RE: Realism

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Realism

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.] >> [American Civil War] >> Forge of Freedom: The American Civil War 1861-1865 >> RE: Realism

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Realism - 7/29/2008 8:21:38 PM

ericbabe

Posts: 11927
Joined: 3/23/2005
Status: offline

Thanks everybody for the kind words.

We are considering an alternate approach using the engine to make much simpler games, since it does seem the complexity (and 250 pages of rules) is a put-off to many players, and the more complicated games do take a lot longer to develop. I don't think we'd abandon the current style of game in COG and FOF if we try this.

_____________________________

(in reply to terje439)

Post #: 31

RE: Realism - 7/30/2008 1:04:41 PM

moose1999

Posts: 788
Joined: 10/26/2006
Status: offline

Well, on the other hand, I'm pretty sure a more simple approach would be a put-off to many players too.
The phrasing "much simpler games" actually sounds a bit scary to me, but it'll be interesting to see what you come up with.
The argument about longer development time (and generally more trouble) is valid, of course, especially in an economic context.
But I still don't much like the thought of more, simpler games from your hands instead of few, but epic ones.

This is just my opinion of course - and I don't need to worry about making money or spending all my weekends preparing patches for a nestful of unruly and unreasonable forumites, who have just had their life ruined by a small inconsistency in the return fire tables in the specific case of when a 50% depleted, high-morale, unsupplied unit dug-in in swampy terrain with Richmond muskets and the medical and swampwise attribute shoots it out with a fresh, low-morale, split brigade armed with European muskets and regimental artillery firing from an elevated, slightly flanked position in close proximity of friendly units from the same division and in command of a general with a tactics rating above fair. During night combat.

And yes, I know you can't entrench in swampy terrain...

_____________________________

regards,

Briny

(in reply to ericbabe)

Post #: 32

RE: Realism - 7/30/2008 8:32:49 PM

IronWarrior

Posts: 801
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: Beaverton, OR
Status: offline

Hey guys,

Another new player here, and want to also add my compliments to this nice game. I also want to say that I agree with briny_norman. I hope you guys reconsider "dumbing" things down. I admit that there were things I didn't get at first and it took me awhile to figure out, but the effort seems to be rewarding. One thing that would really help is having an index in the manual.

One question I did have about containers and structure... I had set up my ANV sort of like mentioned above by attaching artillery and cavalry directly to Corps and Army commanders. I had Lee take command of the Army and had Beuregard take a Corps until I promoted Longstreet and would reassign Beuregard. Although I had Lee as Army commander, it still showed Beuregard on the main map, and during tactical battles Lee was shown as Corps and Beuregard as Army. Not sure if this was because Beuregard was considered a superior ranking 4-star?

Anyway, thanks again for this great game! I have high hopes for the next COG and hope nothing gets "simplified" from FoF.

Bill

(in reply to ericbabe)

Post #: 33

RE: Realism - 7/30/2008 8:36:36 PM

terje439

Posts: 6813
Joined: 3/28/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: IronWarrior

Hey guys,

Another new player here, and want to also add my compliments to this nice game. I also want to say that I agree with briny_norman. I hope you guys reconsider "dumbing" things down. I admit that there were things I didn't get at first and it took me awhile to figure out, but the effort seems to be rewarding. One thing that would really help is having an index in the manual.

One question I did have about containers and structure... I had set up my ANV sort of like mentioned above by attaching artillery and cavalry directly to Corps and Army commanders. I had Lee take command of the Army and had Beuregard take a Corps until I promoted Longstreet and would reassign Beuregard. Although I had Lee as Army commander, it still showed Beuregard on the main map, and during tactical battles Lee was shown as Corps and Beuregard as Army. Not sure if this was because Beuregard was considered a superior ranking 4-star?

Anyway, thanks again for this great game! I have high hopes for the next COG and hope nothing gets "simplified" from FoF.

Bill

Yes, I've seen this more than once myself, which is why always dend Beuregard away from ANV. But why not promote Longstreet on turn 1? There are two Corps commanders that really have a demotion coming for them as the game starts.

(in reply to IronWarrior)

Post #: 34

RE: Realism - 7/30/2008 8:50:06 PM

IronWarrior

Posts: 801
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: Beaverton, OR
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: terje439

Yes, I've seen this more than once myself, which is why always dend Beuregard away from ANV. But why not promote Longstreet on turn 1? There are two Corps commanders that really have a demotion coming for them as the game starts.

Ah, well this is my very first game, but I think I tried to promote him but couldn't for some reason (not enough academies maybe) and didn't want to demote others (felt too gamey and taking advantage of the AI) on my first game. IIRC I was able to get him to 2-star on turn 1 and then it took a couple turns before I could get him to 3-star. Even though this is my first game I am already whipping the Union AI every battle on First Sergeant. Against a human opponent I would probably do what you recommend, however. Maybe since he (Beuregard) is a 4-star he can't be attached to a Corps? Or maybe they were caught shuffling when the Union attacked?

Also thanks for your AAR, it has helped me tremendously to get a grasp for some of the mechanics.

