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: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch

 
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] >> Crown of Glory >> RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch - 7/3/2005 2:37:23 AM   
sol_invictus


Posts: 1961
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: Kentucky
Status: offline 		I agree, it would be more appropriate to be able to position our soldiers before the battle. It is probably a limitation with the engine.

(in reply to Banquet)
Post #: 31
RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch - 7/3/2005 6:52:58 AM   
Uncle_Joe


Posts: 1985
Joined: 8/26/2004
Status: offline 		Yes, one of the things being lobbied for is to slightly increase the distance between the armies so that you have a little bit of time to maneuver before the clash.

One of the things working against this (and especially against allowing deployment) is that the playtime on the tactical battles is supposed to be kept down to a reasonable minimum. Anything that increases that playtime will be carefully analyzed before allowing it into the game.

_____________________________


(in reply to sol_invictus)
Post #: 32
RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch - 7/3/2005 6:57:04 AM   
ravinhood


Posts: 3891
Joined: 10/23/2003
Status: offline
quote:

Yes, one of the things being lobbied for is to slightly increase the distance between the armies


Where's this being lobbied at?

(in reply to Uncle_Joe)
Post #: 33
RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch - 7/3/2005 6:58:14 AM   
Uncle_Joe


Posts: 1985
Joined: 8/26/2004
Status: offline 		On the development forum. The current battle start is actually quite a bit more 'open' than some of the pre-release versions.

_____________________________


(in reply to ravinhood)
Post #: 34
RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch - 7/3/2005 8:13:39 AM   
jchastain


Posts: 2164
Joined: 8/8/2003
From: Marietta, GA
Status: offline 		I think an "undo" movement is important and should be reasonably simple. That is a very high priority enhancement in my mind.

On the report screens, the mouse wheel really should scroll up and down through the reports. It doesn't.

On the supply report, it would be nice if it included the province each unit was in as part of the report. Then if I have a long list of high losses, I could quickly and easily see where the problem(s) is.

One thing that I think would be very helpful for learning the economy is additional information in the popup boxes over province production. Right now, when you hold the mouse cursor over the wine symbol, for example, it says "wine" in a small pop-up box. I think it would be very helpful for new players if the box were expanded to read:

Wine
Produced by: Agriculture
Increased by: Farms

If each box had that information listed, learning what produced what would be easier to learn and one could look at the allocation bars to the left and the improvements at the bottom and immediately begin to get a feel for what was happening. And since experienced players don't really need to click on anything in that quadrant (it is informational only) the expanded pop-up boxes wouldn't get in the way for more experienced players.

Another thing that would be incredibly simple is giving auto-saves a more understandable naming scheme such as COUNTRY (3 letter abbreviation) - MONTH (3 letter abbreviation) - year, so the autosave name might be FRA-NOV-05 or RUS-JAN-07. I can understand what that means. AUTOSAVE4 doesn't mean a thing to me and just fills the directory listing with meaningless names.

Of course, those are all enhancements. Any patch should first address any bugs. There are occasional crashes though I don't think they are identifiable to the point they can be corrected yet. There are 2 minor things I have noticed regarding DPI and battle casualties, both of which are listed in the support. Neither is significant but if there are any bugs that affect gameplay, that clearly comes first.

(in reply to Uncle_Joe)
Post #: 35
RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch - 7/3/2005 9:43:16 AM   
Cyrano


Posts: 47
Joined: 12/28/2001
From: USA
Status: offline 		I tellya...I'm back and forth on this whole Hexwar part of the game.

On one hand, it's a pretty cool Panzer General-esque (someone else made this point elsewhere (c) them) grand tactical game with a wonderfully strong sense of history, despite some of its abstractions. On the other hand, BOY battles take a bit -- even when you "q" out.

I'm not sure I like the idea of letting people deploy. I fear gamey-evilness would occur, particularly in MP. I like the idea of organizing your armies as well as possible, marching them by the best routes and then playing the hand you're dealt.

Now a mid-battle SAVE BUTTON, that would be very nice indeed .

And honestly, though I know they're not TECHNICALLY such, I regard many of the "missing" undo buttons as all but bugs. This really was a dramatic ommission in a WEGO game. I've had to reload a number of saves just to overcome missed clicks.

