Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Proposal of improvements list

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Age of Muskets] >> Horse and Musket: Volume I, Frederick the Great >> Proposal of improvements list Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Proposal of improvements list - 10/18/2006 5:17:21 PM   
Iñaki Harrizabalagatar


Posts: 825
Joined: 12/11/2001
Status: offline 		Hi
This is a list I have worked out together with Howard Jones, both of us have a lot of experience in the H&M 2 game, in PBEM as well as in designing scenarios, so we decided to make this contribution in the hope a game we love wil improve and get better.

Proposal for improvements

1) 1 turn in a single move. This is a must for PBEM, right now every turn requires an inordinate number of moves. A real turn system Igo/Ugo style should be implemented.
2) Activation leaders system should be replaced by something better, my idea is some kind of partial activation, with limited movement and rallying capacity.
3) Path of routing units needs to be fixed, too many times units rout behind enemy lines
4) Leader radius of influence should be blocked by enemy units, so that you can´t rally units behind enemy lines
5) A more rigid command structure that makes use of historical formations. As the game is now, you can move individual battalions without regard for the division formation,, so that battlelines are not practical in games. My idea would be something along the lines of the Great Ancient Battles game, in which there was a limited number of individual units that could be moved by the leader, and then there was a formation movement, in which a division moved like a single unit. Formation movement would be so encouraged as opposed to individual battalions dancing around.
6) Limit random factor in game calculations, right now it is way too high, making design features irrelevant, I have made a number of scenarios for H&M 2 and I posted about it in the Shrapnel forum.
7) Column formations are used too liberally in the game, it should be a formation for deployment, but once deployed in line units should not be allowed to redeploy in column. Besides, Battalions should march in column of columns, id est, in some kind of divisional formation.
8) Another point on rallying units: reading about C18 battles, one has the distinct impression that, although some units endured a lot more punishment than others before they broke, it was never easy to rally a routed unit (i.e. troops whose fear of the enemy had swamped their fear of their own officers & NCOs, leading to the crucial breakdown in discipline and flight to the rear), and almost impossible to rally the same unit more than once. If this were built into the game, it would discourage the casual use of assault tactics on the assumption that routed units could always be rallied subsequently (I plead guilty to this myself!)
9) It would also be good to have some operational structure around the individual battles (a Campaign Game, in effect), thus discouraging players from bleeding their army to death in any single engagement.
10) Please get rid of the ‘charge fire’ for infantry attacked by cavalry: ordinary defensive fire really is enough! How slowly are those horses moving?! Besides, infantry firing cavalry has a bonus because of the size of the target, however the speed of cavalry charging should offset that in comparison to infantry.
Post #: 1
RE: Proposal of improvements list - 10/18/2006 9:17:05 PM   
Tim Coakley

 

Posts: 457
Joined: 1/28/2005
Status: offline 		Inaki,
very good suggestions. I think they all will be addressed in any release (campaign game would be down the road).
1) Will look at 1 file transfer for PBEM
2) Reviewing the activation system...may allow minor adjustments or an aurto rally.
3) OK
4) very good suggestion
5)will look at this
6) will review as well
7) will have attack column to diferentiate
8) will work a combat fatigue system that limits morale for units that have routed previously...will make them more brittle
9) in due time :)
10) will review

(in reply to Iñaki Harrizabalagatar)
Post #: 2
RE: Proposal of improvements list - 10/19/2006 12:34:20 AM   
AndyfromVA1

 

Posts: 34
Joined: 7/8/2006
Status: offline 		Please work on the graphics. They really do need upgrading to at least HPS standards.

(in reply to Tim Coakley)
Post #: 3
RE: Proposal of improvements list - 10/19/2006 2:28:22 AM   
sol_invictus


Posts: 1961
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: Kentucky
Status: offline 		A new formation is needed for units deployed in a redoubt/town, such as Disordered, Dispersed. or Loose Formation. I always hate having an Infantry Battalion deployed in Line while defending a Town hex. Great to see this series getting a makeover.

