Matrix Games Forums

Hannibal: Terror of Rome goes into BetaBattle Academy Mega Pack releases on SteamDeal of the Week Da Vinci's Art of WarCivil War II Patch 1.4 public BetaHappy Easter!Battle Academy is now available on SteamPlayers compare Ageods Civil War to Civil War IIDeal of the week - An updated War in the East goes half Price!Sign up for the Qvadriga beta for iPad and Android!Come and say hi at Pax and Salute
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Top Suggestions for COGEE Rules/"Bugs"?

 
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: Emperor's Edition >> RE: Top Suggestions for COGEE Rules/"Bugs"? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Top Suggestions for COGEE Rules/"Bugs"? - 10/24/2010 10:26:25 AM   
terje439


Posts: 6021
Joined: 3/28/2004
Status: offline
Since most posts in here are about Pbem, I will keep posting on vs AI

There are a few things in detailed combat I wonder if is WAD or not.
1. There seems that ONE unit will always have its movement reduced for some reason, it tends to be a supply unit or cavalry (cav with 8 movement points???)

2. There seems to be ONE unit that is taken out of the army to arrive as reinforcements, this is fine, however after the battle this unit will be removed from its container and left beside the container in the province in which the battle took place.

3. Artillery pieces that are captured in the pursuit phase is merely turned into a PoW, and not turned into your own artillery like the ones you capture on the battlefield.

4. Placement of divisions. As I played a few battles yesterday, I wanted to let my generals visit Mme. Guiliotine. The supply units were placed on each side of the map with the army in the center. The other way around would make alot more sense (the armed forces protecting the supply, not the supply guarding the flanks of the army).

5. When you get the option to rearrange your army at the first turn, there should be a way to ignore this and start with the current setup. This is espesially the case as the attacker, nothing is more frustrating than to having to use the rearrangement and see your artillery end up in the front where the enemy immediately charges it with a cav unit...

Terje

_____________________________

Yeay, back in the computer age!

(in reply to Marshal Villars)
Post #: 121
RE: Top Suggestions for COGEE Rules/"Bugs"? - 11/7/2010 4:18:25 AM   
IronWarrior


Posts: 746
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: Way out in left field
Status: offline
I have another one for pbem that I've noticed recently.

The merging player is often able to see where other nations end their moves. Doesn't always seem to be the case (although this seems to be the exception), but often I am able to see where other nations are ending their moves with armies. An obvious unfair advantage to say the least.

My top "suggestion" is to add 3rd party resolution for battles!

_____________________________




Histwar Belgium Campaign 1815!

(in reply to terje439)
Post #: 122
RE: Top Suggestions for COGEE Rules/"Bugs"? - 11/7/2010 6:22:01 AM   
Marshal Villars


Posts: 966
Joined: 8/21/2009
Status: offline
Thanks guys. Will note these too.

(in reply to IronWarrior)
Post #: 123
RE: Top Suggestions for COGEE Rules/"Bugs"? - 11/8/2010 2:23:57 AM   
Russian Guard


Posts: 1250
Joined: 10/14/2005
Status: offline

Also - as Terje and I discussed in his PBeM game, with sufficient points available one can literally strip a Nation of all it's military Commanders via the Surrender terms and using the "Remove General" clause. Terje removed 7! Austrian Generals with one Treaty. If his allies were on the same page they could have removed ALL of Austria's Generals.

That's silly.

The choices to correct this would be to either

a) Limit the removal of a General to 1 per Treaty

b) make it very expensive in points to remove a General - perhaps a formula taking into account the Rank and abilities of the General

c) limit General removal to only 3 and 4 Star Generals

Personally I would like to see a combination of all three of these.





(in reply to Marshal Villars)
Post #: 124
RE: Top Suggestions for COGEE Rules/"Bugs"? - 11/8/2010 2:52:30 AM   
IronWarrior


Posts: 746
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: Way out in left field
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Russian Guard


Also - as Terje and I discussed in his PBeM game, with sufficient points available one can literally strip a Nation of all it's military Commanders via the Surrender terms and using the "Remove General" clause. Terje removed 7! Austrian Generals with one Treaty. If his allies were on the same page they could have removed ALL of Austria's Generals.

That's silly.

The choices to correct this would be to either

a) Limit the removal of a General to 1 per Treaty

b) make it very expensive in points to remove a General - perhaps a formula taking into account the Rank and abilities of the General

c) limit General removal to only 3 and 4 Star Generals

Personally I would like to see a combination of all three of these.








