Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Wish List

 
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.] >> [American Civil War] >> Forge of Freedom: The American Civil War 1861-1865 >> RE: Wish List Page: <<   < prev  22 23 [24] 25 26   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Wish List - 12/26/2007 9:45:49 PM   
Valdemar

 

Posts: 19
Joined: 7/11/2007
Status: offline
Unit Training by Generals

Allow players to choose the special ability and the unit which learns it when generals make their training roll.

I realize the developers really love randomness in the game, especially if it is the simplest solution, but randomness here is really more than a disappointment, it is not historical or logical. When generals decided on a set of skills that they thought their armies needed to win, they trained every unit under them to the same standard. Individual brigade commanders may have emphasized one skill above another, or added additional skills, but it certainly was not a random affair. Keep in mind that I am only suggesting this for special abilities and that the quality upgrades that generals can give are not included.

I'm certainly no coding expert, but this hardly seems like a difficult process to code.

Please consider this change.

Regards.

_____________________________

"Tell my mother that, when you found me, I was with the only brothers I had left. She'll understand that." - Private Ryan

(in reply to ericbabe)
Post #: 691
RE: Wish List - 12/27/2007 2:19:23 AM   
Gil R.


Posts: 10821
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Valdemar

Unit Training by Generals

Allow players to choose the special ability and the unit which learns it when generals make their training roll.

I realize the developers really love randomness in the game, especially if it is the simplest solution, but randomness here is really more than a disappointment, it is not historical or logical. When generals decided on a set of skills that they thought their armies needed to win, they trained every unit under them to the same standard. Individual brigade commanders may have emphasized one skill above another, or added additional skills, but it certainly was not a random affair. Keep in mind that I am only suggesting this for special abilities and that the quality upgrades that generals can give are not included.

I'm certainly no coding expert, but this hardly seems like a difficult process to code.

Please consider this change.

Regards.



You make an interesting point, and I can see how giving each general prioritized special abilities to teach would be appealing, but the problem here is that for only a few generals would it be clear which ability/abilities to prioritize. So while the coding probably wouldn't be too tough to give Ability#1 a greater chance of being taught than Ability #2, and so on, for only a few generals would the ranking be truly justifiable. I'd welcome thoughts on this, though.

While assigning which brigades should be taught which abilities was something we didn't do because we didn't want excessive micromanagement, I can see how this could be done as an option. What I have in mind is that players who want to bother with this could go to the Military screen, click on the brigade, and then have a menu pop up that lists only the abilities that that brigade's army/corps/division general(s) have, letting the player choose the ability he wants a chance at getting. And players who wouldn't want to bother could do nothing, and let the current random system handle training. It's something to consider, certainly.

(in reply to Valdemar)
Post #: 692
RE: Wish List - 12/27/2007 10:01:52 PM   
Valdemar

 

Posts: 19
Joined: 7/11/2007
Status: offline
Gil,

I'm suggesting that players be allowed to pick both the unit that gets trained, and the skill as well.

1) General makes training check.
2) Player prompted to pick which of his skills is taught
3) and to which unit in his command.

Thus, there is no need to prioritize. The whole idea is to allow the player to prioritize which skills get passed along. Assume a general with 4 skills makes his check. The player then chooses which skill of the four to train and which unit receives the training.

I hadn't thought about your idea of allowing players to choose this as an option, but that is a grand idea for those that do not wish to deal with more detail. However, if you implemented this change, I feel safe in saying that most players will use it.

Regards.

< Message edited by Valdemar -- 12/27/2007 10:04:50 PM >


_____________________________

"Tell my mother that, when you found me, I was with the only brothers I had left. She'll understand that." - Private Ryan

(in reply to Gil R.)
Post #: 693
RE: Wish List - 12/27/2007 10:21:20 PM   
Gil R.


Posts: 10821
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline
Oh, I see -- an end of turn pop-up box similar to the one for promoting generals, but listing units and potential abilities. Well, that would be another way of doing it, so long as it's an option that can be turned off.

But I should stress that we have dozens of ideas that we can implement, so we can make no promises about which ones would make it into a FOF expansion.

