Suggestions thread

Donegal · Post by **Donegal** » Sun Nov 15, 2009 7:36 am

I think a thread like this to compilate all suggestions would be nice.

I going to start:
The facing of the units isn't always easy to see. Some kind of indication printed directly in the hex would be nice

almal59 · Post by **almal59** » Sun Nov 15, 2009 4:12 pm

Some form of "opportunity fire" for missle units during the opponents turn would, I think, be more realistic.

Rosseau · Post by **Rosseau** » Mon Nov 16, 2009 2:06 am

Excellent suggestions. Too new with the game to contribute yet, but having a great time. Let's get the word out on this excellent game.

Post by **IainMcNeil** » Mon Nov 16, 2009 9:25 am

Gettign the word out would be a huge help. Posting on other forums you frequent, writing AAR's about your games, tell people down your wargames club. It's hard for us to reach every community out there as wargaming tends to be quite fragmented so if you guys can help with that it will ensure an ongoing supply of add ons and upgrades for the game which is good for everyone!

Aryaman · Post by **Aryaman** » Mon Nov 16, 2009 3:21 pm

I would like to see a different graphic for the unit in the info box, something more detailed instead of the same top down image of the unit you already get in the game. That could add considerable flavour to the game and facilitate recognizing different types of units

Aryaman · Post by **Aryaman** » Mon Nov 16, 2009 3:40 pm

Another suggestion. The AI is pretty good, but it can be easily fooled by massing your forces in one flank, the AI can´t react to that movement in a fast and coherent fashion, so you end up overruning it in the flank.
So, my suggestion would be to place a fixed "baggage" unit in the center of the battlefield, something worth fighting for it so that if you leave one flank empty the AI can take that baggage and win the game. this way the Human player would be forced to keep forces covering the whole battleline

Donegal · Post by **Donegal** » Mon Nov 16, 2009 3:52 pm

I would like to see a different graphic for the unit in the info box, something more detailed instead of the same top down image of the unit you already get in the game. That could add considerable flavour to the game and facilitate recognizing different types of units

The game seems easily modable in the graphics. Maybe you can do alternative representations

almal59 · Post by **almal59** » Mon Nov 16, 2009 3:56 pm

I think that scenario editor should have the option of setting victory conditions based on some geographical objective, in addition to destroying your opponents army.

grumblefish · Post by **grumblefish** » Mon Nov 16, 2009 4:17 pm

These have already been pointed out, but I figure it's best to add them to this thread:

- ability to change resolution in-game (right now it runs at the desktop resolution).
- a "delete" button for custom maps.

JayRaider · Post by **JayRaider** » Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:22 am

How about a full replay of all finished games from start to finish?
You could look over the games and learn from mistakes.

In the Multi-player results screen, how about a win/loss/draw beside each result. Rather than having to enter each played battle to findout the result. Its easy to forget after a few games.

gdrover · Post by **gdrover** » Wed Nov 18, 2009 1:15 am

Great job guys! The game is a blast. I can't stop playing.

How about 'linked campaigns'!!!!?

I love fighting the battles, but now I need more.

Having the ability to fight an entire campaign is great because then it really matters which units are destroyed and how substantial your victory is. Is this do-able?

vakarr · Post by **vakarr** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 4:11 am

I would like to see some indication of the steadyness of the unit ie whether it is disordered or severely disordered. Do units get disordered in the PC version? Also, the effect on movement seems to be the same for woods as for brush, which is incorrect for most troop types. If there are two types of woods then perhpas they should have different terrain effects - I would like to see Enclosed Fields, Vineyards, and Plantations added, too.

Chris

grumblefish · Post by **grumblefish** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 4:13 am

vakarr wrote: Do units get disordered in the PC version?

Yes, the PC version goes like this:

Steady
Disordered
Fragmented
Routed

If you send certain units into certain terrain, they will also become disordered, although a "D" will not appear next to their graphic (you can see it in the unit info box, though).

grumblefish · Post by **grumblefish** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 6:07 am

Can we have an option to fight battles to the bitter end? I get kind of annoyed when the game ends, and refuses to allow me to finish the day. In Classical warfare, there were a lot of battles that were two-punch bouts. The opening charge would rout the weaker wing of each army, and then the elite wings would turn and sometimes smash into each other. This game currently doesn't allow that, as the weak units might push you over the break point, and you can't have a bitter grudge-fight.