Still likin' it a ton, though.

Best,

Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)

_____________________________

"Gentlemen songsters off on a spree, damned from here to eternity, God have mercy on such as we..." -- The Whiffenpoofs

(in reply to jchastain)
Post #: 36
RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch - 7/3/2005 12:25:55 PM   
goodwoodrw


Posts: 2661
Joined: 2/14/2005
Status: offline 		I think it is imperative that there is a save button during detailed battles. I just finished playing a good size battle, me the french with 78000 men vs the Austrians 138000 men half way through, when I just got the upper hand, dearest wife needed to go somewhere, had leave computer on and finished battle after I got back, not an ideal situation. could have been wife threatening

< Message edited by BASB -- 7/3/2005 12:27:08 PM >

_____________________________

Formerly Goodwood


(in reply to Cyrano)
Post #: 37
RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch - 7/3/2005 2:29:09 PM   
Reg Pither


Posts: 196
Joined: 9/19/2003
From: London
Status: offline 		One little thing I'd like to see changed, or a 'close window' button option introduced, is to stop the unit list in the strategic map disappearing when you move the mouse off it. I understand that it vanishes immediately to speed up moving around the map, but I often need to click on or hover over a unit's display at the bottom of the screen to get more details about it. Then the whole list disappears and I have to open it again to look at the next unit. Needlessly annoying.


(in reply to goodwoodrw)
Post #: 38
RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch - 7/3/2005 11:10:35 PM   
Alex777


Posts: 92
Joined: 7/3/2005
Status: offline 		In the Military Advisor Window, I can attach units to containers and transfer them between containers. However, unlike the Attachments Window, the Detach Unit command is not implemented. Moreover, it seems that a unit cannot be attached to a ship (embarked) via this window.

Can these things be fixed? If they are, it would be possible for me (at least) to play under WinME.

(in reply to Reg Pither)
Post #: 39
RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch - 7/4/2005 11:37:28 AM   
Zan

 

Posts: 21
Joined: 6/27/2005
Status: offline 		I want to control the world.Anyone else?Longer game play plz.

(in reply to Alex777)
Post #: 40
RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch - 7/4/2005 12:06:08 PM   
Kimse123

 

Posts: 61
Joined: 6/27/2005
Status: offline 		-------"no, because when you are planning your orders i strat. mode, the unit doesn't actually move before the turn's resolution phase. So, before to press "end turn button" you theoritically still have time to cancell the order. no ?
and anyway, gameplay would be much better with this button (it's not a RTS !!!) until validated (by "end turn" it should be possible to change orders."-------


Absolutely, if you, by accident(as i did), press ok before you have set the conditions of the long awaited surrender of Austria, you can nothing but roll your eyes in the afterlife when you look back cause that is devastating to say the least.

< Message edited by kimsand -- 7/4/2005 12:08:03 PM >

_____________________________

Beware of what you ask, you might get it answered

(in reply to nukkxx5058)
Post #: 41
RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch - 7/4/2005 1:02:00 PM   
Franz von G

 

Posts: 36
Joined: 7/1/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zan

I want to control the world.Anyone else?Longer game play plz.


Longer? Have you ever played a game with 5000 gp? It seems to me long enough

(in reply to Zan)
Post #: 42
RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch - 7/4/2005 6:03:25 PM   
jchastain


Posts: 2164
Joined: 8/8/2003
From: Marietta, GA
Status: offline 		Sometimes the ego can benefit from complete and total domination. I've played several games where it allows you to continue and take everything after you've already "won". That doesn't seem like such a bad idea to me. When someone accumulates the glory to win, why not have the game state the victory but then allow an option box to end or continue on? It is easy to add, it doesn't hurt anything and some people (myself included at times) would likely enjoy just messing around as Europe's big bully.

(in reply to Franz von G)
Post #: 43
RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch - 7/4/2005 7:04:41 PM   
jchastain


Posts: 2164
Joined: 8/8/2003
From: Marietta, GA
Status: offline 		Another thought to make in game play easier - When choosing advances there is no information regarding the effects of your options and you must either pull out the manual or make a semi-random selection. Since you must click on your choice and then hit an "OK" button, why not display the effects of a choice in a small box on the right when it is selected. That way we can click on each and see what they do and eventually hit "OK" when we find the one that we want.

