Wish List

[jkBluesman]

As the gold patch for FoF is only weeks away, maybe CoG players may start a wish list here, which summarises the improvements they would like to see. At least I hope others join me.

- more historical AI behaviour

- no more "fighting to death" if not total war by the AI

- no more suicidal attacks

- commanders should have the chance to be wounded, so when hit, they are not killed automatically

- allied AI nations should not be allowed to call for player's reinforcements when they attack though totally outnumbered; one way could be that allies get a call for support that they can accept or reject, to reject it would let the alliance suffer

- short bios for the commanders and perhaps the diplomats to add historical flavour (there are far less than in FoF)

- more scenarios (1801/1802 or 1812)

- stop the cossacks from running around on the whole continent

- implement a rule that when the monarch is killed (Alexander, Napoleon after becomming emperor, Friedrich Wilhelm etc.) his nation sues for peace

- offer more setup options like turn on/off the attacker time limit in battles

- if there will be detailed naval battles, include admirals

- give the player the chance to at least choose the disposition for some of his troops at the start of the battle

[arichbourg]

Those all sound like good improvements. I would specifically like to see a much more challenging AI in detailed battles. Knowing I can win every battle in hexwar takes a lot of the excitement out of this game for me.

My current list is at tm.asp?m=1464183 but I'm sure I'll come up with more.

[Gil R.]

Well, not weeks away. At worst, it'll be out after the holiday weekend (this Monday is a national holiday in the U.S.).

A wish list thread is a fine idea, especially since we're in the preliminary stages of figuring out what a COG expansion game would be like.

[Ironclad]

Gil: I know that many wish items have been posted on the forum so I don't know if you want folks to repeat them here again. One issue recently discussed is the desirability of including ceasefire in the treaty options list so that you can add other provisions to it.

[jkBluesman]

Here are more wishes: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1459012&mpage=1&key=&#1470452

[Russian Guard]

ORIGINAL: jkBluesman

As the gold patch for FoF is only weeks away, maybe CoG players may start a wish list here, which summarises the improvements they would like to see. At least I hope others join me.

- more historical AI behaviour

- no more "fighting to death" if not total war by the AI

- no more suicidal attacks

- commanders should have the chance to be wounded, so when hit, they are not killed automatically

- allied AI nations should not be allowed to call for player's reinforcements when they attack though totally outnumbered; one way could be that allies get a call for support that they can accept or reject, to reject it would let the alliance suffer

- short bios for the commanders and perhaps the diplomats to add historical flavour (there are far less than in FoF)

- more scenarios (1801/1802 or 1812)

- stop the cossacks from running around on the whole continent

- implement a rule that when the monarch is killed (Alexander, Napoleon after becomming emperor, Friedrich Wilhelm etc.) his nation sues for peace

- offer more setup options like turn on/off the attacker time limit in battles

- if there will be detailed naval battles, include admirals

- give the player the chance to at least choose the disposition for some of his troops at the start of the battle

As a long time player of CoG I have offered, in many different threads, my opinions on changes to make CoG a better-playing game (not necessarily more "historical", although I lean heavily in that direction most times). My biggest gripe is the inability to play this game multi-player via LAN. I have heard that others (the designers?) have been able to successfully play CoG via LAN; I think it's a myth [:D]

I agree with all of your suggestions here. Although, the whole AI issue is one that is tough to design, and I'd not expect a "smarter" AI anytime soon. But a more "historical" one might be more do-able. For example, not allowing AI Turkish Armies to wander Europe (move into Austria, Russia or Prussia) unless they had extremely positive relations with that European power (something that could be fought against via political machinations) or were at war with them.

I'd add:

Commanders (Marshals, etc) should have more impact in both Quick and Detailed Battles, than they do now.

Implement the FoF set-up options (or similar) in Detailed Battles, for CoG if possible (relates to one of your above)

Fix the multi-player issue [:)]

[jkBluesman]

Russian Guard got me on the track of another wish list thread:

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1295772&mpage=1&key=&#1297585

[Gil R.]

ORIGINAL: Ironclad

Gil: I know that many wish items have been posted on the forum so I don't know if you want folks to repeat them here again. One issue recently discussed is the desirability of including ceasefire in the treaty options list so that you can add other provisions to it.

Repeating ideas is definitely good. We like it when ideas are consolidated -- makes things much easier, and decreases the chance of something falling through the cracks.

[pixelpusher]

Hey, great thread, jkbluesman!

Just to confirm what has been stated in a couple of other threads:

-WCS is indeed planning on doing an expansion pack for CoG, and we're in the planning phase.