< Message edited by Gil R. -- 12/27/2007 10:40:57 PM >

(in reply to Valdemar)
Post #: 694
RE: Wish List - 12/27/2007 10:45:39 PM   
ericbabe


Posts: 11927
Joined: 3/23/2005
Status: offline
Players, in general, don't have perfect control over their generals.  When a general rallies a unit in detailed battle using the "special rally", for instance, the general "chooses" which unit to rally, not the player.  I know that some players don't enjoy anything but perfect control over all their units (we hear from these players every time we implement a C&C-type rule), but I personally think it makes for a better game -- there is less micromanaging and, well, not having perfect god-like control over all your pieces seems somehow more realistic (logical?) to me than having perfect control does.  So in that sense, I-the-developer do like things that are "random" in the sense that I don't like having perfect control over everything.  Also from a game-mechanic point-of-view, if we let players choose which units to give abilities and which abilities to give them, inevitably you'd end up with your best units having the best couple abilities ("heroes all the way around!") and that would seem to make the special abilities less of an interesting game mechanic.  Finally, it makes sense to me that junior officers whose job it is actually to implement this type of training may not "get" certain types of training but might "get" other types.  I've been in classes in which everyone was taught the same thing, but in which people learned quite different things.




_____________________________



(in reply to Gil R.)
Post #: 695
RE: Wish List - 12/28/2007 5:53:53 PM   
terje439


Posts: 6917
Joined: 3/28/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ericbabe

We do have code that prevents double-teaching of some special abilities and I'm surprised that Diggers isn't on the list of things we prevent.



If this is so, I am just throwing something out to you guys, is the "no double teaching" list checked against the "abilities gained from combat" list?
If a brigade is not supposed to be tought diggers twice, maybe the general taught (bah spelling?!) it once, and they then got it again by experience? Just a thought...

(in reply to ericbabe)
Post #: 696
RE: Wish List - 1/7/2008 7:50:21 PM   
terje439


Posts: 6917
Joined: 3/28/2004
Status: offline
Come to think of another thing I would like to see in this game, a "popularity" rating of generals, giving an idea as to how popular they are with their troops. Why? If a popular general is wounded in detailed combat, the troops under his command would make a moral roll, or suffer a blow to moral due to loss of a loved leader. Well just something that would add even more flavor to the game... Well I'm allowed to hope ain't I?

(in reply to terje439)
Post #: 697
RE: Wish List - 1/30/2008 4:02:57 PM   
cragpider


Posts: 9
Joined: 10/15/2007
From: Middle Village, NY
Status: offline
How about a true step by step tutorial on how the game works, even just using the small scenario, like a majority of the SSI games, as well as the Total War franchise always published. I've had this game for awhile now and I still haven't got passed the small scenario level, which I still don't understand, I put in a request for an AAR of the small scenario but to no avail, some sort of strategy guide would also be helpful, and before anyone responds, baptism by fire doesn't work with this game, it only frustrates new players more and more, I hate to think I wasted my money.

(in reply to Williamb)
Post #: 698
RE: Wish List - 1/30/2008 7:30:49 PM   
moose1999

 

Posts: 788
Joined: 10/26/2006
Status: offline
A step-by-step tutorial, where you perform the steps in-game, would actually be a really nice feature.
It would help enormously in making the game more accessible for the casual gamer and help you reach a wider audience.
And you could perhaps avoid the somewhat irritating Steep-Learning-Curve and For-Grogs-Only labels that many reviewers tend to put on really deep, complex strategy games and which, I think, scare away some potential customers.


_____________________________

regards,

Briny

(in reply to cragpider)
Post #: 699
RE: Wish List - 1/31/2008 6:32:28 AM   
Gil R.


Posts: 10821
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline
cragpider,
What exactly is it that you're not understanding? Is it the interface, e.g. how to put brigades in a division or how to move an army into a province, etc. etc.? Or is it what you need to do to win?

The forum not only has those threads with advice on how to win as the North or South, but countless other threads with tips on how to play. I'm assuming that you've looked at these, so what else would you need to move beyond the basicmost version of the game?


(in reply to moose1999)
Post #: 700
RE: Wish List - 2/2/2008 9:51:05 PM   
Kingmaker

 

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

I ain't read all these pages, so this may already have been sugested, but something I think would be really, really useful (especially for Nubbies like myself) would be some sort of Notepad feature so folk can record their actions/plans/wailing & teeth nashings etc.

If set up right, maybe in a diary format directly linked to the turn being played and savable to the FoF folder it would also be a valuable record for future campaigns, a sort of 'Staff log', or, 'Diary of a President' type of thing; the more adventerous could even post them on the forum, a sort of ARR without the pictures.

It could maybe take over the rumour slot, as in any of the games I have played I ain't seen nuthin there!

Just a thought.

All the Best
Peter

(in reply to Gil R.)
Post #: 701
RE: Wish List - 2/3/2008 1:23:56 AM   
Conny D

 

Posts: 52
Joined: 11/27/2007
Status: offline
Havent seen any rumours till now either. Too see rumours the troops are supposed to be fanning out all the time.. at least when major campaigns pull up... or when one side sufferes disastrous defeats in a row, or certain diplomacy actions are undertaken - I would luv to see this, adds more historical flavor

But first af all, the game is awesum, i will purchase every addon released

(in reply to Kingmaker)
Post #: 702
RE: Wish List - 2/3/2008 1:26:54 AM   
Gil R.


Posts: 10821
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline
Well, I guess then we'll just have to release some add-ons...

_____________________________

Michael Jordan plays ball. Charles Manson kills people. I torment eager potential customers by not sharing screenshots of "Brother Against Brother." Everyone has a talent.

(in reply to Conny D)
Post #: 703
RE: Wish List - 2/3/2008 2:39:22 PM   
Kingmaker

 

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

Yer fully agree the game is dynamite! it's sort of taken over my spare time since I bought it, step learning curve but great fun.

Ta for the tips re Rumours, think I will try and give the " disastrous defeats in a row " bit a miss if it all the same with you

All the Best
Peter

(in reply to Conny D)
Post #: 704
RE: Wish List - 2/20/2008 3:53:46 AM   
BruceAZ


Posts: 608
Joined: 10/9/2000
From: California
Status: offline
MORE ROADS IN THE DETAIL BATTLE MAPS

While I am not a student of CW history, those books that I have read always give reference to the battles near communities and roads were always the main form of advance for all troops. Other than a small handful, all CW battles of notable size had roads or rivers close by to allow the supply trains/transport to support the troops. Further, most CW commanders kept reserve units near road works to allow them quicker access to the battlefield.

That's my only wish to a great game - more roads in Detailed Battle.

Recon
Semper Fi

_____________________________


(in reply to Gil R.)
Post #: 705
RE: Wish List - 2/29/2008 5:50:42 AM   
Mus

 

Posts: 1759
Joined: 11/13/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Valdemar

Gil,

I'm suggesting that players be allowed to pick both the unit that gets trained, and the skill as well.


The only problem with this is that there are a handful of abilities that are vastly superior to the rest.

MORE control I would like. For instance some abilities I have so little use for that I will reload a save to avoid using up ability slots one something I dont care for. Being able to choose not to take that ability would be nice. TOTAL control, picking which ability and which unit? That may be a bit overpowered.

< Message edited by Mus -- 2/29/2008 5:53:50 AM >

(in reply to Valdemar)
Post #: 706
RE: Wish List - 3/5/2008 11:37:28 AM   
terje439


Posts: 6917
Joined: 3/28/2004
Status: offline
And then I'm back with another wish;
After winning a battle, is there anyway to prevent Garrison units to pick up weapons?! It is always a pain to see a GAR unit take the sharps from Berdan's sharpshooters in the first battle in NV

< Message edited by terje439 -- 3/5/2008 11:38:01 AM >

(in reply to Mus)
Post #: 707
RE: Wish List - 3/5/2008 12:08:06 PM   
jkBluesman


Posts: 797
Joined: 2/12/2007
Status: offline
Why? You may easily put the garrison unit into the army and another brigade in the Fort.

(in reply to terje439)
Post #: 708
RE: Wish List - 3/5/2008 6:10:54 PM   
terje439


Posts: 6917
Joined: 3/28/2004
Status: offline
Yes, but the GAR tends to have quite a bit lower quality, and it seems all my GAR units will learn some great ability from any combat, aka Swampwise

(in reply to jkBluesman)
Post #: 709
RE: Wish List - 4/13/2008 4:42:17 PM   
Kingmaker

 

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

Dunno if this has been covered, if so apologies.

Just starting to get to grips (ish) with PBEM, now it may just be me but it does seem that the PBEM orders ain't so tight as on the stand alone, movement especially.  Another thing that surprised me was of the 2 naval battles fought, (roughly evenly matched fleets) both times it was the side Without the 'Weather gauge' that won, may just be a freak thing or if it's happening in other games, ?? Code wrong ??, dunno just a thought.

The main thing I am concerned about at the moment though is Reb 'Raiders' we have no control over what they choose as targets, and can’t just have them gathering troop details in enemy territory, + they seem to die like flies, often attacking (IMHO) worthless targets.

As Raiders are very important for Rebs, in the next update could we please have control over targets like with the 'Runners', I am fast thinking Raiders in the PBEM version are a waste of time except maybe to stick with an army for scouting purposes.

