Pike and Shot suggestions

[Aryaman]

Here is the actual clip from the movie I was talking about, go to about 04:12:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gziCU1M8UCQ

I found the dialogues quite interesting...

[fogman]

that was rather fanciful. they confused arquebuses with bows, or grenade launchers.

[KhanDam2]

hi everybody

i've just some little cosmetic sugestions about p&s ( but can be the same for ba/ba2 and Fog

the ability to organise donwloaded scenarii like group some in 1 folder exemple all scenarii from same coflict go in same folder like campaign
the ability to sort scenarii by date
the zbility to save each result of battle in log file with date, result and statistic

it's just a presentation thing not to hard to do but useful for choosing scenario

for lst file the possibility to download from disk until juste allow an url http/https ( for people who have very slow connection it's better, if we can put lst and cpf on disk if we have to reinstall, the second thing is some scenarii, not for p&s but for ba or panzer corps an fog are not already downloadable so unable to reload ).

thanks for considering that

regards from france

[rbodleyscott]

the ability to organise donwloaded scenarii like group some in 1 folder exemple all scenarii from same coflict go in same folder like campaign

This ability already exists, but it cannot be done automatically by the game, it has to be done by the scenario creator. For example fogman has done it for his two triptych campaigns.

The reason it cannot be done for the others is that in effect they are mostly not just scenarios but mods because they have customised squads files etc. This is what allows them to have individually named units. Each such unit has its own separate entry in the modified Squads file.

They cannot therefore be combined automatically in the same campaign with scenarios that require different Squads files.

So if they are to be combined into one campaign, the campaign creator will need to create a unified Squads file for that campaign, as fogman has done. This entails numbering all the individually named units that will be used in any of the scenarios differently so that the units from the different scenarios do not clash.

the ability to sort scenarii by date

Would be nice.

the zbility to save each result of battle in log file with date, result and statistic

Would be nice.

for lst file the possibility to download from disk until juste allow an url http/https ( for people who have very slow connection it's better, if we can put lst and cpf on disk if we have to reinstall, the second thing is some scenarii, not for p&s but for ba or panzer corps an fog are not already downloadable so unable to reload ).

Would be nice.

[KhanDam2]

i just think about grouping for clearest view not realy lik a campaign but to shorten list.

so if it's not possible, sort ability can be thing who aggree me if we can add date and conflict sorting or filtering.

maybe can add version for scenario to avoid conflict with old stuff

Cheers

regards from france

[jomni]

Here is the actual clip from the movie I was talking about, go to about 04:12:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gziCU1M8UCQ

I found the dialogues quite interesting...

It's good that the Japanese are actually speaking Japanese. I'm watching a currently running Imjin War TV series (Jing Bi Rok) and eveyrone (including the Japanese and Chinese) speaks Korean.

[fogman]

Back in the days of the Lords of Pike and Shot tournament, I became aware midway through that losses are recalculated at the end of the battle according to this rough estimate:

"if you win the game:
1.your number of killed stay the same
2. your number of wounded is decreased by a third
3. your number of routed is decreased by 90%

if you lose the game:
4. 25% of your wounded seems to have died
5. your number of captured/deserted decreases by a third
6. you lose all your guns (regardless of whether they were limbered up and leaving the field)"

this still really bothers me.
3 and 5, I sort of understand although still random %. leaving aside 6,
1, 2 and 4 should not apply. it completely gives a false picture of the moment of the battle, which is what matters, not the larger strategic picture a week later, whatever that may be.

I take actual losses seriously because scenarios are designed to take historical losses into account and it is really annoying when everything is on track for the whole game and then, coming to the victory screen, everything is out of sync because the program just decided to rig the numbers.

soooo, it that could be changed to ' please do nothing to the numbers', it would be appreciated.

[rbodleyscott]

Tailoring the game to your particular preferences is what modding is for.

It would be easy enough to change the results code to report the moment immediately after one side's morale cracks, although that would seem rather arbitrary as it would not in reality be the end of the battle, and certainly not the end of the casualties.

The vanilla game prefers to take into account the effects of pursuit and other post-battle losses, as well as routers returning to the colours, particularly on the winning side. We feel this gives a more representative estimate of the actual results of the battle.

(Bear in mind that everything in this and every simulation, however intricately modelled, is in the final analysis just an estimate. This includes the unadjusted casualties.)

There are no plans to change the end battle reports, particularly as the reported results correspond to the actual results passed to the campaign database in the campaign system.

You can, however, mod it to do whatever you want, and having done so, can include the modded code in all of your scenarios. You would not in fact need to write a single new line of code, just remove the code that makes the adjustments made in Results.bsf

[fogman]

oh not just me: many people have expressed utter amazement at the casualties screen.
but since it is what it is, how do you neutralize the results.bsf or play with it?

different topic: is hotseat mode in store? or at least the ability to disable replay?

[rbodleyscott]

how do you neutralize the results.bsf or play with it?

You would need to put a modded version of Results.BSF (and a copy of Results.txt) in your custom "Campaign" in /Data/UI. The program would then use the modded version automatically instead of the vanilla version.

