Canister Reaction, Artillery Improvements Request

[Jack ONeill]

All,

To follow up on Gunships post, I recall reading in either Doug Chandlers or Charles Grants book on Waterloo about a British battery commander there. At one point, he was ordered to open fire on some troops appearing to be advancing on his position. He hesitated because he could not identify them at whatever long range they were at. Various Staff Officers looked thru their telescopes, saying they were French. One Officer rode forward some 200 yards and came back, "confirming" they were French. Still the Battery commander held fire. Finally, at some 400 or so yards, they were identified as Belgians, Allies to the British. Truth is, (and Willard has brought this forward also), just because you can fire out to X range, doesn't mean you can see and identify a target at X range, especially given the vagarities of terrain.

Jack B)

[Saddletank]

Good point. Nowhere near enough smoke and FOW in most wargames.

[Marching Thru Georgia]

Saddletank wrote:

Good point. Nowhere near enough smoke and FOW in most wargames.

Let the smoke mod be your friend>

[Saddletank]

I wasn't asking for actual FOW on my computer screen, but historical FOW is one reason why in wargames we need to set weapon effectiveness and ranges far lower than their paper ranges or effects might suggest because in the black powder era often very little could be seen.

A rifle musket capable of hitting a man at 250 yards is useless if you can't see more than 90 yards.

[RebBugler]

Well, looks like my 'Canister Reaction' theme has no bearing now, and I'll obviously get no help or support in addressing this as a reported bug. But that's cool, I brought it up originally in the Nap discussion in hopes of getting some European thoughts toward solutions, however, I slipped up and mentioned the fact that certain MP play was watering down SOW's historic realism efforts, and my theme was slaughtered thereafter by some of those enthusiasts. My fault completely.

When I first discovered TC2M back in early '06, I found the game somewhat awkward, but holding a lot of potential to go forward with ACW historic simulations and play, continuing where Sid Meyers abruptly left, and abandoned all efforts for this era. As I figured out how to enjoy the awkward play, by awkward I mean primarily the necessity to TC troops to just get them to just move, I eventually got into modding. Then the revelation began - Behold, This engine has the potential to be really great...reenacting historic battles of epic proportions, or, for those that like less, brigade level play...it had the potential for all levels to be the best 'musket wars' engine to date...believe me, I've tried them all, I'm going on 65.

Unfortunately, the designers infighting around those times had brought the engine's progress to a standstill, and modding was only band-aids for an engine with so much potential.

Then, outta the blue, SOW - Sound the Trumpets, there's a new day, the cavalry had arrived, hallelujah. Then...THE LETDOWN --the emphasis would be on MP play. I sucked it up, told myself, that's OK, MP will be added, surely the engine will still evolve.

And yes indeed, the SOW engine has made gigantic leaps from it's TC predecessors. However, MP concessions have taken their toll on this progress. We'd be much further along with this GREATEST MUSKET WARS ENGINE EVER had we not been burdened with trying to sate the squeaks and squawks made constantly by the MP enthusiasts. Sure, without the MP option, sales would be less, but for me, although I do get a cut of the profits for my work, I'd prefer that the MP crowd sucked it up, and just take what we give them, with our emphasis being wholly (Holy ) historic realism.

I was: PRKeen the Player; GrayGhost the Modder; and presently: RebBugler the Designer...On the team I'm known as The HotHead, but still, I'm just Randy Keen, who knows this is just a game, but wants it to be the best MusketWars Game ever, and that's what I am constantly working for...

[Saddletank]

Interesting story, Reb, thanks for sharing.

What MP players want is irrelevant (as long as there are basic features like a working lobby, in game comms, stability and all those techy bits a computer game has to have bolted on so that MP play is possible). You should design a game that meets yours and the teams criteria as far as historical accuracy goes (and, you know, there are some MPers who want historical accuracy) but what the design should include is the ability for those MPers who have a different take on what ACW combat needs to be like on their computer screens to be able to make the changes they prefer.

The base game can go on being the great base game you want it to be and your continuing improvemnet work should reflect that.

Remember the MPers only whine when a change is made that they can't deal with by modding the game - providing what is changed can be 'corrected' by means of a mod, everyone should be happy.

[General P R Cleburne]

I remember when you used to pop into the gamespy user chat lobby we used back then for SMG campaigns.
Pr keen and Adam Bryant in the same chat one night just before CWBR was due to release, for a good while talking to us avid listeners about the new software MMG was due to release.They were great times looking back.
Now that long old wait is well past us and look what we have

[Marching Thru Georgia]

On the team I'm known as The HotHead,

I hate to think what I was known as. :laugh: :laugh:

[RebBugler]

Interesting story, Reb, thanks for sharing.

What MP players want is irrelevant (as long as there are basic features like a working lobby, in game comms, stability and all those techy bits a computer game has to have bolted on so that MP play is possible). You should design a game that meets yours and the teams criteria as far as historical accuracy goes (and, you know, there are some MPers who want historical accuracy) but what the design should include is the ability for those MPers who have a different take on what ACW combat needs to be like on their computer screens to be able to make the changes they prefer.

The base game can go on being the great base game you want it to be and your continuing improvemnet work should reflect that.

Remember the MPers only whine when a change is made that they can't deal with by modding the game - providing what is changed can be 'corrected' by means of a mod, everyone should be happy.

Yeah, I completely agree that mod capabilities should be opened up, sans Maps (that's still our bread and butter ), for the MP Community. At least it would eliminate or subdue many of those persistent squeaks and squawks.

When we had our 'oops' patch release over a year ago that opened up modding capabilities completely I tested the crap out of it...it was wonderful. But that patch was swiftly overridden, and few are aware that it ever existed. Now it's useless in case anyone discovers it, as it does not contain maybe hundreds of the since added great features that we all enjoy now, and frankly can't do without.

But that's completely in Norb's hands. Bottom line, it's his game, he makes the BIG decisions, we, The Team, enjoy a democracy on the lower tier decisions.

And one thing's for DARN sure, everyone on the team knows not to ruffle Norb's feathers forcing an issue or request. :woohoo:

[RebBugler]

On the team I'm known as The HotHead,

I hate to think what I was known as. :laugh: :laugh:

Hate to disappoint ya, but you're seldom mentioned, maybe except for: The One That Got Away.