The biggest disappointment for me with PBEM is no 'Detailed Combat', while I appreciate it is too complex with the Initiative/time factor etc. the lack of placement of units in PBEM for 'Quick combat' is like the Raider thing above, a worry.  In the solo games you can at least right click on the units before placement and put attack units in the attack boxes etc, for eg I tend to carry out Russian tactics with my 'Out of supply' units (No weapons, go in 1st wave [Charge!] kill what you can and soak up enemy ammo :-)  ), or I might want to load more units on one side of the battlefield, or place artillery/cavalry flank or centre etc. etc.

I have noticed watching the playback of PBEM 'Quick combat' that you get some (to me) weird placements eg sharpshooters/attack units placed in defence positions etc.  As we can’t have detailed Combat, shame but ..., could we please at least have what little control there is in Solo ‘Quick combat’ for PBEM 'Quick combat' ... big "Please", it may add a bit more time to the game but would be worth it in my opinion.

Just some thoughts, still love the game!

All the Best
Peter

(in reply to terje439)
Post #: 710
RE: Wish List - 5/6/2008 9:16:58 AM   
R.E.LEE


Posts: 257
Joined: 12/14/2006
Status: offline
Hey Gil the only real issue i can see that has hurt this game is da manual,im ok as are most but some dont have a full deck,all the FOF guys had to do ,although it may be too late now,was have a tutorial of a game playing out say 20 turns explaing every thing thats going on etc,and bam no prob everyone knows how to play,anyway im haveing fun.Ive got to go ry and build my navy up.
quote:

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

Well, I guess then we'll just have to release some add-ons...


(in reply to Gil R.)
Post #: 711
RE: Wish List - 5/6/2008 9:32:31 AM   
Gil R.


Posts: 10821
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline
Personally, I think the manual is pretty good for a game this complex. Some people don't like it that certain features are discussed in multiple places, but that's the cost of creating a manual that lets players start with the Basic game, then move on to Intermediate, and finally Advanced. We thought that was a great way of easing people into the game, but it did come with this trade-off. The good news is that for the hoped-for FOF expansion we'll probably be able to use video tutorials, which should help greatly.

By the way, I assume you know some things aren't in the manual because they were added later, and are in the patch documentation .pdf file.

Good to know you're enjoying the game. Good luck with that navy -- just don't use up ALL your resources on it.

< Message edited by Gil R. -- 5/6/2008 9:36:27 AM >

(in reply to R.E.LEE)
Post #: 712
RE: Wish List - 5/6/2008 11:38:36 AM   
R.E.LEE


Posts: 257
Joined: 12/14/2006
Status: offline
Wow what expansion fist i heard wheres the info about this,is it like FOF2 or what what thread is this in.??
quote:

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

Personally, I think the manual is pretty good for a game this complex. Some people don't like it that certain features are discussed in multiple places, but that's the cost of creating a manual that lets players start with the Basic game, then move on to Intermediate, and finally Advanced. We thought that was a great way of easing people into the game, but it did come with this trade-off. The good news is that for the hoped-for FOF expansion we'll probably be able to use video tutorials, which should help greatly.

By the way, I assume you know some things aren't in the manual because they were added later, and are in the patch documentation .pdf file.

Good to know you're enjoying the game. Good luck with that navy -- just don't use up ALL your resources on it.

Oh BTW july 1863 looked like i had the whole war going my way almost 2 easy then bam they attacked with 300,000 straight down the center i lost 7 forts and 3 cites,so im haveing to abondon richmond and sending lee with 63,000 veterans to deal with this huge army,if i cant throw them back all will be lost.ps you find me any ram gill

< Message edited by R.E.LEE -- 5/6/2008 11:43:45 AM >

(in reply to Gil R.)
Post #: 713
RE: Wish List - 5/6/2008 11:50:16 AM   
R.E.LEE


Posts: 257
Joined: 12/14/2006
Status: offline
Oh sorry to bug you gil but you are here so this could help me,i spent alot to build a level 3 fort in richmond however,they look the same as all other forts and theres no info on the different fort strenghs,at least not in the game,what is the benifit of buying a level3 vs 1 fort.also im watching gettysburg and gods and generals as i play realy sets the mood.ok gota get back to game hope to hear about the forts soon thanks alot,im glad i tried this again.I also checked the manuals and saw no info.I did check the in game miltary screen it list fort 1,2,3 strength and quality ratings as all the same can any one clear this up for me,is it just that you can put more men in fort 3?

