Wish List

[Hook]

I don't know, English.  I'm winning my battles.  And mostly I'm finding it not particularly difficult.  That will probably change with reactive AI.

As for the "artillery is too strong" argument, I'm done with it.  Hell, you could remove the artillery and put a company of skirmishers where the artillery used to be and get the same effect.  The attacks are going to bog down.

In an idealized attack, there would be no chaos, the attackers would move up to the defenders, and someone would retreat.  That probably happens about as often in the game as it did in real life.  And I have seen it happen in the game.  Usually regiments from both sides will retreat, and the winner is the side with the last regiments standing.  D'Erlon undoubtedly had single battalions retreat before they got to the ridge, but we don't have that granularity in the game.

Artillery can be overwhelmed.  It can only fire at one unit at a time.  And I suspect by the time we have British troops and the battle of Waterloo, artillery crews will be able to retreat from their guns to safety and return later when there's no threat.

Hook

[timelord]

HI
I agree with you about troops moving of at different times .I was play the allies in one game and gave them a order to defend on line ,once they got their, I could not get them to form a battle line .
Some unit just started to march of in random directions; I have noticed as well that sometimes units just launch an attack on their own, even thou I have ordered then to defend an area?
I have even ordered then to defend only a few meters from where they started and still find them walking all over the place , and when you do get them their they never stay put, but seem to get it into their heads they would be better over their .
Also how can you stop the cavalry from charging off all the time, as I have lost most of my cavalry doing mad charges at enemy artillery that are miles away, as I have tried to use my cavalry as a threat, to push the enemy into squires, put every time my cavalry just go’s off it’s head and charges and then routs it self!.
The way the game   runs it makes it very hard to from a battle line, as you end up with big gaps between divisions, I have tried all the orders to get them to link up, but nothing seems to work.
Any help would be most grateful.
All the best
Darren

[FranzVonG]

The way the game runs it makes it very hard to from a battle line

ehm.. a line? This is Napoleonic Warfare, not Marlborough's one 
You form "a line" when your corps are advancing together, not when your regiments are holding hands one with the other.
The only line that you can easily do (and it always works in the game, at least for me) is the defensive one for a single corp: the corp will stay put, in line, with the artillery in front (as it should be) and the cavalry on the flanks/behind. The only wandering unit that I see from a defensive line are the ones hardly hit by artillery: in the doctrine of the demo, it seems that the order is to silence the enemy artillery, with your own or charging ahead (one of the first things that I will change in the doctrine for me, I hate counter-battery fire).
For the charging cavalry, I suspect that we have to blame again the doctrine: they tend to charge the artillery or hunt other cavalry unit a bit too much.

[englishoo7]

Hook I'm winning all my battles too. They get there in the end. A bit here and a bit there, I win. I watch while a regiment delays and delays getting up to the enemy line. Sometimes he shuffles in front of the enemy for no apparent reason, trying to sort out his formation and then fires once, the second line battalion fires and often they are misaligned and then usually he routs. I wait for another regiment to come up, after a long delay he does e.t.c. e.t.c.
(I have no problem with second battalion firing or misaligned units. These are just bugs. But the general public will).

You ignore the points I make about D-erlon's attack. You say artillery can only fire at one unit at a time, but the point I was making was that units hang around for so long within range that the artillery has plenty of time to fire on them all and is devastating when it does. You don't address the fact that units just take off after something like an artillery unit away to the left or right or that regiments rout and head for the supply lines one at a time. Sometimes 'reasons' are given that just talks around real issues some have with the game.

I am glad you like the game Hook. I don't mean that sarcastically either . Because I am in awe of 90% of it! All the fantastic order processes, the diffeent troops and multiplayer option is far better and more complete any war game of any period I have ever seen. The trouble is the 10% that is wrong is the most important part. The combat! Even this I have seen work beautifully (when I set up an unrealistic engagement with no artillery). The firefight is the part that most other buyers want to see the most because everything else builds to this 10% of the game. For me, LG is so close to being a classic it hurts! But alas, I think it will not became a Napoleonic 'Combat mission' because of the lack of 'Grand Firefights' and 'Grand Assaults'!.
JMM, of all games developers' deserves success and lots and lots of money! On a selfish note, I would like more 'excitement', not 'homework' and many, many more expansions that will bring!

