RE: Do you play detailed battles?

RE: Do you play detailed battles? (Full Version)

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

[Poll]

Do you play detailed battles?

I never fight detailed battles

24% (41)

I sometimes fight detailed battles

27% (45)

I usually fight detailed battles

32% (53)

I always fight detailed battles

15% (26)

Total Votes : 165

(last vote on : 1/14/2016 5:10:05 PM)
(Poll will run till: -- )

Message

cesteman -> RE: Do you play detailed battles? (4/14/2007 1:27:22 AM)
I am only playing as Sgt right now so I do not use the detailed combat as of yet. I am still trying to learn the game. I don't even know if there's an option to play a detailed battle or skip it with a quick one (not there yet!). Christian

Kingnothinb -> RE: Do you play detailed battles? (4/17/2007 1:53:14 AM)
I would play detailed if there was a prebattle set up phase. Having my divisions scattered all over just drives me nuts.

Erik Rutins -> RE: Do you play detailed battles? (4/17/2007 2:46:43 AM)
Hey King, Note that as your divisions get better, they actually do have a chance of a pre-battle setup.

Kingnothinb -> RE: Do you play detailed battles? (4/17/2007 8:18:38 PM)
oh yeah? Interesting... Is that a function of the command staff? Time to read the manual. [:)]

Walloc -> RE: Do you play detailed battles? (4/17/2007 11:36:36 PM)
For every level of command rating a container has a added 10% chance of u getting the choice where to place it pre battle. Superb having a 80% chance if u so lucky to get those [:)] Kind regards, Rasmus

Odox -> RE: Do you play detailed battles? (4/18/2007 4:42:07 AM)
Gentlemen, I have to confess I also don't do detailed combat in FOF, for the simple reason that's not why I bought the game. As I'm sure everyone recognizes, to have a strategic-level American Civil War game is outstanding. The fact that you have even attempted to do this is phenominal, and that you've actually made a very respectable 'go' of it is wonderful. My hat is off to you all. To be honest, 'hex wars' harken back to my early days and playing so many of the Avalon Hill-type wargames. With the advent of the computer, I'd hoped we would be seeing the last of hexes et al. Especially with such excellent examples as Sid Meier's Gettysburg/Antietam/South Mountain and (for my money) Mad Minute Games' Take Command Second Manassas, it demonstrates what can be done with the computer. I can't stress this enough - that I mean no disrespect - but I don't play hex wars in FOF simply because there are much superior wargames that handle the tactical level. In the end, I see the detailed combat option as just that, one option among many. I am not circuitously meaning to imply there are any changes that I advocate for FOF. Perish the thought! But to reiterate, that's not why I bought the game. You Norb and Adam have done an outstanding job; far be it for me to aim any criticism directly or indirectly when I have such an exceptional game as is. I have absolutely no criticism whatsoever, and will not presume to question in any way the way the game is designed. You have my gratitude and respect. With abiding admiration, Odox

Gray_Lensman -> RE: Do you play detailed battles? (4/18/2007 6:23:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Odox <snip> I can't stress this enough - that I mean no disrespect - but I don't play hex wars in FOF simply because there are much superior wargames that handle the tactical level. <snip> Wouldn't it be cool if somehow they could utilize a Rome Total War/Medievil Total War campaign style map and somehow blend the currently developed tactical rules onto more of a 3-D tactical battlefield? Just a thought... maybe next after FOF...

Queeg -> RE: Do you play detailed battles? (4/21/2007 3:52:31 AM)
I frankly don't have time to play the detailed battles. A challenging campaign game soaks up all the time I have to play. (On a side note: Are the quick battle results with the beta patch less lopsided than in the initial release? The frequent 5000 to 50 outcomes really bugged me.)

Erik Rutins -> RE: Do you play detailed battles? (4/21/2007 7:15:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Queeg (On a side note: Are the quick battle results with the beta patch less lopsided than in the initial release? The frequent 5000 to 50 outcomes really bugged me.) Yes, that's an issue of the past now.

Gil R. -> RE: Do you play detailed battles? (6/15/2007 1:13:20 AM)
(Bump)

Jam_USMC -> RE: Do you play detailed battles? (6/16/2007 12:19:44 AM)
Still waiting for the day when we can play a game with Fof type strategy and TC2M type tactical battles[sm=innocent0009.gif].......................................................I'm only in my thirties.

terje439 -> RE: Do you play detailed battles? (6/16/2007 1:46:03 AM)
I always play detailed battles, as IMHO the best tactic for the CSA is to eliminate as many union battalions as possible, and this is best done in detailed battle. Surround-attack-accept their surrender, repeat. Although the north have a better capacity for producing troops it does not matter as long as I am able to force some 5-10 battalions to surrender every turn. About the ability to setup before the battle... I feel that said ability is poor at best (sorry but my honest oppinion). If I could place each battalion myself instead of having to move them a division at a time it would be better, the reason being that when I move my div's, the AI seems to believe that I want to place my supply unit as a spearhead (aka front unit)...Beside the battalions of the moved Div gets way too stacked IMHO.

Gil R. -> RE: Do you play detailed battles? (6/16/2007 2:26:52 AM)
I rarely use group-move, so I haven't observed this business of the supply getting out front. Are others experiencing this regularly, too? If so, it makes sense to see if that can be changed.

terje439 -> RE: Do you play detailed battles? (6/16/2007 4:45:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Gil R. I rarely use group-move, so I haven't observed this business of the supply getting out front. Is there any other way to move them "pre battle" than moving the entire division? That is all I am allowed to do atleast, if I move the first active unit of a Div, than all its units are moved to its location as well. And not sure if this is working as intended or if it is a bug, but when about to chose a starting location for a Div, if I right-click (so that the active unit changes standing), I get to place my Divs furter up the front. If battles are set to "close" this allows me to place my Divs behind the enemy troops. Well an easy way to capture those yank brigades, but seems kinda wrong to me thou. Terje

ericbabe -> RE: Do you play detailed battles? (6/20/2007 4:58:03 PM)
With the "near start" option, the division move at the start of battle should move your troops behind your own other starting troops, not behind enemy troops. The only other complaints we've had about this behavior is that when you reposition them they end up being too far back from the main line, not too far forward, though I can imagine there might be situations in which they are sometimes too forward.

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

2.171875