One other thing I wanted to add is that I really like the misinterpret commands (among other things) in Detailed Combat. However I'd like to see that when a unit does misinterpret it should end its' movement. Otherwise it doesn't do much as it can keep moving and probably voids the misinterpret anyway.

Eventually I'd like to get a pbem going with detailed battles imported to LAN. Just need to find someone as hardcore and dedicated as me to gaming :D. I'm assuming this is possible... sounds awesome if so!

Bill

One other question... which of the economy choices is the most realistic/historically accurate? Is it without either richer or poorer checked?

< Message edited by IronWarrior -- 7/30/2008 9:04:25 PM >

(in reply to terje439)

Post #: 35

RE: Realism - 7/30/2008 9:42:05 PM

terje439

Posts: 6813
Joined: 3/28/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: IronWarrior

quote:

ORIGINAL: terje439

Yes, I've seen this more than once myself, which is why always dend Beuregard away from ANV. But why not promote Longstreet on turn 1? There are two Corps commanders that really have a demotion coming for them as the game starts.

Ah, well this is my very first game, but I think I tried to promote him but couldn't for some reason (not enough academies maybe) and didn't want to demote others (felt too gamey and taking advantage of the AI) on my first game. IIRC I was able to get him to 2-star on turn 1 and then it took a couple turns before I could get him to 3-star. Even though this is my first game I am already whipping the Union AI every battle on First Sergeant. Against a human opponent I would probably do what you recommend, however. Maybe since he (Beuregard) is a 4-star he can't be attached to a Corps? Or maybe they were caught shuffling when the Union attacked?

Also thanks for your AAR, it has helped me tremendously to get a grasp for some of the mechanics.

One other thing I wanted to add is that I really like the misinterpret commands (among other things) in Detailed Combat. However I'd like to see that when a unit does misinterpret it should end its' movement. Otherwise it doesn't do much as it can keep moving and probably voids the misinterpret anyway.

Eventually I'd like to get a pbem going with detailed battles imported to LAN. Just need to find someone as hardcore and dedicated as me to gaming :D. I'm assuming this is possible... sounds awesome if so!

Bill

One other question... which of the economy choices is the most realistic/historically accurate? Is it without either richer or poorer checked?

# of 3 star generals are not tied to academies (only 5 star generals are). To increase # of 2 star generals, build DIVs, to increase # of 3 star generals build CORPS, to increase # of 4 star generals build Armies.
Gamey? Well it did happen in the ACW that officers were demoted, and some of those officers you start with are just a plain menace to your men.

As to the misinterpretation, yes moving one and one hex will minimilze the penalty this gives you, however if you are like me an move all in one go it can be really painful to see your brigade turn its rear to the enemy at the last movement hex.

About attaching a higher general to a lower container (4 star to a corps etc) this should not be a problem, from my understanding a 4 star can lead anything up to and including an army, a 3 star anything up to a corps.

(in reply to IronWarrior)

Post #: 36

RE: Realism - 7/30/2008 9:49:20 PM

IronWarrior

Posts: 801
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: Beaverton, OR
Status: offline

Ah thanks terje, I did purchase a Corps container early (turn 1 or 2) so that explains it.

I think gamey may have been the wrong term, I meant that I am easily beating the AI as it is, and am not sure if the AI has the sense to shuffle its' command the same way. It's more of a challenge that I impose on myself I guess. The only battle I've lost so far is one where a small Division was caught by overwhelming numbers and I hit Instant Battle :D. Against a competent human opponent I would certainly demote and promote, since my opponent would surely do the same.

Same for misinterpret... I impose the same on myself by moving each unit once, so if it misinterprets the command then that's that.

< Message edited by IronWarrior -- 7/30/2008 9:50:49 PM >

(in reply to terje439)

Post #: 37

RE: Realism - 7/30/2008 10:47:28 PM

Ironclad

Posts: 1924
Joined: 11/22/2006
Status: offline

Re the container command if there are two equal ranking commanders, the choice is determined alphabetically so a 4 star Beauregard tops a 4 star Lee.

Use the difficulty level to give yourself a tougher game - AI combat and resource bonuses kick in at 1st Sergeant increasing up the scale and there is also the possibility of bonus field fortifications for the AI from Major upwards. Southern Steel and the unbalanced version of Coming Fury have the most realistic troop/resource/population levels so are the most challenging for a Southern player.

Its a great game, and gets even better with the advanced options in play.

(in reply to IronWarrior)

Post #: 38

RE: Realism - 7/30/2008 10:57:35 PM

Ironclad

Posts: 1924
Joined: 11/22/2006
Status: offline

Concerning an index - there is an excellent search facility in the pdf manual which will list all relevant references.

(in reply to Ironclad)

Post #: 39

RE: Realism - 7/30/2008 11:45:54 PM

IronWarrior

Posts: 801
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: Beaverton, OR
Status: offline

Thanks Ironclad, I wasn't sure which of the options/scenarios were considered to be the most historically accurate, so I had just picked the standard campaign. Didn't know about the search function either, had been reading the printed manual and using that while the game is running for quick reference. Also thought that attaching Beuregard to a Corps would make Lee show on the main map, thanks for explaining that. Still though, Lee was Corps and Beuregard Army in the tactical battle for some reason.

