This is a personal list of things I would like to see which may be an improvement.
we are all still interpreting behaviors in HistWar. In my humble opinion a continuous 360 degree view
is impossible by anyone or a computer game. Units appearing and disappearing, retrograde
movement and identifiable and recognized bugs all make their appearance in the game as well
as behavior.
The interpretation of behavior is if you cared to read the manual a designed feature of the game
and its actual 3d representation may or may not appear in the frame that we are watching on the
monitor...this is a physical fact. I don't buy the idea that the designer of the game missed out on
some basic 'Napoleonic' battlefield features that we have all read about including 'eye witness' accounts
available in literature past and present.
Some features are still in 'limbo' if I may, because I don't have the play by play of what JMM tried to
include in the algorithm which drives the game, in this decade of testing a potential finished product.
Some have voiced the opinion that playing the game from the 2d view is intrinsically the wrong
approach to take when playing HistWar , I share their sentiments 100%
the 2d map if for planning the strategy out. the minute you press 'go' that is the beginning and tweaking
continuously throws the AI off its job, get on your steed and watch your plan enfold.
I would like to see local dispatches telling me about logistical problems which are going to slow
progress :
wet ground negating deployment of artillery, stiff resistance in a village, chateau, farm
what % do you want to commit in manpower to achieve the goal a regiment ? a brigade ? a division?
the whole corps ? bypass ? commit what % as a rear guard ?
If the game is only 'an algorithm' then within the mathematical sequence all should be possible to
be represented including flying pigs, the reason why Mr Mathe' won't to this is because they don't add to the 'Napoleonic' flavor of the game, not because they can't be designed into it.
Designing other features in the game at this stage might throw the game in a loop I've heard someone
say. Well my take on this is this the game structure is limited to certain things and if it is then
I would like Mr Mathe' do a video, in his native language where he explains to us why we can't have this or that designed in the game, since we all payed money for the game we are entitled to a walk through.
I can find a scholar to translated for me.
So here I go with my short list of things which I would like to see in the game in some form
or rule.
a definite animation of melee between:
_ cavalry vs artillery servants instead of the present 'atomization'
often we see a squadron approach but at a distance from the battery and the next we see all
the gun servants and officers dead on the ground with the guns ruined.
I know this can be done because we have a cavalry vs cavalry melee sequence and an infantry vs infantry
melee sequence.
- I would like to see gunners racing back to support infantry lines to escape from a cavalry charge
- I would like to see cavalry attempt to spike the guns or capture and an in-game pop up window
to relay % of losses in equipment: from 1% to 50% (fair enough?)
I would like to see a definite rule regarding tactics of specialist infantry and how and where they fought
compared to their line infantry brothers.
- built up areas
-rough ground (if its to be considered) woods to deny or stall advance
-entire light regiment in skirmish line to fill holes in the line or be a 'throw away ammunition' for artillery
useful for possible probing attacks.
I would like to limit the accessibility of wooded areas by all arms reducing the march rate by
75 % deny it to cavalry and artillery unless a road crosses the wood for the entire length or width.
-cavalry and infantry must change formation to column of march , enter the wood, exit the wood stop to form back up into line/column of attack. If I'm following the unit F5 I want to be able to see it happen otherwise its a given/calculated even if I don't see it happen to all the units at least to the units in my immediate vicinity ie; in the brigade.
(4 units fair enough ?)
-light infantry can cross in skirmish order
-deny cavalry the present ability to attack through any wooded area (ideal defensive position for
light infantry troops).
- deny artillery the ability to unlimber and fire while inside a wood and firing over a wooded area
unless the deployment area is on higher ground then the wood.
-bombardment behind the wood only :
if explosive shell/shrapnel is used : I don't want to see solid shot (as I saw in the last MP battle I was honored to be a part of) being used by my artillery to fire at targets in the wood and behind the wood.
When infantry is defending built up areas I would like to see smoke coming out of the windows:
you don't have to show me the men inside the buildings just the smoke.
Thank You for Your time
