Initiative

PC/Mac : Digital version of the popular tabletop gaming system. Fight battles on your desktop in single and mutiplayer!

Moderators: Slitherine Core, FoG PC Moderator, NewRoSoft, Slitherine Core, NewRoSoft, FoG PC Moderator

Malty666
Corporal - Strongpoint
Corporal - Strongpoint
Posts: 57
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 10:12 am
Location: Malta
Contact:

Post by Malty666 » Fri Jul 09, 2010 11:25 am

No its not that complicated.

But...

The problem comes where people take AGES to make a turn. Imagine you have a guy who takes 3 days to take a turn. It would take 2 weeks to get to deployment! :o

What you could do is set the option to use terrain generator or select map when issuing a challenge. These show up in the challenge list and you can choose which you prefer...

Although that may give the programmers some nightmares :lol:
Check out my strategy and tactics blog:
http://wargamingaddict.blogspot.com/

Need a writer?
www.artfulquill.com

cothyso
NewRoSoft
NewRoSoft
Posts: 1213
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2005 7:32 pm

Post by cothyso » Fri Jul 09, 2010 11:36 am

hmm.. those are pre-game turns, and even more, they actually already exists atm in game. Pay a closer look when you'll put up or accept the next challenge. the first turns are exactly for this: pick up a terrain, pick up an army and throw the initiative dice.

76mm
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Posts: 1247
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:08 pm

Post by 76mm » Fri Jul 09, 2010 11:52 am

cothyso wrote:Doesn't look too long, or too complicated to me, don't you agree?
Sorry, but I think it is too complicated, if not too long. The biggest problem is I is that you could end up with some real Frankenstein maps: while creating a terrain generator might not be hard in theory, most of the maps I have seen generated in other games are just not that good, and these maps would then be further revised (deformed?) by player choices...I have the feeling that the resulting maps would be very artificial and cluttered.

I think that the existing maps are quite good, but have gotten very sick indeed of some of them. I would probably include a terrain generator somewhere on my wish list, but it would be well below the ablity to import custom maps.

cothyso
NewRoSoft
NewRoSoft
Posts: 1213
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2005 7:32 pm

Post by cothyso » Fri Jul 09, 2010 11:58 am

not deformed, but generated using their terrain type and terrain features choices. you say you saw pretty bad ones, I say I saw pretty good ones, and for games even more sensitive than ancient tactic turn based ones, and 3D too. see Battlefront's Combat Mission game series terrain generators, there are demos for them which are including the terrain generator.

76mm
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Posts: 1247
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:08 pm

Post by 76mm » Fri Jul 09, 2010 12:34 pm

heh, I know the Combat Mission games very well, and was specifically thinking of the Combat Mission maps when I said that--I think the random generator provided exellent base maps (for basic terrain, elevation, etc.) but I really didn't like how these maps jumbled the woods, buildings, ponds, marshes, etc. all over the map (things like marshes on the top of hills, etc.)--you could play a game on them, but the maps weren't natural-looking at all. I would always use the random generator to create the base map and then spruce up everything else myself (make realistic woodlines instead of random splotches of vegetation, put ponds in the low ground, etc.). This is actually exactly what I was hoping to avoid in these DAG battles.

Morbio
Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier
Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier
Posts: 2098
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:40 pm
Location: Wokingham, UK

Post by Morbio » Fri Jul 09, 2010 12:39 pm

We have gone a bit off-topic here. My main questions was how was initiative determined (answered) and why does the number of horse units and commanders determine initiative (unanswered - /bump).

However since we have digressed to talking about maps....

The compromise answer is realtively straightforward IMO
- Have a bigger pool of maps for each map category (Open, Mixed, etc.)
- Have a sequential 3 choice option for the person that won the right to choose (is that the person who won or lost initiative?). The process to do this was previously explained by Deeter and myself.

For the larger map pool, then I know there are a host of players who would happily design some and submit them to Slitherine for consideration. Even I could do that (I think ;)).

Slitherine, what do you think?

TheGrayMouser
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4883
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 2:42 pm

Post by TheGrayMouser » Fri Jul 09, 2010 3:11 pm

Well, in regards to WHY more cavalry /IC would effect choice of terrian....

It is of course an abstraction, as there is no operational aspect to the game... i would guess an army w cavalry superiority would have the ability to screen their army and thus its intent , long range patrols , vedettes or whatnot... Control the area in the general vicinity of the battle field and thus have a better ability to chose the ground you want to fight on... IC would have a better "feel" of the lay of the land, be better able to organise marches and deployment , have a better sense of timing perhaps...

Just a few thoughts...

deeter
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Posts: 1497
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 8:52 pm

Post by deeter » Fri Jul 09, 2010 3:41 pm

I would jump on any alternative to what we have now. It's just plain depressing when you win initiative and pick very dense only to end up on an open map only to find your opponent chose very dense as well. I think the program spits out random maps without any regard to player choice, initiative or etc. The whole thing is broken, in my opinion.

On the TT, both armies have a few gemeral terrain types typical of their homelands (i.e. desert, agriculture, and hilly for Numidians, mountains, hilly and urban for Greeks). The player with initiative is considered the invader and picks a general terrain type from the defender's list. Then both players pick up to 5 terrain pieces from that list and take turns placing them. Something like that is not viable on the computer, but the current system is just pointless.

As to Mordio's question: there are numerous threads on this on the miniatures forum. GM's remarks as pretty close to the mark.

Deeter

deeter
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Posts: 1497
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 8:52 pm

Post by deeter » Fri Jul 09, 2010 9:09 pm

Giving it more thought, I could see the suggestion above working with a little more streamlining. The initiative player would designate a terrain type for the map and the PC would show his terrain choices which he could drag onto the map like placing a camp (which is equal to a small terrain piece). He would send that off to Player B who would add his terrain pieces and make any allowable modifications to Player A's choices. At that point the PC would step in and radnomize things somewhat. Player B returns the map to Player A who deploys as normal. Only one additional exchange.

Deeter

Post Reply

Return to “Field of Glory Digital”