Another delay before to release the game?

[Vorontsov]

You'll have to describe what you mean by "attack from 1000m". 

Ok. My corp deploying in defensive line away about 1000m from enemy. Suddenly one of my regiments start movement to enemy (with 'attack' status on units info box) in 'disordered' order, like a crowd graphically.

[Hook]

The "attack" status in the unit info box should be "Unit engaged" instead.  It's a mis-tranlation.

Edit to add:  I've had the occasional infantry unit march *through* the heavily engaged enemy lines and continue on toward the final deployment line for the corps.  While this seems decidedly odd, it's useful because that infantry can seek out the enemy line of operation, which often isn't defended.  Yet another reason to keep reserves.

He got through the enemy lines because the enemy were already busy fighting other of my units and he had no one to attack.  He was just following orders, in this case to advance to the final deployment line.

Hook

[Holdit]

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.

I can't speak for other people's experiences of the demo, but I've seen this behaviour apply to a single cavalry regiment going off on its own. To compare this situation with the unwise use of cavalry at Waterloo is to compare apples with oranges. If we look at the Union Brigade's attack against I Corps we see that:

• It involved three regiments (seven, if you include the Household brigade).
• It was ordered by the Army commander or possibly his second-in-command.
• It was highly successful in its mission: to break up the I Corps attack.

So this is no way comparable to a single regiment mounting a unwished-for charge off its own bat. The fact that this is what happened after the initial success of the Union Brigade doesn't alter this. In fact, if a feature of the game was that British cavalry were to tend to carry successful charges too far, I'd be delighted, because this would tally with the historical accounts. A single regiment mounting an unprovoked, unordered charge against an intact enemy line isn't something I've ever read about. If such an accounts do exist, I'd like hear about them.

To continue with the Waterloo comparison, if we look at the French massed cavalry attack we see that:

• It involved several cavalry divisions.
• It was ordered by the local battlefield commander.

Again, not the same thing at all.

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.

Granted , but I don't think it was quite so bad as to produce the kind of confusion that players are reporting here. Again, if the accounts confirm it to be so, I'd be grateful for some references to check out.

Holdit

[Barbaronzon]

I can't speak for other people's experiences of the demo, but I've seen this behaviour apply to a single cavalry regiment going off on its own. To compare this situation with the unwise use of cavalry at Waterloo is to compare apples with oranges.

....

Granted , but I don't think it was quite so bad as to produce the kind of confusion that players are reporting here. Again, if the accounts confirm it to be so, I'd be grateful for some references to check out.

I agree that cavalary behaves at times rather crazy. My point was mainly that certain unexpected things are expected at this period of time. Anyhow Waterloo brings up something that seems to be missing in the game and maybe JMM consider adding it in the future. Without a lot of micromanagement it does not seem to be possible to form like a coordinated cavalary counter attack for example (as in waterloo). It would be really cool IMHO if you could select for example multiple cavalary units and give them orders like for a corps, basically charge a position etc. Right now if you detach them to do something like that they are under the HQ control but don't seem to have any coordination capabilities.

[Hook]

It was highly successful in its mission: to break up the I Corps attack.

Actually, I Corps had already won that battle, driving most of the defenders from the ridge.  The cavalry attack was a counterattack.  This is not mentioned in English language accounts.

I'd prefer that my cavalry stay in a support role, scouting (and then returning to the friendly lines instead of attacking anything in sight), defending my corps against enemy cavalry, forcing the enemy infantry into square for my artillery and infantry to deal with, charging weakened enemy infantry as necessary, dealing with enemy artillery units, and occasionally pursuing routing troops (to capture prisoners).  

However, I got the Guard Cossacks inside my own formations once and had the devil's own time dealing with them.  Cossacks liked to do things like that.  These guys don't quit the field until they're down to 135 troopers.

Hook

[Holdit]

1) Artillery is as powerful as it used to be during Napoleonic wars.

I get the impression that artillery is too powerful against infantry and cavalry, but I'm in no doubt that it's too powerful against other artillery. In game after game I've seen artillery batteries wipe each other out with an ease which would make Wellington's ban on counter-battery fire seem insane.

Holdit

[Holdit]

Actually, I Corps had already won that battle, driving most of the defenders from the ridge.  The cavalry attack was a counterattack.  This is not mentioned in English language accounts.

Exactly.

