CLGA volume 2 (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Napoleonics] >> Campaigns on the Danube 1805 - 1809



Message

FrankHunter -> CLGA volume 2 (5/6/2007 10:40:47 PM)

Just wanted to post a note to say that the second game in this series will start playtesting in roughly 6 weeks.

Whereas Danube had several scenarios it was essentially 2 campaigns (1805 and 1809). Volume 2 is 5 campaigns with a couple of scenarios per campaign. The campaigns are 1806, Winter 1807, Summer 1807, Spring 1813 and Autumn 1813.

The biggest change from volume 1 is the battle system. More info to follow on that later.

I apologize for the long wait between volume 1 and 2!



MilRevKo -> RE: CLGA volume 2 (5/7/2007 1:23:38 PM)

I have had the game for a few years and played it through close to ten times.  Let me know it you need a playtester.

Sincerely,



argaur -> RE: CLGA volume 2 (5/8/2007 2:05:25 PM)

great news! superb!



gazfun -> RE: CLGA volume 2 (5/12/2007 1:36:18 AM)

Will volume 2 have the option to reinput figures from a Minitures battle results?
And if so I have a few thoughts about making it a more than 2 player Campaign system, as a 2 players system even though it can involve more than 2 in a battle 1 player per Corps for example, the other players dont get any sense of involvement in the Campaign System, at least that option is not available in COTD now.
I have run COTD several times using a Popular software for resolving battles, but as far as trying to involve more than 2 people, in a great campaign system as this, is very difficult at the moment, I would think that if we had the option of involving more players, it would entertain more people, say to at least 4, to 6 and at the utmost one player per corps.
Would like to assist in testing with you.



FrankHunter -> RE: CLGA volume 2 (5/12/2007 6:11:57 AM)

The problem is that the game puts you in the role of Army commander, not a corps commander.  It would require a different game system to put the player in the role of corps commander.  Because as you've pointed out the current system is two-player.

Such a multi-player game of player controleld corps commanders though would probably be good for online play.



gazfun -> RE: CLGA volume 2 (5/16/2007 11:07:18 AM)

Yes online play through PBEM
Or better still TCP/IP



gazfun -> RE: CLGA volume 2 (5/18/2007 11:56:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: FrankHunter

The problem is that the game puts you in the role of Army commander, not a corps commander.  It would require a different game system to put the player in the role of corps commander.  Because as you've pointed out the current system is two-player.

Such a multi-player game of player controleld corps commanders though would probably be good for online play.


And as far as inputting data form a minitures battle? you didnt mention that



mpa541 -> RE: CLGA volume 2 (5/23/2007 2:03:51 PM)

Congrats on Version 2. Our group loves COTD. We have used it for miniature battles a number of times. Can I suggest that the outputting of OB's and scenario data to an extranal file that can be printed and used for the miniatures game...present system involves lots of scribbling notes down off the screen.

Again if you want any help with PT, especially minaitures input and output we are your guys.

Mike



FrankHunter -> RE: CLGA volume 2 (5/25/2007 10:26:42 PM)

The miniatures system I wasn't sure about including.  I probably will end up leaving it in if I can (there have been some changes which might impact it) and if I do I will switch to a text file that can be printed out.




mpa541 -> RE: CLGA volume 2 (5/26/2007 12:41:56 PM)

Hi Frank,

I think the miniatures system is a really big plus for this game. Its the main reason why I purchased the first version, and I'm always after more of the same. basically if someone puts a miniatures system into a wwargame campaign engine I'll buy it (and use it)...campaigns are such a great way to generate table top battles...but can be such a drag to administer...computer games such as COTD solve this problem for us....Please don't drop it from version 2!

Mike



dwinston -> RE: CLGA volume 2 (6/6/2007 10:49:37 PM)

Frank - any changes from volume 1?



1NWCG -> RE: CLGA volume 2 (6/15/2007 12:53:05 PM)

Congrats! I do hope some of the install issues are worked out in this one...I love it otherwise.



LaFey -> RE: CLGA volume 2 (6/19/2007 3:43:53 AM)

I receive these news with mixed emotions - I only wish the game is properly tested before release this time around. I personally won't buy it as soon as it is released like I did last time - I'll wait for some feedback from other customers.

Otherwise - great news. [:)]



FrankHunter -> RE: CLGA volume 2 (7/13/2007 7:20:39 AM)

Hi, I doubt testing will be a problem this time around.  I'm certainly not in any rush to release it.

Miniatures, can't promise that module will be in version 2.  I can definitely say it won't be in in its present form.  It has to be made better or dumped.  It was in the first game more as an unsupported add-on.  Sort of a "if this works, its a bonus".  If I include it again it has to work better.

