What's next now that the patch is out

[Gil R.]

With the patch released, our plan is to wait until the fall to release another features patch. There are already numerous good suggestions in the "Wish List" thread, and there will no doubt be others made in the weeks ahead, so we will wait before deciding what makes it in and what does not. So, by all means, please keep the ideas coming.

In the meantime, we need to do a small patch to fix some minor data file problems discovered late in testing this patch. (Too late to fix without delaying its release by another week.) We will use that small patch to fix any OOB-related issues that are brought to our attention, from spelling errors to outright mistakes. So, please let us know if you've found anything -- this thread seems as good a place as any to post them. In addition, we want to use this patch to add a few big-name generals who are missing from certain scenarios, as is being discussed in another thread. So definitely keep that discussion going, since once there's a reasonable consensus we'll try to implement it.

Thanks!

[Anthropoid]

Just to clarify, there is no need to REPEAT stuff that is already in the WishList here right? This thread is for additional suggestions (or if somebody doesn't notice it is already in Wish List . . .)

To elaborate on the Generals issue: for PBEM with many players, it seems to be a consensus that the 1792 scenario offers the best balance in which the minor nations have some hope to win.

However, some players are annoyed that, many Generals who appear in other scenarios do not show up at the appropriate time when playing the long 1792 scenario. For example, Napoleon, who I think is present I 1796 onward? Does not show up when playing the 1792 long game.

Not sure if Russian Guard will work on it to update a 1792 version with both the stock Generals AND his extra Generals or what, but if you guys could effectively change the files so that _all_ the generals in all the later scenarios show up in the 1792 scenario at the appropriate time, that would be a huge plus for the PBEMers.

I think there is a big push for us to restart our PBEM, so if you could give us a fairly timely sense of whether or not this would happen, and if so how long, it would be really swell.

[Gil R.]

WCS has made no decision on this -- we've been too focused on the current patch. But I can tell you that this minor patch is unlikely to be out for at least 3-4 weeks, if that helps you reach a decision.

I'd prefer that this thread be used for discussing data file issues rather than features, AI, interface, etc. Those matters can go in the Wish List. Anything in that thread will be considered for the features patch rather than this patch, so if there's something in there related to OOB's or some other issue relating to data files it would be a good idea to repeat it here.

As for Napoleon in 1792, there's no guarantee that Napoleon would have become a major figure in European history, so it's realistic to leave him out of that early scenario. I think this issue is more a matter of taste than anything else. (What we might do is just have a 1792 "All Generals" scenario for those who want it.)

But as I've indicated, no decisions have been made on anything, other than that we need a small patch for additional issues of this type -- i.e., issues that were not critical enough to delay the current patch, but which it would be good to deal with sooner rather than later.

[Mus]

Seems to be a weird error with the renaming unit feature where the name is rounded off to a shorter name if you make it too long.  Wish that could be fixed if it hasnt been already.

[Anthropoid]

If it is not an onerous labor issue, I think an "All Generals 1792" Scenario would be well received.

[Gil R.]

ORIGINAL: Mus

Seems to be a weird error with the renaming unit feature where the name is rounded off to a shorter name if you make it too long.  Wish that could be fixed if it hasnt been already.

We'd like to try to fix that for this patch (which, in addition to being a data files patch, would deal with any new bugs).

[ptan54]

ORIGINAL: Anthropoid

If it is not an onerous labor issue, I think an "All Generals 1792" Scenario would be well received.

I wholeheartedly agree.

[Panama Red]

When I installed the new patch yesterday, I could not find where it said what version is was (just for referance). Was this left out, or if I missed it, on what screen does it say what patch version is currently installed ???

[Joram]

On the loading screen in the bottom right.

[Randomizer]

Gil R wrote:

As for Napoleon in 1792, there's no guarantee that Napoleon would have become a major figure in European history, so it's realistic to leave him out of that early scenario. I think this issue is more a matter of taste than anything else. (What we might do is just have a 1792 "All Generals" scenario for those who want it.)

