Another delay before to release the game?

[Franciscus]

I agree. I can't think of a single game I have bought that hasn't had issues - many of them a great many issues (eg ETW !). In addition, by hitting his deadlines for both demo and game, JMM will be sending out a strong message about the game and its future.

+1, emphatically.

If at all possible, public deadlines should be kept. If not, marketing wise it could be a disaster - specially after the --------- debacle. If the game gets pushed another year, it maybe the end of it. We have been this road before, in 2005 and 2007. Not again! IMHO this kind of debate does no good service to JMM.
No game is perfect. No matter what JMM does, the game when released WILL have bugs !

Now is the time for initiative. As Napoleon would say, bugs can always be patched, but time is lost forever  

[ezjax]

I can wait don't have money to buy anyway.

[Petrus58]

Another advantage of releasing The Game sooner rather than months, or perhaps even longer down the line is that I am sure there are modders itching to get to work! There are a number of games I can think of where modders helped to fix issues, and the games in question are still widely played. This is a very complex game, and expecting one man (with help from beta testing of course) to bring it to a state where most / all are satisfied seems, well, very tough on JMM.

[Hook]

Note:  This is a reply to Cpl Steiner's comment that JMM has had 7 years already.

There's a huge amount of stuff in this game, and we've only seen a part of it.  There's a map editor, an OOB editor, a doctrine editor, and lots of stuff that's not in the demo.  Multiplayer, for example.  JMM's done an incredible amount of work considering it's just him.  

Right now he's fixing bugs we've found in the demo and working on a few things that aren't quite finished... the Grand Tactical AI for example.  Imagine what will happen when the AI gives more orders than just the initial battle plan.

A lot of the things people are complaining about are the game working as designed.  Things will get better as people learn how to do more stuff in the game.  There *are* bugs in the game, but from what I've seen they are minor enough not to effect play.   Just because some units aren't doing what you want doesn't mean it's a bug.  

Some bugs I've seen:

Sometimes units will face 90 degrees from the unit they're firing on.  They're still getting target effect, so right now it's mostly visual and I'm sure it will be fixed.

Units vanish for no apparent good reason.  These units are marked Destroyed in the Regiment screen, and they've taken some damage.  This happens to 1 to 3 units in every Montebello battle I've fought, and a lot more in the tutorial battles.  Probably has to do with artillery shooting them.  While it seems to be a bug, there's no effect on game play if the units are actually destroyed.  This behavior may be intentional.

The game will lock up if you get too close to certain parts of the map edge.

There may be other bugs, but those are the ones I've noticed.  

A lot of things are the game working as designed, but not what the player expects to happen, and often not what the player wants.  I'm sure some of these will be tweaked.  Artillery is probably too powerful.  Sometimes units will sit and look at each other, doing nothing... neither wants to attack.  This usually resolves itself after a bit, generally with the help of artillery.  Attacks don't seem as coordinated as we expect, although I suspect the real battlefield was just like that.  No, it doesn't look like popular paintings of the era.  Units don't always follow orders, because the local commander has a mind of his own.  These things need to be reported, but don't assume they're all bugs.

I'd buy the game, right now, as is, unfinished and with whatever bugs are there, and be happy to wait for JMM to fix stuff and finish it in patches.  But the game can't be released yet because too many people are somewhat less understanding.  If a game isn't complete and mostly bug-free out of the box, they'll generate lots of negative publicity.  

If you want to see what kind of a nightmare releasing an unfinished game can generate, look at Battlecruiser 3000 AD.  The publisher forced a release when it was far from finished, and that generated intense amounts of nastiness on USENET.  There was a small group who played the game and liked it, everyone else bashed the developer, who didn't handle it very well.  Eventually he finished the game and released it for free.  We don't want a repeat of this.

Hang in there.  We've got a great game already, and it will only get better.

Hook

[Vorontsov]

I think this 'bugs' need to be fixed.
1. Artillery is too powerful
2. Regiments cant coordinate attack (each regiment attack alone without support for uknown reason)
3. Strange regiments behavor as notaced before in many posts ( attack from 1000m, staying before enemy about 50m and do nothing, marching around enemy regiment etc)
4. Suicidal behavor cavalry regiments (frontal attack on enemy artilery, rallying near enemy cannons then rout as result)
5. Escape from the battle fresh and sligtly weakened regiments (sometime).

[Barbaronzon]

Here would be my idea to give JMM some help identifying issues and get a game into our hands that works right.

How about JMM opens preorders and everybody that preorders basically gets beta versions of the game until the release is avaailable? This would supply a big base of different hardware for JMM to test and a lot more feedback. Also JMM would recover some money for his hard work and it might help with further development...

Just my 5 cents.

[Petrus58]

Here would be my idea to give JMM some help identifying issues and get a game into our hands that works right.

How about JMM opens preorders and everybody that preorders basically gets beta versions of the game until the release is avaailable? This would supply a big base of different hardware for JMM to test and a lot more feedback. Also JMM would recover some money for his hard work and it might help with further development...

Just my 5 cents.

A good idea - I would be happy to pay and help with feedback, understanding that this would in effect be an open beta.

[Franciscus]

Here would be my idea to give JMM some help identifying issues and get a game into our hands that works right.

How about JMM opens preorders and everybody that preorders basically gets beta versions of the game until the release is avaailable? This would supply a big base of different hardware for JMM to test and a lot more feedback. Also JMM would recover some money for his hard work and it might help with further development...

Just my 5 cents.

Good idea.

Further delays would be absurd, specially after PC4War review (not a preview) with a 9/10   If the reviewer was not bribed  , he certainly saw something we are not seeing in the demo.

[GrosPaul]

Here would be my idea to give JMM some help identifying issues and get a game into our hands that works right.

