Wish List (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Advanced Tactics Series



Message

pad152 -> Wish List (10/29/2007 1:42:38 AM)

Wish list

Random Games
1. The ability to rename your empire and select the flag/nation icon color.
2. Save last settings for random games.
3. Map wrap option for Random Games (exit west end hex goes to first east of map).
4. Force the player to capture the town/city with a random chance of sucess/failure, just like the old empire game.
5. Option to view random map before forces selection.

Unit Transfer
6. Simplify transfer allow back & forth unit transfer between any two selected units, forget this to/from stuff.

Graphics
7. In Capture the flag scenarios have the flags change to players color when captured.

Scalabliity
8. Option ability to create predefined units (like armor unit, inf unit, etc.) and limit sub-fomation types for unit (armor unit only excepts Tanks, Armored Cars), and limit Unit size ( X - max number of each defined sub unit). This would stop units with value of 999. This would allow you to create unit types not just sub-units. Limiting the unit size would give scenario designers more flexibiliy. Sometimes I fell like I'm playing logistics.

Replacement Option
9. Option to select auto-reinforment options for units, Example: unit 2nd Inf has 20 Rifle, & 4 Trucks, if the auto replacementoption is checked, the unit will receive replacements if the sub-typs (Rifle fall below 20 or Trucks are below 4) and the HQ has the sub-type available.

Production
10. New Expaned Production option for towns (allow towns to expand to cities) and towns that are expanding production can't build anything.

Aircraft Range
11. Show the range of aircraft (hex highlight).

Undo Button
12. Add an undo button in both the transfer screen and for unit movement.



freeboy -> RE: Wish List (10/29/2007 2:03:17 AM)

defensive air settings .. interceptions at sea settings for both air and cv air



TheHellPatrol -> RE: Wish List (10/29/2007 2:08:28 AM)

Cycle unit button or units moved, i know they're grayed out but larger games make it hard to see.
Undead regime with bone catapults and the Warhammer Dark Omen army set.
That's all i ask[&o][:D].



leastonh1 -> RE: Wish List (10/29/2007 2:23:15 AM)

My 2p worth...

1. Yes please/Not that bothered.
2. Why? It's only a dozen sliders to set it up anyway. Takes seconds. "Random" is the keyword [:)]
3. No thank you. If so, please make it a config choice. I'd find it too contrived and confusing, being an old person! [;)]
4. Config choice. It's an interesting one, but wouldn't always be appropriate. Depends on the scenario.
5. Yes please.
6. I don't understand this one. You mean get rid of the slider for selecting the numbers to transfer?
7. Yes please/Not that bothered.
8. Should be editor specific & optional, if at all. Wouldn't forcing that reduce the flexibility? Again, with an engine like this, it's too generic an option to be appropriate for all scenarios.
9. No thank you. If the landcap/seacap points are low and you need them for something else, the AI then takes the choice away from you by using them first. I think this would cause me to micromanage as I'd be watching the landcap points all the time and trying to keep up with overall usage of units produced. I guess this one's a judgement call as to whether you think it would help or hinder. I think the latter.
10. I like this idea as an option.

The thing about some of these suggestions is that they wouldn't work in some situations and would in others. In a WWII scenario, point 8 would probably/possibly make it more "historical", forcing the reproduction of the units present in the real battle. However, in a fantasy scenario or even a random, generic, abstract scenario, this set recipe of units would be detrimental.

Number 9 would be a nightmare, particularly in a big scenario. Lets say you have a frontline somewhere. One of your units with 50 inf & 5 tanks has just taken a beating and is down to 10 inf and 1 tank. Your auto reinforce would take the necessary stock from the relevant HQ. But, lets suppose that unit just reinforced isn't in a hot zone and has local backup anyway. In other words, the reinforcement wasn't vital this turn. However you have one or two other units elsewhere that have also taken a beating and there's nothing left for them to be reinforced with. You've reinforced the wrong unit becaue you delegated control to the AI. How would you be able to prioritise this to make it workable? I can't see it unless you always have enough stock in the HQ to cover every shortfall. And that has never happened to me yet.

Regards,
Jim



Westheim -> RE: Wish List (10/29/2007 9:04:21 AM)

pad152 isn't charmed by the magic of the Tactics games yet. [8D]

There are some things that would fundamentally change the system of the whole game, and therefore should never happen. At least in a good world with at least 1 nice and loving god. That would be numbers 6, 8, 9, and 10.



