[ New messages · Members · Forum rules · Search · RSS ]
Page 1 of 512345»
Forum moderator: EbelAngel 
Forum » General Talk » General Chat » Comparing engines
Comparing engines
OC_DavoutDate: Saturday, 18/September/2010, 8:22 PM | Message # 1
Knight
Group: Checked
Messages: 24
Awards: 0
Reputation: 0
Status: Offline
Just a querie concerning the engines for C2 and for AC/DN.

What are the advantages/benefits of using either.

Main issues I am concerned with are:

Fatigue (roads).

Morale/flanking.

Line of sight/unit stacking.

Formation bonuses.

Of course if there are any other points which are significant then please discuss (maybe building capture/manning, resource collection, etc)

Also why we are on this subject is there any difference between AC and DN?

 
OssDate: Saturday, 18/September/2010, 11:10 PM | Message # 2
Count
Group: Checked
Messages: 81
Awards: 0
Reputation: 1
Status: Offline
I do believe you can have more units in DN than you can in Ac. I cant remember the difference though. Ac is like 16000 though.

C2 has alot of nicnacs in it compared to DN like weather effects and uh... ... wacko . Oh I like the road system and my favorite. The tiring of the troops. Very cool.


 
[hwk]poppenDate: Sunday, 19/September/2010, 6:28 AM | Message # 3
The master of Pike and shot
Group: Moderators
Messages: 324
Awards: 2
Reputation: 0
Status: Offline
and in dn, your range of fire damage is always constant unlesss u add a line form FB to the nres.dat i believe





Non progredi est regredi
 
CichorDate: Sunday, 19/September/2010, 11:15 AM | Message # 4
Earl
Group: Moderators
Messages: 232
Awards: 4
Reputation: 3
Status: Offline
In plus for DN - simple field fortification (lack of it in C1 and FB although in XVIth, XVIIth and XVIIIth again and again build it during wars:().

I apologize for my english.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

http://www.kozacy.org/
http://forum.kozacy.org/
 
DaddioDate: Monday, 20/September/2010, 0:41 AM | Message # 5
Marquis
Group: Moderators
Messages: 432
Awards: 4
Reputation: 3
Status: Offline
I have always been a supporter of the C2 engine. the roads and fatigue factors simply can not be duplicated in ACFB, or DN.

The lowering of morale buy retreating units is also a real plus.

Plus that fact that it is a much newer and more powerful platform go's without saying.

It's draw backs are smallish maps, (I always thought the troops were too large) and the lack of an auto fire system.

I do long for the days of pt though.

We can only wait and hope that C3 will address these issues.

Daddio


http://i1045.photobucket.com/albums/b455/Billy_Jo_Patrick/cossacks2_art_03_zpsel8tgwad.jpg
 
[hwk]poppenDate: Monday, 20/September/2010, 0:52 AM | Message # 6
The master of Pike and shot
Group: Moderators
Messages: 324
Awards: 2
Reputation: 0
Status: Offline
i COMPLETELY AGREE with that daddio, its way more realistic. and hopefully there will be a c3





Non progredi est regredi
 
CichorDate: Monday, 20/September/2010, 11:33 AM | Message # 7
Earl
Group: Moderators
Messages: 232
Awards: 4
Reputation: 3
Status: Offline
Quote (Daddio)

It's draw backs are smallish maps, (I always thought the troops were too large) and the lack of an auto fire system.

I agree with you in 100%.

Quote (Daddio)
We can only wait and hope that C3 will address these issues.

Yes... only one condition: Cossacks 3 should be remake of Cossacks 1 not 2 ;].


I apologize for my english.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

http://www.kozacy.org/
http://forum.kozacy.org/
 
NowyDate: Monday, 20/September/2010, 12:12 PM | Message # 8
Marquis
Group: Users
Messages: 320
Awards: 1
Reputation: 1
Status: Offline
In majority I also agree with that Daddio. C2 engine can be more interesting, but this game needs many improvments specially in tactics, army organization, units uniforms, order of battle and maps. There ara few other things which should be implemented too.

Roads and fatigue were important factors in Napoleonic Warfare.
Nevertheless we still have only stone bridges and any pontoon or wooden bridges, drafts and boats which were used many times at that era.
Worse that these stone bridges are not distroyable.

Morale system and retreating units are much better than crazy slaughter every one men on battlefield.
However in C2 we still must do it around military buildings and that is bad. Maybe ocasionally surrender option will be good there.

Maps are smallish and have some problems with realistic land ground. Proper geographical placements in Battle for Europe Campaign do not exist.

I would like to see muskets auto fire system, correct military tactic and Generals commanders.

But I got mixed feelings in pt case. Do not know is it good or not.

 
OC_DavoutDate: Monday, 20/September/2010, 7:11 PM | Message # 9
Knight
Group: Checked
Messages: 24
Awards: 0
Reputation: 0
Status: Offline
Am I right in saying that in the AC/DN series that you cannot fire through your own units? If so how does this affect stacking of units?
 
[hwk]poppenDate: Monday, 20/September/2010, 7:41 PM | Message # 10
The master of Pike and shot
Group: Moderators
Messages: 324
Awards: 2
Reputation: 0
Status: Offline
its possable to fire through them, u just have to mod it. i believe takeing away friendly fire line in the md should do it although it seems to shoot the units in front aswell, but anyways. im not sure how eather will effect the stacking





Non progredi est regredi
 
Forum » General Talk » General Chat » Comparing engines
Page 1 of 512345»
Search: