Residual Fire (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Pike & Shot Series



Message


pacwar -> Residual Fire (10/19/2014 2:17:15 AM)

The residual fire sequence, which automatically fires units that were not ordered to fire during my turn, suggests that the issue of fatigue is not incorporated in the game. Units at the outer limit of their effective range fire during the residual fire so I assume there is no penalty reflected in accumulated fatigue. This is somewhat troubling as we know that commanders understood tired troops fired and fought at a disadvantage. Given the complicated process of musket fire during this period it would seem to me that saving fire until the unit got within effective range would have been a priority, especially for first fire. I would have hoped that the system took account of how much units turned, moved, fired, etc. and applied a fatigue loss. Units moving through disruptive terrain would have to reorder which both took time and added fatigue. Am I correct that fatigue is not factored into either combat effectiveness or morale?




berto -> RE: Residual Fire (10/19/2014 2:23:01 AM)


The Slitherine Pike & Shot Forum is way more active than this one. You are much more likely to get an informed answer to these questions there than here.




aaatoysandmore -> RE: Residual Fire (10/19/2014 8:27:47 AM)

Adding more detail isn't good for a game. Especially details that don't amount to much. Keep it simple is the way to go. From what I have been reading it's working very well too like they made it. The more stuff they add to be somewhat realistic just makes the AI that much worse.




rbodleyscott -> RE: Residual Fire (10/19/2014 8:53:10 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: aaatoysandmore

Adding more detail isn't good for a game. Especially details that don't amount to much. Keep it simple is the way to go. From what I have been reading it's working very well too like they made it. The more stuff they add to be somewhat realistic just makes the AI that much worse.


That's about the size of it.




pacwar -> RE: Residual Fire (10/19/2014 4:16:40 PM)

Well that is disappointing...simple is one thing, unrealistic is another. I don't think that including the impacts of fatigue on combat effectiveness and morale is making this "somewhat" realistic. I'm not sure how it complicates the AI...the AI, like players, would just hesitate to undertake certain actions when the fatigue of a unit was high...and given the multiple rounds of melee that are the hallmark of the system the reality is that a fresh unit, even if at a slight disadvantage quality wise, if engaged in a drawn melee, can wear down an enemy unit. Fatigue is an essential element of combat at this tactical level. Based on the answer to my question about whether artillery can in fact limber or not, it would seem some unhistoric compromises have been made with this game...




rbodleyscott -> RE: Residual Fire (10/19/2014 4:41:38 PM)

Victorious units will usually have suffered losses which degrade their subsequent combat ability. These losses, although low for a computer game, are probably higher than is strictly realistic. In part, therefore, they act as a substitute for fatigue recording.

I am not afraid to agree that compromises have been made in the name of playability. That is what game design is all about.




djitters19 -> RE: Residual Fire (10/19/2014 5:49:50 PM)

User friendly mechanics with good graphics make for a playable, straightforward game. This game has both, I especially like the battle generator! You may have answered this in another thread but I didn't see it, is there(I hope) a 18th century/Napoleonic warfare game similar to Pike and Shot in the works?




rbodleyscott -> RE: Residual Fire (10/19/2014 6:15:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: djitters19

User friendly mechanics with good graphics make for a playable, straightforward game. This game has both, I especially like the battle generator! You may have answered this in another thread but I didn't see it, is there(I hope) a 18th century/Napoleonic warfare game similar to Pike and Shot in the works?


Not yet, but a strategy discussion is underway re future projects.




vaalen -> RE: Residual Fire (10/19/2014 7:31:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rbodleyscott

Victorious units will usually have suffered losses which degrade their subsequent combat ability. These losses, although low for a computer game, are probably higher than is strictly realistic. In part, therefore, they act as a substitute for fatigue recording.

I am not afraid to agree that compromises have been made in the name of playability. That is what game design is all about.