How about JMM opens preorders and everybody that preorders basically gets beta versions of the game until the release is avaailable? This would supply a big base of different hardware for JMM to test and a lot more feedback. Also JMM would recover some money for his hard work and it might help with further development...

Just my 5 cents.

Excellent !!

[Barbaronzon]

Good idea.

Further delays would be absurd, specially after PC4War review (not a preview) with a 9/10   If the reviewer was not bribed  , he certainly saw something we are not seeing in the demo.

I like the demo, I wouldn't give it a 8/10 but I for sure see a lot of potential. Thats why I think my suggestion is good because it would give a lot of feedback on multiplayer issues etc. Look how much replies with issues there where to the beta just based on different video configs that the beta team might not have seen so far.

And since hardware testing on windows is a pain (I know I am a software developer ) widening the base would be IMHO just simply a smart move.

[Pariente]

I think this 'bugs' need to be fixed.
1. Artillery is too powerful
2. Regiments cant coordinate attack (each regiment attack alone without support for uknown reason)
3. Strange regiments behavor as notaced before in many posts ( attack from 1000m, staying before enemy about 50m and do nothing, marching around enemy regiment etc)
4. Suicidal behavor cavalry regiments (frontal attack on enemy artilery, rallying near enemy cannons then rout as result)
5. Escape from the battle fresh and sligtly weakened regiments (sometime).

1) Artillery is as powerful as it used to be during Napoleonic wars.
2) Communication between regiments was very difficult and coordination is the real issue you have to face in a battle simulation.
4) Ah ! Cavalry ! Drunk with glory and wine. Initiative is very important ; if a commander has a high initiative he may charge without order :
« A unit with a High level of initiative will respond more quickly to the
changing nature of the battle. So it is possible that the unit will take it upon itself to deal with an
enemy unit in difficulty or decide to leave its own pieces of artillery
behind it if they are preventing it from executing a rapid manoeuvre
over difficult terrain. » (Manual, book 2, page 12).
5) Manual, book 2, page 10 :

Type	Class	Overall losses	Theoretical number of engagements
Infantry	Guard	42	5
Infantry	Elite	28	4
Infantry	Heavy	26	4
Infantry	Light	24	4
Infantry	Line	21	4
Infantry	Militia	15~20	3~4

What was the class of your infantry unit ?

Regiments of 8 fellows in a field are TW waxing lyrical.

[Duke of Earl]

Bonjour Messieurs,

I must confess, I am a WNLB, LGAA and ANGV veteran (as some of you may already know)   ....

I am satisfied that when ALL the parts are present, LGHW will function properly as intended .... it is the Real McCoy   ....

For now, having put in a good bit of practice with Montebello, I am happy with what I see ....

However, a better Demo is very much needed for the general public (to show its TOTAL AWESOMENESS )....

There are some MINOR bugs/limitations I hope get fixed in the future (game freeze when camera approaches baggage train  - artillery crews misaligned with cannon - 3D camera needs to go higher - local sound zone problems - smoke effects - no concise HotKey List,  etc.. )   ....

But, I enjoy this Demo release and have fun nevertheless   ....

And, there are always new mysteries (?) to unravel (i.e. why does single Voltigeur always run between battalions?)   ....

All I can say is this: Whoever masters the LGHW concepts will be a very POWERFUL opponent indeed, so I hope it's ME!   ....

Cordialement, DoE

[Barbaronzon]

I think this 'bugs' need to be fixed.
1. Artillery is too powerful
2. Regiments cant coordinate attack (each regiment attack alone without support for uknown reason)
3. Strange regiments behavor as notaced before in many posts ( attack from 1000m, staying before enemy about 50m and do nothing, marching around enemy regiment etc)
4. Suicidal behavor cavalry regiments (frontal attack on enemy artilery, rallying near enemy cannons then rout as result)
5. Escape from the battle fresh and sligtly weakened regiments (sometime).

If you read articles about battles in this period of history, cavalary is known to have their own mind and do suicidal attacks, look at the battle of waterloo. Also there where a lot of issues with moral in many battles and soldiers running under the slightest pressure or even running before battles really started when they saw a chance. Artillery was devastating especially as the range got closer. So I am ok how it is in the game now. Note that many soldiers doing this time didn't really served on their own free will. I hope that some if this behaviour is actually in the game as it makes it historically accurate.

Coordination was also not what you expect on todays battlefields, you had smoke, commands where shouted over the noise of battle etc. So a certain amount of confusion is expected.
What part I agree with absolutely is no 3. The regimental and divisional behaviour needs some tweaking, The corps over all seem to do a decent job in implementing the plan.

[Hook]

3. Strange regiments behavor as notaced before in many posts ( attack from 1000m, staying before enemy about 50m and do nothing, marching around enemy regiment etc)
4. Suicidal behavor cavalry regiments (frontal attack on enemy artilery, rallying near enemy cannons then rout as result)

You'll have to describe what you mean by "attack from 1000m".  For the others, watch the unit when you replay the video to see if you can figure out what's going on.  Sometimes it's obvious.  Screen shots won't hurt.

When cavalry goes near an enemy artillery unit, they're probably sending small groups to attack each gun crew.  Watch in the replay.

Hook

[Holdit]

Here would be my idea to give JMM some help identifying issues and get a game into our hands that works right.

How about JMM opens preorders and everybody that preorders basically gets beta versions of the game until the release is avaailable? This would supply a big base of different hardware for JMM to test and a lot more feedback. Also JMM would recover some money for his hard work and it might help with further development...

Just my 5 cents.

I do not intend to preorder with the game in the state that is suggested by the (current) demo. A proposal like the above, however, if implemented, might make me change my mind. I don't know if it's a good or bad idea, but I think it's definitely worthy of serious consideration.

Holdit