More expansions for Medieval?

[MaxRobespierre]

Was sublime porte the last DLC for FOG II: Medieval? Can we begin to look forward to a completely new game in the future? (I know FOG II: ancients will recive another DLC.)

[Athos1660]

Was sublime porte the last DLC for FOG II: Medieval?

It was, according to devs' latest statements.

Can we begin to look forward to a completely new game in the future?

Atm we can dream of it

(I know FOG II: ancients will recive another DLC.)

It'll be a really nice DLC !

[MaxRobespierre]

What do we know about the last DLC for Ancients?

[Cherebuschka]

What do we know about the last DLC for Ancients?

We know it's a dlc about the Bronze age, which isn't suprising looking at the absence of some really popular choice like the hittites, sumerians or Minoans or Myceanean which to be fair, were all much more older than the timeline for "Rise of Persia". You can look for a list of potential army either in the released army books or at the Field of Glory II store page of Slitherine where there is a pdf of the tabletop rule and army you can download.

As for Medieval, I think the idea for a dlc based on the "Blood and Gold" army book was more or less shot down as it was a less popular and as such deemed a commercial risk.

[GentlemanRanker]

The interest shown in the Silk Road mods suggests that East Asian focused DLCs, for both FoGII and FoGM, might prove to be commercially viable.

[MaxRobespierre]

The interest shown in the Silk Road mods suggests that East Asian focused DLCs, for both FoGII and FoGM, might prove to be commercially viable.

I would play it!

[MVP7]

A third standalone FoG2 game for East-Asia and potentially other still missing regions would be great. The "time warp" system already allows cross-play between Ancients and Medieval so it'd probably be realistic to expand that system to cover a third game.

In terms of commercial viability, making a standalone game rather than a DLC and initially focusing on East Asia seems like it could work. The region is relatively popular in the western market and there's a sizable (if a bit hard to reach) local market as well.

[matt3916]

For what it's worth, I'd purchase an official East Asia DLC.

[Ray552]

Definitely would buy East Asia DLCs for Ancients and Medieval.
Would also buy a "Pike and Shot" reworked into the FOG2 system.

[edb1815]

Definitely would buy East Asia DLCs for Ancients and Medieval.
Would also buy a "Pike and Shot" reworked into the FOG2 system.

Ditto

[VideogameghisKhan]

I'd be glad to see an East Asia DLC as well. And then yes, reworking of the pike and shot era into the FOG2 engine would be great too. And rolling East Asia out with the mainline product this time around would be a great idea, as well as filling in other areas that were not covered in the Pike and Shot game the first time around - I'm thinking Safavid Persia and the Mughals as big gunpowder empires that were left out.

[SnuggleBunnies]

I'd be glad to see an East Asia DLC as well. And then yes, reworking of the pike and shot era into the FOG2 engine would be great too. And rolling East Asia out with the mainline product this time around would be a great idea, as well as filling in other areas that were not covered in the Pike and Shot game the first time around - I'm thinking Safavid Persia and the Mughals as big gunpowder empires that were left out.

I mean the dream would be a scope from Britain - Japan, so you could if you wanted to do the silliness of Gustav Adolph vs the Kangxi emperor etc etc

[MVP7]

A new "Pike and Shot" game, ultimately covering 16th to 19th century land warfare from all over the world, would be amazing.

Personally I'd much rather see that done on a different, more up-to date engine though. Using something with more flexible handling of mixed formations, models, animations, and more effective rendering as well as less hard-coded features in general would be vital with the large mixed units and formations of later eras. Realistically that engine would probably be Unity.

[tyronec]

My vote would be for a 'Pike & Shot 2'. Have not played the current version but have watched a few videos and it looks to be a good game so a new version has a lot of appeal.
More DLCs for Medieval or even extending Ancients would be OK but just doesn't grab my interest in the same way.

Also by the time you get to P & S there is something universal about warfare across the whole world so a game combining Eastern and Western armies sits better with me than it does in the earlier periods.

[Ray552]

I'd be glad to see an East Asia DLC as well. And then yes, reworking of the pike and shot era into the FOG2 engine would be great too. And rolling East Asia out with the mainline product this time around would be a great idea, as well as filling in other areas that were not covered in the Pike and Shot game the first time around - I'm thinking Safavid Persia and the Mughals as big gunpowder empires that were left out.

I knew of the Islamic empires of the 16th to 18th centuries, but not of the collective term "gunpowder empires": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunpowder_empires

---

A new "Pike and Shot" game, ultimately covering 16th to 19th century land warfare from all over the world, would be amazing.

Personally I'd much rather see that done on a different, more up-to date engine though. Using something with more flexible handling of mixed formations, models, animations, and more effective rendering as well as less hard-coded features in general would be vital with the large mixed units and formations of later eras. Realistically that engine would probably be Unity.

