbers are high enough based on historical OOB's. The current Union limit according to the manual is 35 brigades. However the AOP at Antietam had over 50 brigades and at Gettysburg it had over 60 brigades. The numbers for the CSA aren't quite as lopsided but if you factor in the artillery reserve untis for the CSA as brigades you will find their in-game limit of 42 brigades is too low for both of those battles. Please raise the army brigade limits and/or make the numbers moddable by the players. Thanks.



ezjax -> RE: Wish List (12/5/2006 11:37:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Clifford

Thanks for your quick replies... so the backspace works for buildings as long as that was the last keystoke and within that turn? I tried that and I thought nothing happened, it didn't remove the build.... I'll try again. It wouldn't be the first time I missed something...


It should be undoing the build order. Let me know if that's not working.

And remember, the backspace key can be used to undo not only the most recent move/order, but every one since a turn began. Just keep hitting it, and you'll eventually undo everything.



Couldn’t help but jump in here and say I was having a problem with this also and figure out what was going on. If you are in the City Detail Screen (ref1) build something or produce a unit and decide to undo by hitting backspace key nothing happens. You have to drop out of the City Detail Screen , go to the Regular Map NarBar Screen (ref2 ) and then hit the backspace key and then it will undo your last build or produce order. It would be nice if you can undo a build or produce order from within the City Detail Screen.


ref1
[image]http://img461.imageshack.us/img461/9181/fofcityuv9.gif[/image]

ref2
[image]http://img461.imageshack.us/img461/8982/fofnavoc7.gif[/image]



Mike Scholl -> RE: Wish List (12/6/2006 1:15:35 AM)

Is Admiral Farragut in the game. Given the use of Leaders in Combat, the man who took New Orleans and Mobile would seem to rate inclusion.



chris0827 -> RE: Wish List (12/6/2006 1:23:06 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

Is Admiral Farragut in the game. Given the use of Leaders in Combat, the man who took New Orleans and Mobile would seem to rate inclusion.


I wish but he's not. I'm no programer but I wouldn't think it would be that hard to add naval commanders. It also seems that Union forces losing a battle surrender instead of retreating to the ships that carried them. That's a major problem.



histgamer -> RE: Wish List (12/6/2006 1:43:01 AM)

Chris if they are allowed to escape they should suffer massive casulties.

the fact is if an ampib assult is thrown back and the men need to quickly retreat there is no way for them to do so in this day in age. If the firepower of a fleets guns are not enough to save a unit in an ampib assult that unit is doomed as it will be overun before it can withdraw by boat.



chris0827 -> RE: Wish List (12/6/2006 1:46:44 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: flanyboy

Chris if they are allowed to escape they should suffer massive casulties.

the fact is if an ampib assult is thrown back and the men need to quickly retreat there is no way for them to do so in this day in age. If the firepower of a fleets guns are not enough to save a unit in an ampib assult that unit is doomed as it will be overun before it can withdraw by boat.



Name a failed union amphibious assault that suffered massive casualties. And they aren't suffering massive casualties they are being totally annihilated.



jimwinsor -> RE: Wish List (12/6/2006 1:51:03 AM)

No Farrugut or any other naval leaders.  Unfortunately, I agree.

Like CoG before it, the naval game has much room for later improvement, in features patches and such.



Mike Scholl -> RE: Wish List (12/6/2006 3:31:34 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: flanyboy

Chris if they are allowed to escape they should suffer massive casulties.

the fact is if an ampib assult is thrown back and the men need to quickly retreat there is no way for them to do so in this day in age. If the firepower of a fleets guns are not enough to save a unit in an ampib assult that unit is doomed as it will be overun before it can withdraw by boat.



What war are you talking about "flany"? The South had nothing like the numbers needed to man it's coastline like a Pacific Island. Northern landings took place unnapposed in general, and retirements (in the few cases they were made) the same manner.



Mike Scholl -> RE: Wish List (12/6/2006 3:35:26 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jimwinsor

No Farrugut or any other naval leaders.  Unfortunately, I agree.

Like CoG before it, the naval game has much room for later improvement, in features patches and such.



That's what I was afraid of. The Union gets an "unarmed" fleet and loses the most successful leader of the entire war (two campaigns..., two total victories---not even Lee comes close).



histgamer -> RE: Wish List (12/6/2006 5:20:11 AM)

Mike if the south didnt opose the landing how are you losing the entire force?

