Matrix Games Forums

COG is a great game...I thoroughly enjoy it when I'm playing a human opponent online.

There are three complaints that I see regularly on this forum and another within the Matrix site.

Complaint 1 is that in detailed battle you are fighting with division size units when many players would much rather do this kind of battle on a regimental scale.

Complaint 2 is that there is really no national flavor...guys wanting Highland regiments and such.

Complaint 3 is the size of the armies involved. Eventually every battle after a couple months in the game is the size of Borodino.

1 and 2 are programming issues which I have no idea how difficult they would be to change. But I believe they'd add a lot of flavor to the game for those guys who like a bit of detail.

Those guys who really hate detail blast this game while waiting patiently for another.

But number 3 can be blamed squarely on the size of a corps. To have a corps of six or seven divisions is just a bit far beyond the Napoleonic norm. Most corps had two or three divisions, some four, and on for Russia Napoleon gave Davout five divisions. We all know Davout was far and away better than the average corps commander of the time.

For '1', I think its a playability issue. I dont think its practical to play out entire wars on this scale using regimental battles. I think most people ARE more comfortable with that level of Napoleonics, but I just dont see how it could be implemented here and still leacve the game playable in any reasonable amount of time.

Number '2' isa valid issue IMO as the game does feel a little generic in how it treats troops. Note that you can (and I have) add the flavor yourself by renaming key units. I have my '95 Rifles' in most Brit games and yes, I know they arent divisional in scale, but hey, cant have everything!

I attribute '3' to the apparent ease of supplying armies. It doesnt how big an army in whatever type of unpleasant terrain you are in, as long as you have the cashflow, you can be in supply. In reality, most nations at the time just did not have the logistics capabilities to throw the armies that we routinely see in the games around like we do.

Personally I think the terrain in the province should limit not only the size of the 'fieldable' armies, but also how much can be in supply. For example, instead of having a single 'Forage' number, have 2 'Support' numbers. The first is the Forage number as it functions now and the second would a somewhat larger number that represents the max that can be supplied regardless of the presence of a depot.

So, a fertile and open area might be 70k/300k whereas a e latter province regardless of having depots or not. That might lead to people spreading out their armies more and thus more smaller scale battles in the long run.

My $.02 anyways.

I prefer Corps de 5 divisions as limit so:
3 Divisions for Infantry
1 Division for Cavalry
1 Division for Artillery

Plus a Corps to Guard or Troops elite of 8 Divisions

I'd don't want regimental level, I'd much prefer brigade level.

I believe this is something Eric has said they are trying to accomplish for the next game.

With brigades being the "building blocks" of a corps, we could then have properly sized corps of a useful composition.

Remembering that the intent behind a corps was to have a smaller combined arms force capable of independent action that had only been previously available at the army level.

Even with brigades, by simply limiting the artillery unit strength (as is done now) we can consider the artillery units to be several batteries, so the proper scale of power/strength is maintained.

One additional thing I'd like to see is the creation of a leader unit each time a corps is created. A principle advantage of the corps is the additional layer of command and control such a formation provides. Right now, a corps merely allows you to operate with more troops, but the command and control aspect seems to be missing or stunted.

One thing that might add more historical flavor would be to create a "Division" container, along with the corps and army containers. The Division container would be used by the allies prior to a future advance allowing them access to Corps. The division container would be able to hold up to 8 brigades, not provide an additional leader, and all the units within it would have to be the same type; infantry, cavalry, artillery.

This last statement, of course, would apply only if brigades became the basic element.

One thing I'd really like to see for this version of COG is more of a distinction between the Prussian style of army organization and the post revolutionary French style. I'd rather see a "reorganization" upgrade as a requirement for building corps containers than merely relying on having a barracks upgraded enough.

Good ideas, I support them all.

We considered naming one of the divisions after the Gordon Highlanders, but we thought that most players would be upset that we confused a regiment with a division. It's an easy matter to rename divisions.

Adding more attributes to the units in order add to their flavor is something we are considering for the sequel.

Re the size of the battles, as I've mentioned before, this is largely an issue of making the game playable against the AI, who needs a large material bonus in order to compete well against a human player. We tried restricting the size of human's armies, but this was a decidedly unpopular feature of the game.