Regiments marching through each other

[Gunfreak]

ORIGINAL: redmarkus4

I listed games in which the graphical element works well. I'm sure you understand that really, but you clearly prefer point scoring and defending SoW at all costs to any kind of rational discussion.

I'm afraid that you're not doing Norb any favours. He'd be better off fixing the problem.

Total War might be total crap, but it sells the hell out of SoW. I wonder why?

Luck.

Rome total war came at the perfect time, and still lives on it.
Medival 2 was a solid game but mostly re skin of rome.

After that total war has lived on the good will of its fans. And they've been disappointed each time, empire was horrible, Napoleon was slight improvement, shogun 2 became decent after a few years and mods.
rome is empire style bad, and unlike napoleon Atilla did not improve rome 2 at all.

They made two good games 10 years ago, rest is hype ans hype.

If you spend 10 million on hype, the game is going to sell.

[Michael T]

Lots of people play the game and clearly enjoy it. That's great and the game fills a niche in that respect.

But it's too lightweight for me (and others I suspect) and falls in to my "beer and pretzels" category.

Moving on, enjoy [:)]

[aaatoysandmore]

ORIGINAL: Michael T

Lots of people play the game and clearly enjoy it. That's great and the game fills a niche in that respect.

But it's too lightweight for me (and others I suspect) and falls in to my "beer and pretzels" category.

Moving on, enjoy [:)]


I guess it's good for the history if you believe in that stuff. But, really if you're going to make an historical wargame at least get the colors right. Purple Parthians? cmon give us a break. [:'(]

[emeg]

ORIGINAL: oho

...with no penalty. No cohesion loss, no speed loss. I'm talking about unit flags (the center) getting very near to each other and with lines crossing very often. It not only kills immergence visually, it is also not at all correct regarding the outcome of manouvering decisions. That's why the AI can beat you easily, because it doesn't have to care at all about manouvering big masses of troops trying not to create a chaos.
Your AI (enemy and subordinate) is creating a chaos (more often than in Gettysburgh I would say) and it's not being punished for that.
I don't have the hope, that even modding AI with using thighter formations like columns of division, which where established to prevent this chaos, will prevent it in this game.
There must be routine established to stop a unit which is too near to a friendly unit.

This is a flaw (not a bug because it's WAD) in the game. The units don't have a size, they are 2d sprites, unable to act as psysical bodies. The game engine only looks where the unit flag is, the rest of the unit don't exist in real, is only made visible for cosmetic reasons. It's a designer choice to overcome the limited workload of computers, a trade off between the huge battlefield scale (much larger as the Total War series) and the lack of manouvering realism you have mentioned.

[Volunteer]

The merging is not so bad when considering the many merits of the game.

[PresbyterJohn]

As somebody who began Napoleonics with 25 mm figures I can say that part of the appeal is the visual effect of the array of columns and lines. A good arguement can be made about this being unrealistic too, but I prefer my battles to have visual appeal along with good fun. Different miniatures rules may have changed the basing or command level but they all had visual appeal on the battlefield and not just piles of figures all merged together. I've spent my money now but I would have paid more for a bit more of that visual appeal that I can have on the miniatures battlefield.

Even the block games have a degree of visual appeal too, although I only played block Ancients.

The alternative is to give a top down, just pins/flags on the map play style and I would like that too.

[aaatoysandmore]

There's a good block game of Napoleon at Waterloo by SSI. Old Dos game that DosBox or D-fend Reloaded will easily get it to work on modern day computers. I have it on mine now. I liked it because you typed in orders and sent couriers and you typed in the days orders at 6am in the morning and watch it all play out. Was quite a brilliant game but somebody liked Napoleon a little to much in it because I always easily won with the French even with Blucher arriving. Of course I didn't make the mistake Ney made by sending in the calvary without infantry and artillery support. Hougomont was harder to take than Le Hae Saint. But, I took them both and then sent the old guard at Blucher. [:D]

[Redmarkus5]

My point was completely lost here, with all the noise about Total War and UG.

My point was simply that there is no conga line waltz in any other game of this type I've ever played.

Nice to see the reference to the old DOS Napoleonic game that used blocks and managed (20-odd years ago) to move units around the battlefield without making it look like a 1970s disco. It CAN be done!

[PresbyterJohn]

My point is I would pay extra to see my men move using real drills of the era. I don't know if anybody else is a student of the training of soldiers, but drills won battles and warm my heart a little to see it displayed on the screen.

