Sandbox Campaign suggestions
Re: Sandbox Campaign suggestions
thats odd because i only use TT for campaigns and i'm reasonably sure Ive seen it
-
- Field of Glory 2
- Posts: 28015
- Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm
Re: Sandbox Campaign suggestions
If you see it again, post a screenshot.TimDee58 wrote:thats odd because i only use TT for campaigns and i'm reasonably sure Ive seen it
Richard Bodley Scott
Re: Sandbox Campaign suggestions
I also play with TT mod, it may be specific
-
- Field of Glory 2
- Posts: 28015
- Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm
Re: Sandbox Campaign suggestions
But it isn't, TT Mod does not contain modded campaign scripts.matlegob wrote:I also play with TT mod, it may be specific
Richard Bodley Scott
Re: Sandbox Campaign suggestions
That's correct. I have not modded the campaign scripts in the TT Mod, it uses exactly the same campaign options as the vanilla game.rbodleyscott wrote:Unlikely, as TT Mod Sandbox does not include modded campaign scripts.TimDee58 wrote:Hi Richard, I may be wrong but i think thats a TT Mod Sandbox modification to the campaign
Field of Glory II Scenario Designer - Age of Belisarius, Rise of Persia, Wolves at the Gate and Swifter than Eagles.
Field of Glory II Medieval Scenario Designer.
FOGII TT Mod Creator
Warhammer 40,000: Sanctus Reach Tournament Scenario Designer.
Field of Glory II Medieval Scenario Designer.
FOGII TT Mod Creator
Warhammer 40,000: Sanctus Reach Tournament Scenario Designer.
-
- Field of Glory 2
- Posts: 28015
- Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm
-
- Field of Glory 2
- Posts: 28015
- Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm
Re: Sandbox Campaign suggestions
Ah, I think I understand. The choice you are referring to is not intended to represent a rearguard action (a defensive action carried out by a retreating army). It in fact represents a battle fought with hastily scraped together rear echelon troops, by which we mean garrison units, militia, reserve units, hastily raised levies etc.
Unfortunately the system cannot cope with fighting a second battle after a non-field-army is defeated.
Unfortunately the system cannot cope with fighting a second battle after a non-field-army is defeated.
Richard Bodley Scott
Re: Sandbox Campaign suggestions
I think you got it.
Sorry, my translation from french to english was not quite good
I understand your answer, but can we imagine a malus on reinforcment as consequence of a lose battle with rear echelon (or with allied army), in stead of replaying this battle?
Sorry, my translation from french to english was not quite good
I understand your answer, but can we imagine a malus on reinforcment as consequence of a lose battle with rear echelon (or with allied army), in stead of replaying this battle?
-
- Field of Glory 2
- Posts: 28015
- Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm
Re: Sandbox Campaign suggestions
Yes, that would be a possibility.matlegob wrote:I think you got it.
Sorry, my translation from french to english was not quite good
I understand your answer, but can we imagine a malus on reinforcment as consequence of a lose battle with rear echelon (or with allied army), in stead of replaying this battle?
Richard Bodley Scott
Re: Sandbox Campaign suggestions
Hello,
another question, unlike in the campaign mod of sengoku jidai, I never play a battle in wich my army sends troops in march to surprise the ennemi, with troops that enter the map in its flank
however, I have at several times been surprise by troops that enter to my army flanc
is it beaucause I usaually play with heavy troop (roman, gallic, spartans)?
another question, unlike in the campaign mod of sengoku jidai, I never play a battle in wich my army sends troops in march to surprise the ennemi, with troops that enter the map in its flank
however, I have at several times been surprise by troops that enter to my army flanc
is it beaucause I usaually play with heavy troop (roman, gallic, spartans)?
-
- Field of Glory 2
- Posts: 28015
- Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm
Re: Sandbox Campaign suggestions
No. Currently the campaigns do not include the player sending flank marches.matlegob wrote:Hello,
another question, unlike in the campaign mod of sengoku jidai, I never play a battle in wich my army sends troops in march to surprise the ennemi, with troops that enter the map in its flank
however, I have at several times been surprise by troops that enter to my army flanc
is it beaucause I usaually play with heavy troop (roman, gallic, spartans)?
Richard Bodley Scott
Re: Sandbox Campaign suggestions
ho! could it be add like in the sengoku jidai: I really like it
Re: Sandbox Campaign suggestions
Will we see siege battles for the game and for the campaign?