In playing the game, it seems as if fatigue is modeled, in the way units behave. Units that have been in combat are less efficient, and seem to move more slowly. There is a morale status that degrades the effectiveness of units, and units are much more likely to break in the later stages of the game than in the earlier ones. It also seems that units can move more hexes in the earlier game than the later game. It is very difficult to get units that have returned from a long pursuit back into the battle, as they seem to have less action points.

While it appears that fatigue may not be specifically modeled, the game plays as if it was, based on my experience.




TheGrayMouser -> RE: Residual Fire (10/19/2014 7:54:49 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: vaalen


quote:

ORIGINAL: rbodleyscott

Victorious units will usually have suffered losses which degrade their subsequent combat ability. These losses, although low for a computer game, are probably higher than is strictly realistic. In part, therefore, they act as a substitute for fatigue recording.

I am not afraid to agree that compromises have been made in the name of playability. That is what game design is all about.


In playing the game, it seems as if fatigue is modeled, in the way units behave. Units that have been in combat are less efficient, and seem to move more slowly. There is a morale status that degrades the effectiveness of units, and units are much more likely to break in the later stages of the game than in the earlier ones. It also seems that units can move more hexes in the earlier game than the later game. It is very difficult to get units that have returned from a long pursuit back into the battle, as they seem to have less action points.

While it appears that fatigue may not be specifically modeled, the game plays as if it was, based on my experience.


I agree with is sentiment. What your seeing for game mechanics is:
*units that are fragmented lose the ability to maneuver well, (loss of AP's)
*units with high casualties (under AI control) are very reluctant to close the distance, basically they don't want to autobreak
*some units, especially lights, when fired upon when moving sometimes lose AP or the ability to reach the target tile (basically interdiction fire)
*The # of men remaining in a unit directly effects firepower but also influences melee combat(but not impact)
*units might begin a battle with kiel status, but lose it once degraded via casualties
When its all put together as a whole, yep, the feel is units certainly are tired and more brittle and less affective bear end game, which makes having a reserve ideal.
Cheers!




pacwar -> RE: Residual Fire (10/19/2014 11:21:40 PM)

quote:

units that are fragmented lose the ability to maneuver well, (loss of AP's)
*units with high casualties (under AI control) are very reluctant to close the distance, basically they don't want to autobreak
*some units, especially lights, when fired upon when moving sometimes lose AP or the ability to reach the target tile (basically interdiction fire)


I must admit I haven't played enough to determine if what you have described actually occurs...clearly the AI will treat units that are disordered/fragmented or have large losses differently.

quote:

It also seems that units can move more hexes in the earlier game than the later game. It is very difficult to get units that have returned from a long pursuit back into the battle, as they seem to have less action points.


I'd be interested to hear from the designers whether what is described above is real, reduced movement for units as the scenario progresses/reduced movement for units returning after pursuit, or just a subjective observation.




aaatoysandmore -> RE: Residual Fire (10/19/2014 11:32:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: pacwar

Well that is disappointing...simple is one thing, unrealistic is another. I don't think that including the impacts of fatigue on combat effectiveness and morale is making this "somewhat" realistic. I'm not sure how it complicates the AI...the AI, like players, would just hesitate to undertake certain actions when the fatigue of a unit was high...and given the multiple rounds of melee that are the hallmark of the system the reality is that a fresh unit, even if at a slight disadvantage quality wise, if engaged in a drawn melee, can wear down an enemy unit. Fatigue is an essential element of combat at this tactical level. Based on the answer to my question about whether artillery can in fact limber or not, it would seem some unhistoric compromises have been made with this game...


In this case historic doesn't matter. That the game is fun and challenging matters more (at least to the devs and most of the players I've read) so I myself can give up this fatigue and morale for a more challenging game (not all wargames have to be historical, just the setting is fine by me, I'd rather play whatif's anyways) an if I want an history lesson I can still read a book. [:)]




aaatoysandmore -> RE: Residual Fire (10/19/2014 11:34:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: djitters19

User friendly mechanics with good graphics make for a playable, straightforward game. This game has both, I especially like the battle generator! You may have answered this in another thread but I didn't see it, is there(I hope) a 18th century/Napoleonic warfare game similar to Pike and Shot in the works?