I am specifically reminded of Agesilaos and the Thebans. In the Battle of Coronea, the Thebans recognised their army's defeat, and attempted to flee the field. However, Agesilaos positioned his hoplites directly, face-to-face, in their path of retreat. The two forces smashed into each other, and after horrendous casualties, only a handful of Thebans made it off the field that day.

This game would be better if there was an option to simulate those two-punch battles. I have played Cynoscephalea about 6 times now, and almost every time there has been the possibility for this sort of grudge match. However, even though the right-flank of each army has thoroughly succeeded and is running in to support the centre, the battle often ends before they make it. It's a good idea to have points and all that, but at least give us a button to finish things off, regardless of who is recorded as the victor.

Also, I have a further suggestion that would make the battles end in a more meaningful manner: brief-out screens. We get an introduction to each campaign when we select them, but the ending is just a chart of numbers, with "Team X wins!" at the bottom. How about a box like this, before you show the numbers (or after):

-Same size box as the victory score box
-The left hand side contains a box for a picture
-The middle/right-side has a large box for text
-The bottom says who won, and has an okay button (clicking Okay sends you to the raw statistics screen, which we have now).

It would work like this:

We are fighting the battle outside Athens, in the first year of the Peloponnesian War. The battle is over, and we get a screen that shows a picture of, say, Pericles on the left, and the text is his speech from Thucydides' text, on the right. You can add a few historical notes if you like.

I think that would add a lot more meaning to the end of battles. You might also make it so that a different concluding picture/statement comes up, depending on who wins the battle (lets say Macedonia wins Cynoscephalea, you could have happy phalangites cheering, while they could be crying if Rome wins).

almal59 · Post by **almal59** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 4:04 pm

As has already been mentioned, I would like to see a way for part of an army to rout without the entire army routing. I think sub-commanders could control part of an army and victory conditions set up in such a way that the sub-commander's force could rout but the battle could continue.

TheGrayMouser · Post by **TheGrayMouser** » Sat Nov 21, 2009 2:50 am

I would like to concur to the suggestion of being able to fight battles " to the bitter end"

Perhaps keep the normal mechanics as is, but when one army reaches the rout limit the player could be given the choice to continue the fight until the turn limit is reached (at least in single player mode)

Another option would be to allow players to manually set the rout levels as an additional option when launching the scenario (much like the free deployment option) I believe the Great Battles games had something similar

My final suggestions/wish items(at least for now):
*perhaps some additional terraign types especially "buildings" ie villages , maybe ramparts walls etc... maybe caltrops to snare those pesky camelry units(actually need to add the camels first

*the ability to define the AI in a scenario editor as a defender (dont know if possible w the the engine AI routines) to keep the advantage in a good defensive postion

Thanks for the great game Slitherine! Look forward to future games/addons to the series (please get to Renaissance ist!! ha ha )
Regards

gdrover · Post by **gdrover** » Mon Nov 23, 2009 2:39 am

I was just coming here to suggest the same thing! I had the Roman army in big trouble. I had routed their flanks and was circling around to hit them from the rear when they reached the rout level.

I would suggest allowing the player to play even beyond the turn limit if he or she wishes.

It's very fullfilling to fight to the end and see your plans come to fruition.

Lamachus435 · Post by **Lamachus435** » Mon Nov 23, 2009 11:38 am

I would suggest to add fog of war as an option, so the player would not be able to obtain exact information on chances of success, Quality, Armour etc. of the enemy units until they are engaged in hand-to-hand combat, while image of the unit in question and its name would serve as general hint.

JayRaider · Post by **JayRaider** » Fri Nov 27, 2009 11:17 pm

How about the inclusion of time?
Daytime progressing to night time during the game?
How about different weather conditions which affect play?

On the Multiplayer screen, scenarios, it would be nice to able to see if the challlengergame is offered with a historical deployment or manual deployment.

JMass · Post by **JMass** » Sun Nov 29, 2009 2:05 pm

All previous suggestions are very valid and I subscrive them, I add mine: fatigue could increase realism, now units can run at full speed or fight all the time without bad conseguence.