I'd prefer that my cavalry stay in a support role, scouting (and then returning to the friendly lines instead of attacking anything in sight), defending my corps against enemy cavalry, forcing the enemy infantry into square for my artillery and infantry to deal with, charging weakened enemy infantry as necessary, dealing with enemy artillery units, and occasionally pursuing routing troops (to capture prisoners).  

Me too.

However, I got the Guard Cossacks inside my own formations once and had the devil's own time dealing with them.  Cossacks liked to do things like that.  These guys don't quit the field until they're down to 135 troopers.

Well, that depends on which cossacks you're talking about. Guard cossacks may have been made of sterner stuff and, if I remember correctly, were organised along more regular lines, but your common or garden cossacks were very risk-averse, being notoriously hesitant about charging home, except where they had an overwhelming advantage.

Holdit

[Hook]

...but your common or garden cossacks were very risk-averse, being notoriously hesitant about charging home, except where they had an overwhelming advantage.

Who wrote that?  It sounds like a British quote.  British authors tend to downplay anything about other troops, even their allies.  Especially their allies, in the case of the Dutch. 

Everything I've read says that your common garden variety cossacks were quite dangerous, mainly due their nature as irregular troops.  While more professional cavalry does things in a predictable manner, these guys might do anything.  They didn't use line formations, but tended to use a "swarm" formation.  By the time professional cavalry had finished dressing their lines in preparation to begin a charge, cossacks would be on top of you already.

Fear them.

Hook

[MoonDog]

Good idea Barbaronzon,
 I too would be willing to purchase an open beta to help things along.
Why not pay the full 50 Euros up front?
Also there could be with an option to buy the manual at cost price delivered to your door.

M

[Barbaronzon]

Good idea Barbaronzon,
 I too would be willing to purchase an open beta to help things along.
Why not pay the full 50 Euros up front?
Also there could be with an option to buy the manual at cost price delivered to your door.

M

Its the internet age I can handle a download only manual perfectly fine so it shouldn't delay it. It could be available for order seperate once the pinting is figured out. Personally I prefer online manuals so I would like i if the printed manuals where a seperate purchase, part of a deluxe edition or whatever

Like I mentioned the main point behind my idea was just like the beta showed there are things like the crashes based on the video resolution for example that the beta team has maybe not caught. So i figured a really big beta base would help with the testing. Also multiplayer code can be a pain in the butt to test, again a point for my idea i think.

[Cpl Steiner]

Just release the whole damn game! Only then will we actually know for sure what state it's in. Oh, and by the way, that DOES mean waiting for the printed manual. All these half measures like open betas and separate printed manual purchase options will just overcomplicate things.

Get the manual done, then release the game.

[LNDavout]

I get the impression that artillery is too powerful against infantry and cavalry, but I'm in no doubt that it's too powerful against other artillery. In game after game I've seen artillery batteries wipe each other out with an ease which would make Wellington's ban on counter-battery fire seem insane.

Holdit

Holdit

Waterloo is a special battle with the Troops on the backside of the ridge. Wet ground.

Movemen for Artillery was close to be impossible.

Wel. was clever and did know that he would loose a direct Artillery battle and so he used it mainly out of sight to its firepower to the final volley to prevent a chage and that worked fine on that day. On a place like Wagram the Brits would have been destroyed in a short time with this strat.

War is not that easy that you can say something works always !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thats why we play it !!!!

[LegerDesOnheils]

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 am very much in favor of Barbaronzon's cents (all five of them). Having had some time to play the solo mode of the demo in the weekend I'm already very pleased with the overall performance of the AI, especially on the grand tactical level. There are defenitely issues to be solved on various AI levels (surveying the battle I saw one of my own calvalry units marching off to the enemy line as prisoners, from the safety of its parent corps with no enemy units near!) but these are IMO not in the way of having an overal good battle experience knowing that these issues are being addressed in the meantime. We would benefit from a very structured way of listing player's found issues and categorizing them to facilitate JMM without swamping him. We would also have to filter out the real bugs from the doctrine and warfare protocols of that era that might be precieved as bugs.          

[MoonDog]

Personally I dont need a printed manual.
I have printed off the first two books and it cost me around less than 1 Euro. Most people have a printer and at this stage know about refilling their ink cartridges.
So why include a hard copy manual in a digital download?

[Franciscus]

Personally I dont need a printed manual.
I have printed off the first two books and it cost me around less than 1 Euro. Most people have a printer and at this stage know about refilling their ink cartridges.
So why include a hard copy manual in a digital download?

+1

Unless of course JMM plans to start pre-order only when a CD version of the game can also be bought. Otherwise, no sense in waiting for a printed manual.