I hope for more "ancients" warfare and battle system is in the works to replace that god awful Field of Glory I wasted money on.[&o]




pacwar -> RE: Residual Fire (10/20/2014 2:02:34 AM)

quote:

In this case historic doesn't matter. That the game is fun and challenging matters more (at least to the devs and most of the players I've read) so I myself can give up this fatigue and morale for a more challenging game (not all wargames have to be historical, just the setting is fine by me, I'd rather play whatif's anyways) an if I want an history lesson I can still read a book


Well, I don't really know where to start with that statement...you've obviously made a tradeoff that would be unacceptable for most wargamers, which you don't appear to be, rather than gamers, which your statement suggests you are...if history doesn't matter, then why go through the pretentions of replicating "historical" scenarios and setting this "game" in the 16th and 17th centuries on earth rather than a mythical alternative universe, where you can just make things up as you go along. Your position, that "fun" trumps historical accuracy, is not a tradeoff I would make...and your suggestion that leaving fatigue and morale out of the game makes it "more" challenging is just plain wrong...having those factors included would really make the game more challenging.

Based on what the designers have said in response to several of the questions about game design I am satisfied they didn't necessarily throw all those untidy things out but made certain decisions to maintain their definition of balance...I might define balance differently but there it is...





aaatoysandmore -> RE: Residual Fire (10/20/2014 4:03:22 AM)

But, you're the only one complaining about it so I don't think the majority really care what you think. [:D] I like the way this game is made and from the sounds of it plays. Thank goodness the devs didn't put in too much detail for gameplay. Some people just don't understand the limits on a computer game vs a boardgame. They think everything should be the same. lol




rbodleyscott -> RE: Residual Fire (10/20/2014 7:19:35 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: pacwar

quote:

It also seems that units can move more hexes in the earlier game than the later game. It is very difficult to get units that have returned from a long pursuit back into the battle, as they seem to have less action points.


I'd be interested to hear from the designers whether what is described above is real, reduced movement for units as the scenario progresses/reduced movement for units returning after pursuit, or just a subjective observation.



Those observed phenomena are not real.




TheGrayMouser -> RE: Residual Fire (10/20/2014 12:28:20 PM)


Oh man Pacwar, you will never get a consenus on the definition of "what is a wargame". I think this game certainly is though. The interaction between troop types is histoical, the flow of the game play and end results appear historical, even if some of the "bottom up details" are absent. It is interesting you bring up detail vs histocial outcome, the two arnt exclusive in SOME designs. Look at the GBOH games. The interaction between troops were accurate, the end results of battles were accurate, the ebb and flow of battle, NO, didnt resemble history at all, yet these were till good games( the example I will cite is Cannae, which was NOT a simple double enevelopement of the legions, rather Hannibal banked on the fact that the ROmans own fierce momentum would basically put em in a pocket , a salient . In the GBOH though, they enforce this historical outcome by: making the ROman army a slug, crippled with numerious ineffective leaders so the army inches fowrd a few segements at a time while the Cartho's have free reign of manuever. Many other key battles in this series had the same issues)
I think if any one was aksed if Steel panthers or the Campaign series games are wargames, the answere would be absoluteley, yet neither of these included fatuige in the mechanics.
Details like fatuige or ammo is nice but not necesary in some simuations. (although I admit I love details as well over the years have grown to appreciate they arnt the be all end all)
.




Moltke71 -> RE: Residual Fire (10/20/2014 1:56:00 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: aaatoysandmore

But, you're the only one complaining about it so I don't think the majority really care what you think. [:D] I like the way this game is made and from the sounds of it plays. Thank goodness the devs didn't put in too much detail for gameplay. Some people just don't understand the limits on a computer game vs a boardgame. They think everything should be the same. lol


+1




pacwar -> RE: Residual Fire (10/21/2014 12:28:43 AM)

quote:

you will never get a consensus on the definition of "what is a wargame". I think this game certainly is though.


