Wish List

[quartermaster]

Lodi,  remember Saski is documenting the early stages of the 1809 campaign which is a very mobile campaign with encounter battles rather than set-piece actions.  Many of the combat descriptions are focused on the movement of divisions with attacks made at regimental (or brigade) level.  A lot of the material concerns the 3rd Corp which seems to have spent a lot of time on the march or in combat with the occasional rest day.  For a battle like Borodino / Moskova or Waterloo where the armies are fully concentrated for battle there is then more a use of pre-planned division level attacks. 

For wargaming I take the view that player control ought to go no further than two levels down from the senior commander.   For a major battle you have the commander in chief issuing orders to Corp or Column commanders specifying what to do with divisions.  You would not bother about what brigades and regiments as the divisional commanders would be expected to manage this lower level.   If however the player is only commanding a Corp then he will order divisions and instruct brigades.

In the main battle in the demo we have a large battle with the player having to address many levels of command.  If this were multi-player then as Corp commanders each player could concentrate at the lower level.

In its current form the player gives orders to Corps commanders to move the corp to position and deploy as required and the player may then command individual regiments.  I can understand the interest in having some interim level command such as division level.  Perhaps we will see this with divisional AI at some point in the future.

[Lancier]

Even though i try to follow, I wish we have some tips from betatesters or JMM about the game that are not involved in the manuals. I try to follow gazfun and VC, thank you both. It would be great if we have some more before the game appear.

[Memnon]

I don't know if something like this is in place yet with the OOB editor, but being able to assign custom flags (maybe two?, a King's Color and a Regimental Color) or custom marches to a regiment would be on my wish list.  I'm not looking to increase JMM's workload (by much ) this would be mainly for player modding.

[lodi57]

Lodi,  remember Saski is documenting the early stages of the 1809 campaign which is a very mobile campaign with encounter battles rather than set-piece actions.  Many of the combat descriptions are focused on the movement of divisions with attacks made at regimental (or brigade) level.  A lot of the material concerns the 3rd Corp which seems to have spent a lot of time on the march or in combat with the occasional rest day.  For a battle like Borodino / Moskova or Waterloo where the armies are fully concentrated for battle there is then more a use of pre-planned division level attacks. 

Yes, but it greatly helps to understand the mechanisms of fighting and that the basic unit for manoeuvre is the battalion for infantry, squadron for cavalry and company for artillery. It's important to understand that when the 1st division attacks, it's not one entity that does with one moral and force but 10 or 12 entities (battalions, squadrons, etc.) each with their fighting competences and moral. Whether they are battles involving only one or several army corps, mechanisms remain the same.

For wargaming I take the view that player control ought to go no further than two levels down from the senior commander.   For a major battle you have the commander in chief issuing orders to Corp or Column commanders specifying what to do with divisions.  You would not bother about what brigades and regiments as the divisional commanders would be expected to manage this lower level.   If however the player is only commanding a Corp then he will order divisions and instruct brigades.

I agree.

[Ras]

I can't seem to find information on the quality and type of a unit in the regiments tab. I only can find those in the unit tab.
It would be nice to see in the regiment tab whether you have a Hussar or Dragoon regiment and whether it's elite or not.

[Gunfreak]

Yes, but it greatly helps to understand the mechanisms of fighting and that the basic unit for manoeuvre is the battalion for infantry, squadron for cavalry and company for artillery. It's important to understand that when the 1st division attacks, it's not one entity that does with one moral and force but 10 or 12 entities (battalions, squadrons, etc.) each with their fighting competences and moral. Whether they are battles involving only one or several army corps, mechanisms remain the same.

I agree.

I agree mostly, but I think in the prebattle sections a command in chief should be able to give a detailed battle plan,
Wellington was know to place every single battalion on his battle field before the battle, like at Salamanca, he made the planes for a Brigade in the 3rd division to have it's first battalion in line, with two battalions behind in column, he gave those kinda orders before the tattle.

But I agree that once the battle has started, the commander should just give order to corps or divisons

[lodi57]

I agree mostly, but I think in the prebattle sections a command in chief should be able to give a detailed battle plan,

Sure, it can be done in LG during the initial order.

[Malaspina]

I guess this has already been said, but I add my voice to this request:

I'd like to have more control over units in the 3D map CM-style (e.g. higher camera and ability to cycle through units pressing "+" or some other key).

I'm pretty sure the next version will be a perfect game.

[JMM]

I'd like to have more control over units in the 3D map CM-style (e.g. higher camera and ability to cycle through units pressing "+" or some other key).

Just both for F5 and F6... you can use Page Up/Down to cycle  through units.

F3 view : you can put the cursor on the icon of each entity : click right to place the camera on the unit.. Keeping the right button down, you can move the camera on each entity...

JMM

[englishoo7]

  I have thought a lot about this and I think we really need another order option - The Assault order.

This would be one where a commander could select regiments, form them up on a designated start line and give them a specific assault order, formation and designate support from local batteries, cavalry e.t.c.

