Two Suggestions for a future version...

[AEWHistory]

I've just gotten P&S with campaigns recently (I have had the earlier version for years) and a couple ideas hit me.

1. It would be awesome if the army lists could be selected in a scrollable list rather than clicking again and again and again and again and again..... and again..... and again. It is particularly annoying when you're trying to sort through the large lists. Just make it an small expandable window with a scrollable list.

2. I'd love to see the campaigns aspect of this game evolve into something more dynamic, but a great step would be the ability to have allied armies. For example, one side could be the Ottomans and the other side could be the Hungarians as the main army with auxiliaries of Bohemians, Transylvanians, etc. Allowing one or two allies would add so much flavor (and, theoretically, realism).

3. (edit) Almost forgot, more unique maps!

Hope other people like these ideas.
Best, Aaron

Edit: I guess I should add that what I'm not talking about designing scenarios but, instead, the in-game generic campaign creator.

[SnuggleBunnies]

Yes, having Field of Glory 2's style of army list presentation would be a very nice feature for the game.

[Paul59]

I have been playing some occasional P&S scenarios lately, after two years of nothing but FOG2, and I have a number of suggestions for improvements:

1) Group moves, as in FOG2.

2) Secondary ZOCs, as per FOG2. In P&S it is remarkable easy to manoeuver around enemy units, this is because of the lack of secondary ZOCs, and contributes to the fragmentation of the battle lines.

3) Restrict infantry pursuits to Warriors and Mobs. Currently, even Pike squares pursue, and that seems rather unlikely too me. These infantry pursuits also contribute to the fragmentation of the battle.

4) Generals. I'm not a great fan of the FOG2 (and SJ) General system, but it adds a bit of colour, and an extra layer of complexity.

5) Obviously, all the little visual clues that we have in FOG2; units decreasing in visual size with casualties, marker flags that don't disappear during the AI turn.

6) Reduce manoeuvrability of many units; ie Reiters, Pike formations etc. At the moment, they all seem much more manoeuvrable than similar units in FOG2, which seems odd. These huge Pike formations, especially the Tercios, should be very unwieldy. Again, this just increases the tendency for the battlefield to dissolve into a fragmented state.

cheers

[Athos1660]

@AEWHistory and Paul 59 : very interesting suggestions !
I like it when P&S forum is alive.

Some thoughts, just my 2 cents :

2) Secondary ZOCs, as per FOG2. In P&S it is remarkable easy to manoeuver around enemy units, this is because of the lack of secondary ZOCs, and contributes to the fragmentation of the battle lines.

3) Restrict infantry pursuits to Warriors and Mobs. Currently, even Pike squares pursue, and that seems rather unlikely too me. These infantry pursuits also contribute to the fragmentation of the battle.

6) Reduce manoeuvrability of many units; ie Reiters, Pike formations etc. At the moment, they all seem much more manoeuvrable than similar units in FOG2, which seems odd. These huge Pike formations, especially the Tercios, should be very unwieldy. Again, this just increases the tendency for the battlefield to dissolve into a fragmented state.

I must admit I like the absence of secondary ZOCs in P&S. It gives cavalry charges and movements in general a better flow, maybe historically accurate, some speed and reactivity FoG2 horses don't have. And it is offset by opportunity fire enemy units can use while you play and between two turns. A great mechanism IMHO btw.
(Sometimes when playing FoG2, I expect that opportunity fire from my enemy, then I breathe a sigh of relief.

As for infantry pursuits and maneuverability, it is not an issue for me as it is now.

All this is ultimately a matter of historicity and of that I am not aware.
However, what I like about P&S is this very 'fluidity' that seems to me consistent with the period (but I may be wrong!).

5) Obviously, all the little visual clues that we have in FOG2; units decreasing in visual size with casualties, marker flags that don't disappear during the AI turn.

Indeed.
I might add that I think I prefer when the figures displayed per unit are small and numerous, a little bit like in P@S, but nicely modeled and textured, a bit separated from one another and animated as in FoG2.

Cheers

[Paul59]

Hi Athos,

I think we will have to agree to disagree on this matter! Actually, I think battlefields get too fragmented in FOG2, even with the mechanics that I advocated.

I don't think battlefields got this fragmented in any period, except perhaps WW2. I used to play (and design scenarios) for Pike and Shot for many years, and the fragmentation of the battlefield was the one thing that annoyed me. Coming back to P&S, after two years of playing FOG2, I can see how the issues that I mentioned are contributing to the problem (as I see it).

I agree that cavalry should be fast moving and unpredictable, but that is catered for in FOG2 by pursuers ignoring all ZOCs.

cheers

Paul


PS: I remembered another suggestion that I would like in P&S:

7) No automatic cohesion drop for a flank charge, unless the target is already in melee.

[Athos1660]

I think we will have to agree to disagree on this matter!

Indeed. I agree

I agree that cavalry should be fast moving and unpredictable, but that is catered for in FOG2 by pursuers ignoring all ZOCs.

insufficient IMHO (once again it's just an opinion)

A little suggestion for a possible future P&S 2 : the middle mouse bouton controlling the camera as in FoG2.

[Paul59]

Another suggestion:

A turn and shoot button.

[Athos1660]

Another one : an opportunity fire button.

Right now, when a unit of ours is hidden in the woods and an enemy is passing by, it automatically fires revealing itself. What about an option to remain hidden and choosing when firing ?

[rbodleyscott]

Thanks for the suggestions. We are not currently working on a new version of P&S, but if at some point we do, we will certainly be considering which of the improvements from FOG2 would be appropriate to introduce in P&S2.

[KiwiWarlord]

Don't change too much RBS, just little tweeks here & there. I find the FoG2 game a bit ' over the top ' for my liking.
Being a tabletop wargamer I find P&S a wonderful extension of the hobby.

[fikabo]

* When you select unit you see where this unit can go but you don't see if can turn at end.
* Undo when there is no possibility of opportunity fire.
* No flank attack if horses are not in melee.
* See ZOC like in FOG2.

PS: I like better graphics in P&S than in FOG2.

[gribol]

Thanks for the suggestions. We are not currently working on a new version of P&S, but if at some point we do, we will certainly be considering which of the improvements from FOG2 would be appropriate to introduce in P&S2.

Please, do that. P&S is a litte more exciting game, that FOG2.
And please make a little more diversified random maps.