Matrix Games Forums

War in the West gets its first update!Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm version 2.08 is now available!Command gets huge update!Order of Battle: Pacific Featured on Weekly Streaming SessionA new fight for Battle Academy!Buzz Aldrin's Space Program Manager is out for Mac!The definitive wargame of the Western Front is out now! War in the West gets teaser trailer and Twitch Stream!New Preview AAR for War in the West!War in the West Manual preview
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: COG2?

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Napoleonics] >> Crown of Glory >> RE: COG2? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: COG2? - 9/7/2007 4:45:53 AM   
jchastain


Posts: 2153
Joined: 8/8/2003
From: Marietta, GA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: arichbourg

Sorry to say, this post has made me lose all interest in CoG. To me you are adding additional chrome, while basic problems go unfixed. I'm sure many people will like CoG, but I think I'll leave it on the shelf.

Good luck!


After seeing these comments, I was a little surprised so I went back to see what problems or suggestions you might have posted that were being ignored. I did find THIS post in the Wish List thread that called for better hexwar AI. While it isn't specified above, a significant amount of effort went into improving the hexwar AI in FoF and I have to assume much of that will port over to an improved CoG. Other than that, your comments have been generally positive.

The post above referenced THIS glowingly positive post that also listed several suggestions, but the majority of them are pretty minor stuff talking about scenario adjustments and tweaking of reports. Am I missing something? Have you posted a message regarding the problems you are discussing? If they are the ones mentioned above, I don't understand the depth of your concern and I suspect many of these minor items could easily be addressed if you'll help the team understand why they are so important. And if those are not the problems you are referring to, I would be very interested in understanding what "basic problems" you are referring to.

Thanks.

(in reply to arichbourg)
Post #: 61
RE: COG2? - 9/7/2007 8:31:12 PM   
ericbabe


Posts: 10691
Joined: 3/23/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Russian Guard
I love the idea of a more detailed map. Originally I liked the period simplicity of the current map but over time it has grown a bit "flat".


We're experimenting with un-squishing Spain and Russia. I was always surprised that so many people complained about the squished Spain but nobody ever complained about the squished Russia, even though Russia was squished much more than Spain was.


quote:


Question - Any chance of General promotions? When I modded in a number of generals I had to choose whether to bring them in early, when they were one-stars, or much later after they were promoted to two-stars - no option to promote. Also, a way to remove Generals. When I tried to set up a 23 year game from 1792 to 1815, you can mod in the required generals (oh, such as Napoleon) as time progresses, but you are stuck with 90 year old Generals still in the game in 1815.


I'll have to look into promotions a bit to see how feasible that would be. A removal date for generals wouldn't be hard to add.








quote:

Question - Any chance of General promotions? When I modded in a number of generals I had to choose whether to bring them in early, when they were one-stars, or much later after they were promoted to two-stars - no option to promote. Also, a way to remove Generals. When I tried to set up a 23 year game from 1792 to 1815, you can mod in the required generals (oh, such as Napoleon) as time progresses, but you are stuck with 90 year old Generals still in the game in 1815.


_____________________________


(in reply to Russian Guard)
Post #: 62
RE: COG2? - 9/7/2007 8:31:41 PM   
ericbabe


Posts: 10691
Joined: 3/23/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jkBluesman
Which book is it? Is it Joathan North (ed.): "Napoleon Options: Alternate Decisions of the Napoleonic Wars"?


Mr Z has it right now, so I don't have it handy to check on the name, but the title sounds about right.

_____________________________


(in reply to jkBluesman)
Post #: 63
RE: COG2? - 9/7/2007 9:53:33 PM   
Russian Guard


Posts: 1251
Joined: 10/14/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ericbabe

I'll have to look into promotions a bit to see how feasible that would be. A removal date for generals wouldn't be hard to add.



The latter is for me more important, glad to hear that it isn't difficult. An inelegant but effective solution might be to activate your diedin field but place a default number of turns high enough that nobody died during the game, unless the date/turn was modded (by folks like me).

If you feel the need/desire is there to introduce Generals' death/retirements as a standard game feature, then an on/off switch for it would appease those who I believe you have stated elsewhere, won't appreciate their favorite Generals having the audacity to die on their due date







< Message edited by Russian Guard -- 9/7/2007 9:56:31 PM >

(in reply to ericbabe)
Post #: 64
RE: COG2? - 9/8/2007 7:47:40 PM   
ericbabe


Posts: 10691
Joined: 3/23/2005
Status: offline
I wouldn't want to add it for combat deaths, since those can happen anyway.  Berthier's murder/suicide might be more appropriate for a random event rather than happening on schedule.  Ditto for Bernadotte's transformation into King Charles XIV.



