regiment disorganization

[NY Cavalry]

Digby,

If all you are looking for is a simple change to fatigue I think that is completely modable. Garnier can do it, so it seems to me, that you yourself can write a mod that would do exactly what you want. If it works out well then make the mod available to everyone and let the individual player decide.

Melee in GCM has been on the down swing. I haven't played MP in 2 weeks, but that was and is the trend. Can more be done, yes.

Auto charge is unfortunate. If GCM is looked at from all the changes that have been brought to the MP community it has been a big plus that benefits everyone. Then it again is completely optional if individual players chose not to use it. GCMs biggest contribution is in making MP more stable across the board.

We are all want the same things and ultimately changes come through Norbsoft.

[Willard]

I am sorry to you too Willard if you were in fact really insulted - lol. I just figured that by this point you had learned to not take me too seriously while MTG still might.

As for Digby, I cannot really say that I am sorry. I think that he offers his opinions on far too many things that he thinks that he is an expert in when in fact he knows next to nothing.

Oh I wasn't insulted, I am used to it by now!!!

I just think it isn't called for to insult MTG or Digby. If you differ with their opinion either prove them wrong or let it go. The insults only take away from the credibility of your opinion.

[Saddletank]

"Charge all you wish, but we do need to reduce the frequency of melees."

All you need do is retreat if you do not wish to engage in melee.

Are you saying that is what ACW defenders did when charged? They chose to retreat? Is that what Chamberlain thought of doing at Round Top? If you're serious then you either know nothing of ACW battles or you just don't care about having an ACW game that's accurate. If you're not serious then you're wasting everyone's time with pointless comments.

Do you think the number of melees now in the game is historically accurate? Do you in fact care one iota for historical accuracy?

I guess what we (GCM players) need and what you (hits and couriers players) need are different. We (gcm players) need a deterrent to the massed charge. Fortunately we (gcm players) have Garnier to give us what we (gcm players) need. I guess all you hits and couriers guys can do is beg.

What a partizan view. All about cliques. Us and them. No interest in the game as a whole and how it can be improved? No, thought not.

I'm not interested in what different groups want, I'm talking about game design and how best SoW can be improved to more accurately reflect the ACW battlefield.

Of course if you think Garnier can tweak things how you want (or rather, how he wants, without asking the group who plays his mod) then you won't be reading this thread anymore or participating in the conversation will you? Bye-bye.

That leaves the rest of us who seek a better game and which is more historical to politely lobby (not beg) the devs for improvements.

[KG_Soldier]

"Are you saying that is what ACW defenders did when charged? They chose to retreat? Is that what Chamberlain thought of doing at Round Top? If you're serious then you either know nothing of ACW battles or you just don't care about having an ACW game that's accurate. If you're not serious then you're wasting everyone's time with pointless comments."

No. . . I'm talking about the game, not the war. but if I'm not mistaken, Chamberlain charged and Rebs chose to retreat. They could have, however, stayed and fought. When the enemy closes, you have choices to make: stand and fight, or retreat, or fall back.

"What a partizan view. All about cliques. Us and them. No interest in the game as a whole and how it can be improved? No, thought not.'

Garnier increased the rate of fatigue for regiments in melee in an attempt to discourage the mass attack or at least make it less effective. He did it for the GCM players. I stated that here. You chose to make the point that that's not what WE (I guess you mean hits and couriers players) need. I've seen you talk for everyone before. My mistake if you were speaking for ALL SOW players; I thought you were only speaking for all hits and couriers players. I simply stated that WE (GCM players) and WE (hits and couriers players) have different wants and needs and that WE (GCM players) are fortunate to have Garnier to try to make the game play as WE (GCM players) want.

I voice my opinion often here on this forum as to what I think would make the game better for MP play. As far as making it more historical goes. . . well. . . I prefer the game to be more fun than historical and that's always been my goal: improving gameplay.

[Hancock the Superb]

Move this to Rave and Rant. My eyes are sick of reading this day after day. My optimism hopes something intelligent will be posted, but I have been dismayed.

