Slitherine

O i see, i understand oposite, for me is not a great problem use any of the 2 models to represent units IF gameplay is not affected and if game offers a way to adapt the unit structure to create scenarios or when you are working with the army builder.

Ummm i allways prefer a visual representation in the units when suffer casualties but this is something rare in wargames but if you add another way to show this is ok for me (maybe in future you can study add diferent unit models based in level of damage in the unit using steps of 10% for example).

Talking about units... then the images we see dont have the final units art???

And commanders... something i need ask, they are like in FOG a regular unit with a leader attached or we talk about a commander with no soldiers under his direct command??? i refer that in many games commanders are a single man unit or a non combat unit and you need protect them???

Thanks.

Scutarii wrote:Talking about units... then the images we see dont have the final units art???

Not yet.

And commanders... something i need ask, they are like in FOG a regular unit with a leader attached or we talk about a commander with no soldiers under his direct command??? i refer that in many games commanders are a single man unit or a non combat unit and you need protect them???

To avoid unnecessary complexity, given that the player can move all units each turn anyway, commanders are not represented separately. This is obviously a simplification of reality, but has been done for the sake of ease of play. Once the decision had been made to allow the player to move all units each turn, the role of explictly depicted commanders would have been cosmetic or mere morale boosters, which did not seem worth the added complication.

The player has more than enough to worry about with up to 64 battalions/squadrons on each side. (The Imperial army at Lützen actually has more, although some don't arrive till part-way through the battle).

rbodleyscott wrote:

Scutarii wrote:Talking about units... then the images we see dont have the final units art???

Not yet.

And commanders... something i need ask, they are like in FOG a regular unit with a leader attached or we talk about a commander with no soldiers under his direct command??? i refer that in many games commanders are a single man unit or a non combat unit and you need protect them???

To avoid unnecessary complexity, given that the player can move all units each turn anyway, commanders are not represented separately. This is obviously a simplification of reality, but has been done for the sake of ease of play. Once the decision had been made to allow the player to move all units each turn, the role of explictly depicted commanders would have been cosmetic or mere morale boosters, which did not seem worth the added complication.

The player has more than enough to worry about with up to 64 battalions/squadrons on each side. (The Imperial army at Lützen actually has more, although some don't arrive till part-way through the battle).

I agree that seperate commander units although nice, do complicate things and give the AI fits(at least in most games) It would be a nice feature though, if you could abstactly have a leader "move his flag" from one unit to another during play, perhaps at a cost of some action points for the unit he is leaving and the one he is entering, with rules neither unit can be with enemy ZOC's, engaged in combat etc. It would be ashame to have to leave Gustav A attached to a shattered unit with 30% strength remaining when healthy units are nearby !

64x64 units? Is this just a comment on how large battles are in general, in the scenarios or is tis a hard coded limit?

TheGrayMouser wrote: It would be a nice feature though, if you could abstactly have a leader "move his flag" from one unit to another during play, perhaps at a cost of some action points for the unit he is leaving and the one he is entering, with rules neither unit can be with enemy ZOC's, engaged in combat etc.

I really like that idea! One can easily imagine how the leader's flag moves from unit to unit.

@ rbodleyscott:

- Will different leaders have a varied effect on the armies morale (or other impact)? I think it should make a difference if an army is led by Wallenstein or the infamous Gallas.

- What about ammunition/supply? Must units that have used their whole ammo be resupplied in some way?
(Idea: An army could start battle low on ammo and you have to decide carefully how to use your resources.)

TheGrayMouser wrote:64x64 units? Is this just a comment on how large battles are in general, in the scenarios or is tis a hard coded limit?

The engine (currently) has a hard limit of 64 units per side at a time - although the unit ids can be recycled for reinforcements (provided that the side has lost some units).

Several of the scenarios push these limits (e.g. Breitenfeld, Lutzen), others are smaller.

Schweinewitz wrote: What about ammunition/supply? Must units that have used their whole ammo be resupplied in some way?

We are trying to avoid subjecting the player to the need to micromanage, so no.

The English Royalists often ran low on powder by the end of a day's battle - but the usual effect of this was to make them retreat rather than fight again the next day.
In such circumstances the scenario victory conditions would require them to put the Parliamentarians to flight on the first day or count as "losing" the scenario.

rbodleyscott wrote:

Schweinewitz wrote: What about ammunition/supply? Must units that have used their whole ammo be resupplied in some way?

We are trying to avoid subjecting the player to the need to micromanage, so no.

The English Royalists often ran low on powder by the end of a day's battle - but the usual effect of this was to make them retreat rather than fight again the next day.
In such circumstances the scenario victory conditions would require them to put the Parliamentarians to flight on the first day or count as "losing" the scenario.