_____________________________


(in reply to Russian Guard)
Post #: 65
RE: COG2? - 9/8/2007 8:44:12 PM   
Russian Guard


Posts: 1251
Joined: 10/14/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ericbabe

I wouldn't want to add it for combat deaths, since those can happen anyway



Yes I was referring specifically to non-combat deaths, such as Kutusov in 1813, or retirements that were permanent.

So if I were modding a Grand campaign from 1792-1815, I'd use that field (or whatever mechansim applied) to have Suvarov move on in 1800, instead of still being around (great as that might be for Russia) in 1815 at the ripe old age of (I think) 87.

Since it appears to me that you are looking for ways to keep the game fresh and replayable (makes sense) via some random happenings, even this could be somewhat variable, now that I think of it; as a General approaches his historical date of death or retirement you could introduce an increasing percent chance every month that he dies/retires.

Just a thought.


edit: for atrocious spelling






< Message edited by Russian Guard -- 9/8/2007 8:46:06 PM >

(in reply to ericbabe)
Post #: 66
RE: COG2? - 9/10/2007 2:03:23 PM   
Ironclad

 

Posts: 1598
Joined: 11/22/2006
Status: offline
Eric:

Your draft improvement list looks good stuff (plus the generals promotions).

I assume (hope) that the COG2 battle module will benefit from as many of the FOF battlefield improvements as is possible to accommodate including improved AI.

Some other changes that would be helpful are:

1. Limitations on the amount of funds an AI power will give through treaty exchanges (perhaps maximum of 10% annual income, or 15% for France, 20% Britain) in total each turn.

2. A better AI awareness of the power relations across Europe and its borders - so will give much higher value to bordering provinces than more distant ones or will, where desirable, assist/entreat a current superpower to restrict the growth of neighbouring countries.

3. Protectorates only being offered to countries that have sizeable forces within movement range.

4. Scope to select two target centres for an allied force - a major and minor one (perhaps two thirds and one thirds split). This would allow an offensive and defensive split or two offensives against the same or different powers. Also reduce a target force the further away from home territory it is ordered to move.

5. It would be great on the battlefield to be able to bring on reinforcements from different directions where the power concerned had won the scouting check and possesses a major cavalry superiority. To be effective the detached reinforcing force would probably need access to its own supply caisson(s).

6. On the economic screen, alert the player to any provinces where labour is available following completion of developments.

On prisoners (after experiencing FOF) I have changed my view - if included have them as a paper exercise. To reflect the temporary escort requirements, there could be a removal of a lower graded unit(s) from the victorious army (returned after one turn).

< Message edited by Ironclad -- 9/10/2007 2:09:33 PM >

(in reply to Russian Guard)
Post #: 67
RE: COG2? - 9/10/2007 5:54:09 PM   
Arinvald


Posts: 1777
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: Kentucky
Status: offline
I am glad to see that a COG2 is planned. My main problems with the original were the interface being a bit of a chore and the fact that the troop levels grew to rediculous levels. It seems that the interface is being streamlined, but has any thought gone into introducing a mechanism to limit or cap troop levels to approximate historical levels?

_____________________________

"The fruit of too much liberty is slavery", Cicero

(in reply to Ironclad)
Post #: 68
RE: COG2? - 9/10/2007 8:54:04 PM   
ericbabe


Posts: 10691
Joined: 3/23/2005
Status: offline
Putting some sort of stronger limit on troop sizes (based on number of provinces) is, in fact, on my list of things to do.

In the original release of the game we had very harsh waste rules to try to keep the size of the armies from increasing too much, but players didn't like to be limited too much by the waste system, so we reduced much of the waste.  So maybe we should try another mechanism.

Much of the issue with the troop levels is simply the income bonus that the AI receives at higher difficulty levels -- this bonus allows for larger troops than would otherwise be possible at the lower levels.  This is a very standard sort of thing to do in these types of games... the material bonuses for the AI in COG are smaller at the higher levels than they are in games like Civ IV, for instance.  Frankly I don't want to make the game too easy at the harder levels, so in instituting tighter limits on troop quantity I would want to make allowances for AI difficulty settings.




_____________________________


(in reply to Arinvald)
Post #: 69
RE: COG2? - 9/12/2007 4:41:26 AM   
Russian Guard


Posts: 1251
Joined: 10/14/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ericbabe

Putting some sort of stronger limit on troop sizes (based on number of provinces) is, in fact, on my list of things to do.

In the original release of the game we had very harsh waste rules to try to keep the size of the armies from increasing too much, but players didn't like to be limited too much by the waste system, so we reduced much of the waste.  So maybe we should try another mechanism.

Much of the issue with the troop levels is simply the income bonus that the AI receives at higher difficulty levels -- this bonus allows for larger troops than would otherwise be possible at the lower levels.  This is a very standard sort of thing to do in these types of games... the material bonuses for the AI in COG are smaller at the higher levels than they are in games like Civ IV, for instance.  Frankly I don't want to make the game too easy at the harder levels, so in instituting tighter limits on troop quantity I would want to make allowances for AI difficulty settings.




Certainly France had a huge Army historically at certain times, part of the issue here (IMO) is that AI Nations will mass everything they have in one massive Army and march on an enemy, leaving nothing at home for defense of the homeland and Capital, or to face other potential threats.

Many times I've seen AI France (and other Nations) lose a war because their entire Army was far from home while some other Nation DoW'd them and sieged their Capital.

An idea might be to have an AI Nation always retain "xx" percent of its forces in a "home Army" that defends the Capital/homeland. This would have the added effect of lessening the size of Armies that march on their enemies, although it doesn't solve the fundamental problem.

If nothing else this would likely make AI nations harder to defeat.






< Message edited by Russian Guard -- 9/12/2007 7:01:59 PM >

(in reply to ericbabe)
Post #: 70
RE: COG2? - 9/20/2007 10:42:22 AM   
Godkin

 

Posts: 6
Joined: 2/25/2006
Status: offline
I was wondering is it possible to add an extra setting to the game manu to start a bonus scenario in which everything is random such as the location of countries, relationship between them and resources destribution, and that without the time limit. So  I don't have to stick to the rutine. I am sure this can promise endless replayability.

(in reply to Russian Guard)
Post #: 71
RE: COG2? - 9/21/2007 12:14:48 AM   
ericbabe


Posts: 10691
Joined: 3/23/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Godkin
I was wondering is it possible to add an extra setting to the game manu to start a bonus scenario in which everything is random such as the location of countries, relationship between them and resources destribution, and that without the time limit. So I don't have to stick to the rutine. I am sure this can promise endless replayability.


Interesting... so the Prussian player might have most of his territory in Italy, or something like that?

This wouldn't be hard to do in principle. It may be hard on the AI. A lot of the AI optimization was made based on the map situation.

_____________________________


(in reply to Godkin)
Post #: 72
RE: COG2? - 9/21/2007 10:59:18 AM   
Godkin

 

Posts: 6
Joined: 2/25/2006
Status: offline
That idea comes from the game serials called Imperialism with two options one is for historical accuracy the other fancy world. For many years the game stays on my hard disk for the novelty with which I start the game once in a while.

As far as I remember  Knights of Honor can sart with resources randomly destributed, which inevitably leads to various ending and which means I have to fight with different big-boss everytime.

In Spartan every AI country has a pre-set goal like stay alive for how-many truns or occupy how-many territories and only a few AIs are set to take the whole map. The number and quality of soldiers is comfined to the pre-set level of the city.

I think different elements and features can be integrated into a suceessful game. If AI optimization was based on the map situation is it possible to link the AI optimization to the different resorces distribution? AI with rich resorces at home tends to be aggressive and those with poor resources tend to be diplomatic-wise until they get rich. One thing for sure is that they always ready to gang up on the player if feel threatened.

Maybe random location of countries seems a bit too much for some players but random distribution of resources with corresponding AI behaviour can add a great lot to the varity of gameplay.

(in reply to ericbabe)
Post #: 73
RE: COG2? - 9/21/2007 6:29:24 PM   
ericbabe


Posts: 10691
Joined: 3/23/2005
Status: offline
It actually wouldn't be to hard to mod the 1820 scenario to setup a random map.  Then we could test how well the AI did.

_____________________________


(in reply to Godkin)
Post #: 74
RE: COG2? - 9/21/2007 7:20:27 PM   
jimwinsor


Posts: 878
Joined: 11/21/2005
Status: offline
Another idea for COG2 is maybe have monarchs represented somehow, with varying ratings. Would affect the economy, stability, etc of the country (major or minor) he/she rules over.