_____________________________

"The fruit of too much liberty is slavery", Cicero

(in reply to AndyfromVA1)
Post #: 4
RE: Proposal of improvements list - 10/19/2006 8:21:02 AM   
Magnus

 

Posts: 299
Joined: 9/9/2005
From: Sweden
Status: offline 		Are we talking HnM2 here or HnM1? It is me who did the art for HnM2. Better graphics yes it's on the list, my suggestion is larger scaled units along with buildings and trees. Larger hexes to accomodiate this, still keep the animations that is in HnM2.

HPS standards? Hey I will by far supercede that :)

(in reply to sol_invictus)
Post #: 5
RE: Proposal of improvements list - 10/19/2006 9:44:59 AM   
Hentzau


Posts: 161
Joined: 8/31/2004
Status: offline 		Graphics seem fine to me, sort of artistic which I like.

(in reply to Magnus)
Post #: 6
RE: Proposal of improvements list - 10/19/2006 10:50:08 AM   
Iñaki Harrizabalagatar


Posts: 825
Joined: 12/11/2001
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Double Shot Design

Inaki,
very good suggestions. I think they all will be addressed in any release (campaign game would be down the road).
1) Will look at 1 file transfer for PBEM
2) Reviewing the activation system...may allow minor adjustments or an aurto rally.
3) OK
4) very good suggestion
5)will look at this
6) will review as well
7) will have attack column to diferentiate
8) will work a combat fatigue system that limits morale for units that have routed previously...will make them more brittle
9) in due time :)
10) will review

Thanks for the swift answer
In general, the game mechanics is about units routing rather easily, and then rallying rather easily as well, that is another reason why battlelines in games are impossible to maintain A game in which units suffer a slower attrition before routing, and then would be harder to rally would be probably more historical and more satisfactory from a gameplay point of view.
I forgot to add another request, in H&M 1 there was a percentage loss of the army that decided when the battle was over. That didn´t work, as many times didn´t reflect how battle was going on, you could hit the loss mark just when you were breaking the enemy, for instance, but most of the times battle was still undecided when it happened.
In H&M 2 there was a penalty to pass the percentage loss, but the battle still could go on. The penlty was rather mild and my experience with PBEM games is that they could go until the last turn and being decided on vivtory locations, by then very few Battalions stand, most are routing all along the map, and the losses are well over 50%, which is not very historical.
I would like to see here some sort of moral level for each army, taking hits for routing units and at the same time making the more that level is lowered the more brittle units become in a feedback process, so that by the time a player hits the low morale mark he is clearly losing the battle.

Edit: Another "bug" I forgot to mention is that, contrary to logic, skirmishers were very effective defending against cavalry.
Another annoyance in game was that it was difficult many times to see the type of terrain a unit was standing on, so that many times i have tried to charge an enemy unit with a cavalry unit only to find I could not because it was on a forest hex.


< Message edited by Iñaki Harrizabalagatar -- 10/19/2006 11:32:27 AM >

(in reply to Tim Coakley)
Post #: 7
RE: Proposal of improvements list - 10/19/2006 10:59:45 AM   
Iñaki Harrizabalagatar


Posts: 825
Joined: 12/11/2001
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: karoliner72

Are we talking HnM2 here or HnM1? It is me who did the art for HnM2. Better graphics yes it's on the list, my suggestion is larger scaled units along with buildings and trees. Larger hexes to accomodiate this, still keep the animations that is in HnM2.

HPS standards? Hey I will by far supercede that :)

Magnus
I do agree with the large scale, but not with the animations, I think most players turn them off as mcuh as possible once they have seen them the first time, especially those movement animations that slow down moves, after the first time it is not fun wait minutes to move a number of battalions because they are performing those animations.
I think we wargamers love the historical detail, and that could be done in larger graphics, but could do without the eyecandy that other type of games require to appeal their audiences.