There are changes from version 1.  The big one being the battle system.  I'll detail that later but suffice to say that area has been completely redone.



mpa541 -> RE: CLGA volume 2 (7/13/2007 7:38:56 AM)

Hi Frank,

please try for the miniatures system...assuming its dosen't cause crashes even the version 1 system is better than no system...in the end players who don't want the feature will never click the option and those that do will put up with an average interface because its the feature they are after not the beautiful interface.

anyway thats my 2c on the topic.

keep up the good work,

Mike



FrankHunter -> RE: CLGA volume 2 (7/13/2007 7:54:46 AM)

I'm just glad to hear someone actually uses it.  I had toyed with the idea of auto-converting the data directly to popular rule systems such as Grande Armee, Volley & Bayonet, Polemos etc but ened up leaving that to the players.



mpa541 -> RE: CLGA volume 2 (7/13/2007 11:23:13 AM)

I don't think that a conversion system is needed, people will generally scale their battles anyway based on the miniatures they have avaliable. I think the main things need to be troop numbers, relative quality (any old scale will do), campaign factors such as low supply/fatigue etc. Its up to the players what they do with this information...as long as all the players concerned are happy it makes no difference if the information is used or not. I really like the way the COTD(V1) gives arrival times for supporting formations...this is a really great feature and often causes head aches for setup games.

The only other information I would like is some terrain details...but again this is not super significant, V1 system is fine.

As I mention before, a text file, or even and xml sheet that the info can be printed from/updated would be great.

regards,

mike



Lascaris -> RE: CLGA volume 2 (7/15/2007 6:49:33 AM)

I'd like to add another vote for including the miniatures combat option in the future game. It was one of the major selling points for buying CotD.




*Lava* -> RE: CLGA volume 2 (7/15/2007 2:20:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: FrankHunter

Just wanted to post a note to say that the second game in this series will start playtesting in roughly 6 weeks.


Excellent news!

As Army commander I assume maneuver units will be corps. Will there also be independent divisions? Also... what zoom levels will be available, if any?

Definitely looking forward to the game and am a sure buy.

As for the miniatures system. As far as I know you are just about the only person who supports this. If at all possible, please don't give up on it. It almost certainly would be a major feature of any new ACW game you might one day make... and probably get a whole lot more use.

Either way... great news!

Hope you and the family are well.

Ray (alias Lava)



Windfire -> RE: CLGA volume 2 (7/18/2007 3:31:18 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mpa541

I don't think that a conversion system is needed, people will generally scale their battles anyway based on the miniatures they have avaliable. I think the main things need to be troop numbers, relative quality (any old scale will do), campaign factors such as low supply/fatigue etc. Its up to the players what they do with this information...as long as all the players concerned are happy it makes no difference if the information is used or not. I really like the way the COTD(V1) gives arrival times for supporting formations...this is a really great feature and often causes head aches for setup games.

The only other information I would like is some terrain details...but again this is not super significant, V1 system is fine.

As I mention before, a text file, or even and xml sheet that the info can be printed from/updated would be great.

regards,

mike


Agree with all of the above. I would also like to see the ability to use miniatures retained.

Paul



gazfun -> RE: CLGA volume 2 (7/21/2007 6:30:51 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: FrankHunter

Hi, I doubt testing will be a problem this time around.  I'm certainly not in any rush to release it.

Miniatures, can't promise that module will be in version 2.  I can definitely say it won't be in in its present form.  It has to be made better or dumped.  It was in the first game more as an unsupported add-on.  Sort of a "if this works, its a bonus".  If I include it again it has to work better.

There are changes from version 1.  The big one being the battle system.  I'll detail that later but suffice to say that area has been completely redone.


Thats one of the reasons I bought this, was for minitures battles, please try and include this in the next release, and there are a lot more people than you think who buy it for the same reasons let me assure you



paulferris1964 -> RE: CLGA volume 2 (7/21/2007 9:46:14 AM)


Another vote for the miniatures function - in whatever form you can include it, Frank. This is the MAIN reason I would buy CLGA Vol. 2....



FrankHunter -> RE: CLGA volume 2 (7/22/2007 4:14:50 AM)

Thanks for all those comments guys.  I'll certainly give the mini system my best shot.  The biggest hurdle is that combat now takes place throughout the day (one round) instead of a multi-round battle at the end.







mpa541 -> RE: CLGA volume 2 (7/22/2007 7:07:51 AM)

Hi Frank,

can you explain a bit more why this is a problem.

would a potential solution be that a list of battles to be fought could be generated and then the user could select which are miniatures and which are system resolved?

