HistWar
HistWar (English zone) => General discussions => Discussion démarrée par: englishoo7 le 05 décembre 2009, 15:20:04 pm
-
First let me say that I have very much enjoyed most of the Demo and have played it extensively... Maybe I am doing something different from others but at this time this is what I am seeing.
I am finding that units that contact the enemy is 'messy'. By this I mean that the unit attacking often 'misses' the enemy unit or moves crazily about in front of it (trying to deploy?). There may be many calculations about the combat going on behind all this, deciding the outcome, but this is not reflected by what I am seeing. Usually there is only 'one' unit attacking the enemy line at any time. I get a feeling of anti-climax :cry:. Instead of severel columns rolling in, (if you get it right) in a co-ordinated assault, I often get single, badly aligned single firefights with very little decided. I want to see co-ordination, with severel columns hitting the enemy line together. The regiments take too long to set themselves up and appear to work completely independently hitting then enemy line way out in front and with no support. The firefight is important to me as a player. It is the part where many of our plans come together. In the demo, for me at least, I am sorry to say this is a major let down.
Now I am sure there are many out there better read read in Napoleonic warfare. I am sure many will be able to quote this this 'incident' or that 'battle' where some of these things have happened and I know that attacking regiments were often unaligned, lost, or any number of other things went wrong, but this is a game for not only 'Grognards', if it has any hope of it selling to a wider audience then I think there has to be more 'dicisiveness' and certainly slicker combat graphics. Co-ordinated assaults did happen, we should be able to accomplish these and get the satisfaction of a defence line broken wide open. I like this game and I love the Napoleonic era, but sometimes I am frustrated by what feels like any excuse for a regiment not to attack or to move back and forth. Yes, I know commanders of the time did get frustrated too, but the buying public will not want to be.
I am not saying the game is bad. Far from it. It has depth and the graphics really do have a certain appeal. For every negative point there are ten or more positives and we have not even got the full version yet! But if the combat is not more slick in the full version then I do not think, 'joe public' will buy it. I will buy it. I also want to buy many future expansions that will come from a popular, selling game.
-
Have you tried sending in your corps with zero reserves specified, and a deployment line long enough that the AI won't make its own reserves? That might produce the effect you're looking for. I haven't tried that yet myself. I prefer to win battles. :)
Hook
-
I have seen a lot of glitchy behaviour in my last few games when my units have come into contact with the enemy. Sometimes one side will be seemingly unaware of the other even though being fired on by muskets for several minutes. Sometimes the unit gets into a mess and can't seem to deploy into any formation and return fire. It just gets all tangled up and eventually retreats.
Some of this behaviour may be intentional but I suspect some it is bug-related.
-
I can understand the comments, the "contact" part of the battle does appear to be not as good as all the other stuff......I'm sure it's a "minitutes" type thing where the "model soliders" represented by the graphics, meet, the calculations are done, and the result given, but the animation of the fighting contact does not appear to be as good as the rest of the game - in the demo.
-
When a units order changes to "Unit Attacked" (highlighted red) they start their unorganized march toward the enemy lines. Sometimes they cover great distances to accomplish this, only to be routed on the first volley. I once saw a lone unorganized (Unit attacked) Russian Pavlovskii Grenadier Regiment march 1000m past their own line straight into my defensive line to be decimated by my combined infantry, cavalry and artillery.
Every engagement seems to have multiple units per side completing the exact same suicidal march.
Does anyone know if they is controllable by orders? I haven't been able to counter it.
I can understand Regimental AI taking a bit of initiative and charging enemy line at short distances or greater distances if they were cavalry. The distance some units currently cover to reach the enemy seems a bit much.
-
Interesting stuff.
1. I think the graphics engine is lagging well behind 'the machine' in the aspects you identify here. What we see doesn't equate or neatly/evocatively express what the calculations are saying. This is an issue for patches/upgrades and well worth highlighting. :)
2. From what playtesters have said, I think that the full version of the game which will include the all-important doctrine editor will slap down those wild Colonel Ney's who just want to attack madly. I presume that without the doctrine editor to restrain them, some high or low initiative characters are following their own groove. With doctrine they will synchronise what they do with their fellows better. This may also go some way to ameliorate English007's concerns as well. Roll on the release!
