Wish List (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Forge of Freedom: The American Civil War 1861-1865



Message


Gil R. -> Wish List (11/30/2006 3:08:38 AM)

Now that "Forge of Freedom" has been released, the WCS development team will entertain any and all suggestions regarding tweaks, changes, and even completely new features that can be added in patches. It would be very helpful not to scatter these requests and suggestions across dozens of threads, since they might get overlooked. So, as you play and come up with ideas and observations, please post them here.


EDIT OF DEC. 15, 2007: It's probably worth noting that this thread was started the very day that FOF was released, and since then many of the suggestions made here have already been implemented.




William Amos -> RE: Wish List (11/30/2006 3:24:22 AM)

Well i dont have it yet so cant give a full rundown.

But I do remember we had some chat about giving Generals special abilities like "Engineer, Marching, sharpshooting training, ect..."

Guess could debate this Idea in a thread somewhere.




regularbird -> RE: Wish List (11/30/2006 4:05:06 AM)

Guys I know this is trivial but the territory you have labeled "KENAWHA"  should actually  be "KANAWHA."  I just checked a civil war era map today and it did have the correct spelling.




pixelpusher -> RE: Wish List (11/30/2006 4:09:02 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: regularbird

Guys I know this is trivial but the territory you have labeled "KENAWHA" should actually be "KANAWHA." I just checked a civil war era map today and it did have the correct spelling.


Oh, IIRC we went around and around with that one. Perhaps Mr. Z can better address the spelling we used.




Missouri_Rebel -> RE: Wish List (11/30/2006 5:08:34 AM)

The only thing I noticed that I would like is a way to zoom in and out on the maps. Would really help out imo

mo reb




Son_of_Montfort -> RE: Wish List (11/30/2006 8:58:18 AM)

Edited: Possible bug report - moved to support forum.

Son of Montfort




Airborne82nd -> RE: Wish List (12/1/2006 1:29:23 AM)

Minor tweak:  I would like be asked to confirm (yes/no) when I hit the "Next Turn" button.  It is much larger than surrounding targets and if one accidently hits it--there is no recourse (except perhaps to reload a saved game). 

Working now. For some reason, it wasn't the first time I tried it. Played around with the Prefs and it is fine. Neat game.




Twotribes -> RE: Wish List (12/1/2006 1:34:26 AM)

Humm it always asks me if I am sure I want to end the turn....


And there are special abilities in the game, well unless you play the july scenario I guess ).




Twotribes -> RE: Wish List (12/1/2006 1:38:39 AM)

I would like the routine for how the South gets faction with the European powers checked. In 2 games now, by February 62 after the US declared emancipation on or near turn one the 3 European powers have totally reverted from 3 points to US to usually one point for CSA or more , this includes the Union player spending max money to influence the countries of France and Britian,in one game both the US and CSA have 3 points of faction with France.




Grotius -> RE: Wish List (12/1/2006 1:41:56 AM)

I'd like a widescreen resolution (or windowed mode), but it's not as big a deal as I thought it would be; it looks fine even a bit horizontally stretched. I only really notice it on the tactical map, where the hexes are a bit too "fat".

I'm repeatedly losing the ability to scroll the map up/down/sideways with the mouse, but I suppose I should post about that in the Support section.




Temple -> RE: Wish List (12/1/2006 3:34:33 AM)

Since scrolling the mouse wheel moves the map north and south, perhaps you could provide support to the "tilt wheel" function on newer mouses to allow it to scroll the map east and west?




andysomers -> RE: Wish List (12/1/2006 5:24:53 AM)

You guys are absolutely shooting yourselves in the foot with that cover art. This game is great, and that art, quite honestly, is 100% awful. There is not one redeeming quality about it at all. It speaks so incredibly poorly for your marketing. You don't sell a brand new Mercedes right after the pigeons crap all over it. The car and what's inside is still a Mercedes and may be great, but people are not going to look past the bird crap.

The US rifleman is dressed in an artillery coat (red NCO stripes and piping) and is carrying a two-banded musket (not the more common three-bander). His kepi looks like it is made of rubber and doesn't fit his head worth a hoot. It is awful.

