Wish List for Patch 1

[Hancock the Superb]

Just an idea for perhaps the 1st Patch.

I would love to see jump-in multiplayer. For people like me that can't always be on at the specific time, this would allow us to jump in when you want (you can't jump in a spot that someone else is in, though). The game sends out a message to your side that says, Hancock the Superb is joining, taking command of the 1st Brigade, 1st Division, 2nd Corps, Army of the Potomac, etc. Then you jump in as that commander, and you can review orders already sent to that brigade and such. (I'm assuming here also that you can jump out when you want. Going along with this is that when you jump in, then you jump out, you cannot reenter the game, so we don't have people that are doing badly jump into other commands to make their score better.)

This would be much appreciated for us with less flexible scheduals that still want to compete in MP!

[O. O. Howard]

Hancock the Superb wrote:

Just an idea for perhaps the 1st Patch.

I would love to see jump-in multiplayer. For people like me that can't always be on at the specific time, this would allow us to jump in when you want (you can't jump in a spot that someone else is in, though). The game sends out a message to your side that says, Hancock the Superb is joining, taking command of the 1st Brigade, 1st Division, 2nd Corps, Army of the Potomac, etc. Then you jump in as that commander, and you can review orders already sent to that brigade and such. (I'm assuming here also that you can jump out when you want. Going along with this is that when you jump in, then you jump out, you cannot reenter the game, so we don't have people that are doing badly jump into other commands to make their score better.)

This would be much appreciated for us with less flexible scheduals that still want to compete in MP!

Hancock the Superb,

Couldn't that possibly be distracting for the players who started with the game. Imagine a scenario in which you are playing as a division. You are well into a game and someone jumps into one of your brigades, starts controlling it for a while and then leaves with the brigade in a position and condition that you may or may not have wanted it.

Also, if there is a ranking system and I jump into a game and take control over a unit that has been already doing very well and the game ends in a win, who gets the credit, me or the person who was controlling it up to that point?

- Double O

[Hancock the Superb]

I leave most of this to Norb to work out. Just an idea.

But roughly:

You can only enter in a position unoccupied. Another idea of mine is to be a watcher and watch the battle for 1 minute, allowing enough time for couriers to reach your commander. At this time, you cannot move any of your units. When the courier reaches your commander, you take command of your unit. Upon your screen, you start with zero points. However, your brigade actually has how many ever points there were originally (not messing up the scoring).

When you leave battle, a courier is sent to your commander. Your end screen shows the point total you got for your time in battle. However, for mp points, you get the final score of that unit at the end of the game, but zeroed out when you entered it. On average, the AI is worse than humans (I would guess), so your score would be less since you left the game. You are responsible for your score at the end, even if the AI bungles and you get -1000000 points at the end.

Just a thought.

[IronBMike]

some ideas for my wishlist:

1) an indication of whether of not a unit is in the line of sight of the enemy - this would help with hiding in woods

2) a more complex supply model

that´s it for now

[Ephrum]

IronBMike wrote:

some ideas for my wishlist:

1) an indication of whether of not a unit is in the line of sight of the enemy - this would help with hiding in woods

There's a LOS icon indicator on the toolbar in TC2M, hopefully it's already in SOWG.

[Hancock the Superb]

I believe IronBMike is hoping for a more complex model, like you can hide in woods and see out, but it is difficult to see in, or you have your troops lie down in a cornfield, and jump up and suprise them.

[Ephrum]

Hancock the Superb wrote:

I believe IronBMike is hoping for a more complex model, like you can hide in woods and see out, but it is difficult to see in, or you have your troops lie down in a cornfield, and jump up and suprise them.

Being able to surprise the enemy is always a plus! And if it were possible to lie your men down close to the enemy without being seen,....that would be fantastic!

[Hancock the Superb]

I always wished that was a possibility in TC2M.

[IronBMike]

Hancock the Superb wrote:

I believe IronBMike is hoping for a more complex model, like you can hide in woods and see out, but it is difficult to see in, or you have your troops lie down in a cornfield, and jump up and suprise them.

That's correct, I just didn't take the time to phrase it right. I meant that I wanted to see a better system for setting up ambushes like you said, which would add an awesome new tactical element.

[IronBMike]

Here is another idea I've been toying with. Not sure if it's even possible, but I'll throw it out there maybe for the next game.

As we all know, in real life there are way more variables than in any game. For example, leaders like Napoleon and Jackson could get their troops to marcher faster and longer than other generals, while McClellan was great at organizing, Lee great at defense, etc. I think it would be great to have the player choose their "style" before a battle, which would then give a bonus to a certain aspect of their game. The player could choose from predetermined historical styles like Lee or Jackson, or pick something like two attributes to create a custom player style.

This way, the player could custom tailer their armies to strategy. Want to dig in? Go with Lee. Want to have better artillery? Go with Napoleon. Want to have faster marching speed? Go with Jackson. Want troops that are less affected by units retreating around them? Go with Grant. And etc etc.

This also brings me to another point that was present in the Waterloo and Austerlitz games from the SMG engine: unit cohesion. As units marched, fought, retreated, etc their cohesion would suffer just like morale. I think this would be great if it was implemented in the game just like it was in those two titles. And with this, choosing a McClellan style of command would give your troops a boost to overall cohesion.

Thoughts?