If you could make sure one thing was in the game what would it be?

I also love being able to give medals or see "flags" of units with the different victories writen on them ala Sid Meier's Gettysburg

Sadly, probably won't happen? An increasingly-disappearing ability in paradox titles... to mod the graphics if I want to?

EDIT: The latest paradox titles all use DDS format for the graphics, sadly you need to be rich to be able to afford photoshop.

I totally second the ability to see battle honours, a regimental history perhaps? As for the ability to award medals, it might be easily implemented as nearly all countries had some kind of award system, Order of this or order of that

For me, I just want that Napoleonic wargame that will please me in the same way CK2 has, the game I have been waiting for

On a minor note, the ability to form my exotic units and have them take part in major battles and campaigns, I want the Battalion Septinsular to form part of the Grande Armee and not serve in the backwaters that were the French Adriatic possessions.

That certain tactical/weapon differences be portayed so that a French main infantry regiment would have different stats than an Austrian main line and still different than a late war recruit French regiment, such as those called up after Napoleon's retreat from Russia/Moscow. Details of weapons use and deployment like Horse Art. some nations used it effectively, others not at all or not until later in the campaigns - actual military history and capabilities need to be preserved beneath the gloss of sprites.

(as a second choice - I strongely agree with the Unit/Leader history concept already requested. That would be great for emersion, role-playing and general enhancement of using a computer game for its strength - keeping track and displaying important/interesting info for the player.)

I want the different nations to have really different units. One of my biggest gripes about HOI3 is that all nations can/do have the same units with the same stats. Especially in this time frame I don't want to see Ottoman units with the same stats as French units. All nations' artillery should not be the same, nor Guard for those nations that have it, etc.

novapaddy said:

Sadly, probably won't happen? An increasingly-disappearing ability in paradox titles... to mod the graphics if I want to?

EDIT: The latest paradox titles all use DDS format for the graphics, sadly you need to be rich to be able to afford photoshop.

Click to expand...

Use gimp ? it's basically the same and it,s free

I wonder will it ever happen?

Well, if you've ever played a Total War game; before you actually go to the battle part of the game, you have a representation of the province you are in, and you can place your armies roughly in position, them depicted as rectangular blocks? So you can arrange your troops for battle.

I notice the feature here, for the first time, where we may be able to arrange our armies and flanks?

I just wonder if we will ever get beyond what we have had so far, and get to arrange our armies in a kind of pre-battle screen. Will we get to "see" rather than "imagine"?

I would live to see regimental histories in game. An example history would be like, "The royal Irish guards regiment served with distinction at the battle of Porto." or "The Welsh Fusilliers were completely destroyed at the battle of Sevilla. They are currently being reformed in Cardiff."

Morrell8 said:

I would live to see regimental histories in game. An example history would be like, "The royal Irish guards regiment served with distinction at the battle of Porto." or "The Welsh Fusilliers were completely destroyed at the battle of Sevilla. They are currently being reformed in Cardiff."

Click to expand...

As much energy and effort they put into CK2/Sengoku and others to track half-wit relatives, mostly useless courtiers and potential heirs could be applied to tracking unit history and commanders' travels/assignments/victories and losses. Tell the marketing team - Think of Units as Characters.

For me the one important feature is to ensure that the game makes you use manouver, ie several stacks (corps size during most of the game, maybe army size in the end) supporting each other during a campaing to achieve victory. I foremost want to avoid this being a big stack game. If when at war with Austria I just have to march the massive "grande Armée" Stack all the way to Vienna, then the game is a no go whatever other fancy features it may have. No big stack pushing is the key.

Than of course being able to track down the histroy of the game (battle honors for units), ledger that lists all the big battles with their results, etc.. would be great. It was sorely missed in AGEOD Titles where one had to manually keep track of one's great battles.

veji1 said:

For me the one important feature is to ensure that the game makes you use manouver, ie several stacks (corps size during most of the game, maybe army size in the end) supporting each other during a campaing to achieve victory. I foremost want to avoid this being a big stack game. If when at war with Austria I just have to march the massive "grande Armée" Stack all the way to Vienna, then the game is a no go whatever other fancy features it may have. No big stack pushing is the key.

Than of course being able to track down the histroy of the game (battle honors for units), ledger that lists all the big battles with their results, etc.. would be great. It was sorely missed in AGEOD Titles where one had to manually keep track of one's great battles.

Click to expand...

Well, we all know that "God fights on the side with the bigger battalions". ....and we all know who said that.