[Redmarkus5]

ORIGINAL: Prester John

My point is I would pay extra to see my men move using real drills of the era. I don't know if anybody else is a student of the training of soldiers, but drills won battles and warm my heart a little to see it displayed on the screen.

+1 and Amen to that!

[Redmarkus5]

I fully accept the criticism that Total War is unrealistic. In fact, I don't play the game - it annoyed me for that very reason.

BUT, one thing TW really does well is the graphical representation of troops in formation:

- No conga line
- No facing the wrong way
- No regiments passing through each other

And the TW units and terrain just LOOK so much better artistically.

The TW series succeeds because it is 'lucky'? I don't think so. It succeeds because it is visually appealing and accurate enough to satisfy most consumers. There's a marketing and sales lesson to be learned there somewhere, although personally I DO want a historically accurate simulation. That looks realistic. And appealing. And doesn't annoy me with nonsense unit moves.

Too much to ask, probably.

[Redmarkus5]

ORIGINAL: redmarkus4

ORIGINAL: Prester John

My point is I would pay extra to see my men move using real drills of the era. I don't know if anybody else is a student of the training of soldiers, but drills won battles and warm my heart a little to see it displayed on the screen.

+1 and Amen to that!

PJ (if I may?) I was an infantry recruit training officer for several years. The key problem I have long reported with SoW is that the units take their guide from the center of the formation - they don't wheel on their extreme left or right marker, they wheel around their central point. This leads to a completely unrealistic scenario with men running to catch up, walking backwards and crossing each other in the crazy dance we all know and love.

The men on the inside of the wheeling movement should 'mark time', remaining stationary, while the men on the outer limit move at marching pace. The speed of the others depends on their position within the unit.

[PresbyterJohn]

Not that I have attempted to study how the little men move in detail, but I think their "only" way to move is by wheeling in extended line. They should be able to resize their frontage, form, retire in close order and turn about in a manner indicating they have companies as part of battalions.

And then there's the arguement about ranks of two or ranks of three .....

[Redmarkus5]

They can move in column along roads as well. They automatically form line when they come within range of the enemy, which is a very good feature of the game in my view.

A simple solution to the number of ranks issue would be (dare I say it?) the one used by TW, which allows the player to define the precise frontage and orientation of any unit. The number of ranks that will result is displayed on the map in advance.

Doctrine aside, men in battle will (independently or as directed) tend to conform to the combined influences of terrain, numbers, direction and strength of the enemy, as well as morale and training. When fighting from a sunken lane or sandpit, for example, Allied infantry at Waterloo proved themselves quite capable of using common sense - they didn't attempt to form ranks as the game suggests; they adapted to the ground they found themselves on. No army in history has won by doing otherwise. There is the parade ground and drill book, and then there is the reality of battle.

[PresbyterJohn]

In the Napoleonic era the reality of battle for many soldiers was the drillbook. Depending on the battlefield and the tactical situation the defender will most likely have more options regarding the individual disposition of soldiers. But effective manoeuvre in battle required the execution of those drills learnt on the parade ground. Column was an effective way of moving from A to B and line was the formation for bringing fire to bear and moving the enemy off the patch of dirt you wanted. The best trained troops could execute their drills faster than milita, and the well drilled troops will have much more confidence in their own ability (less likely to run away). And drills applied to all arms, not just infantry.

[gunship24]

What you see there in the screenshot is the unfortunate result of a battalion about face and moving. The right then becomes the left, and vice versa, and the sprites swap over. We do have an About Face command that could be used but then the direction of movement needs to be calculated relatively so the units current facing, even more for the AI to do. Things like this we would love to avoid but hopefully we deliver on so much more that you find historic, and not to mention fun. When lines are going in the right direction the way they wiggle looks really good in my opinion. I will add the feedback to the powers that be though.

Having said all that we are only on V1.00 so plenty of time to come up with inventive ways to improve all aspects, including movement.

[PresbyterJohn]

The last thing I ever coded on was a PDP-11 so treat this comment with appropriate scorn.

Given that the current formations manoeuvre "by the centre" of the battalion as a whole it would be more accurate to code for subunit "flags" to represent the companies. Each company would then behave as the battalion currently does, wheeling about it's central "flag position". But the company start and end positions do not have to be the same relative to it's neighbours. Each company would move to the best free spot in the line or column when a manoeuvre is being plotted. The about face and move scenario would see the companies dance a bit, front rank men would still be front rank men, but the right flank company would become the left flank company.

