THE HISTORY CHANNEL Great Battles of the Middle Ages

lancerunolfsson · Post by **lancerunolfsson** » Mon Nov 12, 2007 9:08 pm

Question I have though, how are you keeping the controls of the PC version of the game intact (mouse, keyboard) while adjusting the game for console, will the PC version be dumbed down for this?

I think, Iain already said that the PC version was going to be the main design. So what I'm getting is that any compromises will be to the Consoles not the PC. Yet I think Slitherine has a way of making both work just fine.

Post by **pipfromslitherine** » Tue Nov 13, 2007 3:15 am

The core gameplay will be shared by both, but the interface and specific presentation will be custom for each platform. So nobody need think they will be getting a slapdash job on their system

Cheers

Pip

honvedseg · Post by **honvedseg** » Wed Nov 14, 2007 3:55 pm

Will there be a provison for expanding unit size, or a fixed number of figures per unit? That was one of those little details that I really missed in Legion Arena from the previous games.

I don't know how far along the programming is, but I'd like to see something better for casualty replacement than the usual "click here to suddenly find 47 veteran soldiers hanging around with nothing better to do than join your army". With a dozen or more armies running around and suffering heavy losses, there should be a scarcity of recruitable "skilled" combat talent, but plenty of untrained peasants who would need to be taught the basics of combat to be of any use. It would be far more realistic to have extremely limited but automatic replacements each turn for every unit (to simulate a combination of veterans being hired, untrained additions being broken in, wounded returning to duty, etc.); if a unit is too torn up in a battle, you may need to have them sit the next one or two out while they recruit and train back up to useable strength. Bringing on a large number of raw conscripts should be an emergency measure only, and result in a temporary loss of overall unit effectiveness (in proportion to their numbers), such as having the last few upgrades not count until the unit gains enough experience to get back to its previous level. You might also consider allowing a "trainer" and/or a "medic" to be added to each unit as "upgrades", the first of which would reduce the experience penalty for adding new recruits above the normal replacement rate, the second of which would restore an extra casualty or two per turn to the active roster.

Having a fraction of the equipment cost of defeated/destroyed units added to your own treasury (or a seperate "equipment fund", spendable only on weapons and armor) as spoils would be a nice touch. You wouldn't have much to gain by thrashing a bunch of peasants with sharpened sticks and farm implements, but taking down a well-equipped bodyguard unit would pay handsome dividends, and allow you to equip one of your own units better.

Having a strategic map with a choice of "targets" should get rid of the totally linear campaign as in Legion Arena.

Generally, when a new game is released, it ends up as a combination of surprises and letdowns: "Rats! They left this option out; but cool, they added that feature over there!" Overall though, I'm eager to see what new ideas Slitherine comes up with this time around.

kleinemann · Post by **kleinemann** » Wed Nov 21, 2007 10:28 pm

Looks beutiful

I'll love even more it if it will be available for mac

vasikr · Post by **vasikr** » Fri Nov 23, 2007 5:13 pm

About that 'replacement' question - English Crown was not much pressed to find good and able longbowmen to bring depleted squads back to full strength:all longbowmen were peasants and all peasants were longbowmen in English domain,who were encouraged to train military use of bow(means in squads shooting at mark)in free time,having competitions etc.English towns of that time had a place for such training called Rake which might even survive as streets name in some towns to our days

jdm · Post by **jdm** » Fri Nov 23, 2007 5:53 pm

We certainly intend that there will be a MAC version

Regards
JDM

kleinemann · Post by **kleinemann** » Mon Nov 26, 2007 4:07 pm

I got this idea for a side campaign in this game, about the wars of roses in England somewhere between 1400-1500.
How does this sound to you, EarlofWarwick?
I found this page about them ( http://www.warsoftheroses.com/ ) which you might use for info on the subject (if the History Channel can't supply enough).
In this campaign you would play either of the royal houses (Lancaster or York) and be in command of their armies over various battles in that civil war. On this website I found there is also a list of battles fought in the wars + a description of them ( http://www.warsoftheroses.com/battles.cfm ) which you might use for the battles in the campaign.
This is just an idea that popped into my head as I saw this warsoftheroses site shortly after visiting this site, if you don't feel up to making a campaign like this feel free to forget this whole post, just thought I'd share my thoughts a little

.
Oh and its great that you intend that there will be a mac version.