(in reply to Magnus)
Post #: 8
RE: Proposal of improvements list - 10/19/2006 11:25:26 AM   
Iñaki Harrizabalagatar


Posts: 825
Joined: 12/11/2001
Status: offline 		The editor in H&M 2 is probably the best part of the game, it is very flexible, as almost any aspect of the game could be edited. If more formations are included, like the attack column, and graphics are made easy to edit, almost any battle prior to WW1 could be modelled, so that a larger audience than XVIII century warfare fans could be atracted to the game.
I remember though some minor annoyances with fortification graphics, they were difficult to place. Probably some other graphics and terrains could be added as well, but in all it is very good, and the colors changing with season are a good touch.

(in reply to Iñaki Harrizabalagatar)
Post #: 9
RE: Proposal of improvements list - 10/19/2006 2:53:43 PM   
Magnus

 

Posts: 299
Joined: 9/9/2005
From: Sweden
Status: offline 		Actually better up is to add an option that you can turn off the animations if you want and activate them if you want.

As for terrain graphics, with larger hexes the terrain would be much more detailed and we could include far more terrain types than we have now. Also larger scaled trees and buildings to make the game look more realistic in scale with the units. I have very good ideas in my head how to achieve this, graphically it is easy. I can make the graphics much much better with larger scales to use. So I hope we can do this.

< Message edited by karoliner72 -- 10/19/2006 2:57:10 PM >

(in reply to Iñaki Harrizabalagatar)
Post #: 10
RE: Proposal of improvements list - 10/19/2006 3:08:56 PM   
AndyfromVA1

 

Posts: 34
Joined: 7/8/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: karoliner72

Actually better up is to add an option that you can turn off the animations if you want and activate them if you want.

As for terrain graphics, with larger hexes the terrain would be much more detailed and we could include far more terrain types than we have now. Also larger scaled trees and buildings to make the game look more realistic in scale with the units. I have very good ideas in my head how to achieve this, graphically it is easy. I can make the graphics much much better with larger scales to use. So I hope we can do this.


The unit graphics in H&M2 are much improved over H&M1, but the terrain graphics continue to be a problem. If you can substantially improve them with more realistic colors, more variation in the ground, more realistic trees, water, hills, houses, towns, forts, it would add a lot to the look of the game.

(in reply to Magnus)
Post #: 11
RE: Proposal of improvements list - 10/19/2006 8:44:11 PM   
Tim Coakley

 

Posts: 457
Joined: 1/28/2005
Status: offline 		Lots of good suggestions keep on posting.

Some thoughts:

Graphics- looking to make the hex bigger as Magnus noted. Will allow for more detail...also will expand the terrain types. I do want to keep the "miniatures" feel, so you will not see "realistic" terrain.

Formations- will have a "defensive" formation much like a square...but with the intent of holding broken terrain, forts, towns...

Animation- will have a toggle

Withdrawl %- I want to combine the ideas from the HnM games...have a base value for where you lose a Victory level (pyyric victory) and another lower level that is the "army routed" game ending value.

Retreat/rout- (and battle lines) I am planning on 5 levels of leaders...this will allow for more Rally Points....the player will be able to keep units in line better, but it only goes so far. Lines did often break, causing wholesale panic.


Regards,
Tim

(in reply to Iñaki Harrizabalagatar)
Post #: 12
RE: Proposal of improvements list - 10/19/2006 9:45:59 PM   
Magnus

 

Posts: 299
Joined: 9/9/2005
From: Sweden
Status: offline 		Good suggestions Tim. Hmm I agree with keeping the miniature feel. However a little more realistic terrain wouldn't hurt I think.

(in reply to Tim Coakley)
Post #: 13
RE: Proposal of improvements list - 10/25/2006 5:42:03 PM   
Sumter

 

Posts: 62
Joined: 10/19/2005
Status: offline 		Thus far I like many of the proposed enhancements for HNM2.  I too prefer historical accuracy to eyecandy, but rather enjoy the animation -- except when modifying units.  The scenario editor is the best aspect of the game and, while I like the work done creating individual regiments, I would prefer a broader range of national armies.  Additions of assault column formations and formations for units defending towns or fortifications would greatly enhance the game.  Also, improvements in artillery types would add to the game -- particularly howitzers and mortars.  New versions of the game should also include a greater variety of fieldworks and fortifications, as well as engineer units who can bridge rivers, etc.  The more available types of terrain and terrain features the better.  I cannot agree more with the proposal to limit infantry firing at charging cavalry to one volley.

