Development wishlist

Field of Glory II is a turn-based tactical game set during the Rise of Rome from 280 BC to 25 BC.
tyronec
Major - 8.8 cm FlaK 36
Major - 8.8 cm FlaK 36
Posts: 993
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2014 11:09 am

Re: Development wishlist

Post by tyronec »

Could we have more information in the e-mail notifications of server games:
Both players IDs and their armies.
The cumulative elapsed time for each player.

The elapsed time is being used in the Swiss tournaments and works great to score games that have not been completed.
This is sadly missed for player organised competitions. Quite a few games don't get completed on schedule and it leaves organisers with the responsibility of adjudicating games and also puts pressure on players to claim games by default which I don't think anyone wants to do. If we had the elapsed time then this could all be resolved by a clear set of rules as is done in the Swiss competitions.

At present it is particularly problematic to run a competition with a shortish game time, around 2-3 weeks, because there are going to be more games that don't get finished. With the elapsed times it would make knock out competitions more appealing and could open up some more formats for players to participate in.
rbodleyscott
Field of Glory 2
Field of Glory 2
Posts: 27288
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm

Re: Development wishlist

Post by rbodleyscott »

tyronec wrote: Tue Jul 19, 2022 9:45 am Could we have more information in the e-mail notifications of server games:
Both players IDs and their armies.
The cumulative elapsed time for each player.

The elapsed time is being used in the Swiss tournaments and works great to score games that have not been completed.
This is sadly missed for player organised competitions. Quite a few games don't get completed on schedule and it leaves organisers with the responsibility of adjudicating games and also puts pressure on players to claim games by default which I don't think anyone wants to do. If we had the elapsed time then this could all be resolved by a clear set of rules as is done in the Swiss competitions.

At present it is particularly problematic to run a competition with a shortish game time, around 2-3 weeks, because there are going to be more games that don't get finished. With the elapsed times it would make knock out competitions more appealing and could open up some more formats for players to participate in.
I will pass this on to those in charge of the PBEM system.

Including the army lists names would be problematic, however, as the PBEM server does not have access to that data. It is a generic system and has to work for all games using it.
Richard Bodley Scott

Image
Dux Limitis
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 539
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2018 4:11 pm

Re: Development wishlist

Post by Dux Limitis »

Also applies to the FoG 2:Medieval.

More historical accurate unit models/textures.

Soldiers variations within one unit,like the barbarian warband in the game or like the Total War series,instead of using a single model only.

Historical banners.

The budget limits is the main obstacle of the upper proposals,but I think they can be add to the game in a slow pace,like add one or two new models or textures per update(Considering the game's updating rate is somewhat low),or open a donate channel,I'm sure there will be players who willing to donate the game,I'll donate it per month if the channel's open.

Don't know why most of the players focused on the MP competitions more.
Athos1660
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2445
Joined: Wed May 29, 2019 3:23 pm

Re: Development wishlist

Post by Athos1660 »

One thing that may please some players (including myself) is splitting the archaic and classical "Greeks" of the Vanilla FoG:A into the Greek City States (Athens...) and Leagues, like in the TT mod (a partition which I guess comes from a TT book).

(but I for one have nothing against the proliferation of army lists)
gfs26
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Posts: 114
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2018 12:44 am

Re: Development wishlist

Post by gfs26 »

I would like to see statistics for each unit in the original army.

Total KILL+WOUNDED in melee (i think it would be hard to separate the values, but if it is possible that would be great)
Total KILL+WOUNDED due to ranged combat (maybe with extra separation in artillery and normal weapons)
Number of turns in melee
Number of turns shooting
Number of charges done
Number of charges received
List of generals KIA

less important :
Number of cohesion drops
Number of cohesion rallies

i think this information is already in the code... it should only be collected, turn by turn

At the end of the battle the report could include the infos for both armies... when the battle is running, maybe, it should only give info for personal army.