I don't disagree in your assessment of this game...I think we started the conversation discussing essential and non essential details. Having now worked my way through three tutorials it clearly meets whatever criteria exists to define it as a wargame, but on the realism scale the game is somewhat lacking...not without a lot of merit but not all it could be. As far as no one else weighing in on the need for realism, I attribute that to those who want factors like fatigue includes but having read our discussion have chosen to pass on the game...they vote with their wallets.




IainMcNeil -> RE: Residual Fire (10/21/2014 11:01:02 AM)

One of the things that the Field of Glory gaming systems focused on was a top down design, rather than bottom up. By this what we mean is we wanted to model the interactions between troops in a realistic way rather than attempt to model the behaviour of weapons and armour in detail and then add fatigue, terrain, morale, layer on layer to try and get a realistic result. We knew what was supposed to happen so worked out a system to deliver that.

Richard can explain this better but the aim is to get something that feels like a period battle with realistic tactics and outcomes. We feel we've achieved that and that Pike and Shot is one of if not the best recreation of warfare in this period.




aaatoysandmore -> RE: Residual Fire (10/21/2014 12:33:59 PM)

quote:

I attribute that to those who want factors like fatigue includes but having read our discussion have chosen to pass on the game...they vote with their wallets.


By the same token those that don't want that crap have voted with their wallets as well. I'd say in this case we far outnumber the ones that do. The game is pretty popular already. Good reviews are pouring in. Of course there are a "few" sourpusses but there always are in most games.

Good job Iain, now could you go back and redo Field of Glory with this engine? [&o]




Wargamer Editor -> RE: Residual Fire (10/28/2014 10:26:30 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: pacwar

Given the complicated process of musket fire during this period it would seem to me that saving fire until the unit got within effective range would have been a priority, especially for first fire.



I'd like to point out that loading a matchlock musket is not very complicated - although having a match does mean it is a bit more so than a flintlock due to the proximity of fire and gunpowder [:-] Do not be fooled by the long series of illustrations in contemporary works as they are as much artwork as practical and incorporate renaissance artistic fashion for showing the human form in action. It is also not that tiring to handle a musket and due to the methods of shooting used during the period high rates of fire were not aimed for - that starts in the last quarter of the C17th really.




Moltke71 -> RE: Residual Fire (10/28/2014 4:25:22 PM)

Good points, Nik.




pacwar -> RE: Residual Fire (10/30/2014 1:33:47 AM)

quote:

I'd like to point out that loading a matchlock musket is not very complicated - although having a match does mean it is a bit more so than a flintlock due to the proximity of fire and gunpowder Do not be fooled by the long series of illustrations in contemporary works as they are as much artwork as practical and incorporate renaissance artistic fashion for showing the human form in action. It is also not that tiring to handle a musket and due to the methods of shooting used during the period high rates of fire were not aimed for - that starts in the last quarter of the C17th really.
Once again, where to begin...fatigue is a function of more than just loading and firing, although a 17th century matchlock weighed more than a Brown Bess and was far more cumbersome to load, despite whatever deviations an individual soldier might adopt to speed up the process...like soldiers in the American Revolution loading the ball by pounding the stock on the ground rather than using a ramrod. High rates of fire were only one factor...fatigue is the sum total of marching, loading, firing and perhaps most importantly, fear and stress. Then there is the fouling of the muskets themselves which would impact their effectiveness.

quote:

By the same token those that don't want that crap have voted with their wallets as well. I'd say in this case we far outnumber the ones that do. The game is pretty popular already. Good reviews are pouring in. Of course there are a "few" sourpusses but there always are in most games.


Maybe, maybe not...reviews are one thing, sales another. "game pretty popular already"...really... based on what metric?




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.0390625