Page 1 of 2

Field of Glory II Editor - Suggestions & Requests

Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2017 11:43 am
by Benedict151
Hello everyone
In the general 'Field of Glory II is announced' thread we noticed that some of you raised the subject of the editor in 'Pike and Shot' and 'Sengoku Jidai' and how that was difficult to use.

We thought it would be helpful (if only for us consolidating and prioritising feedback!) to start up a separate thread for the Editor where you can tell us what you might like to use if for - and if you have experience from 'Pike and Shot' and 'Sengoku Jidai' the things you find difficult or that you would like to be able to do in the editor but cannot do without scripting.

Look forward to your suggestions

regards
Ben Wilkins

Re: Field of Glory II Editor - Suggestions & Requests

Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2017 4:33 pm
by fogman
automates all of the things I tried to do here:

http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtop ... 19&t=54161

Re: Field of Glory II Editor - Suggestions & Requests

Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2017 5:43 pm
by rbodleyscott
fogman wrote:automates all of the things I tried to do here:

http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtop ... 19&t=54161
Thanks. Much of that might be possible in the long term.

In the shorter term, would you like to propose a short list of key changes you would like to see?

What do the rest of you think?

Re: Field of Glory II Editor - Suggestions & Requests

Posted: Thu Jun 22, 2017 3:48 am
by fogman
game parameters: players should be able to

set number of turns.
set the 'rout threshold' for each side.
write the scenario description.

Unit creation: players should be able to build new units by

editing most attributes from existing units, including
graphics, name, complement, unit size, weapons, morale.

copy and paste units.

personally, I'd like to have available

graphics for 'markers', i.e. abstraction (like 'victory points') or other non combat counters. It can just be a simple square counter.

-----------------------------


tangentially, it should be useful if

we have hot seat to test scenarios offline. as a matter of fact, this is my #1 request.

unit size (which i believe determines the rout % when a unit is lost) is shown during play.

Re: Field of Glory II Editor - Suggestions & Requests

Posted: Thu Jun 22, 2017 6:05 am
by rbodleyscott
fogman wrote:game parameters: players should be able to

set number of turns.
set the 'rout threshold' for each side.
write the scenario description.

Unit creation: players should be able to build new units by

editing most attributes from existing units, including
graphics, name, complement, unit size, weapons, morale.

copy and paste units.

personally, I'd like to have available

graphics for 'markers', i.e. abstraction (like 'victory points') or other non combat counters. It can just be a simple square counter.

-----------------------------


tangentially, it should be useful if

we have hot seat to test scenarios offline. as a matter of fact, this is my #1 request.

unit size (which i believe determines the rout % when a unit is lost) is shown during play.
Thanks

Re: Field of Glory II Editor - Suggestions & Requests

Posted: Thu Jun 22, 2017 5:16 pm
by piteas
fogman wrote: tangentially, it should be useful if

we have hot seat to test scenarios offline. as a matter of fact, this is my #1 request.

unit size (which i believe determines the rout % when a unit is lost) is shown during play.

Great and very necessary ideas. Meanly the first one... Testing scenarios offline would be a "must have"

Re: Field of Glory II Editor - Suggestions & Requests

Posted: Thu Jun 22, 2017 5:27 pm
by rbodleyscott
piteas wrote:
fogman wrote: tangentially, it should be useful if

we have hot seat to test scenarios offline. as a matter of fact, this is my #1 request.

unit size (which i believe determines the rout % when a unit is lost) is shown during play.

Great and very necessary ideas. Meanly the first one... Testing scenarios offline would be a "must have"
We hear you.

Re: Field of Glory II Editor - Suggestions & Requests

Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2017 7:25 pm
by stockwellpete
I didn't use the P+S or SJ editors so my only experience is with the FOG1 editor (which I thought was really good), but what I sometimes wanted to do was to model weather effects in some of the scenarios. My particular area of interest was the period from around 1340 to 1500 AD (so HYW, War of the Roses) where firearms were gradually being introduced onto the battlefield. Sometimes the weather conditions could be considered "permanent" for the entire duration of the scenario, but sometimes they might be intermittent, or occur for only a short period of the battle.

So the ability to fully customise all of the units would be necessary. For example, I remember being unable to make artillery or handgunners "poor" in the FOG1 editor for the Battle of Northampton 1460. I would also have liked to have made the wind a factor at the Battle of Towton 1461 to give the Yorkist archers an advantage in the initial exchanges, so that the pressure on the Lancastrians to engage the Yorkist line was modelled in the scenario.

I am not sure what the limits to scripting are in these scenarios. Presumably, you would need to script a situation whereby you wanted to reduce the lethality of firearms from "average" to "poor" halfway through a scenario because of adverse weather conditions? Are there other ways that scripting might be used to model weather effects? Did anyone try that with the P+S or SJ editors?

Re: Field of Glory II Editor - Suggestions & Requests

Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2017 8:28 pm
by rbodleyscott
Almost anything can be done with scripting. The whole game is scripted.

Just in case anyone does not know, scripting does not mean scripting like a film script, it is actually a type of programming language that works on top of a lower level program known as the engine.

It is hard to condense something that is infinitely flexible into a semi-automated editor. Any attempt to do so will inevitably lose much of the flexibility. The problem is that we cannot guess in advance all the clever ideas a user might come up with for customisation of a scenario. Any predefined options in the editor will inevitably create a straight-jacket on what can be achieved.

