What do you hope to see added before Fog II ends?

[TimDee58]

I would like the ability to remove flanking armies when playing the AI. Too often, troops show up on my flank just as things get interesting and instead of finishing off my glorious plan, I end up aggravated.

Hence why I always employ sufficient dross to guard my flanks

[antiochosvii]

I would like to see both Alexios' army at Dyrrachion and his post-Norman composite Komnenian army as genuinely tactically distinct. Can't wait for that, and can't wait to win the battle of Dyrrachion.

[Let'sPlayHistory]

D'accord on these:

- a direct multiplayer modus
- 2 vs 2 (and other) for battles
- replay of a whole battle
- clear attacker or defender modus for battles

And of cause: FoG:Napoleonic!

[desicat]

I would like the ability to remove flanking armies when playing the AI. Too often, troops show up on my flank just as things get interesting and instead of finishing off my glorious plan, I end up aggravated.

Hence why I always employ sufficient dross to guard my flanks

I actually love that the AI does this, wish it could be included as a % chance for campaign battle choices.

[Athos1660]

Speaking of AI and flanking, I'd like to see the cavalry of the AI main army trying flank/rear attacks by skirting my army, especially when its cavalry outnumbers mine. AI Cavalry (generally?) moves forward towards my opposite units.

And AI with different 'behaviors' : aggressive, defensive, imprudent...

But I guess it would take a lot of dev ressources!
And as I see it, FoG2 is above all a MP game.
And expanding timeframe with new units is certainly more important.

Moreover AI is great as is.

[rbodleyscott]

And as I see it, FoG2 is above all a MP game.

It certainly isn't intended to be. Probably 90% of the player base will never play MP and some game modes (Campaigns, exported Empires battles) can only be played in SP mode.

Moreover AI is great as is.

But there is a limit to what can be achieved with AI, so those who are finding the AI insufficient challenge may prefer playing a human opponent.

[Gaznak]

Some lists: a greek wars persian army with the various subject peoples they brought along the way (indians, assyrians, egyptians). Christian nubian kingdom with superior archers.

Maybe import in some of those Panzer corps 2 assets and give us some panzers...

[Athos1660]

And as I see it, FoG2 is above all a MP game.

It certainly isn't intended to be. Probably 90% of the player base will never play MP and some game modes (Campaigns, exported Empires battles) can only be played in SP mode.

I agree with you.

btw, please, keep in mind that, as English is not my mother tongue, I can express in English only say 60% of my thoughts, feelings, intentions... and can be easily misunderstood.

[Benedict151]

Coming late to this and I suspect most of what follows is a minority view point. I also I should say I don't think many/any of the following would make the game 'better', 'more fun' or 'more commercial' (except for me and probably a couple of others!)
I should also add that 90% of my games are SP (and the remaining 10% are vs humans with similar tastes)

More emphasis on command control

More historical commanders … I don't mind playing an army handicapped by an idiot (Persians at Gaugamela anyone?) but I know lots of people do

Uncontrolled charges … esp if the game moves into the medieval period.... speaking of which

A medieval DLC

Some mechanism for adding camps - and the pros and cons of attacking them

Slightly (but only slightly) more emphasis on quality (of troops/leaders) over quantity

More difference between in terms of responsiveness/flexibility between professional units and amateurs (and I know these are loose terms for this period at best, probably relative rather than absolute and open to near endless debate)

just my 2 ...well 5 … cents

Ben

[desicat]

More Campaign game choices.

Would be nice to have a choice that has the AI provide a certain % of its force for a flanking maneuver.
Would be nice to have a choice where the AI has its main force being reinforced by an ally, player chooses which to attack with the other reinforcing.
Would be nice to receive reinforcements from an ally during a battle.
Camp assault would be great, the ditches choice in the current campaign is surprisingly fun.
Would be nice to prevent the AI from choosing artillery in a campaign battle.

[TheGrayMouser]

How about a dlc with some “classic” fantasy armies, you know : elves, Orcs, Melniboneans etc. some precedent for mixing historical with fantasy with Slitherine ie the old Legion cult of Mithras DLC.

[desicat]

And AI with different 'behaviors' : aggressive, defensive, imprudent...

Moreover AI is great as is.

Or maybe AI Sub Generals with those designated traits

[Mairtin]

I would really like to be able to make a multiplayer challenge with the army of my choice but with no opponent army specified. Whoever accepts the challenge can then make their own army choice. This was possible in FOG1. An improvement to the FOG1 feature would be for the challenger to be able to specify if the opponent's army could be chosen from one or more of the DLC's or be limited to a time period or a geographical location.

Perhaps in this case the issuing players army could optionally be hidden too, so the person accepting isn't picking an army simply to counter the original choice. Together with the optional ability to limit the player accepting the challenge to historical opponents, or the same time period, or a free for all. If the challengers army is hidden, then a region and/or time period could maybe be specified.

[Athos1660]

And AI with different 'behaviors' : aggressive, defensive, imprudent...

Or maybe AI Sub Generals with those designated traits

... which means it would not be the entire army that would get a given trait but only the units led by a given Sub-General, ie several behaviors inside an army ?

Very ambitious and certainly interesting, but did you read rbodleyscott's comment about my suggestion ?

[gnocco.p]

How about a dlc with some “classic” fantasy armies, you know : elves, Orcs, Melniboneans etc. some precedent for mixing historical with fantasy with Slitherine ie the old Legion cult of Mithras DLC.

+1

[desicat]

A campaign game Choice option that lets you import the results from an "Epic Battle" or created battle, say "Elephant Victory", into the campaign results - win/loss at a minimum,to create branching campaigns.

[Jagger2002]

I have never liked the identification of units by numbers. You have Triari units #1 through #4. So I would like each unit to have a commanders name for identification. For example, instead of Triari unit #1-#4, we would have Bianchi's Triari, Romano's Triari, Moretti's Triari and Du Lucci's Triari. IIRC, some of the AGEOD games have this feature. They have a list of names for each nation which are randomly assigned to units as they are created.


It would require a lot of names but it would be nice. And I am sure you would have no problem having people put together lists of national names on a voluntary basis. Add a little more atmosphere to the game.

[miki]

How about a dlc with some “classic” fantasy armies, you know : elves, Orcs, Melniboneans etc. some precedent for mixing historical with fantasy with Slitherine ie the old Legion cult of Mithras DLC.

+1

+1

[desicat]

It would be nice to be able to not only add the CinC to a Campaign, but to be able to add named Sub Generals that stay with the army until RESET.

The ability to select the % of allied troops to be added to a battle, for both sides.

The ability to make battles with reinforcements a bit longer, as it takes a while for the reinforcements to march from the map edge to get to the battle.

An option to stop play and center on a unit that rallies, the camera does not always show the unit when the rally horn sounds.

The ability to select a flank march maneuver Choice for the player during custom Campaigns.

A defend the ditches/camp, or a defend the AI army position in general Choice for the AI in a custom Campaign. Basically forcing the player to assault the AI's defensive position to win.

[rbodleyscott]

It would be nice to be able to not only add the CinC to a Campaign, but to be able to add named Sub Generals that stay with the army until RESET.

The ability to select the % of allied troops to be added to a battle, for both sides.

The ability to make battles with reinforcements a bit longer, as it takes a while for the reinforcements to march from the map edge to get to the battle.

An option to stop play and center on a unit that rallies, the camera does not always show the unit when the rally horn sounds.

The ability to select a flank march maneuver Choice for the player during custom Campaigns.

A defend the ditches/camp, or a defend the AI army position in general Choice for the AI in a custom Campaign. Basically forcing the player to assault the AI's defensive position to win.

Thanks