Really happy with this game so far, I will try one of the scenarios you mentioned. I assume that I would leave richer/poorer economy unchecked as the most realistic as well?

Bill

< Message edited by IronWarrior -- 7/30/2008 11:59:50 PM >

(in reply to Ironclad)

Post #: 40

RE: Realism - 7/30/2008 11:59:16 PM

IronWarrior

Posts: 801
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: Beaverton, OR
Status: offline

*double post*

(in reply to IronWarrior)

Post #: 41

RE: Realism - 7/31/2008 12:20:32 AM

Ironclad

Posts: 1924
Joined: 11/22/2006
Status: offline

Yes leave those untouched. I guess you probably want to play with historic general stats to start with but when you have more experience of the game I recommend trying out the random stats (with hidden too). It adds a whole new dimension when you have to discover who your good and poor commanders are, just like Lincoln and Davis in the real war.

Btw you can use the search faciity on the pdf patch documentation too; important given the great number of improvements introduced since the game/manual were first issued.

(in reply to IronWarrior)

Post #: 42

RE: Realism - 7/31/2008 1:33:03 AM

IronWarrior

Posts: 801
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: Beaverton, OR
Status: offline

Thanks again Ironclad, sounds like fun and will give that a try once I've played it through some. I feel like I'm late to the party, this game is really a lot of fun and I can tell a lot of "love" went into this one.

Another thing I wanted to mention, or request, is that on my last? turn the governor of Virginia requested his buddies become staff of CSA 21st Division? I think it was, which would lower the staff rating but keep the governor happy. As I had renamed my Divisions and couldn't remember where the 21st Division was, it made for a tough decision. This is a cool feature, but I wished it had listed the updated Division name so I knew if it was in a province that was heavily contested or not. Not really a big deal, just nitpicking on my part.

Bill

< Message edited by IronWarrior -- 7/31/2008 1:34:58 AM >

(in reply to Ironclad)

Post #: 43

RE: Realism - 7/31/2008 5:22:22 AM

Randomizer

Posts: 1473
Joined: 6/28/2008
Status: offline

I started out with random and hidden stats, McDowell is now a 1-Star marking time in a Potomic fort and Fremont kept his 4-Stars and is just about my top field commander. Nice option that.

I usually just give the governor's what they want as far as appointments go. There are great advantages over the long term to keeping them sweet and so far more that half have resulted in status quo or better. I now have five supporting volunteer musters which is handy.

Thanks for the tip on the equal-starred leadership, that's nice to know.

Hopefully WCS can resist the sad tendency to replace substance with eye candy and dumb down future titles but in the final analysis, any choices are likely to be driven by production costs and target demographics. Just $0.02 CAD.

Keeping my fire steady and effective...

(in reply to IronWarrior)

Post #: 44

RE: Realism - 7/31/2008 11:47:30 AM

Ironclad

Posts: 1924
Joined: 11/22/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: IronWarrior

Another thing I wanted to mention, or request, is that on my last? turn the governor of Virginia requested his buddies become staff of CSA 21st Division? I think it was, which would lower the staff rating but keep the governor happy. As I had renamed my Divisions and couldn't remember where the 21st Division was, it made for a tough decision. This is a cool feature, but I wished it had listed the updated Division name so I knew if it was in a province that was heavily contested or not. Not really a big deal, just nitpicking on my part.

Fair point. I have asked about it before (ie for more details on location/attachment) and Gil said there looked to be enough room to add some further information. So it may get changed on a future patch but there is a lot of competition for new things as you can see from the wish list.

(in reply to IronWarrior)

Post #: 45

RE: Realism - 7/31/2008 2:47:56 PM

Kingmaker

Posts: 1678
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline

HiHi

Eric, please, please don't dumm these games down, the fact that they are difficult to master is a bonus and brings great credit to GWS, don't let the whingers change your course, be the Best at what you do.

I am really looking forward to CoG EE, but would certainly have second thoughts if it were pared down to cater for a few whiners who haven't the patience to learn by experiance, was it Foch that said it takes 15,000 dead to make a major general? well maybe thats how War gamers should think as well, where is the chalenge in having everything presented on a plate for you, like real life, learn by experiance! ... err, right, ... rant over

Keep up the good work.

All the Best
Peter

(in reply to Ironclad)

Post #: 46

RE: Realism - 8/3/2008 2:29:04 AM

ericbabe

Posts: 11927
Joined: 3/23/2005
Status: offline

COG:EE has lots of new stuff... detailed naval actions, an option to play brigade level battles, 25 new upgrades, 50 special unit abilities, a new map of Europe with about 40 new provinces, 6 new minor powers, unit reaction rules in detailed combat, cavalry screens in detailed combat, improved AI at both strategic/tactical levels, tons of rule changes/tweaks, four new information screens, and 100 historical "events". You'll like it.

There is an option to play with a much simpler economy, but you don't have to choose to play that way if you don't want.

_____________________________

(in reply to Kingmaker)

Post #: 47