Do the results of an early battles (ie morning) have impacts on later(ie Afternoon) movements/battles?

just keen to understand.

thanks

Mike



FrankHunter -> RE: CLGA volume 2 (7/22/2007 10:07:37 AM)

The old combat system was called only at the end of the day so it wasn't a huge issue to allow the player to resolve those battles off-line.

Now however,  the battle system is integrated into the hour by hour sequence of play.  A battle can run throughout the day.  Let's say on Day 5 around 3:00pm a French force contacts a Coalition force.  The initial round proceeds without a human decision, the units involved act based on their contact order.  Let's say the French in this case have a large cavalry advantage and they're on an offensive order so they try to overrun the enemy force.  If the enemy force is too strong the overrun fails and both sides remain in the hex until the next combat phase.  By then let's say more forces have entered the hex.  Sides with offensive orders will check to see if they have a manpower advantage that will allow them to force the enemy from the hex.  If they don't both sides will begin to deploy for battle. 

As it takes two rounds to fully deploy the battle won't begin till the morning of Day 6.  At 6am is the first battle phase.  Unlike the old system you no longer select a battle strategy.  Instead you decide which units to commit, and if attacking, the intensity.  The next combat round is at 9am.  The player at this time gets the results of the 6am round and can commit more units and see if any units have broken or are becoming too tired to continue.

So as you can see, I could still allow the player to resolve a battle offline but it would now be only a round before results would have to be entered back into the game.  Hard to let the player resolve the entire battle offline without the game running as the game wouldn't know yet if any reinforcements entered the battle etc.

I'll have to give this some thought.  Any ideas?



mpa541 -> RE: CLGA volume 2 (7/22/2007 11:59:11 AM)

Ok,

I'll have a try....

Step 1. as describes where the computer actually decides if there is a battle...no human input..keep it that way...no micro management!

Step 2. Forces deploy for battle (2 phases as described). At this stage you could ask for off table. If off table then the computer needs to decide which forces are currently avliable and which forces might arrive (based on order etc.) I would think that your existing procedure for determining who might arrive could be used.

Step 3. Players collect a force list and play the battle. This would include a schedule for reserves etc, including condition...if Ney's Corps was on aggressive orders then I could imagine they might arrive via forced march and be not in much condition to fight! Again I like the option of the computer determining the schedule of this...In the games of COTD we played in our group I often kept the reinforcement schedule secret from the players (at least very vague)

Step 4. Players enter battle details. (finishing time units and fatigue etc.)

Step 5. computer then continues to process the day taking into account the details entered by the player.

Might it be possible for the computer to do a "run through" for the day to determine the potential battles which exist and then allow the players to select the battles which will be done off game. From a personal stand point I don't want to fight every single engagement from the campaign...just the more interesting ones, so its unlikely that I would pick every single battle for off game.

I don't think it is a problem for the game to "suspend" while the battle is resolved...players are picking miniatures....they want to play with the toys, so will expect things to stop while they have their game...if they want things to move along then they will not select miniatures!

Not sure of the implications of the timing. ie. if there are 2 battles running in hexes that are relatively close then I can see a problem...simulation of Auerstedt/Jena. But maybe battle that are that close should be run off game entirely...ie if the players select that battle for off game...then the surrounding hex battles are included.

Anyway, there are a few thoughts. I'm really keen to help out, so let us know how to help.

regards,

Mike



arichbourg -> RE: CLGA volume 2 (12/7/2007 1:58:53 AM)

Quick question for Frank. I stopped playing COTD mainly because attacking from 2 sides (such as front and rear) had (iirc) no effect on combat. Will this ever be "fixed" in this game and does it feature in CLGA vol 2?



FrankHunter -> RE: CLGA volume 2 (12/7/2007 10:54:56 AM)

Just to let anyone know that is following this game, I've been working on it whenever not busy with Guns of August.  Hopefully I will get testing going early in the new year.

Some good ideas there mpa541, I'll be coming back to the off-system resoltuion later.

arichbourg, I'm actually still working on the combat system but unlike the original game the battle does keep track of what direction units entered the battle hex.  So in answer to the question "will this be fixed" I can say probably.


Just as an aside, for the graphics would you guys prefer a game map like the Danube game or a map that looks more like a regular map?






Arthur Wellesley -> RE: CLGA volume 2 (1/22/2008 9:17:27 PM)

Hi,

any news???

I would prefer a regular map or something like the map from AGEods Napoleon's Campaigns.



Alan Sharif -> RE: CLGA volume 2 (1/23/2008 3:36:52 PM)

Excellent news. I am really looking forward to this title. Frank I understand you once produced a game on the US Civil War. Can you, or anyone else here, tell me the title and if anyone knows, where I might find a copy. GoA was so good I am buying your previous titles like CLGA (which I enjoyed also) and I hope, your US Civil War Game.



Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.015991