-
First let me say that I have very much enjoyed most of the Demo and have played it extensively... Maybe I am doing something different from others but at this time this is what I am seeing.
I am finding that units that contact the enemy is 'messy'. By this I mean that the unit attacking often 'misses' the enemy unit or moves crazily about in front of it (trying to deploy?). There may be many calculations about the combat going on behind all this, deciding the outcome, but this is not reflected by what I am seeing. Usually there is only 'one' unit attacking the enemy line at any time. I get a feeling of anti-climax :cry:. Instead of severel columns rolling in, (if you get it right) in a co-ordinated assault, I often get single, badly aligned single firefights with very little decided. I want to see co-ordination, with severel columns hitting the enemy line together. The regiments take too long to set themselves up and appear to work completely independently hitting then enemy line way out in front and with no support. The firefight is important to me as a player. It is the part where many of our plans come together. In the demo, for me at least, I am sorry to say this is a major let down.
Now I am sure there are many out there better read read in Napoleonic warfare. I am sure many will be able to quote this this 'incident' or that 'battle' where some of these things have happened and I know that attacking regiments were often unaligned, lost, or any number of other things went wrong, but this is a game for not only 'Grognards', if it has any hope of it selling to a wider audience then I think there has to be more 'dicisiveness' and certainly slicker combat graphics. Co-ordinated assaults did happen, we should be able to accomplish these and get the satisfaction of a defence line broken wide open. I like this game and I love the Napoleonic era, but sometimes I am frustrated by what feels like any excuse for a regiment not to attack or to move back and forth. Yes, I know commanders of the time did get frustrated too, but the buying public will not want to be.
I am not saying the game is bad. Far from it. It has depth and the graphics really do have a certain appeal. For every negative point there are ten or more positives and we have not even got the full version yet! But if the combat is not more slick in the full version then I do not think, 'joe public' will buy it. I will buy it. I also want to buy many future expansions that will come from a popular, selling game.
Could you send me (histwar@histwar.com) a save file with some example of 'curious behaviours'?
Just give me the times when they appears...
I'll be very happy to fix these bad behaviours up... (if exist ;)
JMM
-
I have e-mailed you a couple of files with details JMM. I hope they are of some help.
-
Firefights
I've only tried the tutorials AI super conservative...Mack placed his Corps inside a wood.
Cavalry on the wings...Infantry marching directly in the middle, artillery detached and supporting
dragoons, on the left...where the found a suitable place and opened fire on Infantry targets exposed..
within a few salvos 1 bn of Jaegers was on the run ...my cavalry sounded the charge without a direct order...?? (no complaints from me) too far away form routing targets stopped in considerable disorder
half way through...Austrian Art deployed out of the woods and fired canister which exploded with a
large puff of gray smoke over the dragoons...a few casualties...dragoons rallied with enthusiasm
and charged headlong into the Austrian guns...which lay in ruins a few moments later.
Once again Dragoons in disarray after the charge... on the far right Austrian Infantry coming out of the
woods after witnessing the demise of their guns, met with Chasseurs in scouting mode which charged the first Aus Bn, routing it and then charging and routing a second,
before stopping to re-dress lines....my infantry meanwhile was a few hundred yards from the wood
and routed the rest of the Austrian troops, without a firefight...game ended with information panel...casualties, awards.
I didn't see any infantry firefights so I can't report any bugs...I'm sure that the game AI won't be
as passive as in this demo, and besides this game is an excellent opportunity to play against other
players, and it is the reason why I'm buying it. If there are bugs in the download version I'm sure
they will be addressed to by the community and resolved in conjunction with JMM.
And I apologize for leaving the topic... Thanks JMM !! ITS GONNA BE A BLAST !!
-
zu Pferd if you want a more active AI play the Montobello battle with Montobello armies in Solo Mode - it's completely different from the tutorials. ;)
LvD
-
Since posting this thread I have managed a large infantry assault after creating a hole in the enemy artillery! It looked fantastic!
The behaviour where attack columns miss their target, the attacking columns although firing causing few problems and the regiments that seem to keep trying to deploy while being fired at by the enemy and then rout, still however persist. I have forwarded this latest file to JMM which contains many of these instances.
-
Englishoo7, how did you manage to get the mass infantry attack? Whenever I order a Corps to deploy, it always seems to be one or two units moving without any co-ordination and normally the infantry march up to the enemy, hang about for a while then run away very fast. Similar behaviour from the computer AI. LG shows us what a battlefield with thousands of men looks like, but not the idea that thousands are actually fighting each other.
-
I have to agree with Uxbridges comments. There is portrayed a great battlefield , great formations and approach movement. But the end product (visually) of all this preparation --the combat and encounter is often very unrealistic and unconvincing-- often many units doing nothing and then routing, others moving in the wrong direction ,others suddenly disappearing . There seems to be no real convincing depiction of the actual firefight.
There is so much which is good and impressive about all aspects of the simulation---except the actual visual representation of the actual combat----and this needs to be really convincing and realistic as it is the depiction of the outcome of all the planning of the player--it has to be one of the key central features of a simulation of this type.
I really hope that this central issue can be solved and we would have a real classic to enjoy.
-
Englishoo7, how did you manage to get the mass infantry attack? Whenever I order a Corps to deploy, it always seems to be one or two units moving without any co-ordination and normally the infantry march up to the enemy, hang about for a while then run away very fast. Similar behaviour from the computer AI. LG shows us what a battlefield with thousands of men looks like, but not the idea that thousands are actually fighting each other.
i first blew a hole in his artillery with my own. Then I think it was the defence line not too far from the enemy's that helped. If you set up a short defence line and make sure you wait until your Corps is in place before you attack your Regiments have a better chance of arriving together. I drew a very short deployment line on the enemy's defence line, this way my infantry remained concentrated. Of course I did all this in front of an enemy that sat behind his defence line and did not have chance to bring up more artillery. Your opponent might not lat you do this! ;)
-
I have to agree with Uxbridges comments. There is portrayed a great battlefield , great formations and approach movement. But the end product (visually) of all this preparation --the combat and encounter is often very unrealistic and unconvincing-- often many units doing nothing and then routing, others moving in the wrong direction ,others suddenly disappearing . There seems to be no real convincing depiction of the actual firefight.
There is so much which is good and impressive about all aspects of the simulation---except the actual visual representation of the actual combat----and this needs to be really convincing and realistic as it is the depiction of the outcome of all the planning of the player--it has to be one of the key central features of a simulation of this type.
I really hope that this central issue can be solved and we would have a real classic to enjoy.
A week or so ago I would have agreed with most of this... However now, the more I practice the more depth I see. I still think artillery is too powerful and infantry rout too much but I am also aware I have 'got it wrong' in the past. I think actions like this will come with a better understanding and practice and that in this will come the satisfaction of 'outwitting' your opponent! In places I see bugs, but (and this is a big but) the calculations behind it seem to be spot on. Just for instance: I believed my cavalry was constantly standing off and not charging enemy artillery and it frustrated me no end. It turned out though that when I looked more closely a detatchment of cavalry was peeling off from the main force and took the artillery on... Stay in there.
-
Thanks, that's very helpful. I love the look of the LG battlefield, it seems utterly convincing with the gently rolling landscape and flags just visible in the distance and then the artillery smoke rolling away in the sky. I so want this game to be as good as it looks.
-
Me too. My main gripe has always been this 'whirling' battlefield in video's with troops routing and routing again. I am begining to believe now though that the battlefield looks like that because in those video's have just placed long deployment lines and let their forces go! I am hoping that if I am playing one or many human oponents things will be a little different. Forces will hit a little more precisely and with more power and more concentration. Of course I will also want Corps and units to do a lot for themselves, that is one of the great things about LG. But if perhaps I am only controling a Corps or two, say in multiplayer, I suppose I will have more time to place that horse artillery battery exactly where I want it while I watch the other side looking for tell-tale signs of concentration of troops ready for their attack! ;)
We will all have to find our tactics and responses. At least I hope we will have to think deeply, for this is a sign of a classic. For instance, I tried the same attack I explained to you yesterday supported by two batteries of horse artillery - it didn't work, they stayed too far back. But I tried it. I will think about these things when building a Corps of my own. It will not be about how the Corps looks, that won't matter to me. It will be all about how long it takes for the commander to get it moving, is it good for assault, how much artillery and what type, cavalry and much more besides? A great game gives you lots to think about. I am hoping LG is that game.
