Scourge of War Boards

As we add new features to the game, entire new game types or modes, we have a bit of a debate because everyone wants something different. This is all our game, so it's hard to find something to please everyone. I like when there is one person that stands above the rest of the crowd as the champion of that feature, like Conor with Couriers. Since he has been the only one that truly plays couriers on the team, he's been left alone to design a lot of it. Which means that he's the one that pushes for new commands, new features, and fixes. Now we have some MP guys on the team, something we have been seriously lacking. So they will be the voice of the MP community. We've got some European players, we have wanted to localize the game for a while now. We almost got there but didn't finish until right before a release so we pulled it out. I didn't like my design anyway, it was too much of a hack, so it's probably better that it didn't get through.

So now we are starting over again and want to add new features, but we struggle because we have different schools of thought. I like to keep things simple. Nothing overly complicated, very easy to explain. Others on the team want massive realism, more complicated, but simulating tons of different aspects. I know these are general terms, but that's the best I've got for now. It's a juggling act that I have not mastered. How much do I insist on doing things my way or do I allow others to have it their way? I never want to be a dictator, as we try to get some of everyone into the game. But at some point it's nice to work on something that I really like and have designed. I haven't done that for a while now, or at least I don't think I have. But then again we haven't added many major new features to the game, so probably no one has. I think the courier screen was probably our last major new feature. Before that multiplayer.

We really want our next release to shine, better looking, better performance, better gameplay and AI, with some really fun new modes. We're going to be working very hard this year and we have the team to do it. We just have to keep focused, stop modifying GB for a while and give something new a chance.

As we add new features to the game, entire new game types or modes, we have a bit of a debate because everyone wants something different. This is all our game, so it's hard to find something to please everyone.

Why not take the top ideas and put it to a vote on the forum.
.............................................................

This is coming from a Single-Player-Only perspective.

The SOWGB is extremely stable, I should know I have done hundreds of edits without crashing the game.

But, I still say that the AI continues to bunch-up too many times. This prevents the AI from forming a good Civil War battle-line. A good Civil-War battle line is several miles long, or longer. This is one-part-of-the-code that I would like to see changed in the next engine.

I would also like to see the AI Divisional leaders working together. You can attack one of their divisions while the other one seems to march on about his way. This is where the human player has the advantage over the AI Commanders.

The re-supplying is also another area where the human player has an advantage over the AI . A human-player will move their brigade-commander back and reform their brigade. The AI will always re-supply and move their regiments back towards the line as individuals.

I would also like to see the AI have the ability to either fall-back to a better position, or to demonstrate with a part of it’s forces. As of now, you the player have the knowledge of knowing that if the fight starts here, it’s going to stay right here.

The courier-system is in my opinion one of your greatest programming feats. The only change that I would make would be to have the Sender of the courier message dispatch the message. But I have been complaining about that for the longest.

Now, none is this is really a new-ideas , just changes to the existing code.

A new-idea would be having a day \ night cycle that would prevent any fighting at night, but allow the player and the AI to move units that are not close to the battle closer.

davinci

I would like to see a variable damage model for rifle fire
At 200 yds minimal
At 160 ys slight
At 100 yds and less increasing to potentially devastating at under 30-40 yds

Good ideas D,

More Ai courier feedback is what I'd like to see most - I think most of the HITS guys agree on that? Where are you, how many enemy do you see, where are they going, are you winning or losing, etc.

A major new feature would be the addition of an operational layer.
The existing maps and AI are already very good IMO.
The operational layer would carry-over the progress of your troops, and maybe you can also decide on movements on a strategic map.

Considering the first four replies were completely different and were from an ex-team member and three current team members - I think we just demonstrated Norbs 'everyone wants something different' point nicely

I'd like to see the formations executed in a more historic manner. For example, wheeling from a flank instead the center. Another example would be when forming a battle line, the regiments form starting at one of the flanks instead of both flanks forming on the center.

How about a more realistic scale of the terrain to the objects. I'm going from memory here, but in SOWGB aren't the soldiers and objects about four times actual size compared to the terrain?

More Ai courier feedback is what I'd like to see most - I think most of the HITS guys agree on that? Where are you, how many enemy do you see, where are they going, are you winning or losing, etc.

This! Its essential for HITS play, to be able to build a (Flawed) picture of the battle from your officers reports.

Going back to the wider picture, there are many questions raised here about game developement and managing a dev team.

All I can say is that the SOW franchise succeeds because it offers something all the others dont. That is realism.

The only reason I play these games is to try to get a handle on what a real 19 century inf commander had to go through in terms of choices and tactical moves. SOW does this so beautifully compared to the Total War series, which if we are honest owes more to Command and Conjurer than it does to a military simulation.

I adore SOW because I know the emphasis is on trying to recreat those famous civil war battles on my PC with me in a position of command. Keep doing that, add more detail, FOW, and dial down the troop movements so they act like their historic contemporaries.

Dont try to be all things to all people, thats where Total War fails, you are a niche product in a niche market, maximize that and dont pretend to be what you are not. Ive introduced several friends to the game by explaining that its a hardcore military sim that require thought and does a good job of representing the period in question. These are all people who are dissatisfied with total war, and are looking for more of a challenge.

The AI is very good, but needs further improvement. The Courier system (Which I think is the crowning glory of the game) is excellent but requires more player feedback. It would be nice to see a strategic campaign layer, but i think this should be attempted only after the battlefield one is at its maximum potential.

In short, keep on doing what you are doing only improve it.

More AI courier feedback is what I'd like to see most - I think most of the HITS guys agree on that? Where are you, how many enemy do you see, where are they going, are you winning or losing, etc.

con20or - Yes, I agree that that would be a nice feature to have in the game.

I would just like to see some minor improvements to the engine that enhances the game, before the game ventures off by adding new features.

I always say that there are only really three basic Civil War Maneuvers , and that is left, right and center. I wish that the AI was also programmed to fight in a similar manner.

davinci

I agree with what I see the majority here is saying. That our ai troop movements look stupid sometimes and that takes away from the realism. We will work on that. We need to assign someone to study that and narrow down the situations. I believe that is something we can tackle and I would really like that myself. We are going to be doing a lot of work on the AI, so that will be on the list.