(in reply to jchastain)
Post #: 44
RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch - 7/4/2005 7:06:45 PM   
Franz von G

 

Posts: 36
Joined: 7/1/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jchastain

When someone accumulates the glory to win, why not have the game state the victory but then allow an option box to end or continue on?


it's already in this way.. you can play after the "end" of the campaign..

(in reply to jchastain)
Post #: 45
RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch - 7/4/2005 7:23:08 PM   
jchastain


Posts: 2164
Joined: 8/8/2003
From: Marietta, GA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Franz von G

quote:

ORIGINAL: jchastain

When someone accumulates the glory to win, why not have the game state the victory but then allow an option box to end or continue on?


it's already in this way.. you can play after the "end" of the campaign..


Doh! Once again I am caught commenting on something before getting actual experience. When someone suggested longer games, I assumed this wasn't the case. Thanks for correcting me.

(in reply to Franz von G)
Post #: 46
RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch - 7/5/2005 12:18:40 AM   
Gil R.


Posts: 10821
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zan

Also an option to speed up or slow down battles.I like to look at the casualty numbers, but find they disappear too quickly.


Zan, you can already do this. The green "Delay" bar at the bottom of the screen during tactical battles can be adjusted to slow things down. My one piece of advice to you and everyone else is that if you decide to hit "Q" and do a quick-resolve on the battle you first lower the delay setting to zero, since otherwise it will take extra time to resolve the battle.

(in reply to Zan)
Post #: 47
RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch - 7/5/2005 3:41:19 PM   
Sonny

 

Posts: 2008
Joined: 4/3/2002
Status: offline 		Don't know if this has bee brought up - change the scrolling of the map. Acouple short jerks then zoooom across the continent makes for a lot of frustration. The jump map helps but is not good enough to get exactly where I want to be on the map.

_____________________________

Quote from Snigbert -

"If you mess with the historical accuracy, you're going to have ahistorical outcomes."

"I'll say it again for Sonny's sake: If you mess with historical accuracy, you're going to have
ahistorical outcomes. "

(in reply to Gil R.)
Post #: 48
RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch - 7/5/2005 4:54:11 PM   
Mr. Z


Posts: 1048
Joined: 3/24/2005
Status: offline
quote:

Zan, you can already do this. The green "Delay" bar at the bottom of the screen during tactical battles can be adjusted to slow things down. My one piece of advice to you and everyone else is that if you decide to hit "Q" and do a quick-resolve on the battle you first lower the delay setting to zero, since otherwise it will take extra time to resolve the battle.

Yeah, the manual is completely wrong about the function of the Delay bar. Sorry! Listen to Gil

(in reply to Gil R.)
Post #: 49
RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch - 7/5/2005 6:06:32 PM   
jchastain


Posts: 2164
Joined: 8/8/2003
From: Marietta, GA
Status: offline 		Another interface point - if the little circle icon that appears when a supply cason is active and you hold the cursor over a unit would include the current supply level of the unit (just put the number in the middle of the little circle or put dots or shade the circle or just do something to indicate current supply level), that would be helpful.

(in reply to Mr. Z)
Post #: 50
RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch - 7/5/2005 6:25:11 PM   
Reg Pither


Posts: 196
Joined: 9/19/2003
From: London
Status: offline 		A couple of small things I'd like to see :

- Either a zoom out function on the strategic map, or the option to play in a higher resolution. Preferably both!

- Change the colour of the messages that appear at the bottom of the screen during the execution phase on the strategic map. A white message doesn't show up well enough on the pale map background. A very, very minor point I know, but I must have played about 20 turns of my first game before I even realised those messages were there...

(in reply to jchastain)
Post #: 51
RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch - 7/5/2005 6:50:25 PM   
Jonny_B


Posts: 299
Joined: 5/20/2004
From: Dunnellon, Florida
Status: offline

Time Duration:

I would like each game turn to be only one week. Giving the player a more realistic turn option or a better tactical interface.

I notice that many enemy navies move there fleets back and forth between harbors and different sea zones during the same turn. My fleets get only one move in one direction.
Does any one know how to move your naval units back and forth, into and out of a harbor or sea zone on a single turn?

