Detail/Tactical Battlefield Units

[Sarge]

I was looking at the screen shots and I see that the unit graphics have changed. I was wondering why did you move away from the COG units on detailed/tactical battlefield, I liked the look of the one individual unit represented with the formation graphic also in the same hex.

Is it due to the detail/tactical map scale being increased , and not having the ability to zoom in and out ?

[pixelpusher]

Hey Sarge,

The units in the screenshot are a sort of proof of concept placeholder. Those are not the final units, and we're still messing w/ the appearance. (Units are the last big complicated item on my to-do list.)

But to answer your question; it's a combination of a number of things:
Main thing is trying to bring everything into more appropriate scale. Forts, buildings, fences, all that stuff needs to be more proportionate. Also, yes - FoF is brigade level, so much 'closer' in of a zoom than CoG means that it makes more sense to make the little CoG dots actual little guys, and the buildings to look like actual little buildings. We're also going for smaller units with more animation, rather than larger units with fewer frames.

We've made a bunch of general graphics changes to Detailed Combat as well:
-General 'smoothing out' of Detailed Combat graphics. (Visible in the coasts, roads, etc.)

-Whereas CoG Detailed Combat was either summer, winter, or desert - The appearance of the Forge Detailed Combat terrain actually changes smoothly with the seasons and location. I think there are about 12 basic variants so there are 12^2 possible combinations. I'm particularly proud of the trees. We have tons of trees. Pine trees, palm trees, trees in winter, trees in spring, swamp trees, etc etc. (Looks like early fall there in the screenshot.)

-Added rocks, trenches, fences ... and probably other stuff I forgot. Whereas CoG had just a single level of 'heights', Forge has more variation w/ rocky edges of things, which have tactical implications. Again this is a scale thing, and historically appropriate. (Devils Den, anyone?)

-Increased the draw speed by about 2x w/ engine side improvements.



Thanks for your interest in Forge,

-Pixelpusher

[benpark]

I love the new little soldiers. Makes it just like those old "American Heritage" CW books!

[sol_invictus]

I think the new tactical look is a huge improvement and looks stunning.

benpark, I still have that AH CW book. I bought it at a grade school book fair around thirty years ago. It was one of the first military history books I ever owned. I now have a rather large library of them. I have always loved the little soldier look and I guess that is why I like the Total War games. I guess they take me back to carefree childhood.[:)]

[Russian Guard]

I have always felt that the single soldier graphical approach of CoG was displeasing (and so always use the "chit" mode).

I much, much prefer this multiple soldier look in FoF - it creates more of a feel of an "Army", good job, I hope it remains that way in the final version!

[Sarge]

Thanks for the reply pixel buster,
 
All the map improvements are just what the doctor ordered. Although I never had any issue with COG graphics, matter of fact IMHO I thought they were well done but even still I welcome the improvements.

[Russian Guard]

Actually let me be more clear about my earlier comment regarding the soldier graphics in CoG - its not that they aren't well done. For me, I just don't get the feeling that I'm leading an "Army" - it feels to me like I'm leading 5 guys on horses and about 10 or so guys with rifles or canons (and a few wagons), against a similar force - almost like I was playing some squad-level tactical game.

Just personal preference. I like these new graphics [:)]