-We have our own developer list of things to add, but we'd like to hear from players what kind of features they'd like. Especially if they're features from Forge of Freedom, which we already have programmed. (Please post them here, so we can find them in one neat and tidy place.)

-One of the completely new things we're talking about is, in fact, Naval detailed combat, aka Hexwar. Many players have asked for this, and it could be a lot of fun.

[jimwinsor]

I think the hex war system in place would be perfect for Napleonic naval battles, on a one unit = one ship basis. Just have wind direction + facing at start of turn = movement points (much like the old board game WS&IM). Have ability to not only inflict men casualties, but hull and rigging and gun damage. Keep the current land rules for units misinterpreting commands (increase frequency based distance from flagship). Have units produce smoke upon firing, impacting los, just like current land rules. Make rules for boarding when adjacent (just like charging in land combat).

Add rules for taking prizes (and prize crews), fires/explosions on board, hidden shoals/running aground, anchoring, sharpshooters in the rigging, marines, off shore batteries, fireships, hulks...all of which are do-able I think...and yeah, the land hex war system in place would translate well IMO, with a little nautical tweaking.

Can't wait for COG 2!  [:)]

[jeffreysutro@jeffreysutro.com]

This has been mentioned on another thread by Ironclad, but since this seems to be the "official" wish list thread I'll mention it again here.  It would be very good to be able to negotiate peace treaties.  At the moment you can ask for a ceasefire, or surrender to your adversary (if you're really desperate), or ask your adversary to surrender to you, but there is no way to negotiate an actual peace treaty.  Since this was how many wars actually ended, and since the lack of it greatly reduces the available options, I think that negotiated peace treatys should be included.


NOTE added 6/12/7: I just noticed that Ironclad's post on this topic is actually earlier in this same thread, so this post of mine is truly redundant. My apologies for my oversight.

[jkBluesman]

ORIGINAL: pixelpusher

-We have our own developer list of things to add, but we'd like to hear from players what kind of features they'd like. Especially if they're features from Forge of Freedom, which we already have programmed. (Please post them here, so we can find them in one neat and tidy place.)

To make it easier for people to learn the rules it would be good to have more options before starting a game like it is possible in FoF. You may call it basic, intermediate and advanced or whatever, but it might help if players can turn things on and off that they do not like or really want to have included.

[Gray_Lensman]

ORIGINAL: jeffreys

This has been mentioned on another thread by Ironclad, but since this seems to be the "official" wish list thread I'll mention it again here.  It would be very good to be able to negotiate peace treaties.  At the moment you can ask for a ceasefire, or surrender to your adversary (if you're really desperate), or ask your adversary to surrender to you, but there is no way to negotiate an actual peace treaty.  Since this was how many wars actually ended, and since the lack of it greatly reduces the available options, I think that negotiated peace treatys should be included.


NOTE added 6/12/7: I just noticed that Ironclad's post on this topic is actually earlier in this same thread, so this post of mine is truly redundant. My apologies for my oversight.

Actually, repeat suggestions from different players would add a bit more weight to the suggestion I would hope.

[Ironclad]

ORIGINAL: Gray_Lensman

ORIGINAL: jeffreys

This has been mentioned on another thread by Ironclad, but since this seems to be the "official" wish list thread I'll mention it again here. It would be very good to be able to negotiate peace treaties. At the moment you can ask for a ceasefire, or surrender to your adversary (if you're really desperate), or ask your adversary to surrender to you, but there is no way to negotiate an actual peace treaty. Since this was how many wars actually ended, and since the lack of it greatly reduces the available options, I think that negotiated peace treatys should be included.


NOTE added 6/12/7: I just noticed that Ironclad's post on this topic is actually earlier in this same thread, so this post of mine is truly redundant. My apologies for my oversight.

Actually, repeat suggestions from different players would add a bit more weight to the suggestion I would hope.

Jeffreys - No problem. As GL says additional requests are helpful. Also your description is a fuller and better one.

[Russian Guard]

Thought I'd comment more directly to these points:

- more historical AI behaviour

Defined how? One thing I'd like to see is a more historical Turkey - the idea that AI Turks wander central and western Europe with 300,000 soldiers is ludicrous. I'd suggest that AI Turkey not be allowed to enter Austria or Prussia or Russia unless at war with that Power, or Allied and have a Political standing above a certain (extremely high) number (say over 1,000). This would prevent some of the silly wars we see, like Turks marching through Prussia to attack Sweden. Note that this limit should only apply to an AI Turkey; players can do whatever they want. Note that this does put an AI Turkey at a disadvantage, since Sweden might still march through Russia to attack them - but that's at least a bit more historically feasable.