Thanks



(in reply to sol_invictus)
Post #: 52
RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch - 7/5/2005 7:45:41 PM   
Jordan

 

Posts: 171
Joined: 6/21/2005
From: California, USA
Status: offline 		After two days of pissing off my wife, who can not seem to understand the importance of my Italian strategy....great game! Some initial thoughts:

- Clearer economics. I like the variability in the results but I would like to be able to make some reasonable assumptions plus or minus a percentage, if you know what I mean. I do not want complete control nor a game where I am a clerk, determining the number of shoelaces I need to buy. On this level, the abstraction of the economics of the game are just right (imo), just need to be a little clearer, that's all.

- Tactial battles. Would like to see a little more space between the opposing forces, not much more just a little. Would like the opportunity to use my light cav. As it stands now they have little practical game use (although they may affect pursuit totals in the quick battles - I don't know) and I don't produce them.

- Survivability(?) of nations and Conquer the World. I would like to see defeated nations be able to survive more - Austria surrended three times and still was a viable nation, playing the vital, pivot role in 1813. Not sure how this can be accomplished - maybe the victorious nation should be penalized for too harsh a peace settlement in terms of GP? That is, it should be in the interest of a player to render another nation to servititude. I like the wastage idea, which inhibits the ability to conquer the world and I even think it (and other inhibiting ideas like it) should be increased. I don't care for "steamroller" games but prefer a game with midgame and endgame challenges. Perhaps dominance rather than conquering should be the main goal.

(in reply to Jonny_B)
Post #: 53
RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch - 7/5/2005 8:03:22 PM   
jchastain


Posts: 2164
Joined: 8/8/2003
From: Marietta, GA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Jordan
After two days of pissing off my wife...

WOW! Does that ever hit close to home.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jordan
- Clearer economics. I like the variability in the results but I would like to be able to make some reasonable assumptions plus or minus a percentage, if you know what I mean. I do not want complete control nor a game where I am a clerk, determining the number of shoelaces I need to buy. On this level, the abstraction of the economics of the game are just right (imo), just need to be a little clearer, that's all.


I agree, though if you have any detailed suggestions of specifically what you might add, that would likely be more helpful. I have suggested adding additional information to various boxes that I think would be helpful, especially to beginning players. But this is a case where I think they really benefit from specifics such as "Add information X to display Y".

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jordan
- Tactial battles. Would like to see a little more space between the opposing forces, not much more just a little. Would like the opportunity to use my light cav. As it stands now they have little practical game use (although they may affect pursuit totals in the quick battles - I don't know) and I don't produce them.


Agree. But as you say, just a bit. The battles that start on the far end of the current range are just about right. The right answer might be to just reduce the variability a bit be removing the half of the current range that is closest.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jordan
- Survivability(?) of nations and Conquer the World. I would like to see defeated nations be able to survive more - Austria surrended three times and still was a viable nation, playing the vital, pivot role in 1813. Not sure how this can be accomplished - maybe the victorious nation should be penalized for too harsh a peace settlement in terms of GP? That is, it should be in the interest of a player to render another nation to servititude. I like the wastage idea, which inhibits the ability to conquer the world and I even think it (and other inhibiting ideas like it) should be increased. I don't care for "steamroller" games but prefer a game with midgame and endgame challenges. Perhaps dominance rather than conquering should be the main goal.


I actually haven't seen a problem here myself. Nations surrender and lose a province and some glory but are generally far from crippled. I would disagree about increasing waste. I think the game strikes a very nice balance now and allows some growth without allowing it to become a "grab everything you can" type game. I also suspect that by tightening the rules around expansion, you are more likely to narrow the appeal of the game instead of broadening it.

Just my two cents worth.

(in reply to Jordan)
Post #: 54
RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch - 7/5/2005 8:07:56 PM   
adamc6


Posts: 46
Joined: 4/21/2003
From: Canadensis, PA
Status: offline 		LOVE THE GAME!

So far I have hardly played past the first 5 months....but here are my ideas, take 'em, leave 'em, etc.:

Armies are wandering all over the map too well. How the hell are Austrians building depots in France when they have not invaded yet? This allows them to march w/o attrition across France! This is a MAJOR issue IMHO.

