PDA

View Full Version : worried



monkeytart
21st Jul 2005, 09:47
correct me if im wrong (and i may be), but perhaps we have too high of an expectation for the patch, do u seriously think the patch will be able to include almost all of the improvements, i doubt it. like someone has mentioned years before (sarcasm) patches are usually files not too big right? of course, his thread has been drowned by other voices. total improvements usually come from expansion pacts. and dont get me wrong, i like the game. and i would want to see the patch just as eager as anyone else, but perhaps we may also be overly disappointed in the end?

Mister Nock
21st Jul 2005, 10:37
The patch should fix all of the bugs we have uncovered, and would hopefully address most of the gameplay issues. but I doubt aesthetics will be changed, nor do I expect unit stats to be varied from Empire to Empire like they should be, except maybe the uber-milita will be toned down.

I really can't see them implimenting morale or other formations like skirmish order.

monkeytart
23rd Jul 2005, 15:19
I really can't see them implimenting morale or other formations like skirmish order.
that is exactly the thing i am worrying about! since patches are usually not too big. they wouldn't have space to put in all those stuff. but morale is a MUST for most war games!

Azharas Knight
23rd Jul 2005, 16:06
aslong as they fix the main bugs, and errors with the first patch I'm happy. The other things can be done later.

Queeg
23rd Jul 2005, 17:21
I doubt we'll see a major morale change. And I'm fine with that. Frankly, the morale deal is hugely overblown in my opinion. Yes, it's absolutely realistic to have armies break and run all the time. But when it happens every time, over and over and over, then the battles become repetitive and boring. The battles in RTW were just meet their line, flank them, rout them, chase them - lather, rinse, repeat. Realistic? Absolutely. Fun? Not after the first 20 times or so.

5/77 Armd
23rd Jul 2005, 18:45
I completely disagree, morale is crucial.

"...then the battles become repetitive and boring...."

As if they aren't already!?!
I find myself repeating the same tactic with the game as is, it's very repetitive.

For me, three of the most important fixes would be to add morale, STOP the units from refacing on their own. (One battalion coming up on the fight flank makes practically the entire line reface and expose their own individual unit flanks to the enemy regardless if there are other enemies advancing.) And lastly, to either weaken the uber-militia or strengthen the infantry's melee attack. Later on militia is very weak so an increase in infantry melee would be preferable.

I don't know if it would be possible to fix in a patch, but it seems that in later eras the AI continues to purchase sub-par units. Usually lots and lots of howitzers as well as militia and line/light infantry. Why? I end up mopping the floor with them by using Black Watch, etc. I don't think I've ever come against enemy grenadiers, ever! Once in a while I might see the second-level light infantry (riflemen), but that's it!

Queeg
23rd Jul 2005, 19:10
Well, I guess it's a matter of taste, but I find the battles in IG to be far more challenging and interesting than those in RTW where the only necessary tactics were to flank the enemy or kill its leader, either of which would induce a massive crap-your-pants-by-companies collapse of the enemy. That's no fun in my book.

I agree with the rest of your points.

gcr59
24th Jul 2005, 19:19
I believe the patch will only contain improvments copncerning game playability. Anything concerning moral, Troop formations, Different unit types will most undoubtably be in an expansion. If they plan an expansion that addresses the issues ive read in this forum id be happy to wait on that and would buy it. But the patch we need now, just to be able to play the game.

bbushe
24th Jul 2005, 20:48
Well, I guess it's a matter of taste, but I find the battles in IG to be far more challenging and interesting than those in RTW where the only necessary tactics were to flank the enemy or kill its leader, either of which would induce a massive crap-your-pants-by-companies collapse of the enemy. That's no fun in my book.

I agree with the rest of your points.

the rtw battles where only easy because of that games great tactical ai flaw: the suicidal enemy commader. (did they ever patch that btw?)
making it harder to actually catch the enemy general would have make the whole campaign more interesting.

the whole IG no morale problem makes the battles so artificial, and ruin the whole campaign model as a result. I'm off to check it RTW has a patch...

Queeg
24th Jul 2005, 22:23
RTW is better with the patches and better still with the mods. But I still enjoy the IG battles. Much of that is due to my preference for the era. But I also find the battles more interesting and challenging in IG.

zeroh
25th Jul 2005, 13:13
Imo morale is a must but morale is useless when your only controlling the small armies in IG since most if not all of the units would get killed as they flee they should defintely give an option to increase the unit sizes so when the enemy does break and flee some men actually gets away.