Will you use the 3d view in MP battles ?.

[Gunner24]

One worry I have for MP is will it all be done on the 2d map ?......there is not much you can "do" on the 3d map other than watch the action, all the important orders will be on the 2d screen, so, what will an average MP game be like ?.

How much will a player need to use the 3d view ?......it looks like not much.  Games like the TW series give the player a lot of fast decisions to be made in the 3d view, we all want LG to be different to that, that's the whole point, but is it too much - will you ever use the 3d view while in a MP battle ?.

It might be that it only gets used as a replay, is that good or bad ?.

[Darsh]

It's also one of my fears and that"s the reason why in the french forum we have reported to JMM some elements to improve the 3D view. I think that JMM listen us and he will make the 3D view more efficient in the final version.

[FranzVonG]

I don't really see the matter: you don't really have to issue orders every moment (and with the delays...), and I doubt that MP games will be played at 6/60. So there will be plenty of time to look at the troops in the 3d view, even if only to look at the uniforms, cavalry charges and firefights.

[HarryInk]

Well, I'm noticing that I use the 3D symbolic NATO view a lot.

when I first started to play, I thought that one thing modders might do is to dress up the NATO blocks a lot more.  Hell, I'll end up doing it if no one more skilful gets into the act!  Also, I thought that having a few figures for each battalion, rather than single figures, might be useful.  On reflection, it would make it look a little more like a miniatures game which is where I've been while waiting for LG. 

I can't see myself using the full visuals of the 3D map.  I find I do F6 units that are going into action to watch what happens.  Otherwise the scale is a little large to grasp it all.  However, I am keen to have try battles where we're locked to our COs and have to direct corps sized formations 'from the ground'.  THAT will be challenging.

I agree with FVG's comment.  You don't make continual series of decisions.  That's not how LG works.  It's designed more as a sim, I think, than with the player's entertainment (& need to feel actively involved in/in control of every moment).  Hence my luxury of F6ing.

[Gunner24]

It's also one of my fears and that"s the reason why in the french forum we have reported to JMM some elements to improve the 3D view. I think that JMM listen us and he will make the 3D view more efficient in the final version.

Very interesting, do you have any more info about this.

I'm sure MP will be more popular if the 3d view were a little more, well, I'm not sure how to put it - user friendly maybe.

I'm not sure MP games are going to be all that thrilling looking at the 2d map, you have lost the detail of a Napoleonic battle that way.

So there will be plenty of time to look at the troops in the 3d view, even if only to look at the uniforms, cavalry charges and firefights.

I agree, I'm sure that's right, but the key word here is "look".....there's no real actions you can take in 3d view, so it will be like watching a replay, rather than being involved at ground level, you will be watching, not doing, if you understand what I mean.

[Hook]

...there's no real actions you can take in 3d view, so it will be like watching a replay, rather than being involved at ground level, you will be watching, not doing, if you understand what I mean.

How do you propose giving orders in the 3D view from ground level when the action is going on 2 miles away on the other side of a hill?

If you raise the 3D viewpoint so you can see that area without scrolling away from the commander, you might as well use the 2D map. 

If you scroll around the 3D map, you see things you shouldn't.  Location of enemy troops, exact locations of your own troops, the condition of various units.  If you hide all units that aren't "spotted" then you won't be able to see things you could see through a telescope from your commander's position.  People might prefer to play with the 3D viewpoint locked on the commander.

Right now, the 2D map is your best bet, unless you like the symbolic 3D maps.  Maybe eventually we'll have a way to play without using the 2D map or symbolic 3D maps at all, everything being done from the 3D map.  But that's a long time down the road.

Hook

[Darsh]

Very interesting, do you have any more info about this.

I'm sure MP will be more popular if the 3d view were a little more, well, I'm not sure how to put it - user friendly maybe.

I'm not sure MP games are going to be all that thrilling looking at the 2d map, you have lost the detail of a Napoleonic battle that way.