All of the units can already be customised by editing an Excel file. No programming necessary for that.

For changes to the customisation to occur half way through a battle, scripting is necessary, but doesn't have to be complicated.

If you really want to be creative and original, in taking a computer game to its limits, you cannot avoid scripting, because anything that you can be allowed to do in an editor has already been thought of by somebody else. You don't have to be a trained programmer to program. (I, for example, am trained as a doctor, not a programmer). You certainly don't need to be a trained programmer to write a few lines of code to customise a scenario.

In the words of Kevin Ayers: "It begins with a blessing. And it ends with a curse; Making life easy, By making it worse."

Having got that off my chest :wink: we are still looking for ways to improve the editor.

Re: Field of Glory II Editor - Suggestions & Requests

Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2017 9:11 pm
by stockwellpete
Richard, you have referenced both Benny Hill and Kevin Ayers this week. From the ridiculous to the sublime, I would say! :lol:

Re: Field of Glory II Editor - Suggestions & Requests

Posted: Sat Jun 24, 2017 8:16 am
by Mirek69
Will there be weather effects: rain, fog ?

Re: Field of Glory II Editor - Suggestions & Requests

Posted: Sat Jun 24, 2017 8:24 am
by rbodleyscott
Mirek69 wrote:Will there be weather effects: rain, fog ?
That is not yet decided.

Re: Field of Glory II Editor - Suggestions & Requests

Posted: Fri Jul 07, 2017 2:31 am
by Talizh2
As a long time player of FOG1, I recall many debates between people holding very different views regarding the the effectiveness of chariots, elephants, missile troops, and the existence/extent of anarchy charges, etc. It would be nice to have some control over this, either in the difficulty panel, or else in the scenario editor. Much like the old Steel Panthers series had a toggle allowing the player to make tanks, artillery, infantry more or less effective in a game (I seem to recall it was a percentile scale you could slide up or down) it would be nice to make something like this for FOG II. Say, for example, if I think that elephants are over-powered, I can toggle their effectiveness to 80% for that scenario,which deducts from their POA in combat. If I think that archery is not effective enough, I can slide it to 120%. If this scales could be adjusted for each side, it would allow scenario designers/players to explore different interpretations of the period. For example, anarchy charges make perfect sense for me for Gauls or Germanic warbands but not so much hoplites. I know that anarchy charges are not going to be implemented in FOG II, but it would be nice to have it as an optional rule.

Literally can't wait to throw my money at FOG II :)

Re: Field of Glory II Editor - Suggestions & Requests

Posted: Fri Jul 07, 2017 5:55 am
by rbodleyscott
historian wrote:As a long time player of FOG1, I recall many debates between people holding very different views regarding the the effectiveness of chariots, elephants, missile troops, and the existence/extent of anarchy charges, etc. It would be nice to have some control over this, either in the difficulty panel, or else in the scenario editor. Much like the old Steel Panthers series had a toggle allowing the player to make tanks, artillery, infantry more or less effective in a game (I seem to recall it was a percentile scale you could slide up or down) it would be nice to make something like this for FOG II. Say, for example, if I think that elephants are over-powered, I can toggle their effectiveness to 80% for that scenario,which deducts from their POA in combat. If I think that archery is not effective enough, I can slide it to 120%. If this scales could be adjusted for each side, it would allow scenario designers/players to explore different interpretations of the period. For example, anarchy charges make perfect sense for me for Gauls or Germanic warbands but not so much hoplites. I know that anarchy charges are not going to be implemented in FOG II, but it would be nice to have it as an optional rule.
Interesting ideas. Thanks.

Re: Field of Glory II Editor - Suggestions & Requests

Posted: Fri Jul 07, 2017 3:36 pm
by Captaii
Will Steam Early Access? When release game? :)

Re: Field of Glory II Editor - Suggestions & Requests

Posted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 3:23 pm
by Yarev
Can you tell me why hastati/principes are combined into 1 unit instead of being 2 seperate units?

Re: Field of Glory II Editor - Suggestions & Requests

Posted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 3:36 pm
by rbodleyscott
Yarev wrote:Can you tell me why hastati/principes are combined into 1 unit instead of being 2 seperate units?
Because the units (at the standard representational scale) represent 480 men, which is 4 maniples. So a single unit of hastati/principes actually represents 2 maniples of hastati and 2 maniples of principes in a chequerboard formation.

Re: Field of Glory II Editor - Suggestions & Requests

Posted: Sun Oct 08, 2017 3:51 pm
by Yarev
rbodleyscott wrote:
Yarev wrote:Can you tell me why hastati/principes are combined into 1 unit instead of being 2 seperate units?
Because the units (at the standard representational scale) represent 480 men, which is 4 maniples. So a single unit of hastati/principes actually represents 2 maniples of hastati and 2 maniples of principes in a chequerboard formation.

ohh I see, that makes sens

Re: Field of Glory II Editor - Suggestions & Requests

Posted: Wed Oct 11, 2017 2:18 pm
by Yarev
I wanted to ask one more question:

Has the Slitherine ever contemplated about making a game like Alea Jacta Est but with Field of Glory II battles?

Re: Field of Glory II Editor - Suggestions & Requests

Posted: Wed Oct 11, 2017 4:07 pm
by rbodleyscott
Yarev wrote:I wanted to ask one more question:

Has the Slitherine ever contemplated about making a game like Alea Jacta Est but with Field of Glory II battles?
It has been discussed, although there are technical issues.