[JamesLxx]

ORIGINAL: Prester John

The last thing I ever coded on was a PDP-11 so treat this comment with appropriate scorn.

Given that the current formations manoeuvre "by the centre" of the battalion as a whole it would be more accurate to code for subunit "flags" to represent the companies. Each company would then behave as the battalion currently does, wheeling about it's central "flag position". But the company start and end positions do not have to be the same relative to it's neighbours. Each company would move to the best free spot in the line or column when a manoeuvre is being plotted. The about face and move scenario would see the companies dance a bit, front rank men would still be front rank men, but the right flank company would become the left flank company.

I second this excellent suggestion!

In addition - To keep brigades in liner formation a regiment with both flanks covered by its neighbours should have the wheeling command "locked out". A regiment with one flank covered should be limited to moving only its free flank using the already programmed 'wheel back' command which keeps its attached flank attached to the formation - ie the "refuse flank" manoeuvre. This will stop the situation where individual regiments wheel out of line just to get a better shooting angle - which breaks up the line formation - and then the now individual regiments finding their flanks exposed or trying to readjust for marginally better shooting angle wheel again and again...

This will also realistically limit the manoeuvrability of a brigade line formation to small forward/back/oblique moves for readjustment - or the simple advance forward. For brigade manoeuvres the various column formations are both practical and historically right.

These suggestions from myself and others are not just for visual appeal. If regiments and brigades behaved in a way that mirrors historical reality then you would get historical results. IE: if a line breaks up into individual regiments in all directions then the combat result would be different from one that held the line. At the operational level SOWW is outstanding...but at the tactical level it needs work. Just imagine the end masterpiece if it were complete!

[RebBugler]

ORIGINAL: JamesL

ORIGINAL: Prester John

The last thing I ever coded on was a PDP-11 so treat this comment with appropriate scorn.

Given that the current formations manoeuvre "by the centre" of the battalion as a whole it would be more accurate to code for subunit "flags" to represent the companies. Each company would then behave as the battalion currently does, wheeling about it's central "flag position". But the company start and end positions do not have to be the same relative to it's neighbours. Each company would move to the best free spot in the line or column when a manoeuvre is being plotted. The about face and move scenario would see the companies dance a bit, front rank men would still be front rank men, but the right flank company would become the left flank company.

I second this excellent suggestion!

In addition - To keep brigades in liner formation a regiment with both flanks covered by its neighbours should have the wheeling command "locked out". A regiment with one flank covered should be limited to moving only its free flank using the already programmed 'wheel back' command which keeps its attached flank attached to the formation - ie the "refuse flank" manoeuvre. This will stop the situation where individual regiments wheel out of line just to get a better shooting angle - which breaks up the line formation - and then the now individual regiments finding their flanks exposed or trying to readjust for marginally better shooting angle wheel again and again...

This will also realistically limit the manoeuvrability of a brigade line formation to small forward/back/oblique moves for readjustment - or the simple advance forward. For brigade manoeuvres the various column formations are both practical and historically right.

These suggestions from myself and others are not just for visual appeal. If regiments and brigades behaved in a way that mirrors historical reality then you would get historical results. IE: if a line breaks up into individual regiments in all directions then the combat result would be different from one that held the line. At the operational level SOWW is outstanding...but at the tactical level it needs work. Just imagine the end masterpiece if it were complete!

Very useful constructive criticism, got me thinking about the advantages of having the basic unit starting at the company level. Actually a lot discussed here could be modded, and to represent large battles it would probably need to be at least SR10 scaled (1:10 sprite ratio). Still other hurtles that coding would have to address, not to mention an overhaul of the drills.csv and some other files.

But nevertheless, a positive discussion of possible ways to move SOW more toward better realistic representations rather than just comparing it with other games that use modeling engines that only display a few thousand sprites...SOW displays tens of thousands and it's AI challenges most Armchair Generals.

Thank you Gentlemen...

[aaatoysandmore]

Ditto on the AI challenges most Armchair Generals. I just went back and played the 2nd Second Manassas and the AI is sooooo superb in that game. Playing against the Union is a masterpiece as they are like the Zulu they just keep coming and coming regiment after regiment. Great game and great series I don't care if it doesn't look totally historical. I think it's so silly to grade a game on looks. If it was Bilbo Baggins out there vs the whole armies of Mordor I'd still love it even if they did do circles to make lines.[:D]