ETA on the Patch

[Johnus]

I put the game aside to wait for the second patch. The retreat bug was a show stopper for me. That was about 6 weeks ago. I understand that more and more improvements have been included in the patch, but if it isn't ever issued, what's the point ?

[Gil R.]

It will most definitely be issued. Programming for it is winding down, and it's just a matter of testing it, and making tweaks here and there as needed.

[parusski]

OUCH. My wife just smacked me on the head because I played FOF for 8 hours last night, till 4:15 this morning. But guess what? The head injury gave me a special vision: THE UPDATE WILL BE DONE-----WHEN IT IS FINISHED.

[:D]

[Titanwarrior89]

I am wondering what the historical campaign will look like.[:D]

[ETF]

So check in maybe in about 2 weeks time would be fair?

[Gil R.]

No promises, but you should possibly check in sooner.

[christof139]

OUCH. My wife just smacked me on the head because I played FOF for 8 hours last night, till 4:15 this morning. But guess what? The head injury gave me a special vision: THE UPDATE WILL BE DONE-----WHEN IT IS FINISHED.

That's hilarious!!! [:'(][:)][X(][:D] Chris

[ericbabe]

ORIGINAL: Titanwarrior89

I am wondering what the historical campaign will look like.[:D]

The big four things we've done so far are:
1) Combed over the generals file to enter actual (rather than year-based) start dates and to correct other errors. Starting generals at the proper starting rank for the scenario and in the proper province.

2) Went back to our old economic data based on the 1860 census -- changes to the basic economic numbers as well as some starting buildings and population levels.

3) Made CSA troop levels closer to the minimal numbers in the error ranges we found rather than near the maximal ends of those limits as we'd done previously. (For instance, if the West Point Atlas of the Civil War said there were 20,000-40,000 CSA troops in an area, previously we'd have given them almost 40,000. We'll now be giving them closer to 25,000.)

4) Removed all CSA regular navy.

I've not been able to find concise firearm data for the OOBs -- if anyone knows of a resource that would tell me how many of each type of firearm each military group might have had in 1861 I'd greatly appreciate such a thing. My guess is that such a table might not exist, since the data I have been able to find on this in general has been a bit scant.

[Gil R.]

I should add that the work on making the generals database more accurate will benefit all current and future scenarios, not just the "historical" one.

[Titanwarrior89]

Sounds great. Thanks for the hard work. I do like the changes your making with the Generals(ranks, start dates). I think overall it will enhance a already Great game.[;)]

ORIGINAL: ericbabe

ORIGINAL: Titanwarrior89

I am wondering what the historical campaign will look like.[:D]

The big four things we've done so far are:
1) Combed over the generals file to enter actual (rather than year-based) start dates and to correct other errors. Starting generals at the proper starting rank for the scenario and in the proper province.

2) Went back to our old economic data based on the 1860 census -- changes to the basic economic numbers as well as some starting buildings and population levels.

3) Made CSA troop levels closer to the minimal numbers in the error ranges we found rather than near the maximal ends of those limits as we'd done previously. (For instance, if the West Point Atlas of the Civil War said there were 20,000-40,000 CSA troops in an area, previously we'd have given them almost 40,000. We'll now be giving them closer to 25,000.)

4) Removed all CSA regular navy.

I've not been able to find concise firearm data for the OOBs -- if anyone knows of a resource that would tell me how many of each type of firearm each military group might have had in 1861 I'd greatly appreciate such a thing. My guess is that such a table might not exist, since the data I have been able to find on this in general has been a bit scant.

[christof139]

Oh poodle-doodle. The CSA could have one itty-bitty teeny-weeny gunboat-ram fleet on the miss. River at New Orleans or memphis. Heck, they river fleets they did have were a great concern to the USA, when coupled with shore fortifications and batteries.
 
Maybe make a CSA River Gunboat/Ram unit less strong than a USA one, maybe 50% as strong, and a bit shorter time and cost to build it.
 
We all have  bit of Navel in us you know.[8|]
 
I know, bad pun.
 
Chris
 
 
 

[General Quarters]

ORIGINAL: christof139

We all have  bit of Navel in us you know.[8|]

I know, bad pun.

Chris

Oh, Christof, based on your previous posts, I had put you on a pedestal. [&o] Now this! O, how far you have fallen! [X(]

[christof139]

Thanx for the pedestal, it sure beats the soap box I have been using down at the park, but it's heavier to carry. [:D][8|]

Chris [>:][>:][>:]

[Wahoo]

Ok serious, it's been long enough already, stop at verision 1.5 er whatever and let's get back to playing...geez![:@]

[Gil R.]

Sadly, it's not that simple. Some of the changes we've made require that other changes be made. For example, lots of people don't like the AI trenches "cheat," so we've reduced their role, but now we have to find other ways to help the AI in detailed battle. When it comes to programming games, changes will often create the need for various other changes. So that's where we're at: not really adding anything new that's major, but trying to put the patient back together after the operation.

[Curious]

ORIGINAL: Wahoo

Ok serious, it's been long enough already, stop at verision 1.5 er whatever and let's get back to playing...geez![:@]

Geez...do you want them to do a good job or a fast job? A good job usually turns out more satisfactorily in the long run than a fast job. It will be well worth the wait when it arrives.

CB

[Hard Sarge]

LOL Gil, if the room had ears, it could tell some stories

I know, I spent 17 hours in the game the other day, and I am about to crank up the new patch and start bugging everybody all over again

but really guys, it is not as easy as it may seem, just a little change here or there and everything goes out the window

Eric is working, Gil is working, Pencil (think he sleeping someplace) and I on Vaction, so I been working

[Johnus]

Seven ? weeks;  and counting.

[Wahoo]

Yup[:@]

[Jonathan Palfrey]

Patience is a virtue. [:)]