Page 1 of 2

March Update

Posted: Thu Feb 27, 2003 9:41 am
by datacollectioncenter
Hey all:

I know your probably thinking ... March update? But it's early? ... Well I thought I would get jump on things and I'm also excited to let you guys know that we are doing some preliminary testing on the entire engine. The combat is done and now we're throwing the AI into the combat so the computer will be able to fight back.

BTW: Thank you "Le Tondu" for the reminder and also the wierd shadow on the coast is gone in our new map :-)

We have a new map and we're currently getting the art work done so things are progressing.

I want to thank you all for your patience and hope that it is worth it since I've put about two years of my life into it. We're not done yet but I think I'll buy at least 20,000 copies for myself to make sure it is worth the wait!

Thank you all for your posts about PBEM play because that will be the next big trick but I've already got some coding done for it and I've seen some PBEM methods and played a few so I hope to make it much easier just simply by letting the engine do the rules interpretation.

Again all, thank you for your patience. I'm sorry I cannot get back to all of your posts but please keep'em coming because I do read them all!

Thank you

Posted: Thu Feb 27, 2003 2:55 pm
by eg0master
Ok, that made my day!
I think it is great you are starting to test the complete game engine.
I cannot help myself, I must ask the forbidden questions everyone wants to ask:

- When do you think you will go into Beta test?
- Will you use "matrix standard beta testers" (mentioned in another thread) or is there a possibility to be part of the Beta?
- Is the realease date slipping or are we still talking "summer 2003"?

Good question(s)!

Posted: Thu Feb 27, 2003 6:54 pm
by datacollectioncenter
Beta test ??? ... Not sure of date yet.

Beta tester ??? ... I'm not real involved in that selection process Ross Moorhouse will post something in the fourm when we are ready.

Date slipping??? ... Possible but not certain and certainly not preferred! I would say that if it slipped, it would probably slip from early summer to late summer but still release in the summer.

Hope this helps!

Thank you

Wooo Hooo!

Posted: Thu Feb 27, 2003 7:40 pm
by Le Tondu
Good news indeed. Thanks Marshall. :)

Posted: Thu Feb 27, 2003 8:13 pm
by eg0master
Better answers than I expected!

Now stopreading this forum and get back to work Marshall Ellis! :D

Combat??

Posted: Fri Feb 28, 2003 2:09 am
by EricLarsen
Marshall,
The March Update header certainly draws attention since it's still February. Glad to hear the game engine is starting some preliminary testing. Still very interested to know how closely it will resemble the boardgame's combat. I really enjoyed the tension of multi-round combats and the decisions I had to make; not to mention waiting to see if that flanking element shows up in a later round as hoped. For an easy, abstract combat system it still was good at capturing the flavor of Napoleonic combat. It sure will be nice to have the computer tallying up all the strength and morale data in an instant.:D

As far as release date goes, don't rush it. If I've got to wait a while longer for you to get the game right then I'm happy to wait. I really have no tolerance for sloppy work like Hearts of Iron that was released far too prematurely! Quality takes time and I'm happy to wait for the quality.
Eric Larsen

EIA Combat

Posted: Fri Feb 28, 2003 3:41 am
by datacollectioncenter
To your points Eric:

I'm happy to say that combat will be identical to the boardgame! We originally designed a much different combat system that I first called enhanced but after doing the EIA combat which entails standard chits , pursuit and multi-round combat, I'm happy to say that I like the original EIA combat much better. It's a proven system and I sweat a little more with the suspense. You also get the benefit of letting the PC take care of all of that pesky paperwork (morale, outflank force composition, casualty calculation, etc.).

Thanks for the support Eric. I too, believe in a stable program and not one that was rushed to market. Nothing bothers me more than being in the middle of a game that I may not have saved in 30 minutes and BAM! ... Locked up!

Thank you

Posted: Fri Feb 28, 2003 9:42 pm
by sol_invictus
Oh boy, sounds like we are getting relatively close now. Can't wait.

A look at the new map

Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2003 10:45 pm
by IChristie
Here's a few shots of the new map that Marshall mentioned. Please note that it's still a early draft and we have not chased down all the errata yet so please hold off on pointing out any inconsistencies or specific cartographic errors just yet.

Basically the last version seemed to be about halfway between a "realistic" terrain type map and a "canvas parchment" look. The compromise wasn't working. After trying out a few ideas we settled on the current "painted - parchment" look. Let us know what you think of the overall look.

First of all here's a look at the whole map in reduced scale.

Image

Here's another version with the empire boundaries overlaid

Image

Here's a few looks at the map in full scale (It measures 4600x3500 - a bit of a monster really ;) )

Image

Image

Image

Enjoy!

Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2003 6:24 am
by ASHBERY76
Thats looks cool, now we want to see the armies on the map.;)

Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2003 8:22 am
by pasternakski
I really like the painted parchment effect. I only have two complaints (but don't mind me, I'm an unconscionable b1tcher, just ask anybody)

-Those sea zone divisions need to be a lot more distinct
-The political boundaries still wash out into the background color and make them difficult to see (note, for example, how the Spanish boundaries blend almost completely into the light green background and how the Austrian boundaries get lost in the white mountain terrain)

I suggest that the political boundaries be made a distinctly clear line rather than the "fadeaway" shading that they currently are. A bolder, non-Italic typeface for the placenames would help too, I think.

It's all a matter of making it legible for the player, IMHO. When I think of how much more detail will be added when the various icons are added, it's going to be hard to separate it all visually. Bright colors on the icons in contrast to the subdued earthtones on the underlying map should be helpful.

Oh - I would make those cities and port symbols a little crisper, too.

Okay, I'll shut up.

Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2003 1:27 pm
by eg0master
Map looks good. Just have to get a cloth and wipe all these druel fluids from my keyboard... :D

Wow

Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2003 7:56 pm
by Le Tondu
Originally posted by ASHBERY76
Thats looks cool, now we want to see the armies on the map.;)


Clearly, the word is cool.

I like how the mountains have turned out. I also like how the land is made to look like an old map. The texture on the oceans looks great too.

Wow, thanks for the look. It certainly is coming along very nicely.

Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2003 2:56 am
by IChristie
Thanks for you comments. Much appreciated
I really like the painted parchment effect. I only have two complaints (but don't mind me, I'm an unconscionable b1tcher, just ask anybody)


What! Perish the thought! How can that be? I am disappointed. Everyone here usually just says nice things about these wonderful games. ;) :D

Seriously - thanks for the constructive comments. Legibility has been one of my major concerns. As you say the map is very busy - making the information obvious while trying to maintain the overall look is going to be a challenge. I'm sure there will be adjustments as we start looking at the map in the game with the game pieces etc.

Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2003 3:13 am
by sandy
I much prefer the map like this, more like the game. It looks great!

Not that its any of my business (especially as I know how hard and how long it can take just to do the little things!) I would suggest the following

1) If you were worried about clarity or the map looking too busy then allow some of the map to be viewed as the user wants ie the ability to turn on or off certain features, so for example if I just wanted to see state borders (ie no terrain features or cities) then I could just check the approp box or something

2) Other games have tried different ways to deal with large maps with lots of info. Total War allows you to press the shift key which highlights your provinces, which can be a good idea if you want to see the big picture etc. Other games let you switch from different types of maps such as political, terrain and so on.

You should know that I know a lot of wargamers that are looking forwrd to this game a LOT, if you get it right it will be successful. All this about taking time is obviously a good idea if you can afford the time lost without sales... so good luck guys, a lot of people are excited about your work.

Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2003 5:29 am
by pasternakski
Originally posted by IChristie
Thanks for you comments. Much appreciated



What! Perish the thought! How can that be? I am disappointed. Everyone here usually just says nice things about these wonderful games. ;) :D

Seriously - thanks for the constructive comments. Legibility has been one of my major concerns. As you say the map is very busy - making the information obvious while trying to maintain the overall look is going to be a challenge. I'm sure there will be adjustments as we start looking at the map in the game with the game pieces etc.


I do love the parchment effect. This may wind up being one of the most attractive maps of its type ever built into a computer wargame. I guess I prefer more sharpness and contrast as a utilitarian matter. I agree with Sandy that the original's "flavor" should not be lost, but utility is the primary concern for me.

Great stuff, Iain.

Map

Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2003 7:23 pm
by Yorlum
Looked great!

My questions/concerns...

Will there be a reference view that shows money/manpower values, forage values, spires, port defenses, and fortess fleches?

Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2003 4:46 am
by martinmb
This map work looks great. I am one of those people that liked the old map but after seeing this one I just can't wait to see what other improvements you have done to the game.

Minor points Prussia's national borders is still incorrect if I am understanding the map correctly.

Sandy I totally agree with your statements and well said. I think that the optional information button selection would make everyone happy. Thsi way you could set the game up as you like it and for what you have always not wanted on the map.

Yes, as some of you can tell I am back online again. ( to bad for those of you who though that you got rid of me because I'mmmm baaack). <BEWG>

Marshall have you decided as to what might be the best way to solve the email situation? If so please let us know what you have decided in next month's update. Thanks

Martinmb :cool:

Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2003 7:32 pm
by ASHBERY76
I see thats it mainly a europe map, so how is fleet strength worked out? will all of the british empire's ships be on the english channel.

Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2003 8:15 pm
by Le Tondu
Originally posted by ASHBERY76
I see thats it mainly a europe map, so how is fleet strength worked out? will all of the british empire's ships be on the english channel.


Didn't the Napoleonic Wars mainly take place in Europe? Don't forget that the game map has a healthy dose of Northern Africa, the Middle East, the Mediterranean Sea, ....

As for the English Navy, where they are on the map is up to the player, I'd say.