Guess this means that the system will be able to support multi day battles like Marignano ?

Keeps sounding better all the time, looking forward to this one as I really enjoyed playing FogR

rbodleyscott wrote: Swedish brigades have their advantages (in the game) from their Salvo capability but are far from invincible.

What is the advantage of salvo in game terms? Historically it had a morale effect on the enemy but on the other side if the enmy didn´t break it left the musketeers in a weak position. In fact salvo was used as a resource for poorly drilled infantry, while better drilled infantry, like in the Dutch Republic army, prefered rolling fire, much more difficult to execute but in the long term much more effective.

Aryaman wrote:

rbodleyscott wrote: Swedish brigades have their advantages (in the game) from their Salvo capability but are far from invincible.

What is the advantage of salvo in game terms? Historically it had a morale effect on the enemy but on the other side if the enmy didn´t break it left the musketeers in a weak position. In fact salvo was used as a resource for poorly drilled infantry, while better drilled infantry, like in the Dutch Republic army, prefered rolling fire, much more difficult to execute but in the long term much more effective.

The game gives Salvo a big advantage in the Impact phase of close combat. If the enemy don't drop Morale as a result, then they are back on equal terms in the continuing close combat.

In distance shooting the salvo troops have a disadvantage compared with rolling fire.

A little question about expansions... the 2 first covering english civil war and Italy wars are planed to be released with base game or later??? thanks.

Scutarii wrote:A little question about expansions... the 2 first covering english civil war and Italy wars are planed to be released with base game or later??? thanks.

At the same time as the base game.

rbodleyscott wrote:

Scutarii wrote:A little question about expansions... the 2 first covering english civil war and Italy wars are planed to be released with base game or later??? thanks.

At the same time as the base game.

Nice!

Question: from the pics and descriptions, towns walls and fortifications appear to be in game

In the BA engine, is terrain perishable (ie can say a wall be blasted down by culverins?

TheGrayMouser wrote:In the BA engine, is terrain perishable (ie can say a wall be blasted down by culverins?

Potentially, though this isn't pertinent to any of the current scenarios, which are all field battles other than the Storming of Bristol, which was an assault without preparatory bombardment. (In fact Prince Maurice's troops to the south of the city did not even wait for Prince Rupert's 2 demi-cannon to fire, which was suppposed to be the signal to commence the assault).

Thanks a lot for the reply, great know that release time is for the combo basegame+expansions.... ummm now i think on this... you plan release game packs with discounts??? i refer that base game price is x, base game+expansion A or B price is (x+y)-small discount and base game+both expansions price is (x+y+z)-bigger discount.

Well, the i think that the TheGrayMouser point is interesting, i think in battles like Pavia or Bicoca where destroy a wall open a "tactical gate" and well, here we can talk about if game can deal with urban combat... i remember read about an action in the british civil war or after it where a dragoon unit fight in urban VS some kind of militia...

Game sounds better every new day cant wait beta test and less game hehehe.

rbodleyscott wrote:
The game gives Salvo a big advantage in the Impact phase of close combat. If the enemy don't drop Morale as a result, then they are back on equal terms in the continuing close combat.

In distance shooting the salvo troops have a disadvantage compared with rolling fire.

Good, that is reasonable. BTW how is random managed in the game? I hope it is not too much a factor, some wargames imo are ruined by too much random, making luck the larger single factor in battle

Scutarii wrote:Thanks a lot for the reply, great know that release time is for the combo basegame+expansions.... ummm now i think on this... you plan release game packs with discounts??? i refer that base game price is x, base game+expansion A or B price is (x+y)-small discount and base game+both expansions price is (x+y+z)-bigger discount.

That will be a matter for Slitherine.

Aryaman wrote:BTW how is random managed in the game?

Randomly

Seriously, we too don't like games where the random factor is too decisive. Conversely too much determinism isn't good either, otherwise we may as well go and play chess.

We hope to get the balance right using bell curves and skewed bell curves.

Scutarii wrote:Well, the i think that the TheGrayMouser point is interesting, i think in battles like Pavia or Bicoca where destroy a wall open a "tactical gate" and well, here we can talk about if game can deal with urban combat... i remember read about an action in the british civil war or after it where a dragoon unit fight in urban VS some kind of militia...

The Pavia scenario starts with the wall already broken and the Imperialists deployed in the park.

You would be lucky (as the French) in the Bicocca scenario to do much damage with artillery since the Swiss won't wait for you to carry out a bombardment. ... wait... waiiiit!

keeps sounding better all the time....