HistWar Napoleon : 05f (RC3)

[risorgimento59]

Sorry...
I haven't compared HWN to SOW or NTW at all.
I just think they're both going to be more played (also among our "niche") because they've got something more recognizable.
NTW for its graphics and modability (worse AI ever though, small scale engagements).
SOW for its commanding experience (outdated graphics and flawed low-level implementations).
I also haven't suggested that HW should change its basic design.
Just improving toward something more recognizable (you can consider ideas that are already in, but need to be polished and expanded, as well).
Operational layer was just an example, though I believe we start to disagree from the word "resolve".
There's nothing to resolve in facts.
An initiative taken during a marginal skirmishing at a crossroad, can have an impact of greater order of magnitude in the final outcomes of a war, than whole corps sent forward a day later.
Like a rearguard action or failed contact after a battle lost or won can make all the difference of the world.
At an higher/macroscopic scale, just consider the importance of the dynamics of operational concentration of forces to a battlefield...
This "continuum" is the real revolution on Napoleonic Wars and I've never seen it caught by any game.
It's just my opinion, of course, and I understand it's very hard to code.
Ciao.

[MarshalJean]

I appreciate your clarifications, but I think our basic disagreement still boils down to what we are wanting from a game like this, which was really my original point to begin with.  I'm still not sure what you mean by "recognizable," it's a term that screams for definition in a conversation like this.

But, my point is that what makes this game stand out (more recognizable???  is the ability to create such massive battles, with so many different opponents, using a broad range of unit types, with historically based doctrines anywhere from 1805-15, in such a short period of time.  This is what I want the most, in a game like this.  And no other game can do it.  When I want to fight just Waterloo for the 100th time, I guess Scourge of War will do.  When I just want to watch a beautiful company-sized unit fire muskets for a few minutes, then NTW will do.  But when I want to re-create literally any battle from 1805-1815 and then fight it out in a few hours, no other game even offers me this option.  This game does.  For me, that's what "recognizable" means, I guess.

MJ

[risorgimento59]

Sorry for my poor English. 
I mean a game that can mark some important differences on the other ones, obviously.

Your considerations make sense.
Nevertheless, the fact that HW allows to recreate quickly and quite realistically a wide range of engagements and that SOWWL, NTW, WON, COTD, etc. fullfill different demands, doesn't imply that we've got enough to simulate them in the detail, from the perspective and consistency (as they don't communicate) I would like.
Basically I believe there's much more to exploit from current hardware generation (with the right programming techniques, of course) than what we've seen so far.
Even so, I'm fully aware small indipendent devteams cannot build the perfect game.
From there comes my idea of "distinguishing" on significant aspects...
Unfortunately I will never find enough free time to "re-create literally any battle from 1805-1815". And I neither want to, maybe. Joking.
But it may be a rather subjective criteria.
Just different point of views I think.
Excuse again my English.
Ciao.

[MarshalJean]

No need to apologize, my friend.  Your English is perfect enough for me to understand.  And I probably know way less of your first language, so I will never be one to talk. 

Thank you for the good conversation.