Sumter

(in reply to Magnus)
Post #: 14
RE: Proposal of improvements list - 10/26/2006 11:39:28 PM   
Tim Coakley

 

Posts: 457
Joined: 1/28/2005
Status: offline 		I have howitzers and mortars on my wish list but no promise on those for the first release.

There will be more terrain types...and I am open to suggestions.

Tim

(in reply to Sumter)
Post #: 15
RE: Proposal of improvements list - 10/27/2006 11:23:10 AM   
Iñaki Harrizabalagatar


Posts: 825
Joined: 12/11/2001
Status: offline 		I have a bold suggestion. The editor is the best part of the game, solving some gameplay problems already posted, why not converting "Horse & Musket" in a general preWW1 battles game editor, from Quadesh to Gettysburgh? instead of Horse & Musket it would be "Sickle Sword & to Rifle" or "The Tactical Art of War"

< Message edited by Iñaki Harrizabalagatar -- 10/27/2006 3:13:58 PM >

(in reply to Tim Coakley)
Post #: 16
RE: Proposal of improvements list - 10/27/2006 11:19:36 PM   
Tim Coakley

 

Posts: 457
Joined: 1/28/2005
Status: offline 		Inaki,
we are looking at how things will come out in the end. Nope sure on the distribution model for the games/engine.

More to come in the next few weeks.

Tim

(in reply to Iñaki Harrizabalagatar)
Post #: 17
RE: Proposal of improvements list - 10/28/2006 1:26:00 AM   
lancerunolfsson

 

Posts: 257
Joined: 2/7/2005
Status: offline
quote:

Please work on the graphics. They really do need upgrading to at least HPS standards.


But HPS Graphics Blow ;^) Really by the time you get to Prussias Glory there are for me at least no problems with the graphics. My main things would be wanting a jump map and a smarter AI. As far as the game editor goes just give me some genric units of each nationality building them in H&M 2 figure by figure is tedious.

OH and a Great Northern war release!!!


(in reply to Tim Coakley)
Post #: 18
RE: Proposal of improvements list - 10/28/2006 1:59:48 AM   
Magnus

 

Posts: 299
Joined: 9/9/2005
From: Sweden
Status: offline 		Ah yes Great Northern War!! :)

(in reply to lancerunolfsson)
Post #: 19
RE: Proposal of improvements list - 10/28/2006 6:43:42 PM   
Tim Coakley

 

Posts: 457
Joined: 1/28/2005
Status: offline 		Jump map is on my list.

AI will need some though and development.



Tim

(in reply to Magnus)
Post #: 20
RE: Proposal of improvements list - 10/29/2006 2:53:24 AM   
lancerunolfsson

 

Posts: 257
Joined: 2/7/2005
Status: offline 		Tim
I think that one thing that gets overlooked on AI's any more is that Scripting is not entirely bad. Especialy in certain situations I recall several times when HnM AI had a bunch of its troops in close proxcimity to each other all they would do is mill about countermarching in the same area disrupting the heck out of themselves. It seems like an AI that reconizes such situtations and forces groupes of battalions to adopt some sort of higher formation such as a line oriented toward the enemy, maybe splinting the difference between closest foe and most numerous would be better than standing around and getting slaughtered after all are disrupted.

By the same token Grand tactical scripts need not be bad if, the scenario designer can can generate several of them. That then are selected either random or by a probability scale of occurence. These could even be layered by events. Such as

Script 1a
apply game start
Army refuse left flank advance

script 1b
Apply if hostiles on left = less than xnumber, on turn xnumber +or- xnumber (or %chance or random number)
advance left flank

Potentially there could be a large number of possible starting scripts each with a % or random possiblity of being the one the AI uses initialy. With a potentialy large number of event or random or % dependent subscripts for each starting script.

one of the primary questions of course is at what level the script starts and leaves off on ther AIs behavior. Since HnM armies are already diveded in to commands under a particular officer this is maybe the place to make that cut.