Awac835 -> RE: Wish List (10/29/2007 9:16:51 AM)

I agree with westheim.

Though you could argue if it should be possible to allow transfering from a unit with no LANDCAP to a unit who has LANDCAP since you would then use its trucks/horses.

But i dont see why a cap is needed for unit size. Super units with a huge stack size gets bombed easy by arty and air and besides if you only have few of these units you will have a hard time covering a front and get concentric bonus i think its called (multiple directions of attack) and if you look in the manual it do constitue the largest single combat modifier going up to a 250% bonus. I find that units even out as you need to balance size vs number of units.

And predefined units??? Why. If you want a panzer division just throw in tanks and then couple it with a few rifles infantry or scouts arcording to the limited weight carry of the armor and you have your armor division.

Also the auto replacements system sure sounds nice. But i often find i have a lack of troops and its not always obvious where i actualy want them to go. and besides if a unit gets a transfer they cant move afterward so i hate to see the computer doing this for me also expending all my landcap which i might rather have used for a strategic transfer.



seille -> RE: Wish List (10/29/2007 10:48:23 AM)

1,2 and 7 is ok, maybe 10 as a additional option on the editor.

For all the other wishes like map wrap itīs probably better to write a new game.
Such a long wish list for such a great game. Unbelievable [&:]
Some of the things you ask for would imho ruin the great game. Transfer works well.
There is absolutely no need to change something. AND i donīt need predefined units to produce.
Itīs great to produce some trucks there, some tanks there and in a other city the infantry.
And let them arrive all in the same HQ to form a new unit following my own wishes. Exact to manage these
part is why i like that game so much.

Replacement option....tststs...would be a nightmare to play with [:(]



SMK-at-work -> RE: Wish List (10/29/2007 11:54:00 PM)

Production - institute a penalty for changing a slot.  It's too easy to change from heavy tanks to infantry, or from light tanks to heavy, or AT to AT-II, etc.

In "real life" such changes were often seriously disrupted and delayed or even abandoned rather than change the production lines - eg the Brits keeping the 2 pdr in production after Dunkirk, the sov's ditching all sorts of advanced weapons and tanks in 1941 (107mm AT gun, heavy tanks armed with the same, T43, T50, T80 and so on)

Reducing production in one slot should not allow you to immediately increase it in another - at the very elast there should be a turn or 2 delay if changing between similar types (eg rifle to Rifle II), and longer delays for greater differences....eg changing from rifle to any kind of vehicle should probably take a minimum of 6 months before anything is available, and the production should probably only slowly increase for at least another 6 months after that....changing to producing naval should take a year or more befoer anythign is available, and then another year after that to get up to full....




Westheim -> RE: Wish List (10/29/2007 11:57:13 PM)

Why does everybody have the strange need to overcomplicate this game?



SMK-at-work -> RE: Wish List (10/30/2007 12:33:27 AM)

Why do some people hate improvements?



pad152 -> RE: Wish List (10/30/2007 12:53:34 AM)

Most of the requests (1-5) are for random games only, I would like the game to be a little more like the old classic - Empire Deluxe!

Map wrap option for random games, what's a matter, all you hexheads here members of the flat earth society? [:D]

I like the game but sometimes I feel like I'm playing logistics command and looking for some ways to help simplify/automate the reinforcement process.









Banquet -> RE: Wish List (10/30/2007 1:00:19 AM)

One suggestion I would have is that some of the mouse clicking be reduced where possible. An example that springs to mind are the times where you're called to select an HQ (creating new unit or strategic movement) In cases such as these it would be great if the nearest appropriate HQ was defaulted so you only had to click space to confirm. You could still pick another HQ instead if necessary. If you're creating 10 new units and each time have to click the same HQ it does add to the clicking required!