I've been an avid follower of this forum and am very impressed with the game so far and very happy with my purchase. But, if I was your marketing manager, I would fire whoever put together the cover art. Do yourselves a big favor and put an honest effort into something that looks at least halfway decent. You've done 99.9% of the hard work, but have neglected perhaps the most vital 0.1% - making a good first impression. Again, no skin off my back, but do this and I guarantee your sales will boost 10% at least.

Buy a copyright permission from Don Troiani or Keith Rocco if you can't make your own in house, but PLEASE do something.




briny_norman -> RE: Wish List (12/1/2006 5:39:30 AM)

I'll sign the petition for a zoom-function - both on the strategic and the tactical map.

And a little thing that irritates me when fighting detailed battles: The way the camera instantly jumps from one unit to the next when the last action has been performed, so sometimes you don't get to see the results of your order (I don't want to miss the cool new animations...!). This is aggrevated by the seemingly random way you jump through your units when giving orders, as you might be thrown form one end of the battle-line to the other without warning and apart from missing out on some action and results of your latest move this jumping back and forth across the map can be quite disorienting. At least, I don't think it makes for very fluent gameplay.

Perhaps the unit 'jumping' could be a little less random and based on your army organisation - next unit is always from the same division etc... That would also encourage realistic battlefield manouvering, ie. keeping divisions together etc...
And maybe you could make so the you don't jump to the next unit before the animations of the current unit has been played through...

By the way, also adding to the jumping effect is the fact that your moves are intermingled with your opponent's, but I really like this feature for other reasons, so I guess I wouldn't want to see it go.

Anyway, that's all I can think of right now. Back to the game!

Cheers!




Gil R. -> RE: Wish List (12/1/2006 5:45:04 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: briny_norman

I'll sign the petition for a zoom-function - both on the strategic and the tactical map.

And a little thing that irritates me when fighting detailed battles: The way the camera instantly jumps from one unit to the next when the last action has been performed, so sometimes you don't get to see the results of your order (I don't want to miss the cool new animations...!). This is aggrevated by the seemingly random way you jump through your units when giving orders, as you might be thrown form one end of the battle-line to the other without warning and apart from missing out on some action and results of your latest move this jumping back and forth across the map can be quite disorienting. At least, I don't think it makes for very fluent gameplay.

Perhaps the unit 'jumping' could be a little less random and based on your army organisation - next unit is always from the same division etc... That would also encourage realistic battlefield manouvering, ie. keeping divisions together etc...
Also adding to the jumping effect is the fact that your moves are intermingled with your opponent's, but I really like this feature for other reasons, so I would hate to see it go.

Anyway, that's all I can think of right now. Back to the game!

Cheers!



I quote from the final draft of the manual, so this is probably what you'll find in the final product:

Delay Bar/Display Speed
This option is accessible from the ‘Advanced Menu.’ It controls the speed at which action occurs on the screen, including how fast messages are displayed. Click on the bar at the level of speed which you wish the battle to be displayed at; the shorter the bar, the faster the speed (and the longer the bar, the slower the speed).



Try that and see how detailed battles go for you.




chris0827 -> RE: Wish List (12/2/2006 1:04:49 AM)

How about making it so generals can be assigned to containers at the start of a scenario?




spruce -> RE: Wish List (12/2/2006 1:08:15 AM)

when you are in the city detail screen - the governor is there in top - but you can't see his loyalty ratings very annoying (observed in the july scenario).

when a garrison unit achieves a certain level of quality - it name flips over into something less generic ...




flanyboy -> RE: Wish List (12/2/2006 1:09:35 AM)

A scenerio editor might be cool if you dont have one yet. A 1862 or 1863 start date might be fun.

Also a big plus for me would be commerce raiders (and the ability if you have a raiding with any of the euro powers of 4 they will build you commerce raiders 5 warships (spain built teh CSA a ironclad at the end of the war i belive) maybe make it a 6 i dont know.

Anyway commerce raiders would be great, they could destroy Union supply but they wouldnt be able to capture them, (as the souths ports were to heavily blockaded to allow ships to be taken as prizes) they burned 100s of union merchent ships and did millions of dollars of damage




ElGuapo -> RE: Wish List (12/2/2006 2:02:49 AM)

How about allowing Armies to assault forts or at least enter the same provinces of forts. It's a bit strange when your army can't even enter a province because there is a fort there. I can't imagine not being able to enter Annapolis just because it has some forts inside it! Entering a territory should not be considered the same as taking the territory over! At least give attackers the option of assaulting forts.




chris0827 -> RE: Wish List (12/2/2006 2:16:22 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ElGuapo

How about allowing Armies to assault forts or at least enter the same provinces of forts. It's a bit strange when your army can't even enter a province because there is a fort there. I can't imagine not being able to enter Annapolis just because it has some forts inside it! Entering a territory should not be considered the same as taking the territory over! At least give attackers the option of assaulting forts.


