Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Brausepaul

The one of the reports lists which regiments gets new weapons, for example. This report lists BOTH sides, I don't think that this is appropriate. Maybe reports about the oponent should be moved to the rumor page and randomized.

it does ? hmm, I never seen that report ?

or are you talking about the battle report when one side is dropping weapons ??

The ironclads made in England were started however as CSA diplo prestige declined the british government siezed them and became much more strict on the issues of neutrality.

It would be nice if the honor scroll of a brigade contained a bit more information instead of just date, place and outcome of each battle.
For example it could also list how many men the brigade lost during the battle, how many of the enemy they killed, how many and which enemy units they routed and other stuff like that.
If it's possible to keep track of these things (maybe the engine does it already to some extent?) it would be really cool to add it to the honor scroll.
Would be a very immersive feature, in my opinion.

Would be nice for a tally to be kept of killed men for the whole war. So all the men lost get added to this list, then at the end of the game you find out how many you lost and how many the CSA lost along with the result.

ORIGINAL: briny_norman

It would be nice if the honor scroll of a brigade contained a bit more information instead of just date, place and outcome of each battle.
For example it could also list how many men the brigade lost during the battle, how many of the enemy they killed, how many and which enemy units they routed and other stuff like that.
If it's possible to keep track of these things (maybe the engine does it already to some extent?) it would be really cool to add it to the honor scroll.
Would be a very immersive feature, in my opinion.

I think that would make it better. Almost like reading a history lesson. Hope they consider.

Work on the casulty figures to get more realistic numbers.

Something I'd like to see in a patched version is a "link" from the "All Cities" screen entries to the "Individual Cities Screen" that would bring up a list of "improvements" built there. So I don't have to "scroll through" them all individually to find the ones with a University to get the bonus for other "research" buildings. Being able to "build" from this screen is great..., but more useful information would be nicer still. As it stands now, I'm making notes on a legal pad.

ORIGINAL: flanyboy

Work on the casulty figures to get more realistic numbers.

Still say, you got to take the player out of the game then, once the player is part of the battle, the numbers are not going to be realistic

They still should be realistic in a ratio sense.

IE its just plan bull to have one side lose 5 times the other when 2-1 rarely ever even occured.

ORIGINAL: flanyboy

They still should be realistic in a ratio sense.

IE its just plan bull to have one side lose 5 times the other when 2-1 rarely ever even occured.

As is discussed elsewhere in the forum, those battle "casualties" reflect by how many an army has been diminished after a battle -- not casualties suffered during the battle alone. So, they include pursuit losses, march attrition, etc.

I realize that but even all those numbers taken into account sides didnt suffer 5 times the enamy.

ORIGINAL: flanyboy

I realize that but even all those numbers taken into account sides didnt suffer 5 times the enamy.

I was just making sure that you understood what the numbers represented. Battle casualties can be tweaked, and this would indeed be the thread to request it...

I would request a mod or do it within a patch (though I suppose someone who knows more about computers than I could make a mod) to make losses (including the aspects you mentioned) in an appropriate ratio.

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

Something I'd like to see in a patched version is a "link" from the "All Cities" screen entries to the "Individual Cities Screen" that would bring up a list of "improvements" built there. So I don't have to "scroll through" them all individually to find the ones with a University to get the bonus for other "research" buildings. Being able to "build" from this screen is great..., but more useful information would be nicer still. As it stands now, I'm making notes on a legal pad.

And I still wish I could open up a "troop container" screen and bring up a list of my leaders and their stats inside it (like the buildings list in the single city screen---but including where and if they were assigned). Then be able to assign one to the container I'm in and have it "auto-join" that container.
Current system still seems backwards to me.

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

ORIGINAL: flanyboy

They still should be realistic in a ratio sense.

IE its just plan bull to have one side lose 5 times the other when 2-1 rarely ever even occured.

As is discussed elsewhere in the forum, those battle "casualties" reflect by how many an army has been diminished after a battle -- not casualties suffered during the battle alone. So, they include pursuit losses, march attrition, etc.

One question here, Gil. Are these losses "Morale Dependent"? The kind of straggling and desertion losses you are describing happened primarily in "green" forces. As the Armies on both sides became veterans it was much less noticable. By the time of Gettysburg, The South lost over 1/3rd of the Army's strength in battle casualties, and the Union over 1/4th---but neither lost any significant amount outside of the battle. Actually, the Union's "straggling" losses on the march to the battle were the only other noticable number.

My wishes:

1. Increase fog of war: technology upgrades should be hidded from the enemy in the event report and hide enemy city incomes from the map. These are IMHO very important in PBEM games. I don't want the opposite to see what kind of technology strategy I have chosen. I would rather let them see it in the hard way aka losing battles.

2. Add more weapon slots for bigger forts, e.g. Fort I has one slot, Fort II two slots and Fort III three weapon slots. All can contain different artillery weapons and each can cause different salvo results.

I also like to see an option for 1280/1024 and a print screen that works please.
Furthermore a new Mustang and... oh, sorry , that's another list.
I settle for the first 2 options ty.

Might as well add this here too. Give the Union Navy it's proper weaponry at the start of the game. Take them one step up the ladder from "Improvised Weapons" so that the South isn't in a position to compete in this area. And it would still be nice to see "Ironclads" built as single powerful ships instead of in squadrons of 10. Add some flavor..., there weren't 10 "Virginias" or 10 "Monitors" at Hampton Roads.

1. "Undo" orders button.
Due to misclicks, I end up sending a unit somewhere I didn't want to, after I get done inspecting it. Is there a way to "cancel" orders? I haven't seen one.

(Amusing anectdote: due to me not realising I had the AoP selected, I watched it move from Anapolis to Harrisburg, then back again, by foot, one summer turn. Must have been time to go liberate the bordellos from the Rebs.)

2. Slightly modify the US Army container symbol.
When I right click and inspect the contents of a province, the northern Division and Army container symbols look alike. The Corps symbol has that triangle shaped portion cut out of it, so no problem there. It would be nice to differentiate the containers present at a glance. (Add something into the flag, like a golden wreath, to make it stand out from the division container graphic.)

I got the game last Thursday. For some reason, I found this game easier to learn (and more fun to play) than Crown of Glory. (Sorry, I can't put my finger on exactly why...) That means you gents did good. Two thumbs up.

ORIGINAL: flanyboy

Bounty I agreed or suggested that idea though you would need alot better relations with europe or the UK or w/e to get ships than rifles. (ie as the war progressed the UK refused to make more ships for the south, also they didnt make frigates only raiders, i suggested that raiders be added to the game with the idea of them performing like partisans on land though they can only destroy not capture.

Legally the English Goverment could not sell WARSHIPS to the CSA. They skirted the legal issue ( a mtter of their own laws not anything the US had done or threatened) by building the ships sans weapons and mounts and then provideing said armament at Sea where the ship was then outfitted as a warship.