Oops, didnt notice the game is set in the hundred years war... well, you might still have this idea of mine as a bonus campaign, or side campaign or whatever...

Zoidfarb · Post by **Zoidfarb** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 10:14 pm

The screenshots of this game look amazing! Better than any out there at the moment, especially since this game's units look the most true to history. Ihope you continue being authentic but with your partnership with Osprey publishing I think it shouldn't be too difficult.

I'm left a little disappointed however.

The game's title is Great Battles of the Middle Ages. It was a bummer that the game is focused only on the Hundred Years war. Whatever happend to all the other campaigns and famous conflicts?

This game looks so promising to the gamer who enjoys accurate-looking units, I hope you will create other campaigns...and soon

vasikr · Post by **vasikr** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 11:31 am

This war was the biggest event in Medieval period,OK maybe the next biggest after Crusades,but it could be that future games in the serie would include other Medieval events.

Zoidfarb · Post by **Zoidfarb** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 6:45 pm

vasikr wrote:This war was the biggest event in Medieval period,OK maybe the next biggest after Crusades,but it could be that future games in the serie would include other Medieval events.

Not to belittle the importance of this war between France and England but there are many other conflicts just as important:

The Reconquista
The Mongol Invasion(s)
The Northern Crusades
The emergance of the Ottoman empire
The wars between the Holy Roman Empire and the Papacy
The Husssite Wars
etc

I didn't say that the Hundred Year's war wasn't a good choice, but I am impressed by the accuracy of the units' appearances and hope the scope of this game broadens

coldknight · Post by **coldknight** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 7:50 pm

wow, looks really nice, ive always been a fan of medival games hehe

-btw ill be back on from time to time, getting busier by the day, but just wanted to say a quick hello

coldknight · Post by **coldknight** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 7:51 pm

wow, looks really nice, ive always been a fan of medival games hehe

-btw ill be back on from time to time, getting busier by the day, but just wanted to say a quick hello

BdColonel · Post by **BdColonel** » Tue Jun 17, 2008 7:47 pm

The screenshots look good, and with the LGS taking care of the multiplayer balance this really could turn out to be an amazing game.

Btw, first post of mine here. Any chance that we could be told how many troops we can have in the field at once? *crosses fingers for at least 30,000 per side*

lancerunolfsson · Post by **lancerunolfsson** » Thu Jun 19, 2008 2:02 am

BdColonel wrote: *crosses fingers for at least 30,000 per side*

Which is way bigger than almost any medieval battle unless you count the camp followers. Of course I guess the most interesting part of some battles might be riding down the Suttlers and Whores.

BdColonel · Post by **BdColonel** » Thu Jun 19, 2008 5:42 am

Well, for instance the battle of Hastings was small yes, only 7,000 per side. But there were other battles throughout europe and the middle east. The battle of Manzikert had about 30,00 per side.

EDIT- Oh nvm, I just saw that you can only play as the French or the English. That's a bummer but I bet it would be easy to have new nations added later on. In a patch or expansion.

kleinemann · Post by **kleinemann** » Sun Sep 07, 2008 5:39 pm

BdColonel wrote:Well, for instance the battle of Hastings was small yes, only 7,000 per side. But there were other battles throughout europe and the middle east. The battle of Manzikert had about 30,00 per side.

EDIT- Oh nvm, I just saw that you can only play as the French or the English. That's a bummer but I bet it would be easy to have new nations added later on. In a patch or expansion.

does 30,00 mean 30,000 or 3000? or 30?

I think your army should normally be like 3-5000 men big

kleinemann · Post by **kleinemann** » Sun Sep 07, 2008 5:42 pm

and experience shouldn't be too good, so you can't just use one elite unit with a really high level to kill a whole army.
And mercenaries would also be cool, they might have a preset level and you pay them for each battle they fight in

BdColonel · Post by **BdColonel** » Sun Sep 14, 2008 4:09 am

I meant 30,000.00 (thirty thousand). But that would be more than what are needed considering the armies being portrayed.

kleinemann · Post by **kleinemann** » Wed Nov 05, 2008 10:39 pm

dejan07 · Post by **dejan07** » Fri Feb 06, 2009 1:54 pm

Any news about "Great Battles of the Middle Ages"?It is 2009!!

THE HISTORY CHANNEL Great Battles of the Middle Ages

British "side" campaign

looks good, but...