My piont was at this time in history if an ampib assult was thrown back withdrawing under heavy attack was nearly impossible. *getting on ships under heavy attack that is*



Mike Scholl -> RE: Wish List (12/6/2006 7:12:41 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: flanyboy

Mike if the south didnt opose the landing how are you losing the entire force? Actually, someone else said this

My point was at this time in history if an ampib assult was thrown back withdrawing under heavy attack was nearly impossible. *getting on ships under heavy attack that is* And my point was that in reality the South had no way of bringing "heavy Fire" to bear on anything that didn't land or leave directly in front of a Fort---which was not what the Union did. With 1,000's of miles of coastline to choose from they had no need to. Even failed assults like the 54th Mass. were launched by forces already ashore and with plenty of room to retire to. This isn't Tarawa...




TimoN -> RE: Wish List (12/6/2006 6:34:55 PM)

Siege starts in the first turn with normal siege. This is what the manual (light) says about the normal siege:

Normal – This is the default type of siege. Defending units inside the siege target get an attack against randomly determined besieging units, and besieging
units in the province also each make an attack on the defending units.

The problem is that one defending unit picks randomly one brigade and deals large amount of casualties to it. This amount of casualty is enough to cause that brigade to go below 1000 men strength and usually causes it to disband itself.

My wish is that the damage caused by one defending brigade should be spread out by multiple besieging units. Total amount of damage is ok IMHO.



Mike Scholl -> RE: Wish List (12/6/2006 8:04:47 PM)

How about making "Unknown Leader Stats" a bit less of a "crapshoot"? Generals didn't spring full grown from the forehead of the War Departments..., they had some past life and history to at least make a guess from.

Suppose the "unknown stats" just randomly picked an "estimated rating" to show (in italic) when the leader first appeared. Maybe a 10% chance of being accurate, 25% of being one better, 25% of being one worse, 15% of being 2 better, 15% of being 2 worse, and 5% of being off by three in either direction.
Then you would at least know something about what his true stats were likely to be, but still be guessing on how he might actually work out. When the true rating was revieled, it would no longer be in italics.



regularbird -> RE: Wish List (12/6/2006 9:41:07 PM)

Mike, I kind of like the way it is right now.  I play random-hidden, and most generals have a trait or two already revealed when they enter the game.  I think this represents some kind of a past, or at least it gives you a little info to improve your guess.  As you play more are revealed and then you can decide how much longer his career will last. 



Icedawg -> RE: Wish List (12/6/2006 10:05:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

Now that "Forge of Freedom" has been released, the WCS development team will entertain any and all suggestions regarding tweaks, changes, and even completely new features that can be added in patches. It would be very helpful not to scatter these requests and suggestions across dozens of threads, since they might get overlooked. So, as you play and come up with ideas and observations, please post them here.




How about an option to go into "encircle" mode straight away when starting a siege? In another thread, I've been whining and carrying on about the high casualties I'm taking when initiating a siege. I want to be able to sit back from a safe distance (out of range of the garrison's artillery), block supply from reaching the fort/city and wait for starvation to do its ugly work. I realize I can do this AFTER the first turn, but why not ON the first turn as well?

Half of the forts the CSA player has to take in the July 1861 scenario aren't worth taking if you're going to get slaughtered just setting up your siegeworks. So, until a patch addresses this, I'm going to sacrifice the income from those provinces so I can conserve precious troops.



gunnergoz -> RE: Wish List (12/6/2006 10:22:05 PM)

How about a module where we can set up detailed battles without playiing the strategic mode at all?  Just for practice or for fun?  It would be a nice way to try out some battlefield scenarios too.  Mainly, I'd like to practice more detailed battles to get the hang of them, without losing a war that I worked hard on the strategic side to get right.



Mike Scholl -> RE: Wish List (12/6/2006 10:29:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: regularbird

Mike, I kind of like the way it is right now.  I play random-hidden, and most generals have a trait or two already revealed when they enter the game.  I think this represents some kind of a past, or at least it gives you a little info to improve your guess.  As you play more are revealed and then you can decide how much longer his career will last. 



Then your "vote" probably "cancels" mine..., so you won't have to worry.



dude -> RE: Wish List (12/6/2006 11:05:55 PM)

Along the lines of Generals... having it so that certain generals just weren't good at higher commands would be a nice "hidden" trait.  Sure this guy look great at the division level... let's promote him to corps commander... woops... he sucks there...  You don't have to actually have to change his traits... just a hidden value that says up to what level he's able to command... if you put him into a higher posistion his normal traits would suffer a bit... but if you put him back in charge of a lower command his normal ratings would apply again.





Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.765625