You can already do that.




ElGuapo -> RE: Wish List (12/2/2006 2:43:30 AM)

Actually, I have a whole thread about how I am unable to have an Army group of mine enter Annapolis. No matter how many times I move it it reverts back to its previous position. I can move small units in but not the Dept of Virginia group.




flanyboy -> RE: Wish List (12/2/2006 4:54:40 AM)

Keeping track of troops that were captured (if possible) and possibly prisoner exchanges?




AU Tiger -> RE: Wish List (12/2/2006 6:34:36 AM)

Don't know if it possible already, but I would like to be able to substitute MP3's into the music library. Bobby Horton's music would be perfect background for the game.




Gil R. -> RE: Wish List (12/2/2006 7:32:52 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: AU Tiger

Don't know if it possible already, but I would like to be able to substitute MP3's into the music library. Bobby Horton's music would be perfect background for the game.



I don't know how to do this, but people playing "Crown of Glory" had the same desire, so somewhere in that forum there's an explanation of what to do. Or, you can wait until Eric gets to this thread.




AU Tiger -> RE: Wish List (12/2/2006 7:59:07 AM)

Thanks. I will look at the CoG threads.





Ironclad -> RE: Wish List (12/2/2006 3:44:31 PM)

Improved PBEM after battle reports?

I have still to get FOF (roll on Christmas!) but from following the AARs I would endorse the requests for improved PBEM after battle reports. Eg accurate details of own forces engaged and of the enemy - a good approximation of total numbers involved (within 10% below or 20% higher), the names/titles of the army(ies), corps faced and approximate total number of enemy brigades faced (within 10% below or 20% higher)and perhaps the names of some of the enemy commanders (50%?). Also no numbers but just a list of enemy weapons encountered. This would better reflect the reality of information gained from actual battle experience.





slybelle -> RE: Wish List (12/2/2006 4:31:01 PM)

Add game option to allow only instant battles. Currently only options for quick or detailed. I personally prefer just instant battles so would be great if we could have an option for it.

It would also be nice to have the popup come up and say the results of the battle right after the battle during instant battles, versus having to wait for the end of turn report.




Gil R. -> RE: Wish List (12/2/2006 6:32:19 PM)

Thanks for some very good suggestions so far.

I'm not sure if it's necessary to state this, but we're definitely paying attention to these, even if I/we do not respond to each particular one. Keep 'em coming.




Brausepaul -> RE: Wish List (12/2/2006 9:33:27 PM)

I had something strange happening in my first (basic) game as the Union. A CSA unit entered East Ohio River at the same time as my division. I hugely outnumbered and routed them. The enemy unit got pushed to Parkersburg, where he got routed again...to East Ohio River, where he got routed again...to Parkersburg, where...I guess you know the story. This didn't happen indefinately, only about seven times, but this behavior is highly annoying. There should be a check to stop this game of "Fleeing Army" pingpong. Actually, I know that a good solution is not that easy: one just can't destroy the fleeing army, otherwise a huge army could be destroyed by a 50 men unit once one the run. Either the check is more sophisticated, or a fleeing army doesn't give battle more than twice: the real battle and a retreat battle.





bountyhunter -> RE: Wish List (12/2/2006 9:49:46 PM)

Maybe add the option to attempt to purchase European warships (frigate, ironclad). In that the only cost to the player would be possibly for the vessel and the weapons (and not for labor, etc.). Obviously this was attempted by the South on numerous occassions with only a few successful purchases - but the potential was enormous - and what I can see so far is if there was historical potential most people seem to be able to accept the potential being represented in the game.




William Amos -> RE: Wish List (12/3/2006 1:30:48 AM)

Id like to suggest some kind of editor that would allow us to create scenarios or campaigns. I for one wouldnt mind doing a mod that allows a different setup than any of the prepackaged ones that come with the game.




Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.539063E-02