-
- Field of Glory 2
- Posts: 28015
- Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm
Re: Sandbox Campaign suggestions
Undecided at present. The problem is how to make siege mode enjoyable.matlegob wrote:Will we see siege battles for the game and for the campaign?
Richard Bodley Scott
Re: Sandbox Campaign suggestions
I can suggest 2 scenarios for siege:
- assualt: like the scenario in sengoku jidia, when the defense army was behind fortified positions
- exit: the siege army try an exit with the help of an allied army which arrived in the back/flank of the siege army
To my point of view,this 2 types of scenarios could be included as battles in the campagin
there where a such scenario in "tin soldier ceasar", and the community content scenario as "Alesia" works well
- assualt: like the scenario in sengoku jidia, when the defense army was behind fortified positions
- exit: the siege army try an exit with the help of an allied army which arrived in the back/flank of the siege army
To my point of view,this 2 types of scenarios could be included as battles in the campagin
there where a such scenario in "tin soldier ceasar", and the community content scenario as "Alesia" works well
Re: Sandbox Campaign suggestions
Hello,
2 suggestions:
- add the possibility of hitting the general when firing at the unit where the general is: maybe a very few chance like 1% fot each fire
- add the possibility of a unit which receive an order to not apply it (the unit refused to apply order ou do not receive it), we can also imagine the opposite i.e an unit which not receive ordre could act by its own and taking an initiative of moving or charging
2 suggestions:
- add the possibility of hitting the general when firing at the unit where the general is: maybe a very few chance like 1% fot each fire
- add the possibility of a unit which receive an order to not apply it (the unit refused to apply order ou do not receive it), we can also imagine the opposite i.e an unit which not receive ordre could act by its own and taking an initiative of moving or charging
Re: Sandbox Campaign suggestions
Hi Guys,
First of all, thank you for this great game. As a long time fan of ancient warfare I found this game very enjoyable. My main suggestion for sandbox campaign would be to made some sort of "ancient general simulator", by adding other aspects of ancient warfare to the game, all these other issues, which ancient general had to deal with:
- skirmishes,
- scouting,
- foraging (and other logistics issues),
- proper ambush mechanics,
- setting up a and defending a camp,
- sieges,
- forts, fields fortifications,
- guerilla warfare etc.
What I would like to get, is something more than just pitched battles. For instance, imagine if player could control the battle not only from the moment when army is already arrayed for battle, but from the moment of leaving the camp and deploying in battle order.
This would make especially light infantry/cavalry very valuable, since these formations excelled in these aspects of warfare (in pitched battles their role is limited to skirmish and pursuit, which is not portrayed in the game).
Another suggestions is to give some formations more flexibility in the way they fought on the battlefield or were used in other stages of the campaign. For instance, we know from the sources that roman legionaries in Spain, when fighting on rough terrain with enemeies which employed hit and run tactis were deployed to battles as fighting "expediti" without armor, sacrificing some protection for more mobility, (moreover, they could fight even using billhooks when neccesary ).
Same goes for some of Alexander's soldiers who could fight either in the phalanx or as more mobile hypaspist etc. It would be great to have such features in the game.
I know my ideas may sound a bit chaotic and impossoble to employ in the current game, but maybe you can use them in some other future projects.
First of all, thank you for this great game. As a long time fan of ancient warfare I found this game very enjoyable. My main suggestion for sandbox campaign would be to made some sort of "ancient general simulator", by adding other aspects of ancient warfare to the game, all these other issues, which ancient general had to deal with:
- skirmishes,
- scouting,
- foraging (and other logistics issues),
- proper ambush mechanics,
- setting up a and defending a camp,
- sieges,
- forts, fields fortifications,
- guerilla warfare etc.
What I would like to get, is something more than just pitched battles. For instance, imagine if player could control the battle not only from the moment when army is already arrayed for battle, but from the moment of leaving the camp and deploying in battle order.
This would make especially light infantry/cavalry very valuable, since these formations excelled in these aspects of warfare (in pitched battles their role is limited to skirmish and pursuit, which is not portrayed in the game).
Another suggestions is to give some formations more flexibility in the way they fought on the battlefield or were used in other stages of the campaign. For instance, we know from the sources that roman legionaries in Spain, when fighting on rough terrain with enemeies which employed hit and run tactis were deployed to battles as fighting "expediti" without armor, sacrificing some protection for more mobility, (moreover, they could fight even using billhooks when neccesary ).