< Message edited by R.E.LEE -- 5/7/2008 6:50:04 AM >

(in reply to R.E.LEE)
Post #: 714
RE: Wish List - 5/8/2008 6:46:49 AM   
Gil R.


Posts: 10821
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline
Oh, this is the thread you were referring to in the other thread. I somehow missed these posts.

Regarding forts, check pp. 43-44 of the manual, which explains all. And the three types do look a bit different. One thing I should add to it is that a "fort" doesn't refer to a single structure, but rather an honest-to-goodness fort as well as an abstracted amount of fortifications in the area. (For the expansion, we're considering adding coastal forts as a fourth type of fort.)

As for a FOF expansion, we have no official plans, but definitely would like to do one, probably next year. If you dig through the forum going back a few months you'll find at least one thread on the subject. And this thread is very useful for keeping track of ideas that we might consider.

_____________________________

Michael Jordan plays ball. Charles Manson kills people. I torment eager potential customers by not sharing screenshots of "Brother Against Brother." Everyone has a talent.

(in reply to R.E.LEE)
Post #: 715
RE: Wish List - 5/8/2008 7:03:50 AM   
R.E.LEE


Posts: 257
Joined: 12/14/2006
Status: offline
Hey Gil so many thanks for the replies if not for you being here i dont know,i mean the buzz is GONE for this game,ive really been having alot of fun,however i been winning to easy on about the fifth diffuclty level so i just tried a game on full general,whats up with that 6 turns in petersburg is taken and all buildings sacked all area forts destroyed,3 union armys ivaded and all the south gets is 40,000 standing army,am i not understanding something was it ever this uneven at start of war,dont get me wrong ive gone from being sickly dissapointed with this game when it came out ,to loving it and i know all acw buffs will lov it too.i ,ll check the manual for the forts gill ive had a real hard time find ing any fort details though and ive looked for hours,mabye im dumb.The main thing i want to know now is,(and ive posted this elsewhere)how does the increase in AI difficulty work it realy seems like they just get way more men and stuff as opposed to playing a better stratdgy etc?thanks Gil,also do you think id be able to play a pbem with my 512 rams cause id realy like to play if anyone can do just instant battles as i cant do the detailed ones no ram.and yes i was that guy i bought the game rite away.

(in reply to Gil R.)
Post #: 716
RE: Wish List - 5/8/2008 7:18:14 AM   
Gil R.


Posts: 10821
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: R.E.LEE

Hey Gil so many thanks for the replies if not for you being here i dont know,i mean the buzz is GONE for this game,ive really been having alot of fun,however i been winning to easy on about the fifth diffuclty level so i just tried a game on full general,whats up with that 6 turns in petersburg is taken and all buildings sacked all area forts destroyed,3 union armys ivaded and all the south gets is 40,000 standing army,am i not understanding something was it ever this uneven at start of war,dont get me wrong ive gone from being sickly dissapointed with this game when it came out ,to loving it and i know all acw buffs will lov it too.i ,ll check the manual for the forts gill ive had a real hard time find ing any fort details though and ive looked for hours,mabye im dumb.The main thing i want to know now is,(and ive posted this elsewhere)how does the increase in AI difficulty work it realy seems like they just get way more men and stuff as opposed to playing a better stratdgy etc?thanks Gil,also do you think id be able to play a pbem with my 512 rams cause id realy like to play if anyone can do just instant battles as i cant do the detailed ones no ram.and yes i was that guy i bought the game rite away.


If you're playing on the highest difficulty level it means that the enemy is getting a lot of bonuses and you're being somewhat hamstrung, so it's not surprising that an overwhelming force attacked you. (Playing at the highest difficulty level is not necessarily historical -- the idea is to make things even more challenging than they really were, after all. So that's what you're seeing.)

I'm not sure which scenario you're playing, but if you're going to play at that level as the CSA I'd recommend the November scenario with the option for hindering winter movements turned on, since that buys a bit of time for the South to prepare.

Eric will have to answer you on the AI issue, since he's the programmer. I'm pretty sure I know the right answer, but I'll defer to him.

As for PBEM, I'm pretty sure it should work. But you can easily test it by playing a turn or two against yourself in PBEM. If you can start a game, save your turn, open the files that were generated, and play that turn, I'd say that PBEM should be no problem at all.