If there is no place (or is complicated) to add this in the game interface, it would be useful in a file .txt (at the end or even better during battle)... there could be a command button somewhere that downloads and open the last .txt (updated to the last turn of play)

This is not finalized to see what is the best unit in the battle (also because a unit doing nothing, but in dangerous tactical position could even be more decisive than a unit involved in a lot of combat)... it is only a way to know some statistics... if it appears not historicla this is not a problem... if someone is not interested, he could completely ignore this extra information.

That is my personal suggestion... i think it will make this great game better!
Athos1660
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2445
Joined: Wed May 29, 2019 3:23 pm

Re: Development wishlist

Post by Athos1660 »

Being able to 'Name unit' in Custom battles as it is currently the case in the Campaigns (at least in SP, if MP creates the risk of bringing out hurtful/offensive names).
ZeCid
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Posts: 76
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2020 12:29 pm

Re: Development wishlist

Post by ZeCid »

hi, i want really to make attention on the way epic battles are "classified" by DLC : maybe easy for devs, but for players it is a nightmare to find many of them which the battle thematic has nothing to do with the concerned DLC ; in france we talk about a classiffication in "poupées russes" (russian puppets) which means every epic battle is hide in some DLC with no idea where it is. IMHO it would be muche better to get ALL epic battles in one screen (in both game), even if you keep the information of "what DLC does it come from". Sometimes finding an epic battle need to go back, then forward, then fuck ! go back ! etc... ("russian puppets", i said...). It is like getting a file, and in this file there is a file which contain a file where there is maybe what you search... or not! So it sounds more like hiding battles than "classify" them (who never had to deal with it at work ??)
War is like hunting, except rabbits shot you back
Image
ZeCid
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Posts: 76
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2020 12:29 pm

Re: Development wishlist

Post by ZeCid »

I mean i love tournaments, but i play a lot of multi epic battles in miror, and it was so insane to remember or find some, that i took a screenshot of every epic battle on a personnal file, so i don't have to search anymore "where is what" ; i named them by DLC and protagonist, so i have solutionned for myself, but for common people it is absolutly messy.
War is like hunting, except rabbits shot you back
Image
Athos1660
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2445
Joined: Wed May 29, 2019 3:23 pm

Re: Development wishlist

Post by Athos1660 »

LoD Distance of FoG:M implemented into FoG:A.

On my mid-range computer (with shadows on Normal, No anti-aliasing and full-screen), when I widening the map of a Custom battle a bit (say width from 32 to 39), the FPS drop a bit (from 60 to 45) when I fully unzoom which is not the case with FoG:M.

PS : the 'issue' is however settled with the 'Windowed' screen mode in Options.
rbodleyscott
Field of Glory 2
Field of Glory 2
Posts: 27288
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm

Re: Development wishlist

Post by rbodleyscott »

Athos1660 wrote: Sat Aug 20, 2022 11:33 am LoD Distance of FoG:M implemented into FoG:A.

On my mid-range computer (with shadows on Normal, No anti-aliasing and full-screen), when I widening the map of a Custom battle a bit (say width from 32 to 39), the FPS drop a bit (from 60 to 45) when I fully unzoom which is not the case with FoG:M.

PS : the 'issue' is however settled with the 'Windowed' screen mode in Options.
Because the tree models are a lot less demanding in FOG Ancients than in FOG: Medieval it wasn't deemed likely to be as beneficial in FOG: A as it is in FOG: M

If there is no issue in "Windowed" mode - which we would normally recommend be used all of the time - then this decision tends to be validated.
Richard Bodley Scott

Image
Athos1660
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2445
Joined: Wed May 29, 2019 3:23 pm

Re: Development wishlist

Post by Athos1660 »

All right. Thank you for the clarification.
cfeicht_slith
Lance Corporal - Panzer IA
Lance Corporal - Panzer IA
Posts: 15
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2014 10:22 pm

Re: Development wishlist

Post by cfeicht_slith »

Bring the FOG Ancients UI and graphics up to the FOG Medieval standard.
Flockaveli
Corporal - Strongpoint
Corporal - Strongpoint
Posts: 58
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2021 3:20 am

Re: Development wishlist

Post by Flockaveli »

