|
Cossacks III wishlist
|
|
| Nowy | Date: Tuesday, 05/May/2015, 11:05 AM | Message # 31 |
|
Marquis
Group: Users
Messages: 320
Status: Offline
| Such wagons for battle purposes are possible only as auxiliary units for baggage, equipage and supply trains.
It was the best usage for horse drawn wagons at that period. They were very important in Iberian and Russian Campaigns.
So, supply resources carts and military train wagons could be fine in the game.
We could think how to implement weather conditions in the game.
Seasons of the year and weather conditions sometimes played decisive roles.
It could be interesting include such settings or changable land texturies in Grand Campaign.
For instance
1. Winter = January, February = snow, frost, very cold time, men needs heating dwellings
2. Early spring = March, April = chengable weather, thaws, possible muddy ground
3. Spring = May, June = nice weather, green grass, green leaves, but green cereals too
4. Summer = July, August = hot time, dusty roads, possible rain storms, harvest time
5. Autumn = September, October = colourful foliage or leafless trees, dry grass
6. Early Winter = November, December = cloudy weather, cold time, early snow, frost
Then one tour in this campaign could include two month and all campaign include 60 tours.
Message edited by Nowy - Wednesday, 06/May/2015, 7:14 AM |
| |
| |
| kirjasbeltran | Date: Wednesday, 06/May/2015, 5:21 PM | Message # 32 |
|
Viscount
Group: Users
Messages: 59
Status: Offline
| Okay.. I just thought they could use war wagons for battle purposes, specially those thAt are armed with light cannons.
anyways. Do you have an idea as to when this cossacks 3 may take place, or the time periods that it may cover?
|
| |
| |
| Nowy | Date: Friday, 08/May/2015, 11:20 AM | Message # 33 |
|
Marquis
Group: Users
Messages: 320
Status: Offline
| I have not idea when C III may take place and what time periods it may cover.
C I covered 17-18 centuries and C II covered Napoleonic Wars. These were time periods when cossacks were famous warriors.
In other time periods they were not so much involved. So, horse, sabre, musket and sail ship era is the best time period for new Cossacks style game.
There were few rumours that GSC is back and probably work under new game. Then Cossacks fans could express their wishes what game they want to see in near future. What a pitty that there are not many fans whcih likes to discuss, what they want to include in future C III game.
I prefer Napoleonic Wars because it is better known period. There are lot of informations which could help develop new RTS game in fine Cossacks style. These wars were waged c.a. 10 years. There were many campaigns and battles. Famous commanders, characteristic units and warfare. Such time period would be interesting in CIII.
I think that this time period could be easier implemented in the game. So, GSC Game World could faster develop new game and make profit. Then they can develop next games in Cossacks series. For instance 17 centrury would be next interesting time period.
|
| |
| |
| kirjasbeltran | Date: Friday, 08/May/2015, 6:03 PM | Message # 34 |
|
Viscount
Group: Users
Messages: 59
Status: Offline
| okay.. how about the nations and the units? btw do you think it is better if formations can only be organized by an officer if a drummer and/or standard bearer is present, as in an officer only cannot organize formations if a standard bearer/drummer is not present as seen in cossacks 1 and american conquest, or it would be fine if an individual officer/standard bearer/drummer can singlehandedly organize a formation without the presence of the other one/two, and organizing formations with 2/3 or all 3 present is just an option as seen in cossacks 2? also, if you can see in american coquest mounted variants of the officer and drummer are present if playing as the european factions.
|
| |
| |
| Nowy | Date: Saturday, 09/May/2015, 9:36 AM | Message # 35 |
|
Marquis
Group: Users
Messages: 320
Status: Offline
| Number of officers and their sequence is less important to me. I can accept C I as well as AC or C II cases.
It would be good create well formed squads which include officer, flag bearer and drummer from the begining.
More interesting question is how many soldiers should include basic infantry and cavalry squads.
C I, AC and C II included different number of men in squads and different squads organization.
I suggested include in C III such squads:
Foot soldiers
- 12 men companies for sappers and skirmishers
- 30 men militiamen squad, visually split in two comapnies, each 15 men
- 108 or 120 men basic infantry battalion plus officer, flag bearer and drummer
Cavalry
- 10 men irregular cavalry small squad e.g. Cossacks sotnia or Mamelukes
- 15 men regular cavalry squadron
- 45 or 60 men basic regular cavalry regiment whcih include cavalry officer, flag bearer and trumpeter
- 36 or 50 men in basic irregular cavalry regiment, plus officer, flag bearer
There are some questions.
What number of men would be better for basic infantry squad?
108 men in infantry squad would be fine, but these number of men could inflict some symmetry errors.
120 men is easier to implement into the game. Then I can accept this number of soldiers in infantry squad.
However bigger squad include more men, this could mean that 10% less infantry squads players could create in the game.
What number of men would be better for basic regular and irregular cavalry squads?
45 men in basic regular cavalry squad, I can accpet, but in this case irregular cavalry should include 36 men.
Basic irregular cavalry squads should include less men because these were cheaper, but weaker cavalry squads.
Then the game should include such cases.
When regular cavalry basic squad could include 60 men, then irregular could squad should include 50 men.
In this case cavalry units buildstage (creation time) should be quicken. Then 60 men could be created in similiar time frame as 45 men. However more men in the squad could mean that bigger squad in size needs more place. More big squads needs more free room. Then chocke points on skirmish mpas could inflict some troubles.
Main question still is how many basic infantry, cavalry, artillery and train squads, and General Commanders, Chiefs and Adjutants all together are accesible in the game? How big maps would be acceptable for let say 40 or 60 basic squads, 40 Generals and 70 Adjutants? How many artillery guns, horse drawn limbers, ammunition caissons and supply wagons could operate in skirmish game?
How many units squads can control or handle well the game engine and players?
|
| |
| |
| kirjasbeltran | Date: Sunday, 10/May/2015, 6:53 PM | Message # 36 |
|
Viscount
Group: Users
Messages: 59
Status: Offline
| if you ask me, i like it better if officers can organze formations if trumpeteer(has yet to appear in a cossacks game), drummer standard bearer are present, at least depending on which nation will have at least either all three, or at least one or two of them, though it is likely that the drummer will not be ommited in any nation like the officer, then either or both standard bearer and trumpeteer will appear, if not neither one..
i also like it if it is still possible to reinforce a formation anytime, even when moving as seen in cossacks 1 and american conquest as opposed to idle in cossacks 2. organizing formations should be a combination of cossacks 1/american conquest elements of highlighting an officer with the presence of a drummer and standard bearer(depending on which nation has the latter) or chieft and shaman if playing as native american factions in american conquest plus being able to organize formation regardless of which part of the map you are viewing by having the image of an infantry/cavalry unit appear on the top left of the screen plus the image of the officer, drummer and standard bearer, provided that all three are present, or at least two, if your nation does not have a standard bearer in cossacks 2Added (10/May/2015, 6:53 PM)
---------------------------------------------
how about the nations in this cossaks 3 game?
|
| |
| |
| Marshal | Date: Sunday, 10/May/2015, 9:44 PM | Message # 37 |
 Count
Group: Users
Messages: 95
Status: Offline
| For me, I would like to see a regimental system like in Histwar. What I mean is that you don't have to control every company of men whether be 120 units or what ever. In this system that I imagine, a colonel can be assigned to a certain amount of companies made up of the same unit types such as regulars, grenadiers, etc. This way the AI takes control of basic order of command in that the AI reacts to cavalry as a regiment should and to being attacked frontally or by and enemy regiment of infantry trying to flank and so on. This way if your regiment is attacked they can react according to the situation and not scatter because you forgot to assign auto fir or something like that. This of course will take some advanced AI and will be a bit or work coding but it will allow for you to deal with more important matters and not have the worry of keeping an eye out for every darn company of men on the field. And maybe, if they really want to be extravagant, they might add the core system which will allow for many regiments to be under the command of generals and such. This will allow for much larger battles providing maps large enough to hold a battle such as Leipzig, or at least something like 1/4 the true size.
So what do you guys think, to ambitious? Any constructive criticism?
Me
1st Prince de Wagram, 1st Duc de Valangin, 1st Sovereign Prince de Neuchatel, Marshal of France, Marshal Louis Alexandre Berthier
|
| |
| |
| Nowy | Date: Monday, 11/May/2015, 4:46 PM | Message # 38 |
|
Marquis
Group: Users
Messages: 320
Status: Offline
| Marshal it is fine that you cast you wishes to C III game, but it looks that they are too ambitious. Histwar game system is different than Cossacks style games. GSC Game World had some financial troubles and they probably have small budget in their disposition now. So, they should work under easier game concepts, then they wiil develop faster new game.
Infantry and cavalry squads should include officers, flag bearers and drummers or trumpeters from the begining. What sequence and how they will join these squads is not important to me. I can accept C II as well as C I or AC cases.
Quote "kirjasbeltran" how about the nations in this cossaks 3 game?
What do you mean by nations? I suggested in my OP that CIII game could include 18 factions split in six tiers.
They can represent different factions which played different roles during NW.
There were not equally balanced factions, they had their own specific conditions.
Different geographical locations, territories, population, resourses determined their power strength and areas of activity.
Therefore CIII game should include six factions tiers as fallows.
1. Dominant maritime, mercantile, industrial and colonial great power = Great Britain
This faction dominate shipbuilding, overseas trade, industrial development and colonial expansion at thaqt period.
Their strong navy dominated naval warfare and can defend their home isles. British employed in these areas their manpower, while their standing army was realitively small. They must hold some garrisons in faraway key stronngholds and dispersed their forces to hold control over faraway strategic points. They can not gather bigger armies needed in land operations in continental Europe. Therefoe for land war here British needed many allies and coalitions.