Yeah this is something I commented on a long time ago. I actually wanted to make it a house rule to not use this clause, but didn't seem to find interest. I like the way EiA did this one (if I remember correctly) in that you could remove a general for a limited amount of time (costing more the longer the general is out). It was also much more expensive to do than in COG.

_____________________________




Histwar Belgium Campaign 1815!

(in reply to Russian Guard)
Post #: 125
RE: Top Suggestions for COGEE Rules/"Bugs"? - 11/8/2010 9:07:38 AM   
terje439


Posts: 6021
Joined: 3/28/2004
Status: offline
A BIG question in pbem games.

Is there ANY way to make the demand for an alliance work?
If I win a war, and demand a nation to ally with me, he will have to do so, but he is not forced to fight alongside me, he could merely declare war on my enemies and then do nothing, thus having fullfilled his obligations.
So what I am asking basically, is there any way to make this clause worthy of spending points on in a pbem game?

Terje

_____________________________

Yeay, back in the computer age!

(in reply to IronWarrior)
Post #: 126
RE: Top Suggestions for COGEE Rules/"Bugs"? - 11/9/2010 3:42:22 AM   
IronWarrior


Posts: 746
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: Way out in left field
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: terje439

A BIG question in pbem games.

Is there ANY way to make the demand for an alliance work?
If I win a war, and demand a nation to ally with me, he will have to do so, but he is not forced to fight alongside me, he could merely declare war on my enemies and then do nothing, thus having fullfilled his obligations.
So what I am asking basically, is there any way to make this clause worthy of spending points on in a pbem game?

Terje



The way I used it in the first pbem game (1805 scenario) as France, was to break up the coalition for a period of time. You can't really affect free will of course , and I didn't expect those nations to actually go to war for France, but it did break the coalition up so I felt that it was worth it in that situation. Some of the others didn't seem to like it though lol.

_____________________________




Histwar Belgium Campaign 1815!

(in reply to terje439)
Post #: 127
RE: Top Suggestions for COGEE Rules/"Bugs"? - 11/9/2010 7:58:14 AM   
Marshal Villars


Posts: 966
Joined: 8/21/2009
Status: offline
Can ANYONE get Kingmaker to comment further on this earlier statement of his? I see his PM is disabled:

"Trade needs to be completely overhauled, one e.g. being whereby minor nations cease to produce trade items once their original stock has been traded. (Kingmaker) b) Minor powers to continue producing resources for trade, it seems that once the start up goods are allocated thats it, the minor powers give up production completely!"

I really, really want to understand it!

(in reply to IronWarrior)
Post #: 128
RE: Top Suggestions for COGEE Rules/"Bugs"? - 11/9/2010 8:54:38 AM   
Marshal Villars


Posts: 966
Joined: 8/21/2009
Status: offline
IMPORTANT: Do you guys feel that ships are being captured in PBEM during combat????

(in reply to Marshal Villars)
Post #: 129
RE: Top Suggestions for COGEE Rules/"Bugs"? - 11/9/2010 11:29:50 AM   
Marshal Villars


Posts: 966
Joined: 8/21/2009
Status: offline
I would also like to get an accurate description of Kingmaker's "dream" Fog of War system. Thanks :) (of course I am giving no promises!!!!, but would love to know so Eric and I can discuss).

(in reply to Marshal Villars)
Post #: 130
RE: Top Suggestions for COGEE Rules/"Bugs"? - 11/9/2010 12:03:07 PM   
Kingmaker

 

Posts: 1678
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline
HiHi

Later but maybe tomorrow.

All the Best
Peter

(in reply to Marshal Villars)
Post #: 131
RE: Top Suggestions for COGEE Rules/"Bugs"? - 11/9/2010 12:50:11 PM   
Marshal Villars


Posts: 966
Joined: 8/21/2009
Status: offline
K Thanks Peter.

(in reply to Kingmaker)
Post #: 132
RE: Top Suggestions for COGEE Rules/"Bugs"? - 11/9/2010 11:59:39 PM   
Kingmaker

 

Posts: 1678
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline
HiHi

I’ll again put forward Terje’s thread as it contains many important bits.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2280129&mpage=1&key=

Capturing ships is mentioned in Terje’s post above and NO, they are not being captured in PBEM games, well, I’ve never seen it anyhow and have fought a fair few naval engagements in several games.

It’s not actually a FoW system, “Dream” or otherwise, the FOW is fine in game, it’s the ‘Military Groups’ overview being available for PBEM games that I take issue with.

For the period, that remember didn’t have Satellite Navigation/Spy systems ... “Honest!”, it is absolutely ridiculous that any player around the board can just go over to the ‘Military Groups’ overview and see info on disposition & Composition of everybody’s Armies or Navies anywhere on the Board never mind what FoW is prevalent in game (i.e. on the game map), it doesn’t matter how inaccurate, for the period it is just plain wrong, and all I’m suggesting is that there be the option on the PBEM set-up page to switch off the ‘Military Groups’ overlay if it is decided amongst the group that they would like to play a more historical setting re Intel via an ‘Extreme FoW’ option, much like the option for Advanced or Simple Economics.

Some Trade issues are again mentioned in Terje’s post above.

"Trade needs to be completely overhauled, one e.g. being whereby minor nations cease to produce trade items once their original stock has been traded. (Kingmaker) b) Minor powers to continue producing resources for trade, it seems that once the start up goods are allocated thats it, the minor powers give up production completely!"

I really, really want to understand it!


OK, let’s try via an example, let’s say on Turn 1 of a new game Montenegro has showing on the ‘Trade’ page 2 Money, 5 Food, 2 sheep & 1 Wine, and to simplify, let’s say that by turn 5 PBEM players have set up trade deals for all those items, then from turn 6 to the end of the game Montenegro either disappears from the ‘Trade’ page or is left with just its name tag (I’ve seen both) and no resources for trading, this would imply that for (in a 23yr game) the next 22.5yrs Montenegro produced Bog all by way of trade ... just a tad unlikely, so what I’m asking is can the Montenegrin economy be given a helping hand in the game so that it does actually produce tradable resources after its game start resources have been assigned.

While I’m here, and unfortunately this may sound like Sour Grapes, it’s not, it’s an in game situation and just plain “Tough Titty” for me.

In the ‘Invitational’ game England has at any one time between 10 & 14 Diplos parked in its lands all set to Propaganda, fair enough, but what I think the Devs may want to have a look at for the Patch is the timing of the ‘Expel’ function, I have 5 Diplos all set to expel which they do on a fairly regular basis, but the expelled Diplo does his damage before he’s expelled.

Now my thinking is that once a Diplomat starts spreading propaganda in any Nation, his ticket would be marked for expulsion before he can do any more damage, working on that premise the Devs may wish to have a rethink about the phase order that Diplo expulsions occur i.e. before they do more damage rather than after.

Now this process is seen to work then in future games any nation can be attacked by hoards of Diplos and in the case of nations like Sweden or Spain have little by way of defending themselves, poor old Poland has no Diplomat at all and would therefore be especially vulnerable.

Just a thought.

All the Best
Peter

(in reply to Marshal Villars)
Post #: 133
RE: Top Suggestions for COGEE Rules/"Bugs"? - 11/10/2010 9:29:03 AM   
Marshal Villars


Posts: 966
Joined: 8/21/2009
Status: offline
QUESTION: Have other people noticed this production issue for minors which Kingmaker has pointed out here? That they stop production and do not produce once their "initial allocation" is give out? That would make it so that basically nothing is available from minors (who have managed to stay independent) after a few years... right? I don't remember noticing this myself and remember pumping tons of stuff out of Poland for well over a year. Is it an isolated incident?

Kingmaker, point noted on the diplo issue. I don't know what to say about that right now. The list of things which Eric is going to try to tackle for this upcoming patch is already so huge that I don't know if I can convince him to take a bite on the diplo system. So you think that "expel" should happen first? I can try to add that to the "last minute list".

Have also added request for a "disable strategic map" option to the "last minute list" (which grows by the day).

I do hope you all appreciate the seriousness with which I have approached this task of making sure we get a good patch out. :)

By the way Kingmaker, I have seen you use it more than once. What does BOG stand for?!!?! ;)

< Message edited by Marshal Villars -- 11/10/2010 9:40:04 AM >

(in reply to Kingmaker)
Post #: 134
RE: Top Suggestions for COGEE Rules/"Bugs"? - 11/14/2010 9:28:25 AM   
terje439


Posts: 6021
Joined: 3/28/2004
Status: offline
Came upon another non-pbem bug.
I were involved in two major battles with Austria in the same turn and won both, however in Austria's NM calculations, they get +500 for victory in battle and -700 for loss in battle, while I get +500 and +700.

Terje

_____________________________

Yeay, back in the computer age!

(in reply to Marshal Villars)
Post #: 135
RE: Top Suggestions for COGEE Rules/"Bugs"? - 11/21/2010 5:29:40 PM   
evwalt

 

Posts: 644
Joined: 11/14/2007
Status: offline
Kingmaker is INCORRECT as far as diplomats and expelling goes.  It IS possible to expel a diplomat before he hits the NM though propganda.  I have had it happen in Invitational (I am one of the countries feeding diplomats into Britain). 

I think what happens is that during the diplomatic phase, the computer choses randomly among all the diplomats in play to conduct their mission.  If it choses a "propganda" diplomat first, it hits the NM.  If it choses the "expel" diplomat first, it expels.  Sometimes the "expeller" is lucky enough to get "propagandist" BEFORE his own mission, sometimes it happens after the propganda mission is completed.

I think that is an ok way to do it.

Also, I do think the Invitational game (where Britain's navy has been swept from the seas by a coalition of France, Spain, Russia, Austria and Prussia) and Britain is currently under diplomatic siege by the expanded diplomatic corps of all of the above, is a fairly unique situation. While it COULD happen in theory to others, I can't imagine it would happen that often.

THat being said: 1) when replacing Sweden with Poland, Holland, Denmark, etc. THOSE countries need a starting diplomat and non-player Sweden needs to lose his. Also, if the "textiles MUST be used for luxuries" restriction is removed, all countries will have the option to make more diplomats.

< Message edited by evwalt -- 11/21/2010 11:38:53 PM >


_____________________________

Russia in "Going Again II"
France in "Quest for Glory"
Prussia in "Invitational"

(in reply to terje439)
Post #: 136
RE: Top Suggestions for COGEE Rules/"Bugs"? - 11/25/2010 5:55:42 AM   
Marshal Villars


Posts: 966
Joined: 8/21/2009
Status: offline
Thanks guys. I am still here making notes and listening. :)

By the way, what do you think of the following comments made by a user who PMed me personally on them:

1. there appears to be no penalty if a countries neutrality is violated? I think this should cost 5-10 glory points any time it occures.

2. One thing I did was violate Britains neutrlality the same turn I invaded and declared war. No ill effect but it did allow me to get in a good position!

3. Also, was the designer going to address how sometimes treaty agreements are'nt enforceable?

4. Besides the enforced peace, does'nt the computer allow you to go to war when you have a mutual defense pact with someone, regardless having lost a war?



< Message edited by Marshal Villars -- 11/25/2010 5:56:51 AM >

(in reply to evwalt)
Post #: 137
RE: Top Suggestions for COGEE Rules/"Bugs"? - 11/26/2010 5:48:17 AM   
evwalt

 

Posts: 644
Joined: 11/14/2007
Status: offline
1.  I think I mentioned this earlier.  I think that there should be a GLory penalty any time you END the turn in a neutral.  I would make it -1 Glory per turn and this number GROWS by -1 per turn to some maximum, say -20 Glory per turn.  If you violate the neutrality of a major power, the country BEING violated should lose NM per turn, say -1 NM and this number GROWS by -1 per turn to a max of -20 NM per turn (your people are PO'ed you aren't keeping them safe).  Also, I think if you are a country that has their neutrality VIOLATED (ie. the victim), you should ALWAYS be able to DoW the violator, even if in an enforced peace (even the 18 month peace imposed by the end of a war).

2. You should NEVER be able to DoW a power if you have any forces in that country.  (You can do so now.)

3. I don't THINK that "liberate country" works.  If it does, I don't believe you can force the liberation of a country not adjacent to your borders (like ceding a country).  You should be able to liberate anywhere on the map, regardless of your own country.

4. DOn't know this one.

ALso, PLEASE don't forget to make sure that the bonus levy areas (ie. Serbia, Confederation of the Rhine, etc.) 1) can be properly formed and 2) actually get their special levies.

Another also, PLEASE correct whatever it is that allows some minors that have been fully occupied to stay at war (ie. they can never be conquered).

_____________________________

Russia in "Going Again II"
France in "Quest for Glory"
Prussia in "Invitational"

(in reply to Marshal Villars)
Post #: 138
RE: Top Suggestions for COGEE Rules/"Bugs"? - 11/26/2010 2:56:16 PM   
Marshal Villars


Posts: 966
Joined: 8/21/2009
Status: offline
Evwalt, Mus sent me an email and file on the "unconquerable" minors problem. Do you have any other concrete examples/files?


(in reply to evwalt)
Post #: 139
RE: Top Suggestions for COGEE Rules/"Bugs"? - 11/26/2010 4:37:27 PM   
evwalt

 

Posts: 644
Joined: 11/14/2007
Status: offline
Yes. It is an unconquerable Poland that occupies about 7 provinces. VERY frustrating.

I can email it to you if you need it.

_____________________________

Russia in "Going Again II"
France in "Quest for Glory"
Prussia in "Invitational"

(in reply to Marshal Villars)
Post #: 140
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Napoleonics] >> Crown of Glory: Emperor's Edition >> RE: Top Suggestions for COGEE Rules/"Bugs"? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
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

0.109