There were a lot of games that used path following scripts. The major problem with wich, is that units tend to clump, or if they hold lines they do not react to flank threats. Or under or over value flank threats. Clearly a major problem is projecting possible flank threats. A failing shared with many human oponents. Implmenting super formations (that is above the unit level) could go a long way toward fixing this problem. EG a command of 8 battalions, if designated to do so keeps a foward facing line of 4 battalions while staggering back the remaning 4 on wich ever flank the bias is set for.

I have never played any HnM morph PBEM or Hot seat (The turn phasing format kills the game for PBEM for me)but did a while back play a Lot of East Front and West Front Pbem and Hot seat. After I had picked up much of the technical part of the way those games work. I noticed quite quickly that many Human oponents that were otherwise much better at playing the games than I was, had serious flank security problems. I note this also playing minatures or board games in wich deployment has a fog of war element. One way to make Make AIs stronger, it follows might be to emplement order action lags. In other words when the player issues orders to units the unit action on the orders is not instantaneous. Probably talking about a whole diferent engine there. But the advantage is that it gives a scripted AI a better change to shove a battle plan down the Human players throat. Even in Human to Human play the guy that has a plan vs the guy that doesent is at an advantge.

Now Mostly off of AI discussion another thing that can greatly add to any games fun level is some type of free deployment within some specified area of the map. The way that relates to AI is that given multiple AI scripts available to a scenario designer the AI deployment need not be the same from game to game in the same scenario.








(in reply to Tim Coakley)
Post #: 21
RE: Proposal of improvements list - 10/30/2006 10:21:58 PM   
Tim Coakley

 

Posts: 457
Joined: 1/28/2005
Status: offline 		Lance,
great comments on the AI.

I have added "multiple set up options" as a wish list item. This would have the coputer select from a series of files based on the same scenario, but with differing starting set ups and reinforcement schedules. This will keep the player from knowing exactly what they face (and where everything is located).

My design philosophy also calls for the opponents to start further back out of contact than the current scenarios...this allows the player more options in developing a plan.

The scripted AI has pros and cons. More to come on that.

Regards,
Tim

(in reply to lancerunolfsson)
Post #: 22
RE: Proposal of improvements list - 10/31/2006 10:44:51 AM   
Iñaki Harrizabalagatar


Posts: 825
Joined: 12/11/2001
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Double Shot Design



My design philosophy also calls for the opponents to start further back out of contact than the current scenarios...this allows the player more options in developing a plan.


I understand that will require the use of march columns, ideally they should be implemented as a group movement instead of individual Bns in column each moving independently, besides being more historical it allows less room for micromanagement, something that always favours the Human player against the AI

(in reply to Tim Coakley)
Post #: 23
RE: Proposal of improvements list - 11/1/2006 11:45:28 AM   
lancerunolfsson

 

Posts: 257
Joined: 2/7/2005
Status: offline 		Thanks Tim
Yeah variable setups for the AI are a good thing for suspense and replayability. Would be nice though for the human to be able to force the last deployment he played against as well I somtimes get a lot of millage out of figuring out how exactly the best way is to crack a particular nut;^) So basicly there is somthing to be said for variety and repeatablity. Course I guess a guy could just do a save first thing on a game.

I definately agree that there are pros and cons to scripting. Obviously there can be a problem for some players being disapointed at finding out what they have to do to make the AI lauch a particular tactical script. But others will really like the proccess of discovering the trick. I think what I'm really talking about is a system of layered semi scripting, if that makes sense.

(in reply to Tim Coakley)
Post #: 24
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Age of Muskets] >> Horse and Musket: Volume I, Frederick the Great >> Proposal of improvements list Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

3.203