Wasn't sure if or how to respond to this rather surprising comment. While I am not a real fan of the "Great Man" theory of history it is difficult to see how, provided he was not killed off early, somebody of Bonaparte's vision, talent and ambition would not have emerged from obscurity in some capacity. Indeed, the idea of a Napoleonic era game without any Napoleon is entirely oxymoronic in my opinion and uncharacteristic of WCS. Just $0.02

Love the "All Generals" idea though.

Best Regards

[Gil R.]

ORIGINAL: Randomizer

Gil R wrote:

As for Napoleon in 1792, there's no guarantee that Napoleon would have become a major figure in European history, so it's realistic to leave him out of that early scenario. I think this issue is more a matter of taste than anything else. (What we might do is just have a 1792 "All Generals" scenario for those who want it.)

Wasn't sure if or how to respond to this rather surprising comment. While I am not a real fan of the "Great Man" theory of history it is difficult to see how, provided he was not killed off early, somebody of Bonaparte's vision, talent and ambition would not have emerged from obscurity in some capacity. Indeed, the idea of a Napoleonic era game without any Napoleon is entirely oxymoronic in my opinion and uncharacteristic of WCS. Just $0.02

Love the "All Generals" idea though.

Best Regards

Ahh, but you see, the first game was subtitled "Europe in the Age of Napoleon." But this one is merely "Emperor's Edition" -- and all that that can be construed to mean is that if you own the game you're an emperor.

[Anthropoid]

It took me a couple turns to realize that you have 'fixed' the way supply works, but now that I realize what you've done, I think it is FANTASTIC. Yes! Finally it will possible to use cutting off supply as a regional strategy. Great.
 
Haven't experienced what the superfortress capitols are like yet, but that will be cool I bet.
 
A great game just got better!

[Mus]

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

Ahh, but you see, the first game was subtitled "Europe in the Age of Napoleon." But this one is merely "Emperor's Edition" -- and all that that can be construed to mean is that if you own the game you're an emperor.

The "Emperor's Edition" of Crown of Glory: Europe in the Age of Napoleon is how I thought of it.

I just thought you were being laconic, not changing the whole concept of the game.

[:'(]

If its a serious argument that Napoleon might not have come to power theres no reason to have any general arrive at the historically appropriate time. Random generals with random abilities would suffice. And the scripted historical events are inappropriate under that philosophy as well because who is to say whether or not what happened is what was likely to happen or simply a freak occurence.

In reality I think a historical wargame about Napoleonic warfare doesnt do very well without Napoleon and the major figures that opposed him being included. Im fine with Alternate history as an option.

This makes me wonder what members of the forum think would have even happened without Napoleon arising to great prominence in this period. My impression is that Napoleon was the root cause of most of the conflicts from 1799 on. Another impression is that a Revolution like that in France, with complete disrespect for the rule of law and other societal foundations would almost inevitably result in a military dictatorship. So maybe just a Napoleon under another name. But extended discussion on that is off topic and probably best in another thread.

But I am all for the most important generals of the period being included in all scenarios.

[Randomizer]

@ Gil R.
Ha! Your spirited defence of an indefencible position would arouse the admiration of all - except for the small detail of your own company cutting you off at the knees...

From page 9 of the CoG-EE manual:

Crown of Glory: Emperor's Edition is a historical turn based strategy game and tactical simulator, set in the Europe of the Napoleonic Era - the period covering 1792-1815.

Obviously somebody figured that 1792 was Napoleonic and one cannot have Napoleonic without Napoleon.

Kidding aside though, this is a great game and the receptiveness of WCS to player input is a pretty good indicator that it will only get better. My only issue is dragging myself away from the newly patched FoF to give the newly patched CoG-EE a thorough run through.

Best Regards

[lenin]

ORIGINAL: Mus

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

Ahh, but you see, the first game was subtitled "Europe in the Age of Napoleon." But this one is merely "Emperor's Edition" -- and all that that can be construed to mean is that if you own the game you're an emperor.

The "Emperor's Edition" of Crown of Glory: Europe in the Age of Napoleon is how I thought of it.

I just thought you were being laconic, not changing the whole concept of the game.