As I noted somewhere else I'd also like to see a function when if you're supposed to be selecting an HQ that only HQ's were selectable.. so if the HQ is sitting in a hex with 8 other divisions, you don't have to click through the other 8 to get the HQ in the stack.




seille -> RE: Wish List (10/30/2007 1:03:24 AM)

Jesus, AT is a complex game and thatīs ok.
Nobody said itīs easy and the production management and supply management are a part of the game
Vic exactly wanted work that way. Where is the challenge when i have advisors or automatic routines
for each thing in the game ?
To be honest Empire Deluxe and AT that are two different worlds. Alone the combat in Empire is a bad joke
compaired to AT. And combat was already in Peoples Tactics much better.



leastonh1 -> RE: Wish List (10/30/2007 2:38:00 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: pad152
Map wrap option for random games, what's a matter, all you hexheads here members of the flat earth society? [:D]


Isn't everone? You'll be saying you're one of "those" people who believe the earth is round next!

quote:

ORIGINAL: pad152
I like the game but sometimes I feel like I'm playing logistics command and looking for some ways to help simplify/automate the reinforcement process.


But...how could you automate it? Realistically, practically? It isn't possible without breaking the game. Give the AI control over your reinforcements and you'll be in big trouble very quickly.

Regards,
Jim



Snoman -> RE: Wish List (10/30/2007 2:39:48 AM)

1. Already has this feature.
2. It already does this over the same session. It would be nice if it lasted between sessions.
3. Would be nice aesthetically in some situations, but doesn't really add to gameplay. You can still corner people, and some places will always be far from others, even with the shortcut of map wrapping.
4. I don't get it. Right now you still have to capture cities, but instead of it being random, its determined by how well you attack against the defences that are there. Surely this is better than an arbitrary random chance of success.
5. Again, you can already do this. (provided the random game wasn't created with shroud. but then if it was, you would be cheating.)
6. Not sure what you're saying. Are you saying that you want to be able to transfer negative amounts? (ie transfer back from the destination unit at the same time as you transfer to it?) If so that seems to me you don't get it. The transfer is dependent on the transport assets available at the place you are trying to transfer from.
Add to this the fact that transferring troops away from frontline units is very rare, (usually the flow is in one direction) this feature seems pointless. Don't forget the strategic transfer option that is already there.
7. That would be cool.
8. Again, it seems like you don't get it. Firstly, I can't understand how imposing limits would increase flexibility. Secondly, if you choose to go over the stack limit, you're going to suffer significantly increased losses in all combat actions that your units see, including when they attack.
As it is, if you stick to the limit, you get the most efficient effectiveness out of your troops. If, as the manual says, "the situation will call for the need to take a hex at any cost" then you have the option of going over the limit, at the cost of significantly increased casualties.
Finally, you should lobby the developer to leave unlimited size as a feature, in the hope that your opponent creates 999 value units. They are great targets!
9. This one has been covered. How would you make sure that the right units get your limited resources?
10. I've thought of this one as well, but it takes away the focus of the game, which is combat. Not empire building. Personally, when I get feeling like that I go play Civ IV.



pad152 -> RE: Wish List (10/30/2007 3:06:57 AM)

Snoman

Random Games
1. The ability to rename your empire and select the flag/nation icon color.

Ok, How do you do this?



Snoman -> RE: Wish List (10/30/2007 3:17:22 AM)

1. create random scenario.
2. click edit instead of start.
3. click 'Reg' up the top.
4. select the regime/side to alter in the box on the left.
5. select statistics in the box that appears in the middle labeled 'Property Sheets'.
Ok at this point everything is diplayed for you to change. Mousing over the grey buttons makes a description appear at the top of the screen.
Counter colour is up the top next to an example of the current blank counter.
Name is little lower down.
On the left you can see the large and small versions of your flag. click the button to change them. I suggest that you go into your game directory outside the game first and look at the image files in .\Advanced Tactics\bin\graphics\default\national And find the name of the file you are after first.

When you are done, click the red 'x' on the top left and then hit 'start' to play.

I've yet to figure out how to change your subformation graphics, but I'm working on it.

I've only changed this once, and its about all I can do with the editor, so I hope this helps.

edit:

Figured out how to change subformation graphics.



Westheim -> RE: Wish List (10/30/2007 9:02:19 AM)


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. From the very first moment, AT was not meant to be a Civ-like game, or Empire-like game, or Risk-like (just in case someone wants to bring something like territories to be conquered as a hole up), but as a successor to PT. And therefore it's not intended (or shouldn't be) that the AI delivers your own reinforcements where it thinks they use you best (wait, is that the same AI that is your opponent ...?), or that divisions have set amounts of "ingredients" like "for an infantry division you need 25 rifle, this will take 2.7 turns".

