Some questions on gameplay

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Some questions on gameplay

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.] >> [Napoleonics] >> Napoleon in Italy >> Some questions on gameplay

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Some questions on gameplay - 11/12/2007 4:49:21 AM

Alex Gilbert

Posts: 140
Joined: 9/20/2002
From: New York City
Status: offline

Hi. As someone new to the system (I did not play For Liberty), a few questions have come up while playing:

1. Reinforcing Battles- I know that you can set formations to reinforce from 1 space away, but have noted that (even with sufficient move points, and in an attack stance) this is not automatic. Can you provide some info on the factors that influence this chance? I have had Napoleon march to battle with the Guard (well, actually they are still the Guides), while every other division just sat and watched-- not terribly historical or fun for Napoleon.

2. Is there a corresponding ability for the defender to have units "march to the sound of the guns" or is this just for the attacker?

3. I gather that the trade-off is that only 1 general can be with each unit, so if everyone is in Napoleons "unit" he will be the only general present. Just wanted to confirm that this is correct, and there is no way to place multiple generals in 1 unit.

4. Since all supply is drawn from local towns, am I correct in interpereting that there is no value to maintaining a supply line back to France? Similarly, it seems that a "maneuver-sur-les--derrireres" would in no way force an opponent to retreat, assuming he controlled a few local cities to draw supply from.

5. I have noticed that in both tactical and strategic terms, water barriers (and therefore bridges) mean very little. Especially in tactical battles, the movement penalty (8 vs 16) seems minimal, especially as artillery pays no additional penalty. At the strategic level, it seems armies pay a minimal penalty to cross a river. Given the importance of rivers in Napoleon's strategy in 1796, I am just curious why this is-- from what I have read, it seems like each of these rivers were considered a significant strategic barrier.

6. In tactical battles, is there a penalty for changing formation in close proximity (i.e. next to) an enemy unit. I found nothing about this in the manual, although I think that I have seen this in a battle. It seems that there should be some penalty.

7. Is there any way of re-supplying a unit in tactical battle. I have not found any.

8. Is there any way of forcing a unit to surrender in tactical battle. I have surrounded them, but the best I can do is chop away at their strength, and when the battle ends, it seems that whatever men are left manage to rejoin the retreating army.

9. I think (from observation) that the command radius of a leader is based on his rank alone (Gen=3, Brigadier=2, Col=1) but just wanted to confirm this. (Ah, just found this on page 28. Never mind)

10. I have yet to come across any unit which has a "pay" value--I assume this is left over from For Liberty?

Thanks for the help.

Alex

Post #: 1

RE: Some questions on gameplay - 11/12/2007 7:40:45 AM

Sytass

Posts: 53
Joined: 7/25/2004
Status: offline

1. I think it has also to do with the other commanders' abilities, but I could be mistaken.

2. Yes, I've seen units rush to aid to an attacked hex. Stance was defense IIRC, you need enough movement points etc.

3. The major drawback for me so far is a lack of a chain of command. All units with a leader operate very independently from one another. So yes, �berstacks with one general only draw benefits of that one general. So you would want cavalry units to be led by cavalry specialists, arty by arty specialists, but splitting command like that adds the problem of coordination (see your points 1 and 2).

4. All towns have a supply stock. So I am guessing if a unit is isolated and only has access to one town, it only can access that town's supply depot. My cavalry under Murat, Kilmain and Kellermann is currently breezing through the Austrian's hinterland capturing small towns on the way, and the Austrians are retreating ever further, even they have a 2-1 advantage in men, but that could be coincidence.

(in reply to Alex Gilbert)

Post #: 2

RE: Some questions on gameplay - 12/25/2007 3:00:49 AM

Mowersben

Posts: 10
Joined: 12/24/2007
Status: offline

I would like to see Alex Gilbert's questions answered. In particular I would like to understand whether there is any value in cutting off towns ie, is there a final supply source? or is everyone always in supply?

(in reply to Sytass)

Post #: 3

RE: Some questions on gameplay - 12/28/2007 7:07:20 PM

HussarGames

Posts: 253
Joined: 10/18/2006
Status: offline

1. Readiness and the rating of your general matter most.
2. Works the same as with attacking, but only in 'defense' stance.
3. Yes.
4. Yes, a limitation of the engine.
5. There are significant penalties when attacking across the river.
6. No penalty, but it is a good idea.
7. No.
8. No.
9. Yes.
10. Yes, leftover bug. Thanks for spotting.

Thanks for the feedback, we might use some of your ideas in the next patch.

_____________________________

(in reply to Alex Gilbert)

Post #: 4

RE: Some questions on gameplay - 6/24/2008 2:12:23 AM

FM WarB

Posts: 292
Joined: 2/14/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alex Gilbert
4. Since all supply is drawn from local towns, am I correct in interpereting that there is no value to maintaining a supply line back to France? Similarly, it seems that a "maneuver-sur-les--derrireres" would in no way force an opponent to retreat, assuming he controlled a few local cities to draw supply from.

Same problem in For Liberty! (American Revolution). Hussar Games not only did not respond to complaints about it on that forum, they ported the same misbegotten supply sysyem to this game.

(in reply to Alex Gilbert)

Post #: 5

RE: Some questions on gameplay - 11/19/2008 4:27:48 PM

HussarGames

Posts: 253
Joined: 10/18/2006
Status: offline

The supply system works as intended. Long supply lines would be very easy to cut / disrupt by a few cavalry regiments in our game system. This would make the artificial intelligence very easy to beat - gamey.

Cutting supply matters a lot with the current system as well, taking towns in the enemies rear, while at the same time beating the enemy army causes a lot of trouble.

_____________________________

(in reply to FM WarB)

Post #: 6

RE: Some questions on gameplay - 12/2/2008 3:45:39 AM

FM WarB

Posts: 292
Joined: 2/14/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HussarGames

Cutting supply matters a lot with the current system as well, taking towns in the enemies rear, while at the same time beating the enemy army causes a lot of trouble.

Thanks for the reply.
In For Liberty, an American army of some 40,000 remained quite in supply sitting on one town in Massachusetts, with all other towns in the area Brit controlled. (Alot of Southern militia included.) Does that same "logic" apply in this game?

(in reply to HussarGames)

Post #: 7