More randomness on fleet and army encounters.....just because two fleets are in the Bay of Biscay, does not mean they will spot each other.....same with armies, though I guess the avoid battle aspects plays into this.

As noted, economics are a headache.....I like some level of unknowns, but too much now -- concur with some effort at simplification.

I like the battles......diplomacy is good so far, though I have not played enough to get deep into it.




_____________________________

If hindsight is 20/20, what is foresight?

(in reply to sol_invictus)
Post #: 55
RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch - 7/5/2005 8:11:01 PM   
ericbabe


Posts: 11927
Joined: 3/23/2005
Status: offline 		The minimum victory points from a surrender is currently 5,000. I'm thinking of lowering it to 3,500 (where it was for a long time) or maybe 4,000. As getting home provinces in TOS (terms of surrender) cost 2,500, making the minimum less than 5,000 would go a long way toward weakening the effects of victory (in most cases...)

We're also toying with the idea of making provinces with high enough levels of culture and/or courts unable to be ceded via the Cede Province clause. Culture is the weakest Development at present (though it is useful in getting more military upgrades once you've maxed out barracks, and has some small glory and NML value) and this might help make Culture more useful and help keep nations from losing core provinces, which sometimes seems a bit silly.

Comments?


Eric

(in reply to jchastain)
Post #: 56
RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch - 7/5/2005 8:18:29 PM   
jchastain


Posts: 2164
Joined: 8/8/2003
From: Marietta, GA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ericbabe
The minimum victory points from a surrender is currently 5,000. I'm thinking of lowering it to 3,500 (where it was for a long time) or maybe 4,000. As getting home provinces in TOS (terms of surrender) cost 2,500, making the minimum less than 5,000 would go a long way toward weakening the effects of victory (in most cases...)

We're also toying with the idea of making provinces with high enough levels of culture and/or courts unable to be ceded via the Cede Province clause. Culture is the weakest Development at present (though it is useful in getting more military upgrades once you've maxed out barracks, and has some small glory and NML value) and this might help make Culture more useful and help keep nations from losing core provinces, which sometimes seems a bit silly.

Comments?

Eric


Perhaps blend your two ideas. Make the cost of ceding a province based upon the culture level. In fact, I might even make it something like:

The victory point cost for ceding a province = ( 3 * culture + courts) * 200 ( + 1000 if a home province )

The numbers are examples and would abviously need to be tweaked a bit, but you get the idea.

(in reply to ericbabe)
Post #: 57
RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch - 7/5/2005 8:42:36 PM   
ericbabe


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

ORIGINAL: Jonny_B

I notice that many enemy navies move there fleets back and forth between harbors and different sea zones during the same turn. My fleets get only one move in one direction.
Does any one know how to move your naval units back and forth, into and out of a harbor or sea zone on a single turn?


Issue two distinct move orders. The 'm' key gives a move order without de-selecting the unit. Or just select it again after issuing the first order.

(in reply to Jonny_B)
Post #: 58
RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch - 7/5/2005 8:53:27 PM   
bluemonday

 

Posts: 233
Joined: 6/20/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ericbabe

We're also toying with the idea of making provinces with high enough levels of culture and/or courts unable to be ceded via the Cede Province clause.

That'sa good idea - it would prevent the seemingly regular event from occurring where Austria cedes Austria to Spain upon the first surrender.

(in reply to ericbabe)
Post #: 59
RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch - 7/5/2005 9:01:24 PM   
Mr. Z


Posts: 1048
Joined: 3/24/2005
Status: offline
quote:

How the hell are Austrians building depots in France when they have not invaded yet? This allows them to march w/o attrition across France!

That is correct. We have considered modifying this, and will continue to consider modifications.

quote:

More randomness on fleet and army encounters.....just because two fleets are in the Bay of Biscay, does not mean they will spot each other.....same with armies, though I guess the avoid battle aspects plays into this.

Exactly. Both fleets can avoid each other (and if only one is seeking battle, there is a chance they will still not meet.)

< Message edited by Mr. Z -- 7/5/2005 9:02:46 PM >

(in reply to adamc6)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Napoleonics] >> Crown of Glory >> RE: Wish List: Suggestions for a future patch Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
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

1.594