These units could be ordered to atatck a certain feature like a redoubt, a town, a hill or a specific part of an enemy defence line. They would move TOGETHER! They would be forced to adavance within a designated 'corridor' of approach. If the attack fails then those units withdraw/rout back to their start line.
 
Imagine looking out from behind your Corps and seeing the enemy concentrating forces for an assault. We would come to watch for these concentrations and react with rushed reserves! It would be realistic and bring a new dimension, perfectly rounding off what are fantastic other elements of the game.
 
Most of these features are already there! But of course I am not a programmer. I don't know how hard this would be to implement. Perhaps it would be impossibly time consuming? But what I do know is that at this time the battlefield 'swirls' about without often having any what historians would call, 'phases of battle'. (Just watch some of the saved files of the game in 2d) Regiments rout and rout again, too often for any definate feeling of a specific phase or any particular engagement where the battle was won. At the moment we cannot ever hope to produce D-Erlons attack at Waterloo! Napoleons Imperial Guards final advance on the Allied line later that day! Why? Is this not the simulation that has already gone far beyond what anyone else has ever done before. I feel JMM is so close.
  I really do believe that if this extra order feature could be implemented and units were made to rout less often, then this game would truly be a classic!

[lodi57]

I have thought a lot about this and I think we really need another order option - The Assault order.

"to deploy" is an assault order.

This would be one where a commander could select regiments, form them up on a designated start line and give them a specific assault order, formation and designate support from local batteries, cavalry e.t.c.

You already could do this by detaching units and attaching them to a corps commander without any units. Or by detaching units, giving them a support order to each other and then order to attack. Or you can initially prepare a light corps to do this.

Imagine looking out from behind your Corps and seeing the enemy concentrating forces for an assault. We would come to watch for these concentrations and react with rushed reserves! It would be realistic and bring a new dimension, perfectly rounding off what are fantastic other elements of the game.

No need to have an assault order for that. The ones that participated to LG Austerlitz 2009 could tell you.

At the moment we cannot ever hope to produce D-Erlons attack at Waterloo! Napoleons Imperial Guards final advance on the Allied line later that day! Why?

  . The only thing that LG can't represent is the 1st corps divisions formation.

Is this not the simulation that has already gone far beyond what anyone else has ever done before.

Yes. That's why if you try the same action as the Middle Guard at Waterloo, you will have the same result as in real  .

[LNDavout]

I think the main problem is that the most of us need an explanation about the combination of Deploy and Defence Deploy with the line order and the many things you can achive with it.

We are used to get a idea of what the order means by its "name".

Also we are not used to Play Leader+Regiment actions.

So guys this is not a drop and drag game, we ,me too, have to learn new ways

So a clear Excel like sheet that shows the possible action would help to clear up a lot things.

[LNDavout]

We need a Headquater with some ADCs to build a "Task Force". Some free Comanders , historical more for the french less for the allies, would be cool !

[englishoo7]

"to deploy" is an assault order.

You already could do this by detaching units and attaching them to a corps commander without any units. Or by detaching units, giving them a support order to each other and then order to attack. Or you can initially prepare a light corps to do this.

No need to have an assault order for that. The ones that participated to LG Austerlitz 2009 could tell you.

  . The only thing that LG can't represent is the 1st corps divisions formation.

Yes. That's why if you try the same action as the Middle Guard at Waterloo, you will have the same result as in real  .

I appreciate your answers and I can see that some of your reply would address some of my concerns. The point you are missing however is that we cannot reproduce an attack like D-Erlons! Or at least I cannot and I have yet to see anything near that on any video. If someone could I would love to see it as it would put my concerns to rest! You ignored the point I make about units constantly routing and usually hiting the enemy alone? This 'whirl' of units whenever you watch a Battle in 3d mode is frustrating because there does not often appear to be any dicisiveness in any any area. The thing is I can see the brilliance behind all this! JMM has done such a great job. I wonder if I am worried over nothing. Perhaps it will all come to life with the full AI active or a human opponent?

Did almost every unit in a napoleonic Battle Rout at least once?

I am constantly concerned that comments like these will be seen as completely negative. They really are not meant to be. In fact it's because I can see such a great game that I and many others post these comments. I have never posted on any Forum before. I hope they will be taken in the way they were meant. An attempt to make a great game even better.

[Malaspina]

Just both for F5 and F6... you can use Page Up/Down to cycle  through units.

F3 view : you can put the cursor on the icon of each entity : click right to place the camera on the unit.. Keeping the right button down, you can move the camera on each entity...

JMM

Thanks JMM. You're always so helpful and patient. I guess I should get rid of my old CM habits!

However, having played about 5 Montebello games, I see that I usually spend about 80% of my time in 2d and only perhaps 20% in the 3D map, which I use just for entertainment, to watch my regiments on the move. I would like to revert that ratio, and replicate the sort of general that rides  into the thick of battle with his troops rather than one who sits in a backroom consulting the map.

Perhaps just a few changes could make that beautiful 3D map more practical. For example:
- higher camera view
- moving the mouse to sides of the screen to navigate the map rather than holding down the mouse right button
- highlighting regiments belonging to the corps commander I click on
etc.

Just a wish for a future version as I impatiently await the release!