See http://www.slitherinebravo.net/GameWiki ... tub_engine

The code that adds up (and modifies) the casualties is in the GetBattleLosses() function in Results.BSF. You would need to mod that to your liking, or persuade someone else to do it.

different topic: is hotseat mode in store? or at least the ability to disable replay?

Hotseat mode by PBEM++ already exists.

Direct hotseat mode without going through PBEM++ is not currently available in the engine, so we cannot add it to the game. Likewise disabling replay is not feasible because of the way the engine stores and recreates the situation prior to the other side's turn.

Development work in Slitherine is currently concentrating on the new engine, of which we do not have full details as yet.

[BrentBJ]

When there are new scenarios to download the Historical button turns red and pulses. Is it possible to do this for the multiplayer button when your opponent has completed his move and it's your turn?

thanks
Brent

[rbodleyscott]

When there are new scenarios to download the Historical button turns red and pulses. Is it possible to do this for the multiplayer button when your opponent has completed his move and it's your turn?

thanks
Brent

That is an interesting idea. I will put it to the engine team.

Actually currently the Historical button does not pulse red in Pike and Shot: Campaigns, but we are working on that.

[KateMicucci]

Here is one historical quote I like a lot.

"A soldier's musket, if not exceedingly ill-bored (as many of them are), will strike the figure of a man at eighty yards; it may even at 100; but a soldier must be very unfortunate indeed who shall be wounded by a common musket at 150 yards, provided his antagonist aims at him; and as to firing at a man at 200 yards with a common musket, you may just as well fire at the moon and have the same hopes of hitting your object. I do maintain and will prove, whenever called on, that no man was ever killed at 200 yards by a common soldier's musket, by the person who aimed at him."

Col. George Hanger, To all Sportsmen and Particularly to Farmers, and Gamekeepers (London, 1814)

It's funny that you've dismissed all of the sources who disagree with you as being hyperbolic exaggerations, and then you post one who deliberately is being hyperbolic.

Keep in mind a few things about Hanger.

1. Hanger was taking into account the poor marksmanship training that the average musketeer received, not the mechanical inaccuracy of the musket alone.
2. Hanger himself advocated for the creation of a large skirmishing militia who would fight from a distance of no less than 150 yards.
3. Hanger was trying to sell his own brand of muskets to equip said militia.

now, whether the bow is superior to muskets, no it's not, simply because it is easier to train a musketeer than to train an archer, and that consideration alone superseded anything else in an age of mass armies.

I found something else relevant to this.

Lindsay Boynton, The Elizabethan Militia, pg 113:

"One of the reasons that firearms superseded bows, it is suggested, is that they could be mastered in a shorter time. Such an argument runs wholly counter to the growing professionalisation of military affairs. Training, in particular, was becoming ever more comprehensive and the specious argument that firearms required less, not more, training, bears all the marks of a propagandist's sophistry. No contrast could be more pointed between the old assumption that levies were briefly trained en route for battle, and that implicit in the whole conception of the trained bands, that a certain minimum of discipline and instruction were essential."

[fogman]

professionalism equates to more training, yes but it changes nothing to the FACT that mastering the musket is easier than mastering the longbow. talking about sophistry...

one forgets that musketeers don't get that much training compared to longbowmen because it costs money to practice musketry (in terms of powder and cartridges) while it costs nothing to practice archery. despite that, the musket wins because

a. it is primarily a close range weapon fired en masse.
b. archery has a fatal flaw: it can be countered by armour.

[BrentBJ]

I've just finished a fantastic, very close fought, Russian 1495 vs Russian 1495 game with egos. It was a weird game because both armies looked the same which made it extremely difficult figuring out which units belonged to you. Especially when you didn't know if was yours rallying after a pursuit or his waiting to attack.
So is it possible to have option of changing the flags of one army to allow players to differentiate between units?

Oh and from now on my title is :

Brent the Great, Grand Prince of Moscow and Grand Prince of all Rus. :

[jomni]

A modder can clone the army, assign to the other side with a new fag.

[rbodleyscott]

I've just finished a fantastic, very close fought, Russian 1495 vs Russian 1495 game with egos. It was a weird game because both armies looked the same which made it extremely difficult figuring out which units belonged to you. Especially when you didn't know if was yours rallying after a pursuit or his waiting to attack.
So is it possible to have option of changing the flags of one army to allow players to differentiate between units?

Historically, in civil war battles it really was difficult to distinguish one side from the other. There are plenty of historical instances of units attacking units of their own side, thinking they were the enemy. At least the game won't let that happen, but a certain amount of confusion is realistic.

[BrentBJ]

Was a fun if confusing game.
Thanks for the reply

[KiwiWarlord]

Oh and from now on my title is :

Brent the Great, Grand Prince of Moscow and Grand Prince of all Rus. :

Should that be Boris Bogdan-Jaska, mercenary General employed by the Portuguese and now captive of the Moors in Alcazarquivir ?

[venividivici]

Hi all

Haven't been on the forums since the Legion Arena days, but just picked up Pike and Shot Campaigns and thrilled to have a PC strategy game covering the Thirty Years War at last

One thing I have noticed while playing through the tutorials is the lack of a rotating overhead map view (M hotkey). We seem to be stuck with a scrollable top down portrait view and it would be nice to be able to rotate to landscape, particularly if you have a widescreen monitor, to get a better overall view. Any chance that could be added ?