2. Domiant land great powers = France in West Europe and Russia in East Europe
These great powers had big population, vast territories, sufficient resourses which gave them big advantage in land warfare on home soil. They can create big armies which can defeat enemy which alone try attack their homeland. They also can lead aggresive wars in Europe, but there they needed some allies. Nevertheles in sea warfare they can meet lot of troubles.
Only great coalitions could defeat these dominant land powers.
3. Major powers in troubles = Austria and Prussia in Central Europe
These factions get into troubles. They can create big armies, but they sufferd with many things. They alone can not won war against bigger powers, however they can won war with smaller factions. Austrian and Prussian multinational subjects unwilingly fight for their German rulers and aristocratic circles. Especially Polish, which lived in occupied Poland, dreamed about their freedom. Therefore they allied with French which liberated some parts of former Polish lands occupied earlier by Austria and Prussia. These factions needed stonger allies and coalitions to defend their positions in Central Europe.
4. Major powers in decline = Spain and Ottoman Turkey
These factions had vast colonies or dependent territories however they were in long time decline. These factions suffered with lot of troubles and bordered with stronger enemies. They alone can not lead military operations outside their empires. Only defensive strategies, guerilla war, lucky cases or allies could help them. They had big navies, but they alone can not witstand in sea war against Britain.
5. Divided, dependent or emergent six factions =
North German, South German, North Italian, South Italian states, Polish and Egyptian factions. They were too weak and too small to lead alone military operations against other factions. They needed alliances with greater powers. European factions could allied with French or their enemies while Egyptian were dependent to Ottomans.
6. Five minor factions = Batavia-Holland, Denmark-Norawy, Sweden-Finland, Swiss-Helvetia and Portugal.
These factiosn were too small and too weak. They needed stronger allies to defend their countries. They also could joined coalitions against agresive powers. Except Swiss, they could lead overseas trade and maritime operations, but only when they were not in war agaisnt Britain.
Such conditions for faction. nations should include C III game.
|
| |
| |
| Marshal | Date: Tuesday, 12/May/2015, 3:36 PM | Message # 39 |
|
Count
Group: Users
Messages: 95
Status: Offline
| Quote Nowy (  ) Marshal it is fine that you cast you wishes to C III game, but it looks that they are too ambitious. Histwar game system is different than Cossacks style games. GSC Game World had some financial troubles and they probably have small budget in their disposition now. So, they should work under easier game concepts, then they wiil develop faster new game.
Infantry and cavalry squads should include officers, flag bearers and drummers or trumpeters from the begining. What sequence and how they will join these squads is not important to me. I can accept C II as well as C I or AC cases.
I understand what you're saying, but I think that implementing such a system would actually be easy. The reason is because all you have to do is add an officer who instead of accepting regular troops, infantry for example, will instead accept officers who already have a company under their command. So you have officers who command 120 man squads under the command of a higher ranking officer. That shouldn't be so hard. I ACDN, a high ranking officer like a general can have captains under him, something like 6 captains or colonels, or just a bunch of standard bearers. ACDN already has a system that somewhat eludes to what I am saying, but the officers under the command of the general don't have their squads. If you what you say is true and it is a hard to implement idea then battles will remain at the same scale they are now. Grow them bigger and then things will get difficult to control. Also a more advanced AI wouldn't be that heard, ACDN had an AI that actually created regiments, though it was still a poor excuse for anything.
An other feature I would like to see are mot tools that are made available to the community, people actually buy games just because of a mod they want to play on it and I think making their game modifiable would be a great choice. I know the games now are modifiable, but I want the tools to be made available from the start by the producer.
Me
1st Prince de Wagram, 1st Duc de Valangin, 1st Sovereign Prince de Neuchatel, Marshal of France, Marshal Louis Alexandre Berthier
|
| |
| |
| Nowy | Date: Thursday, 14/May/2015, 1:16 PM | Message # 40 |
|
Marquis
Group: Users
Messages: 320
Status: Offline
| If it will be possible it would be fine include Generals which can take command under few units squads formed with officers, flag bearers and drummers. ACDN has similiar system however it has some glitches, especially when these squads were involved in battles or moved somewhere. Maybe GSC company can improve that system or implement new one which will include proper order of battle. I was little bit sceptic in this case that's why I proposed easier system similiar to C II game.
I know that HEW mod also included Generals. Few squads under Generlas command could figh together. However that system also had some troubles. Nevertheless I believe that devlopers can develop new engine and new command system where few squads under Generals could fight together.
That's why I had questions how big maps will be avaiable in C III game and how many squads could operate there.
I asked about possiblity to inlcude in the game higer level or army organization as like Brigades, Divisions and Army Corps represntation under few ranks Generals few years ago. There were not any reasonable aswers, except that it is hard to do in the game. I believe that complex army order of battle would be fine in the game. Even these Generals will not control subordinate squads, they would be well come in the game. Army will looks much better when Generals are present on battlefields.
It would be fine include good editor mode which could help players mod this game. There are many people which want to change some things in the game. Then editor mode could include mod tools too.
Message edited by Nowy - Thursday, 14/May/2015, 1:20 PM |
| |
| |