I have been doing some testing with the game modability. I created a hundred or so four man units(comrades in arms from Hardee's Manual) and organized them into a regimental fashion on the OOB Brigade level. Although there were a lot of flags, I think it simulated Civil War disorganization on the regimental line very well. In addition, it allowed these mini pockets of melee to break out if the lines got extremely close. The only unfortunate things are: the tendancy of the four man groups to spread out a lot (when controlled by the AI), the need for 1:1 sprite ratio, routing of four man groups, and the copious flags.

The above is merely a demonstration of the modability of the game. It isn't necessarily practical, or even all that much more historically accurate than the game. If we all pitched in on the modding and research portion, instead of doling the tasks out to SOW, we might make the progress many have demanded.

[Blaugrana]

My 2c worth:

I have greatly enjoyed playing GCM and value the huge contribution Garnier and the GCM regulars make to MP and the game's development, and the friendly welcome and help I've received from people on the GCM TS server.

I am currently enjoying playing HITS & Couriers with a group that has grown up around Martin James' Kriegsspiel group. I'm finding HITS hugely immersive (if that's a word).

The two ways of playing do seem to result in different priorities, so I can see why we might speak of HITS & Couriers people wanting X, or GCM people wanting Y. However, as any look at the respective forums will show, neither group is unananimous (on anything!) and neither has elected a spokesperson. I would hate any us and them animosity to develop.

[Martin James]

The two ways of playing do seem to result in different priorities, so I can see why we might speak of HITS & Couriers people wanting X, or GCM people wanting Y. However, as any look at the espective forums will show, neither group is unananimous (on anything!) and neither has elected a spokesperson. I would hate any us and them animosity to develop.

Very much agree. I personally prefer a congenial atmosphere, with friendly discussion. But I also think the existence of the two types of player has a very practical benefit for everyone. NSD is operating in a niche market, and needs to appeal to the widest audience if they are to sell enough games to make a living. The game therefore needs to be attractive to both types of gamer. So the two groups need each other to exist, and both need to provide constructive feedback to the company.

Martin

[NCDefendersD]

My thought on the matter, after having played MP for about 2 and a half months now pretty regularly is that while the game is accurate to a point, it's not perfect. I don't think any game is perfectly historically accurate. It's meant to be a fun representation, and I am grateful to Garnier and the others who take the time to try and improve the game, and if the test is run unsuccessfully, a person can turn the mod off, or Garnier undoes his updates. I can't speak for the HITS crowd as I am not a fan of that type of play (though greatly respect them for being able to play HITS and COURIERS!) but as an active member of GCM, I am certain that all of our requests are heard and considered objectively and fairly.
As for melee charges in the civil war, while I agree with many of the others that have posted that few civil war soldiers wanted to engage in melee as a course either for reasons of fear or guilt (shooting at a distance not knowing who you hit vs stabbing someone up close and personal), it did happen on many occasions during many battles (Wheatfield at G-burg, Spotsylvania's Mule Shoe, Corn Field at Sharpsburg, many instances at Petersburg and the list goes on and on). And yes, the tactics in MP games is sometimes not quite right, I still think that the game does it's best to portray the history as closely as it can while being improved by Norb and others. Sure, there's very few ways to stop a mass charge, and let's face it, who likes to be on the receiving end? But there are always options and you can typically see a charge coming long enough to make a decision to stand or retreat.
I think it's neat that the HITS gents have made their own group to play how they like to play and that we in the GCM MP group have our own way to play. I don't think it's fair for either group to criticize the other when we are all looking for the same thing: better gameplay. GCM has needs and so do the HITS boys. I'm sure both are considered when modding is done. Anyway, that's my 2 cents. Thanks for reading and see you all on the battlefield!

NC Defenders, company D 37th NC, "Tell General Lane, if the troops I had the honor to command today could not take that position, all Hell couldn't take it!" Gen. Isaac R. Trimble July 3rd 1863

[charlesonmission]

I've been away for a while, but it's nice to see the forum and game is still so active! Looking forward to MP one of these days.

Charles