A new thread on tactics like this might be a good idea? :)
-
Yep, I 've came to think, that there's a great idea here. Think of it; the more you are a "little-scale" commander (sorry i don't know the way it should be said in english ...) and the closer you are from a Total war game features (except from the historical accuracy :smile: ), even if it's not the main aim of the game. If it is really improve in the 3D part (which i'm not interrested in, just a way to analyse ...), you could have a neat total war 4vs4, where every one is able only to command a corp - and so no delay order, no odb cause all is more micro manage on your account, and a more quickfest game, more dynamic, when you are on contact with the ennemy. The wrong thing is that before or after the engagement you should wait a really long time in the game before an other one.
Forgive my awful english, and take this as a hypothesis (even if it's not what i'm loking for in that game).
-
Tonight I had the best experience so far. Commanded both sides, moved one corps on each side to form defence lines close to each other and pulled the rest back. Both Corps began fighting and for the first time I saw several infantry regiments engaged at the same time, with firefights, marching and counter-marching, units advancing and falling back, forming square as cavalry approached, and even a successful charge by some lancers that resulted in the enemy infantry (who for some reason did not form square but were in a loose line/skirmish formation) putting up their hands and slowly trudging away under escort. Some units made the old mistake of advancing against artillery, only to fall back in disarray, but they did not go into escape mode but regrouped later on. Some of the cavalry from the other Corps came up and joined in later. I gave no other orders at all (apart from trying to make the artillery on side fire on the artillery on the other, so as to see if the infantry would advance more freely) and just watched a really nice representation of a Napeolonic battle.
JMM, I think at last I can see what LG is about. I'm more excited now than just before the demo was released.
-
I did exactly the same as described in the above post, I put all other Corps out of the way except for the two I wanted to 'experiment' with and took most of the artillery off the enemy. And do you know what happened? Artillery came over from another enemy Corps to the south and broke up my attack! Now I have read somewhere that Corps can call for assistance and this must be what happened. This is what I mean by a thoughtful game. :smile:
-
There's tomorrow's experience lined up for me! Ta fellas. :)
-
Tonight I had the best experience so far. Commanded both sides, moved one corps on each side to form defence lines close to each other and pulled the rest back. Both Corps began fighting and for the first time I saw several infantry regiments engaged at the same time, with firefights, marching and counter-marching, units advancing and falling back, forming square as cavalry approached, and even a successful charge by some lancers that resulted in the enemy infantry (who for some reason did not form square but were in a loose line/skirmish formation) putting up their hands and slowly trudging away under escort. Some units made the old mistake of advancing against artillery, only to fall back in disarray, but they did not go into escape mode but regrouped later on. Some of the cavalry from the other Corps came up and joined in later. I gave no other orders at all (apart from trying to make the artillery on side fire on the artillery on the other, so as to see if the infantry would advance more freely) and just watched a really nice representation of a Napeolonic battle.
JMM, I think at last I can see what LG is about. I'm more excited now than just before the demo was released.
Hi
The artillery vs artillery comes from your doctrine, there are two options you can choose when you get the main game for artillery, Primary and Secondary targets for Artillery.
You can name artillery as a primary target for your artillery or as a Secondary Target, as well as either Infantry of Cavalry
-
Thanks for this info - but can the doctrine be overruled when you select an artillery unit and order it to attack a unit that you specify?
-
Thanks for this info - but can the doctrine be overruled when you select an artillery unit and order it to attack a unit that you specify?
Doctrine can be overruled if the unit is directly threatened by enemy units or if you give it a specific order.
-
This is a very good thread, it summarises many of the oddities of the 3d unit behaviours i have seen in demo1, demo2 and now the full program...I've just watched two regiments of austrians defending on line, while being attacked by two full french corps. They refused to retreat (brave foolhardy boys!) , in fact one of the french attacking corps suddenly decided to march backwards away from them under a corps commander retreat order i didnt issue! eventually they came back and the leading regiments were 'marching towards enemy' even when almost on top of the austrians who also decided to 'march towards enemy'. The regiments collided and for the first time i saw a melee animation... though both the second line batallions of the french and austrian regiments started vollying into the meleeing battallions of their own regiments. I thought the massively outnumbered Austrians will now run away but was surprised to see both the austrians and the french units rout in opposite directions. Detaching cavalry to chase the routing austrians didnt do anything as they just refused to go!