Same goes for some of Alexander's soldiers who could fight either in the phalanx or as more mobile hypaspist etc. It would be great to have such features in the game.
I know my ideas may sound a bit chaotic and impossoble to employ in the current game, but maybe you can use them in some other future projects.
-
- Field of Glory 2
- Posts: 28015
- Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm
Re: Sandbox Campaign suggestions
Thanks. Some of these ideas are already on the wish list, and thanks for the others, which are food for thought.
Richard Bodley Scott
-
- 2nd Lieutenant - Elite Panzer IVF/2
- Posts: 748
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 4:05 pm
Re: Sandbox Campaign suggestions
I my sandbox campaign now.... which is very good.... I'm getting a very wide diversity of enemy armies to fight caused by truces with the Romans while other eastern type nations attack and now an Arab army allied with the evil Romans.
The game is fun but I don't feel that I have a core army in this campaign cause I'm using mostly rearguard armies of new irregulars, a couple of archer units and untrained mobs and a few veteran zealot units from my original army which is good but I'm thinking it would be nice to have a campaign set-up option to decide from 3 levels of diversity in enemies ranging from only one enemy (example is Roman enemy every time) to sometimes fighting Roman allied armies and then a fully diversified option for many enemy armies along with one main one sometimes. Most probably people generally prefer the 3rd diversified option which is like it is now so this isn't an important idea but something to consider maybe.
I think you have made it this way using new units often to avoid the player army from gaining too much quality improvement from experience. I have some superior zealot units but they still get steamrolled by the Roman legions in normal combat until I can add in flanking & terrain advantages and have some weaker enemy auxiliary routing units debuffing legion morale if I'm lucky, and I'm still able to win the fights (on the default normal difficulty) despite particularly onerous losses in the early melee portion before gaining advantages.
Thank you for continuing to improve the campaigns and support this nice game.
The game is fun but I don't feel that I have a core army in this campaign cause I'm using mostly rearguard armies of new irregulars, a couple of archer units and untrained mobs and a few veteran zealot units from my original army which is good but I'm thinking it would be nice to have a campaign set-up option to decide from 3 levels of diversity in enemies ranging from only one enemy (example is Roman enemy every time) to sometimes fighting Roman allied armies and then a fully diversified option for many enemy armies along with one main one sometimes. Most probably people generally prefer the 3rd diversified option which is like it is now so this isn't an important idea but something to consider maybe.
I think you have made it this way using new units often to avoid the player army from gaining too much quality improvement from experience. I have some superior zealot units but they still get steamrolled by the Roman legions in normal combat until I can add in flanking & terrain advantages and have some weaker enemy auxiliary routing units debuffing legion morale if I'm lucky, and I'm still able to win the fights (on the default normal difficulty) despite particularly onerous losses in the early melee portion before gaining advantages.
Thank you for continuing to improve the campaigns and support this nice game.
-
- Field of Glory 2
- Posts: 28015
- Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm
Re: Sandbox Campaign suggestions
IndeedGiveWarAchance wrote: ↑Sun Aug 26, 2018 6:04 am I my sandbox campaign now.... which is very good.... I'm getting a very wide diversity of enemy armies to fight caused by truces with the Romans while other eastern type nations attack and now an Arab army allied with the evil Romans.
The game is fun but I don't feel that I have a core army in this campaign cause I'm using mostly rearguard armies of new irregulars, a couple of archer units and untrained mobs and a few veteran zealot units from my original army which is good but I'm thinking it would be nice to have a campaign set-up option to decide from 3 levels of diversity in enemies ranging from only one enemy (example is Roman enemy every time) to sometimes fighting Roman allied armies and then a fully diversified option for many enemy armies along with one main one sometimes. Most probably people generally prefer the 3rd diversified option which is like it is now so this isn't an important idea but something to consider maybe.
No evil plot, just the RNG I think. Did you not get the option to use the field army in most of those battles?I think you have made it this way using new units often to avoid the player army from gaining too much quality improvement from experience. I have some superior zealot units but they still get steamrolled by the Roman legions in normal combat until I can add in flanking & terrain advantages and have some weaker enemy auxiliary routing units debuffing legion morale if I'm lucky, and I'm still able to win the fights (on the default normal difficulty) despite particularly onerous losses in the early melee portion before gaining advantages.
Richard Bodley Scott