This would be outstanding, better than using the FOG2 system.

---

My vote would be for a 'Pike & Shot 2'. Have not played the current version but have watched a few videos and it looks to be a good game so a new version has a lot of appeal.
More DLCs for Medieval or even extending Ancients would be OK but just doesn't grab my interest in the same way.

Also by the time you get to P & S there is something universal about warfare across the whole world so a game combining Eastern and Western armies sits better with me than it does in the earlier periods.

I mean the dream would be a scope from Britain - Japan, so you could if you wanted to do the silliness of Gustav Adolph vs the Kangxi emperor etc etc

That whole sweep from East to West would be fantastic. Perhaps include the armies of the pre-European contact Americas and sub-Saharan Africa?

Or would that be getting too far away from what would be commercially viable (and historical documentation of those forces)?

[Athos1660]

A P&S 2 with the current FoG2 rules ? With opportunity fire or/and Undo ? With un/limited ammo ? With automatic cohesion drop when charged in flank or rear, even when unengaged ?

A new game about the 17th century warfare would actually be great fun.

[Dux Limitis]

A new "Pike and Shot" game, ultimately covering 16th to 19th century land warfare from all over the world, would be amazing.

Personally I'd much rather see that done on a different, more up-to date engine though. Using something with more flexible handling of mixed formations, models, animations, and more effective rendering as well as less hard-coded features in general would be vital with the large mixed units and formations of later eras. Realistically that engine would probably be Unity.

This would be outstanding, better than using the FOG2 system.

I always thought that the P&S's engine and graphics are better than the FoG 2,for example,accurate and larger formations,flags/banners,and the unit cards(which are more economical and easier to make/swap) prevented the ahistorical/anachronism 3D unit models caused by the limited budgets.I remember,about two months ago,I saw Mr.Richard had said in the FoG 2:M's Steam hub that he wants to add a new unit called the Routiers to the game.But unfortunately,the models are not easy to get,which can only be animated with the weapons that were originally created as part of the model.He only can re-animate the existing models.

[MVP7]

If I recall correctly, both P&S and FoG2 use the same engine originally made for Battle Academy (or some other Slitherine WW2 game). The engine allows for one unit to have one distinct model with up to 16 instances of that model visible and separately animated at the same time.

In P&S and Sengoku Jidai that one model was the entire formation with little to no animation or any other visual presentations of the state or actions of the unit. There wasn't enough resources to have distinct unit portraits for most units so you have several different units sharing the same look on the GUI even more so than the units in FoG2 games do (where a rendering of the model itself is used in the GUI).

In FoG2/FoG2M the distinct model is usually individual soldier with differences in equipment and weapons within a unit being basically hacked in through texture and animation tricks. It gets the job done but doesn't scale well as almost every little thing has to be done on model/animation rather than at engine level.

With the old engine it is possible to create units that have different elements, such as the Battle Wagons, but they are technically just a single model with the apparent individual models being part of that single model and sharing the one big animation. What that means in practice is that trying to use the same approach for the multitude of early modern (and age of revolution) unit formations would be prohibitively complex and inflexible.

A more modern and generic game engine would allow better in-engine animation system so you could make soldiers, horses, weapons, cannons and potentially other pieces of equipment individual components that could be applied to different units and formations in editor or runtime. It has been the common practice even in strategy games for 10-15 years now. It takes a bit more setup but scales far better than doing everything individually for each unit in graphics software.

For Pike & Shot 2 (and really there's little reason not to extend it into 18th and 19th centuries in expansions) I'd wish for something between P&S and FoG2 for unit scale. Like one visible model for every 50 men at default scale so you could get a better sense of the formations (and formation changes) than with FoG2 scale, and still have the individual troops large enough to see some detail.

I think it technically could be done on the current engine, but that would require some really hacky and ineffective animation tricks that, production-pipeline-wise, wouldn't scale to a game of that scope and would be very hard to get running at acceptable frame-rate.

[Athos1660]

If I recall correctly, both P&S and FoG2 use the same engine

I don't think so.

imho unit scale and graphics are aesthetic details. Those in both the FoG2 series and P&S do the job and are nice (P&S graphics looking however a bit crude/basic nowadays). I am not worried about aesthetics. The devs showed great artistic achievements in P&S, FoG2:A and FoG2:M. The question is : will there be a sequel ? (And : what would be the time frame, the geographical area : ACW, Napoleonic Wars... ?)

[locustmustdie]

There're many famous European scenarios FoG2M not contained yet,why so hurry?
Italian wars and Commonwealth-Russian wars have not been exploited yet.
if must chose one,Ottoman-Safavi Ottoman-Russia Ottoman-Hungarian wars are among my most wanted