A -1 to CT taken when a routing ally is adjacent or within some short range. This would increase the chances of chain routs when a forward unit breaks and flees towards or along the main battle line.
SnuggleBunnies
Major-General - Elite Tiger I
Major-General - Elite Tiger I
Posts: 2572
Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2015 2:09 am

Re: Development wishlist

Post by SnuggleBunnies »

Flockaveli wrote: Thu Aug 25, 2022 2:45 pm A -1 to CT taken when a routing ally is adjacent or within some short range. This would increase the chances of chain routs when a forward unit breaks and flees towards or along the main battle line.
+1 to this, possibly with non lights not getting the -1 from fleeing lights
SnuggleBunny's Field of Glory II / Medieval / Pike and Shot / Sengoku Jidai MP Channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjUQy6dEqR53NwoGgjxixLg
Latro
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Posts: 318
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 4:05 pm

Re: Development wishlist

Post by Latro »

Just had an idea.
I’ve always found it a bit odd, when the battle is officially won and you choose to continue, that the enemy just keeps feeding its troops into the fray.
It would be more realistic that they would start to retreat and flee.

How about a massive drop in morale for the defeated army?
If you have any more mobile troops left, you could have another few turns pursuing the enemy.
Might be fun for single player.
stockwellpete
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 14453
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:50 pm

Re: Development wishlist

Post by stockwellpete »

If all generals in an army are killed, or routed off the map, then the army collapses and routs. A variation on "kill the king".
Aetius39
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
Posts: 788
Joined: Mon Sep 16, 2019 11:45 am

Re: Development wishlist

Post by Aetius39 »

Two things:

1. More chat options besides only being able to send a message at the end of your turn. It'd be nice if you could send multiple messages while you play, commenting on a particular event or unit.

2. Multi-player with teams of two or three (or more). For example, in a 3 player team, one person could control each wing, and one the center. They could have limited knowledge/visibility about their other teammates' parts of the army. It would maybe help simulate how the sides had to keep in touch and communicate well with each other, but sometimes it didn't work out, to disasterous effect.
Creator of "There Can Be Only One" tournaments in Field of Glory 2.
deeter
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Posts: 1931
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 8:52 pm

Re: Development wishlist

Post by deeter »

Adding to the above, please move the chat window to the end of the replay. Seeing remarks before the replay spoils the drama! I hate seeing something like "Sorry about your general" before actually seeing him fall.

Deeter
Karvon
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Posts: 1161
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 12:36 pm
Location: Osaka, Japan

Re: Development wishlist

Post by Karvon »

1. Standardized number of commands for lights.

My pet peeve is the unfathomable random number of commands allotted for light troops.

I have recently played a dozen custom battles with the Parthains at 1600 pts with no fewer than 23 lights and never been given more than 2 commands. OTOH, I can recall numerous 1200 pt games with various Roman or Hellenic armies with less than 12 lights and being often given 3 commands for these.

It is very tedious moving a bunch of lights individually when you can't do group moves.

2. Different color base option for commands able to be toggled on/off. This would help immensely in set up to help avoid missing the odd unit getting put in the right group. The current highlighted dark bases don't always show up depending on the terrain.

Karvon
FOG2 Chaos Tourney and Little Wars Organizer, TDC - Imperial and Early Dark Ages Coordinator
MVP7
Lieutenant Colonel - Elite Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Elite Panther D
Posts: 1302
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: Development wishlist

Post by MVP7 »

I'd like an option to use FoG2 Medieval terrains graphics (except the buildings) in the ancients (and vice versa for those who prefer the latter style). It would be a bit like the different ground texture options in Sengoku Jidai. Ancients doesn't have a winter set but I don't think that would be much of an issue.
cfeicht_slith wrote: Wed Aug 24, 2022 9:54 pm Bring the FOG Ancients UI and graphics up to the FOG Medieval standard.
Some UI tweaks would be really nice thing to have if there's ever a Pike and Shot Campaign style repackaging for FoG2 Ancients.
Post Reply

Return to “Field of Glory II”