- no more "fighting to death" if not total war by the AI

Agreed, although I don't see this happening as often as you do, perhaps

- no more suicidal attacks

Yes - some form of relative strength check should be made before a Nation DoW's another, unless it is part of a larger Allied coalition - in which case the entire coalition strength should be taken into account.

- commanders should have the chance to be wounded, so when hit, they are not killed automatically

Yes - but not a critical one for me, more "chrome"

- allied AI nations should not be allowed to call for player's reinforcements when they attack though totally outnumbered; one way could be that allies get a call for support that they can accept or reject, to reject it would let the alliance suffer

Agreed - the "auto-call and auto-respond" is weak and annoying

- short bios for the commanders and perhaps the diplomats to add historical flavour (there are far less than in FoF)

Color but fun and easily do-able I'd guess

- more scenarios (1801/1802 or 1812)

Personally I think there are enough scenarios as is - but more can't hurt

- stop the cossacks from running around on the whole continent

YES, and Guerrillas also - Spanish Guerrillas in Russia are just silly

- implement a rule that when the monarch is killed (Alexander, Napoleon after becomming emperor, Friedrich Wilhelm etc.) his nation sues for peace

Have no opinion on this

- offer more setup options like turn on/off the attacker time limit in battles

Yes, institute the FoF placement optiond for DB in CoG

- if there will be detailed naval battles, include admirals

Sure, I love the naval period - but more chrome to me - the only naval commander that had big importance is already modelled in the game. Villaneuve and others were more a burden than an asset

- give the player the chance to at least choose the disposition for some of his troops at the start of the battle

See implementing FoF DB, as above

[jkBluesman]

More historical behaviour includes for me that AI controlled nations act reasonable in peace treaties. That means that major powers should not be reduced to one or two provinces. The AI should do more of what is in his interest, e.g. Spain should try to get Austria out of Italy and enlarge its own influence there instead of obtaining some Austrian "home provinces".

[Ironclad]

Yes, the diplomacy module is a very clever one but the AI's decisions do need to become more focused and selfish. When I was playing regularly I had to introduce some house rules for myself to follow to avoid taking advantage of the AI's willingness to agree to excessive amounts in return for offers of enforced alliances, embargoes, respect neutrality of 2 years or more. (I tended to play Russia so obtaining funds was an important consideration)

The house rules for these non-surrender treaties were:

1. Alliances can only be initiated with a maximum of 3 powers (beyond this limit alliances can be accepted if offered by the other party).

2. Payments requested shall not exceed 200 money or 10% of treasury of the paying nation, whichever is the lowest. Limits are increased to the lowest of 300 money/15% treasury when enemy is in home territory.

3. Reparations requested shall not exceed 10%. (Note the advantage for longer term alliances).

4. Respect neutrality offered shall only apply to provinces of independent countries within:
- 3 provinces of home contiguous territory (including protectorates)
- 3 provinces of the location of own army, corps or group of 6 units
- 3 provinces of own protectorate containing 6 or more units
- 4 provinces of own fleet of 5 or more ships

5. Loans requested shall not exceed 200 money except when own country is subject to invasion (limit 300 money) and enemy is in own capital province (limit 400 money).

6. Colonies requested must be fewer than the paying country is left with and cannot reduce its remaining total below 10. (There is no limit on a colony offer received).

I am not suggesting these fully did the trick or that I always remembered them or applied them completely but they were an attempt to build in a more sensible AI response.

One other thought away from diplomacy - protectorate offers need to have more regard to the power balance and geographical distance between the countries concerned. Saxony for Prussia makes sense but Portugal for Russia doesn't - unless the latter has neighbouring armies/fleets.

[Russian Guard]

In my humble opinion...you are to be commended for the style of play you profess here; I do the same, that is, set limits on the degree to which I am willing to take advantage of the AI once you understand some of the ways in which it will allow you to abuse it.

I tend to think historically when applying these kinds of self-limitations. Is it "realistic"?

But there are many (I'd dare say most) other players who do not limit themselves in such a way, and for them, the game is poorly designed if it can be taken advantage of in such manner.

That may be true in a more straightforward pure wargame, but this game has SO many elements that it is likely impossible to code every conceivable "abuse" out of it.

[argaur]

more and more areas, to see real strategic movements...

[Russian Guard]

This has gone too quiet...hopefully the desire to enhance CoG with some improvements hasn't fallen from grace?