Monarchs could be toppled/replaced by conquerers and/or civil disorder.  France, for example, would start with a pool of Bonaparte family members (ie, Joseph, Jerome, Eugene, Louis, etc...) that could be put in charge of conquered minors. The old monarch of that minor would flee into exile. An exiled minor monarch would be restored if that minor got liberated. That restored monarchy might then be very friendly and loyal to the power that restored it.

An exiled Louis XVI monarch would take power in France should it decend into civil disorder. Etc..

There are certain details to be worked out, but you can see the bare bones of the concept here...

_____________________________


(in reply to ericbabe)
Post #: 75
RE: COG2? - 9/21/2007 10:50:42 PM   
ericbabe


Posts: 10691
Joined: 3/23/2005
Status: offline
We do want to incorporate big monarch mugshots into the game, give the AI a bit more personality.  I don't know if a detailed monarch-rating and monarch-replacement system would appeal to people in proportion to the work it would take to implement it... I guess it just depends on how it was done.  We might at least hardwire a few of the big changes that occured in the period -- the transition from Czar Paul to Alexander involved an enormous change in Russian foreign policy, for instance, and it'd be nice to have at least an event to represent that.  (It'd be kind of neat to give Paul a chance not to be assassinated and to successfully implement his Chivalric Code for the Russian aristocracy... we could have Bennigsen executed instead in this case.)

_____________________________


(in reply to jimwinsor)
Post #: 76
RE: COG2? - 9/22/2007 7:41:23 AM   
Godkin

 

Posts: 6
Joined: 2/25/2006
Status: offline
Thank you guys you are really listening!

What impressed me most is AI's behaviour in Imperialism. If one of the major AIs is defeated by other AI (or player) on battlefield or lag behind millitrily, which subsequently weaken its strength, the rest of world just gang upon that unlucky one without mercy to get a share until that target AI finally breaks down to pieces.

I remember in Civilization IV: BTS small AIs can start with research in separate direction only to provide the technology to the most promising one, which leaves the player far behind without cheat.

And in Imperial Glory, I was kept being invited by different AIs to join different ally against different target, and if I decline maybe I would be the target, so I should be very careful to take side. Soon the weakest one was wiped out or absorbed into big empire. Then the tricks go on and on until there are only two or three major AIs left. Player can also do whatever it takes to unit other AIs to set up an ally (with time limit) against the weak one in order to plunder its territories together with others. But he must be cautious about other AI's conspiracy against him. That is an excellent representation of dog-eat-dog world. The name of game is to sacrifice small AIs for the big ones in order to create some superpowers against the player.

I think the purpose of competition between AIs is not to weaken AIs' strength but on the contrary, to pick out the chosen one to fight against the player the most cunning. Let the player confront the whole AI world and try to devide and rule.

If there is such a bonus scenario please leave it with no time limit becuz I want to help create the biggest boss ever and defeat it. By doing so it takes time.  


(in reply to ericbabe)
Post #: 77
RE: COG2? - 10/23/2007 1:07:14 AM   
Eskil

 

Posts: 24
Joined: 9/19/2004
Status: offline
A feature request from me would be to include an option to allow different resolutions so we can make use of our nicer monitors these days.

/Eskil

(in reply to Godkin)
Post #: 78
RE: COG2? - 10/31/2007 1:53:04 AM   
Peeking Duck?

 

Posts: 96
Joined: 8/30/2001
Status: offline
I don't know if this is the place to ask for features in a new CoG, if it is then here goes, otherwise please ignore...

I would like to see historical/real world topography on the detailed battle maps that relatively match real world topography.  I would also like to see AI that takes advantage of such features, be they natural or man made.  To me, this adds a serious level of immersion - knowing that as soon as you cross a certain ridge the same cannon that blasted you last time might be waiting there again.  Some cities could become reknown trouble spots for conquering armies (is there an urban terrain tile?)

I know it adds a lot of work to the game but perhaps it could be toggled between random maps for those who like them and historical maps for those who prefer that option.  What say ye?

P

(in reply to Eskil)
Post #: 79
RE: COG2? - 11/5/2007 5:40:36 PM   
vanmi


Posts: 87
Joined: 1/28/2006
Status: offline
Another idea to improve PBEM :
is it possible that each player play his turn in same time and send it to a master ?
Because when we wait the turn with 4 and more player it's unplayable.

