Scourge of War Boards

IIRC, replacement commanders are spawned miles away. It is a pain (to say the least) to get back to your troops. I've never had to do this playing HITS. I suspect I would just ride to the nearest tavern...

If this is ever implemented, please let it be a mod, or in some other way optional. I think it could be disastrous.

On the subject of generals scouting, in HITS games, which is what I play, I'm very happy for generals to scout to their heart's content.On the subject of generals scouting, in HITS games, which is what I play, I'm very happy for generals to scout to their heart's content. Personally, I would only want to limit this if and when each side has at least 2 or 3 human-led (cavalry?) scouting units. A real division commander could potentially receive information passed up the line of command from the eyes of hundreds or thousands of troops. We are relying on the eyes of a handful of fellow players.

Jeff

Sorry. I only saw up through Saddletank's post when I posted my last remark (weird internet service lately).

Anyhow, I do agree that the probabilities should definitely be moddable---to zero if really desired. And also if only if small cavalry units are substituted (as you noted above). I just feel that there is something missing without the possibility of commanders lost in combat---a small part of what it means to be engaged in Napoleonic combat. It is unrealistic, to send out a commander, and not risk the chance of losing that individual to enemy fire, whether scouting or in combat. The records are filled with commanders making a hasty retreat when coming under fire by artillery or sharpshooters, which is why probing was generally done by detached cavalry units or advanced pickets. (I would also like to see skirmishers used more too, in all honesty. But that's another topic).

However, I understand that there may be technical problems or AI related issues, which is why I posed it as more of a question rather than request. It sounds like the spawning issue may be a problem, but if a line of succession is predetermined, it seems like some of this would be resolved. Are there other issues that may make it unfeasible, or am I missing something?
Best,
Gary

I just feel that there is something missing without the possibility of commanders lost in combat---a small part of what it means to be engaged in Napoleonic combat. It is unrealistic, to send out a commander, and not risk the chance of losing that individual to enemy fire, whether scouting or in combat.

For me, its all abstracted. There are no infantry picket lines in the game (which every army had), nor skirmish screens (often), nor cavalry patrols... so lacking any form of representation of recon ability, for me, sending the general out doesn't represent that actual individual going out, but an abstract patrolling and intelligence gathering ability the army should have, only it doesn't.

Thus, out on patrol, etc, I would not want the general figure to be at risk.

Players (both in SP and MP) would need to use their own conscience and restrain themselves in not sending these patrol elements through, behind, or up to enemy lines. It seems most of the MP groups here have such a rule anyway.

I would, however, want this same general to be at risk when he's riding up and down the lines in a firefight. That is when so many commanders were killed or wounded.

I created a mod a very long time ago that would send you into the debriefing screen, and not let you return back to the battle if your commander got himself killed on the battlefield. Simply put, it ends the battle. Only way to keep playing is to load a save.

Anyway just thought I would let you know that something like that is out there.

Garniers GCM randomly kills brigade commanders and regt colonels, but it is a completely random feature and only announces this post-battle. Its still a nice touch that adds a feel of the risk of battle.

It's not actually random. The more casualties a regiment or brigade takes, the more likely its commander gets killed. It is all post battle though.

Speaking strictly in terms of a modification, would altering/slowing the run speed of a commander help resolve this issue? This would make the commanders fairly 'easy kill' fodder by running infantry, and also take them a long time to get in advantageous scouting positions.

Yes, I know, this is presently a moot point/suggestion given the files available for MP modifications, but it might be anther case in point for that relaxation.

That would be a way for us to solve it but as you said the file isn't mod-able.

Those files wouldn't even have to be modable if 'toolbar control only' designs were available. A myriad of issues could be solved if the keyboard functions could be modded out of gameplay. Toolbars can be modded specifically allowing and restricting play for exact tastes, with no cumbersome gentleman's rules to abide by. Simple rules, if it's on the toolbar, it's legal, making for a level and equal battlefield.

Edit: Deleted stuff that was just rant, since nothing can be done about keyboard controls...

For me, its all abstracted. There are no infantry picket lines in the game (which every army had), nor skirmish screens (often), nor cavalry patrols... so lacking any form of representation of recon ability, for me, sending the general out doesn't represent that actual individual going out, but an abstract patrolling and intelligence gathering ability the army should have, only it doesn't.

That’s largely how I reconciled in my mind too, i.e., the “general” sprite represented the entire HQ and attached personnel (staffers, couriers, scouts, and guard if present). But the fact that they can be moved about with near impunity, immune from the threat of rifle or field piece continues to gnaw at me, especially when leading or rallying while in close combat. A small squadron of cavalry, able to receive fire would be best suited for the task. For HITS people, a courier sent from the patrol stating what they had “seen”---perhaps not necessarily the true situation---would only add to the realism.

Speaking strictly in terms of a modification, would altering/slowing the run speed of a commander help resolve this issue?

It would help dissuade some of it perhaps, but would just substitute one ahistorical problem for another. An entire regiment shouldn’t have to break formation or marching order so as to run down a general hundreds of yards when that general is initially within rifle range. A dozen or so sharpshooters would most likely be detailed to the task. That’s why I believe a radius that gets progressively higher would be better---more of an implied operation than explicit command. However, the probability should be a very low as: 1) it could become a nightmare for the AI; 2) many commanders continued in active control after being wounded, and only removed themselves as combat died down.

garyknowz

You have touched on yet another issue supporting the need for a separate MP version of the game. Lately I have been on a tear against one faction of the MP community for messing up certain aspects of the game by making demands, creating bad PR, and forcing us, the SOW team, to comply with said demands. We can ill afford bad publicity, because up to now, publicity dictates whether this game will flourish, or go the way of TC2M, unsupported, with no future for improvement.

We have a new deal coming soon that will help to get the game's name out, and that, in addition to the bold new changes coming with the introduction of patch 1.5, will most likely broaden our community.

Still, the ever increasing issues of an MP engine residing within an SP engine will persist. Maybe this can approached eventually. Right now it would be completely impossible for Norb to undertake, for it would essentially double his workload in preparing SOW's next project, not to mention retooling that would be necessary for a separate MP engine, or patch that could be installed as an option for MP play only.

I should be excited now about our new stuff coming, it WILL BE BIG, but unfortunately I'm rather bummed out at present. We're in a lull in between projects and I'm just managing to get myself in trouble with the team, stirring up and blaming MP'ers for breaking the game with their demands and insisting MP play be opened fully for modding...to at least temporarily address repeated concerns and issues. But possibly the only solid solution is SP MP separation...still, I'll continue on my open all for modding quests, the 'free spirits' that all games need to helpl keep things fresh and new.

So, get the word out, help make this game successful so Norb can hire on a co-coder to handle the MP side of things...I believe now that THATS THE TICKET WE ALL NEED.

garyknowz

You have touched on yet another issue supporting the need for a separate MP version of the game. Lately I have been on a tear against one faction of the MP community for messing up certain aspects of the game by making demands, creating bad PR, and forcing us, the SOW team, to comply with said demands.

Not to stir anything up, and I don't want to go off topic, but I have to disagree with this. Every change we have made to the game that was requested by the MP community or anyone for that matter was carefully considered and tested for historical accuracy and of course gameplay. You know those changes weren't just thrown in there, they were passed by the testers, by me, Norb, Larry, Jim, the whole crew. Think of all of the requests we have turned down. Nothing has been forced on us. The community has done a lot to improve this game.