[Doyley]

I wonder if people have been too conditioned by playing tabletop games and previous computer games to appreciate what Histwar offers. I have been dabbling in wargaming ever since taking part in one at Donald Featherstone's many years, ago and to me Histwar seems a huge leap ahead of anything that has gone before. People argue that the artillery is too powerful, that attacks go in in penny packets and so on,but perhaps they are conditioned by their previous gaming experiences, or of reading accounts of battles which seem to have gone like clockwork, and expect unrealistic progression of battles as the norm. Sergeant Bourgogne, who was in the Imperial Guard and fought at Borodino and many other battles including Jena, Friedland, Pultusk, Eylau, Essling, Wagram, Lutzen and Bautzen,wrote that Borodino, "like all our great battles, was won by the artillery". Presumably it will be possible to make some adjustment via the doctrine editor , but to me the important thing is that it is realistic, and that is what makes it so far advanced.

[HarryInk]

On that note, it will be interesting to play some earlier battles where there aren't so many guns then.  Batteries of 4 of this or that. 

[Gunner24]

I'm stuck in the middle about all this, I see both sides being correct !

For me (as Gunner24) I want to see loads of artillery, as it was in big battles, but I don't want single Regiments advancing (or standing still) into mass artillery fire and routing after losing 5 men.

We do need the real game to see if attacks are done in a different way to the demo, I do not believe the way attacks are handled in the demo are correct, if they are correct, well, I don't know then.

[englishoo7]

If I get the option to turn down the affects of artillery, then perhaps both myself and Hook will be happy.  (I would also like the option of stopping Corps commanders stopping for artillery preparation too  ).

[Hook]

You ignore the points I make about D-erlon's attack.

I'm saying that D'Erlon's attack may not have been as clockwork as you think.

... regiments rout and head for the supply lines one at a time.

How could it be otherwise??  Once a unit routs, it's not going to wait politely for everyone else to decide to leave.  It's going to leave.  Right then!  Units on either side may still be effective.  Do you want them to rout too, just because another unit routed?  Do you think you, as a commander, have that much control over them?  In any advance at least one regiment will be weaker or come under more pressure, and rout early. Do you want the entire rest of your corps to be only as strong as that one unit, and rout when it does?

If we take it to the individual company level, some men will leave formation and run away while the rest will stay and fight.  Until some of them run away too.  Eventually the entire group runs.  It's not like they're all chained together and have to stay or flee at the same time.  Same with regiments in a corps.  

If you're finding that your corps are just wandering back and forth in front of an enemy you've ordered them to attack, and not closing with the enemy, then you aren't sending in enough troops.  

I recently watched replays of an entire corps getting destroyed, twice in different battles, because I gave the wrong order.  I've described this in my "Remembering my first battle" thread.  Earlier today I watched an enemy corps form a defensive line and sent two corps to attack, one frontally, one flanking, and watched both corps advance and attack in proper lines.  It happens that way if you do it right.  The enemy line didn't exist in a vacuum either; there were other enemy units in the area that had to be pushed out of the way first.  My corps still maintained their lines.

If I never saw a corps keep some kind of cohesion, I'd have to wonder why.  But I see it fairly often.  A corps getting disordered must be intentional, or we wouldn't have a unit status for it.

Hook

[Hook]

(I would also like the option of stopping Corps commanders stopping for artillery preparation too  ).

If you take away their artillery, they can't very well stop for artillery preparation.  Detach regimental guns and transfer all artillery to another corps commander.

I don't think you'll like the effect.  Artillery preparation was doctrine for armies of the time.

If it happens that they request artillery support from another corps for their preparation, you can disallow support in the doctrine editor.  This will disallow ALL support, so you might want to consider it very carefully.

Hook

[IRH]

Wish list:

Keyboard command to move all units of a corps with the commander, such as hold down a key when you right click the commander to move him.

Regiment AI to calculate chance of winning; in a game yesterday, one regiment of Austrians advanced against two whole French corps. They marched into 3 or 4 batteries alone. There should be something to limit suicide charges by individual units.

A new status for the AI to use, maybe "In close support of a battery" (?) to assign to an infantry or cavalry unit in reserve behind the artillery company. Thus assigned, the Regimental AI of the unit "In close support" will select, as its primary target, any enemy infantry or cavalry threatening the artillery company.

Regiment AI of infantry to work with Regiment AI of other friendly infantry units close by. An infantry regiment under attack by infantry should be able to ask a friendly infantry regiment (close by) to please flank the attackers. The AI makes a check to see if it would be safe to do, etc.

[Holdit]

Wish list:

Regiment AI to calculate chance of winning; in a game yesterday, one regiment of Austrians advanced against two whole French corps.

Ballsy lads, those Austrians.

Holdit

[Hook]

Keyboard command to move all units of a corps with the commander, such as hold down a key when you right click the commander to move him.

That would be the control key.  It's mentioned in the tutorial.

Regiment AI to calculate chance of winning; in a game yesterday, one regiment of Austrians advanced against two whole French corps. They marched into 3 or 4 batteries alone. There should be something to limit suicide charges by individual units.

Some of this is already being done, but I don't know to what extent.  Some corps commanders might refuse the order while others will do whatever you request.

A new status for the AI to use, maybe "In close support of a battery"

Does "Support a unit" not do what you want?

Regiment AI of infantry to work with Regiment AI of other friendly infantry units close by. An infantry regiment under attack by infantry should be able to ask a friendly infantry regiment (close by) to please flank the attackers. The AI makes a check to see if it would be safe to do, etc.

I think this is already being done automatically.  You wouldn't see it often because the other regiment is either already busy or too far away.  We'll need confirmation from JMM or the testers.

Hook

[Hook]

I agree with you about troops moving of at different times .I was play the allies in one game and gave them a order to defend on line ,once they got their, I could not get them to form a battle line .
Some unit just started to march of in random directions; I have noticed as well that sometimes units just launch an attack on their own, even thou I have ordered then to defend an area?
I have even ordered then to defend only a few meters from where they started and still find them walking all over the place , and when you do get them their they never stay put, but seem to get it into their heads they would be better over their .

All this happens when you try to form a defensive line too close to enemy troops.  The regimental AI takes precedence and your units will move around or attack.  If you form the defensive line further back you won't have these problems.

Also how can you stop the cavalry from charging off all the time, as I have lost most of my cavalry doing mad charges at enemy artillery that are miles away, as I have tried to use my cavalry as a threat, to push the enemy into squires, put every time my cavalry just go’s off it’s head and charges and then routs it self!.

The doctrine for the demo is quite aggressive.  The full game will allow you to keep better control over your cavalry.

The way the game   runs it makes it very hard to from a battle line, as you end up with big gaps between divisions, I have tried all the orders to get them to link up, but nothing seems to work.

I've intentionally left 1000 meter gaps between two corps defending in line and the few enemy units that do get through are easily dealt with by my reserves 1000 meters behind the line.  They're like free victory points.

If you're getting large gaps within a corps, it may be that your defensive line was drawn too long.  I've also had it happen when the corps had lots of cavalry or artillery, and there would occasionally be gaps where these units originally were.  It may help to use 25% reserves for a defensive line.

Hook

[englishoo7]

I'm saying that D'Erlon's attack may not have been as clockwork as you think.

 I must not be explaining myself very well but I will have one last try. I do not want a 'clockwork' attack, far from it. I am happy for troops to rout. I am happy for the whole corps to rout if what I have asked them to do is too much. The essence of my point is that I can never get a corps to a defence line as a co-ordinated force like D-Erlon did if there are enemy cannon. I would be happpy to lose a regiment or two on the approach, or have the whole lot shot up and retreat, but that is not what happens. A few go on, then rout. The others behind stop routing and come on again. Then the Corps commander stops, calls for artillery preperation. Another unit routs. And so it goes on. Every regiment going back and forth doing there own thing. (Bt the way I have no problem with Corps conducting their own Artillery preperation as long as they do not stop to do it and then rout. I always have Mortiers' £12 firing them in.)

How could it be otherwise??  Once a unit routs, it's not going to wait politely for everyone else to decide to leave.  It's going to leave.  Right then!  Units on either side may still be effective.  Do you want them to rout too, just because another unit routed?
If we take it to the individual company level, some men will leave formation and run away while the rest will stay and fight.  Until some of them run away too.  Eventually the entire group runs.  It's not like they're all chained together and have to stay or flee at the same time.  Same with regiments in a corps.

That is not what I am saying. I am trying to make the point that when a Corps commander saw that his command had fallen apart, his line broken and many troops running he would order a withdrawl and save those troops he could, unless his position or time he was buying the army was vital perhaps. Corps sometimes do a short retreat in the game but I have never seen one make the decision that their lines are broken, their men routing and it is time to pull back some distance. If this were to happen then we could actually take ground. (JMM did say that the AI was not the best so perhaps this will happen in the full game? I really hope it does, then we won't just keep fighting over the same ground.)

I feel like we are looking at different games. I hope I am wrong and that you are right. I hope this game is huge success. I hope that many of my concerns will be ironed out in the full game.