(in reply to Peeking Duck?)
Post #: 80
RE: COG2? - 11/24/2007 8:33:10 AM   
2skoop

 

Posts: 5
Joined: 1/12/2007
Status: offline
I don't get why everone prefers cog division size detailed combat over fof brigade level combat? I love the detailed combat in fof( this is the reason I bought it over AGEOD) and have been waiting for the day that they would transfer that to cog. Having never played cog, I can't knock it too much, but the screen shots of 2D chits look terrible. Please tell me the units will have similar detail like fof. In fact I was going to request the units in detailed combat have more eye candy than fof. Zooming in and looking at all the different uniforms would be cool, just seems to me you miss the flavor of the period looking at 2D chits. I read some of the earlier post stating this would require major recoding, but atleast show brigade graphics with orders given at division level.

(in reply to ericbabe)
Post #: 81
RE: COG2? - 11/24/2007 11:44:02 PM   
ericbabe


Posts: 10691
Joined: 3/23/2005
Status: offline
The chit-view in COG is optional; the default way of playing shows figures to represent the divisions.  (There are a lot of people who like the chits -- including me!)



_____________________________


(in reply to 2skoop)
Post #: 82
RE: COG2? - 11/25/2007 11:39:01 PM   
Gil R.


Posts: 10104
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline
Yes. I'm sure that you can find some screenshots of COG detailed battle that show the units rather than the chits. Perhaps check out some of the old AAR's (which would require viewing threads that are more than 365 days old).

(in reply to ericbabe)
Post #: 83
RE: COG2? - 11/27/2007 4:11:15 AM   
2skoop

 

Posts: 5
Joined: 1/12/2007
Status: offline
Ok I went and looked at some AARs of cog with screenshots of the figuars like Gil suggested, and they do look good, but I don't like the 1 figuar with little color boxes representing the formation. I'm hoping for the fof multiple figuars to show the action, with ability to zoom in and see more detail of uniforms and such. Would it really be that hard to go to brigade for detailed combat? I just can't imagine division level being better, like everyone else recommends. I don't mean to be a pain, I just really like the engine you guys have put together for fof and I am excited to see it applied to cog. I think you guys should make as many improvements as possible, and not just transfer fof to cog.

(on a side note, I recently played AGEOD's napoleon game, and its good but I just don't buy into the no tactical/ detailed combat. After an hour of looking at the pretty map and moving the icons around I find myself board, I want to see the battlefield carnage and be involved in it. I love all the planning and customizing of your own forces in fof, then seeing it all come together on the battlefield in DETAIL.....keep up the good work.)

(in reply to ericbabe)
Post #: 84
RE: COG2? - 11/27/2007 8:58:24 AM   
pixelpusher


Posts: 689
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: 2skoop

Ok I went and looked at some AARs of cog with screenshots of the figuars like Gil suggested, and they do look good, but I don't like the 1 figuar with little color boxes representing the formation. I'm hoping for the fof multiple figuars to show the action, with ability to zoom in and see more detail of uniforms and such. Would it really be that hard to go to brigade for detailed combat? I just can't imagine division level being better, like everyone else recommends. I don't mean to be a pain, I just really like the engine you guys have put together for fof and I am excited to see it applied to cog. I think you guys should make as many improvements as possible, and not just transfer fof to cog.

(on a side note, I recently played AGEOD's napoleon game, and its good but I just don't buy into the no tactical/ detailed combat. After an hour of looking at the pretty map and moving the icons around I find myself board, I want to see the battlefield carnage and be involved in it. I love all the planning and customizing of your own forces in fof, then seeing it all come together on the battlefield in DETAIL.....keep up the good work.)


Hi 2skoop, thanks for the encouragement. We're looking at making a number of different improvements to CoG.

The feeling around here is that going to brigade level in CoG2 means that detailed battles would take a LOT longer. Imagine having 4x the number of units to move around! Given that greater detail, detailed battles might even want to be it's own product, maybe, and perhaps more scenario-based.

It would be nice to be able to see more of the splendifferousness of the various nations' uniforms.

Evidently, Chits vs Figures units is one of those hot button invite-a-rant topics: like Mac vs PC, Coke vs Pepsi, trackball vs mouse. :)

(in reply to 2skoop)
Post #: 85
RE: COG2? - 12/16/2007 6:10:17 AM   
pixelpusher


Posts: 689
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
* bump *

(in reply to pixelpusher)
Post #: 86
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Napoleonics] >> Crown of Glory >> RE: COG2? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.125