One of the major wish is the improvement of the mini-map which isn't very useful in the 3D view.
The mini-map should :
- show the emplacement of the units (like in the 2D view) or at least a zone of control of the units
- show the order arrows
- show the names or the numbers of the corps
- show the corps/units which are selected
etc.
With a better mini-map, the use of the 2D view will be less frequent and will spend more time with the eyes of the general on the battlefield.

[Gunner24]

Sounds like a good idea, I don't know that a MP game without the 3d views will work very well, sticking with the 2d view will not get all that much interest from a lot of MP vets from other games.

People might prefer to play with the 3D viewpoint locked on the commander.

They might do, but they might not.....why play a huge scale, massive game, if all you can see is what's happening within a few hundreds yards.....each to his own preference of course, but I thought the whole idea of LG was the large scale of the game - which will be lost if you can only see a few hundred yards.  From a big hill he might be able to see a mile or so, so it's not as bad as I say above, but you get the idea....I'm sure most people will want to be able to view any part of the battlefield, from their own troop positions of course.

A game is after all, a game, that people want to enjoy, MP is not going to be easy to arrange and those that take the time and trouble to play it will want to enjoy it.

I have not seen much evidence yet on any of the many forums I use that MP is going to be popular, SP sure will be, no doubt about that, but interest in MP games appears to be very slow, even after we have seen a demo.

Maybe everyone is waiting for the real game to get interested in MP.

[GrosPaul]

I have not seen much evidence yet on any of the many forums I use that MP is going to be popular, SP sure will be, no doubt about that, but interest in MP games appears to be very slow, even after we have seen a demo.

Maybe everyone is waiting for the real game to get interested in MP.

- we should not lose from sight, this a totally new game and need, for this reason, a new mental approach. This explain for me the very slow growing interest for the moment. Also many not playing the kind of arcade games at the moment could be interested in this game, I feel comfident;

- that is for sure! I am amongst the crowd waiting the full game, even in beta mode.

[Hook]

I'm not sure what's wrong with issuing orders on the 2D map then switching to the 3D view to watch them being carried out.  You aren't watching a replay, you're watching your very own orders being carried out in almost real time.  You don't know what the outcome will be.  And you need to *watch* from one view or another because some things only become apparent by watching the reactions of the troops.

You could turn the jump map into an inefficient miniature version of the 2D map but I don't think it would let you do away with the 2D map completely. 

Hook

[Gunner24]

I'm not sure what's wrong with issuing orders on the 2D map then switching to the 3D view to watch them being carried out.

Fair point, it's the "watching" rather than "doing" I find a bit odd at the moment, it lacks tension and excitment, maybe becasue of the bugs, the real game may answer the problem.

[von Döbeln]

I too tend to give almost all orders and watch a lot of the progress of the battle in 2D view since it gives a much better overview than 3D, which I almost only watch for details and when I'm not "needed" in 2D (and sometimes for ordering separate units to attack particular units). I must say that the camera controls also keep me from using 3D view more since I'm not on really good terms with them, even after several hours of playing. I would much prefer controlling camera with keys and do the rest with the mouse (I know about the arrows ).

LvD

[Gunner24]

I too tend to give almost all orders and watch a lot of the progress of the battle in 2D view since it gives a much better overview than 3D

This is what I find as well, but is this a good sign for MP gaming ?......I tend to think not.

[Darsh]

The 3d view is one of the most important argument to sell the game and not the 2d view, most of the screenshots show the 3d view and not the 2d view.
It's important to develop this view to have really the feel to be a general who give orders on the battlefield and not a general in this headquarters who study his battle maps.

[Hook]

This is what I find as well, but is this a good sign for MP gaming ?......I tend to think not.

Since you will never ever get as much information from the jump map as you do from the 2D map (that kind of compression is not lossless), and the amount of information you can get from watching the 3D view is considerably limited, competitive players will probably prefer the 2D map.  

This is not TW after all.

This would still be a great game even if there were no 3D view at all.

Hook