On the other hand, I agree that having commander's abilities, and if possible, some sense of tactics (truly the key) would be nice.
The flank system shown in a screenie is a start.....but to use tactics, you have to get down to the sub-province level, to deal with terrain, etc.
If you've ever seen Crown of Glory, a matrix title -- they give you an option to play the battle in a tactical manner. Problem there is that now you're dealing with a strategic AI and a tactical AI -- and as much as I enjoy COG .... well, neither AI is particularly enjoyable.

veji1 said:

For me the one important feature is to ensure that the game makes you use manouver, ie several stacks (corps size during most of the game, maybe army size in the end) supporting each other during a campaing to achieve victory. I foremost want to avoid this being a big stack game. If when at war with Austria I just have to march the massive "grande Armée" Stack all the way to Vienna, then the game is a no go whatever other fancy features it may have. No big stack pushing is the key.

Click to expand...

I believe the key to that is an agressive and effective Fog of War mechanic. After all, why did the powers spread their troops out rather than concentrate? Logistics and uncertanity of the enemy's location. The first is often fairly well represented, but the latter is generally not. Having a good FOW with appropriate sighting/scouting mechanics and reaction moves would, I believe go a long way to help reduce the Stack of Doom.

RickInVA said:

I believe the key to that is an agressive and effective Fog of War mechanic. After all, why did the powers spread their troops out rather than concentrate? Logistics and uncertanity of the enemy's location. The first is often fairly well represented, but the latter is generally not. Having a good FOW with appropriate sighting/scouting mechanics and reaction moves would, I believe go a long way to help reduce the Stack of Doom.

Click to expand...

Excellent point Rick....especially on logistics. Armies lived off the countryside (particularly the French Armies) and thus had to keep some level of dispersal.

Attrition is a feature that will be critical in this game. It should have some balance with the quality of the troops and the size of the army...and the distance marched/conditions. Napoleon could march the Grand Armee from the Channel to Ulm in 1805 with little attrition, but in 1813, the same size army could not march 100 miles beyond Leipzig without straggling massively. The difference: morale/quality of force.

An award system would be awesome but I would love to redraw the map of Europe with client states and their flags (and maybe pick who I want to be on the throne/in-charge of my puppets.)

I also hope that we avoid the "stack of doom" syndrome but I very much would like to see a meaty diplomatic model. I realize that diplomatic AI is a difficult task but I really think this era almost requires a finely crafted diplomatic model. Otherwise it will end up as simply France against the rest of Europe all day and every day for the entire length of the game. I hope that the player will have a chance to avoid some of the rather unfortunate diplomatic faux pas of Napoleon by being a bit more willing to accomodate the national desires of selected major nations. I also hope that this diplomatic system allows some flexibility with the Continental System with the option of foregoing it altogether; with ramifications both good and ill of course. I just want many choices in trying to achieve victory. If I am forced to invade Russia with no alternatives available then I will consider the diplomatic model to be less than what I hoped for. How far can we go to accomodate the Czar and what are the consequences? I also hope that the French player has a few options in handling the Spanish issue as well. Can we simply put Ferdinand on the throne and try to control him? Some other Spanish noble? Any options to attempt to make Joseph acceptable to the Spanish? There are just so many important diplomatic decisions that could have been made differently that would have had such a huge impact on the way that events unfolded that it would be a shame if we don't have an opportunity to wrestle with them.

Just off the top of my head...

* An option to have dispatches with FoW. Meaning, you are the commander. Orders take time to reach subordinates, cannot be rescinded - only changed in further dispatches. Then dispatches come back to you with information which updates the map appropriately.

I realize for Clausewitz this may be difficult to implement, but would capture the time period.

* Battles end at darkness, otherwise heavy losses to the attacker occur. Night retreats and drunken troops with hang overs in the morning.

* Troops drain food and resources from holdings in the territory and can be completely drained, or scorched by dedicated retreating forces.

* Keeping the existing AGEoD defensive, probe, or assault commands. Cavalry will need to be able to move around and easily disengage and retreat without suffering huge losses to doom stacks.

* Most importantly... Keeping the supply and logistic options available from AGEoD that is so sorrily missing from HOI3... Supply trains, forts, etc.

I would love to have a challenging AI in the game. I don't know whether this feature will make it, though.

There is one thing MAJOR that is missing, The ability to see battles and guide troops. Maybe thats why NTW is so much more popular . This game just looks like another Vicky2, or sengoku, they are a dime a dozen. PARADOX!! Stop wasting time and money on these look a like games and give us something that we can command troops in battle, even if its hex's and turn based. PLEASE enough of this nonsense.