[:'(]

If its a serious argument that Napoleon might not have come to power theres no reason to have any general arrive at the historically appropriate time. Random generals with random abilities would suffice. And the scripted historical events are inappropriate under that philosophy as well because who is to say whether or not what happened is what was likely to happen or simply a freak occurence.

In reality I think a historical wargame about Napoleonic warfare doesnt do very well without Napoleon and the major figures that opposed him being included. Im fine with Alternate history as an option.

This makes me wonder what members of the forum think would have even happened without Napoleon arising to great prominence in this period. My impression is that Napoleon was the root cause of most of the conflicts from 1799 on. Another impression is that a Revolution like that in France, with complete disrespect for the rule of law and other societal foundations would almost inevitably result in a military dictatorship. So maybe just a Napoleon under another name. But extended discussion on that is off topic and probably best in another thread.

But I am all for the most important generals of the period being included in all scenarios.

Europe without Napoleon = 1796 pbem game on the forum. Hedged in, but rich, temporarily hidden behind their borders. But sooner or later, we will all be singing the "Marseilles"! - but what a fine song that is!

[Mus]

1796 has Nappy, just not 1792.

[Anthropoid]

Here's a question for you: If Napoleon had been born in the Dark Ages, would we still have had a "Napoleonic Era" except with primitive thug-like skull cap helmets, huge skull-crushing axes, and fierce smelly coastal raiders instead of guys in big furry hats?

I think there is probably an untapped market for WCS to explore this kind of scenario with famous historical figures transposed to alternate time periods [:D] Imagine:

Genghis Khan, the booze smuggling Chicago gangland warlord
Richard the Lion Hearted in the role of JF Kennedy "Ask not what your country did to your neighbors, but what we might do to you to if you do not serve your feudal lord . . ."
Franklin D. Roosevelt as Shogun, Warlord over all of Feudal Japan "Well actually, you're right Yashohiro my good man, I cannot get up and beat you fairly in hand-to-hand combat, but this fellow right here with this carbine CAN blow your brains out *BLAM*
Alexander the Great as Richard Simmons . . .
Danny Devito as Darius of Persia . . .

. . . the possibilities are seemingly limitless.

[Randomizer]

Somehow Alexander the Great as Richard Simmons seems just plain wrong on every level, rather like Jim Belushi as Leonides of Sparta.  But Danny DeVito would make an excellent Darius the Great, King of Kings provided a suitable beard and curls could be applied.
 
I would like to see:
 
Sir Douglas Haig as Jack Bauer;
 
Survivor, the Dark Ages (featuring the Black Death);
 
Josif Stalin hosting Jeopardy; ("Comrade, you never phrased it as a question, please go back stage and shoot yourself or your family dies")
 
and of course Scipio Africanus vs. Bernard Montgomery
 
Best Regards

[Mus]

Alexander the Great as Richard Simmons, sounds familiar, I think somebody made a major motion picture like that.  I recall the Greeks were upset at the time.
 
Survivor the Dark Ages, I dont want to spoil the season for you, but the Saxons ended up getting voted off the Island.  Normans won all the money and got all the chicks.
 
Josef Stalin as host of Jeopardy, get a question wrong you were never even on the show.  Erased from history.  Get a question wrong in the Double Jeopardy round your family gets erased too.
 
 
 
 

[Gil R.]

ORIGINAL: Randomizer

@ Gil R.
Ha! Your spirited defence of an indefencible position would arouse the admiration of all - except for the small detail of your own company cutting you off at the knees...

From page 9 of the CoG-EE manual:

Crown of Glory: Emperor's Edition is a historical turn based strategy game and tactical simulator, set in the Europe of the Napoleonic Era - the period covering 1792-1815.

Obviously somebody figured that 1792 was Napoleonic and one cannot have Napoleonic without Napoleon.

Kidding aside though, this is a great game and the receptiveness of WCS to player input is a pretty good indicator that it will only get better. My only issue is dragging myself away from the newly patched FoF to give the newly patched CoG-EE a thorough run through.

Best Regards

Curses! Mr. Z must have put that in there after I had edited his draft...

Glad to know you like the game, regardless of its central theme.