As for the buzz, you're right that the forum is pretty dead these days, but there's still a steady stream of new visitors and customers. I regularly see people in the forum whom I haven't seen before. (I don't have the world's greatest memory, but I usually have the ability to look at a forum name and know if that person has been around before.) With the obvious exception of WITP and one or two other games, it's pretty normal for a game to get less attention once it's been out for as long as FOF has. My expectation is that when we produce the small patch that we need to come out with there will be some life back in the forum. And if we announce that we are indeed working on a FOF expansion and begin soliciting further input on it I think we will definitely see the forum roar back to life. In the meantime, I hope you and others will spread the word, especially to those who gave up on the game right after release, before we made all those changes.


_____________________________

Michael Jordan plays ball. Charles Manson kills people. I torment eager potential customers by not sharing screenshots of "Brother Against Brother." Everyone has a talent.

(in reply to R.E.LEE)
Post #: 717
RE: Wish List - 5/8/2008 7:25:12 AM   
R.E.LEE


Posts: 257
Joined: 12/14/2006
Status: offline
I hope your getting paid for this,thanks for all the help.Terry
quote:

ORIGINAL: Gil R.


quote:

ORIGINAL: R.E.LEE

Hey Gil so many thanks for the replies if not for you being here i dont know,i mean the buzz is GONE for this game,ive really been having alot of fun,however i been winning to easy on about the fifth diffuclty level so i just tried a game on full general,whats up with that 6 turns in petersburg is taken and all buildings sacked all area forts destroyed,3 union armys ivaded and all the south gets is 40,000 standing army,am i not understanding something was it ever this uneven at start of war,dont get me wrong ive gone from being sickly dissapointed with this game when it came out ,to loving it and i know all acw buffs will lov it too.i ,ll check the manual for the forts gill ive had a real hard time find ing any fort details though and ive looked for hours,mabye im dumb.The main thing i want to know now is,(and ive posted this elsewhere)how does the increase in AI difficulty work it realy seems like they just get way more men and stuff as opposed to playing a better stratdgy etc?thanks Gil,also do you think id be able to play a pbem with my 512 rams cause id realy like to play if anyone can do just instant battles as i cant do the detailed ones no ram.and yes i was that guy i bought the game rite away.


If you're playing on the highest difficulty level it means that the enemy is getting a lot of bonuses and you're being somewhat hamstrung, so it's not surprising that an overwhelming force attacked you. (Playing at the highest difficulty level is not necessarily historical -- the idea is to make things even more challenging than they really were, after all. So that's what you're seeing.)

I'm not sure which scenario you're playing, but if you're going to play at that level as the CSA I'd recommend the November scenario with the option for hindering winter movements turned on, since that buys a bit of time for the South to prepare.

Eric will have to answer you on the AI issue, since he's the programmer. I'm pretty sure I know the right answer, but I'll defer to him.

As for PBEM, I'm pretty sure it should work. But you can easily test it by playing a turn or two against yourself in PBEM. If you can start a game, save your turn, open the files that were generated, and play that turn, I'd say that PBEM should be no problem at all.

As for the buzz, you're right that the forum is pretty dead these days, but there's still a steady stream of new visitors and customers. I regularly see people in the forum whom I haven't seen before. (I don't have the world's greatest memory, but I usually have the ability to look at a forum name and know if that person has been around before.) With the obvious exception of WITP and one or two other games, it's pretty normal for a game to get less attention once it's been out for as long as FOF has. My expectation is that when we produce the small patch that we need to come out with there will be some life back in the forum. And if we announce that we are indeed working on a FOF expansion and begin soliciting further input on it I think we will definitely see the forum roar back to life. In the meantime, I hope you and others will spread the word, especially to those who gave up on the game right after release, before we made all those changes.



(in reply to Gil R.)
Post #: 718
RE: Wish List - 5/8/2008 7:46:38 AM   
Gil R.


Posts: 10821
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline
quote:

I hope your getting paid for this,thanks for all the help.Terry


Thanks, but this all counts as customer support. If you bought the game then I already have (some of) your money, so I've been paid.

Hmm. Maybe I should do what Microsoft and other companies do, and start an 800-line that charges for customer support...

(in reply to R.E.LEE)
Post #: 719
RE: Wish List - 5/8/2008 9:37:26 AM   
GShock


Posts: 1245
Joined: 12/9/2007
From: San Francisco, CA - USA
Status: offline
You'll probably be a millionaire already Gil. :-)))))

(in reply to Gil R.)
Post #: 720
Page:   <<   < prev  22 23 [24] 25 26   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Forge of Freedom: The American Civil War 1861-1865 >> RE: Wish List Page: <<   < prev  22 23 [24] 25 26   next >   >>
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

0.432