Those ... are NOT improvements ...[:-]



SMK-at-work -> RE: Wish List (10/30/2007 11:54:20 AM)

And they're not what _I_ asked for...none-the-less auto-delivery of reinforcements is not a defining feature of any game I'm aware of - it's a player aid that can be used in almost any game at all.



seille -> RE: Wish List (10/30/2007 1:24:22 PM)

I think SMKīs point 1 did not aim for using the editor for renaming empire/regimes.
I think in a running game itīs impossible. Would be also nice for ladder PBEM games to name
the regimes with player names.

Changing colors of HQīs or renaming HQīs/units is indeed already possible.



Snoman -> RE: Wish List (10/30/2007 1:50:47 PM)

Yeah you're right. Once the game has been set up and started, you can no longer change the name of sides, or flags etc.
I guess if some of the things (ie regime names/flags/unit counter clours) in the scenario editor were still available once a scenario was started, that could work. The problem i guess is that at the moment its all or nothing. You can change anything at all in the editor, but if you allow the editor to be accessed in-game it would be an incredibly tempting opportunity for some ppl to cheat in multiplayer games, so its disabled.
And so it is that changes cant be made to ladder games.
hmm, I think the problem is the anticheating vs ability-to-edit-everything compromise. Vic landed on the side of preventing cheating I guess.
The only solution I see is to add another layer of editing options that only affect things inconsequential to the outcome of combat, that is available even when the full editor is not.

I agree that would be nice, but personally I'm not overly worried.

Sorry if ramble on a bit.[8|]



Franky007 -> RE: Wish List (10/30/2007 2:48:57 PM)

A few suggestions for the mouse:

Enable the mouse wheel to scroll the list in the Transfer screen.
The right mouse button could be used to exit from all menu.
The middle button could be used as a Move shortcut.



Vic -> RE: Wish List (10/30/2007 4:23:14 PM)

@all,

i am reading all these suggestions and making notes.

but the first patch and probably the second patch will focus on bugs and fixes.

i am planning to do a bigger patch with some feature improvements in like a month or 1 or 2.

kind regards,
Vic



ravinhood -> RE: Wish List (10/30/2007 6:58:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

Why do some people hate improvements?



Why this need almost immediately after any game is released for some people to have this need to sit in the developers chair when they didn't put a dime of money into the development and buying the game doesn't count or give you that right after product is released? It's like telling the farmer how to farm after one has bought produce or milk or beef. It's like telling a band how to play after going to a concert. I guess nobody stops to think that others might not like your ideas either. lol



cdbeck -> RE: Wish List (10/30/2007 7:05:04 PM)

I would like a randomize button for the elements on the random scenario screen (be able to randomize rivers, mountains, forests, etc). Sure, I could get out some dice and roll myself, but that requires effort!

Otherwise, no changes to production and supply for me, I likes it as its is, simple -- I don't want another carbon copy of TOAW.

SoM



leastonh1 -> RE: Wish List (10/30/2007 7:05:10 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ravinhood
Why this need almost immediately after any game is released for some people to have this need to sit in the developers chair when they didn't put a dime of money into the development and buying the game doesn't count or give you that right after product is released? It's like telling the farmer how to farm after one has bought produce or milk or beef. It's like telling a band how to play after going to a concert. I guess nobody stops to think that others might not like your ideas either. lol


Seconded! I can't believe it, but I actually agree with ravinhood on this one!! [;)]

Although, I'm not sure I'd have been quite so blunt.



Banquet -> RE: Wish List (11/2/2007 9:23:41 PM)

Just an idea, but would it be possible to include an option, in the random games, to have say 1/3 of the towns already under the control of each player at the start (assuming a 2 player game) with the last 1/3 of towns in the middle uncontrolled like a kind of no-man's land?

That way you could start with some kind of frontline. The current random maps where you start with just one town are great fun and do evoke the Empire spirit.. but sometimes they are won and lost with no clear frontline and often without the whole map being uncovered if playing with shrouded map option.

If there were more than 2 players then the towns could be divided between each player, with still a percentage of towns uncontrolled in the middle up for grabs.

I would only suggest this as an option in the random setup screen.



dave74 -> RE: Wish List (11/2/2007 9:34:47 PM)


I agree with this one or maybee an option when you can designate a number of starting towns for each regime?



EagleMountainDK -> RE: Wish List (11/2/2007 10:20:05 PM)

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.



ravinhood -> RE: Wish List (11/2/2007 10:26:05 PM)

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.



Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.03125