PDA

View Full Version : Order relay preferences



Rithal
03-01-2015, 09:12 PM
To be more specific.

Option 1: Real people who choose to play as couriers are given a letter at HQ. This letter has worded orders written by the highest ranking officer on the field. The courier then is given a waypoint on his map or on his hud, displaying where the regiment's last known location was. He has to go there either on foot or on horse, track down the regiment, and give the colonel the letter. The colonel reads the letter, and acts accordingly.

Option 2: Real people who choose to play as couriers are given a letter at HQ. The letter is merely just a representation, and really holds no words. The highest ranking officer at HQ selects that he wants to create a letter, he configures new attack/defend/movement/patrol/camp/skirmish waypoints for the regiment in the letter. The letter is given to the courier. The courier is given a waypoint on his hud, displaying where the regiment's last known location was. He has to go either on foot or on horse, track down the regiment, and give the colonel the letter. The colonel opens the letter given. By doing so, it automatically places the selected waypoint on every officer in that regiment's hud, so they all know their new orders, and act accordingly.

Option 3: Same as option one, except the courier is AI.

Option 4: Same as option two except the courier is AI.

Option 5: Same as option one, except there is no actual courier and the letter automatically appears to the colonel after the appropriate delay depending on that regiment's distance from HQ.

Option 6: Same as option two, except there is no actual courier and the orders automatically appear to the colonel after the appropriate delay depending on that regiment's distance from HQ.

So, to be clear:

Option 1,3, and 5 all feature the colonel opening a letter. He must interpret the letter and then act. These are the most realistic and historically accurate options.

Option 2,4, and 6 all feature the colonel opening a "letter". After he opens the letter, it simulates that there were actual words in the letter, however it just updates ordered waypoints on his hud and map. It does the same for every other officer in the regiment.

If there were any viable relay options I missed, suggest them below. :D

Bravescot
03-01-2015, 10:16 PM
*Hold up 3 figures* Pick number 2 my lord

[RG]Chewie
03-02-2015, 01:57 AM
I prefer the signal corps :)

Rithal
03-02-2015, 03:09 AM
Chewie;5847']I prefer the signal corps :)

Its an interesting idea, however as far as I know, there was no signal corps present during the Maryland Campaign. At least, not during any combat that is.

Hairywarhero
03-02-2015, 07:14 AM
Damn so my signal sargent is going to be more useless then what he already is now?

TrustyJam
03-02-2015, 07:18 AM
The signal corps was very much present at Antietam: http://www.nps.gov/anti/learn/historyculture/signal.htm

- Trusty

Soulfly
03-02-2015, 08:04 AM
Since we are talking about a huge battlefield there are many questions coming up, like how will the navigation on the map work (coordinates, marks on the map) just imagine you are the courier and you need to find a regiment miles away.."it might be somewhere between Sharpsburg and the Dunker Church" so here comes the status update of certain regiments into play. How will this be displayed ? i mean the moving, position and status of units.

So currently i voted for the AI doing this job.

Rithal
03-02-2015, 10:23 PM
The signal corps was very much present at Antietam: http://www.nps.gov/anti/learn/historyculture/signal.htm

- Trusty

I stand corrected. I was always under the impression that they only took part in reporting Lee's movements after the battle. You learn something new every day ;)

Aniallator
03-03-2015, 04:26 AM
I choose player messengers over AI ones for a few reasons. One being, what if the AI messenger happened upon or was intercepted by the enemy? What if the route he were to travel on was subject to bombardment? What if something pegged the player's common sense that the AI wouldn't detect? There are numerous factors to think about. I chose 1 over 2 for realism reasons.

Rithal
03-03-2015, 04:32 AM
I choose player messengers over AI ones for a few reasons. One being, what if the AI messenger happened upon or was intercepted by the enemy? What if the route he were to travel on was subject to bombardment? What if something pegged the player's common sense that the AI wouldn't detect? There are numerous factors to think about. I chose 1 over 2 for realism reasons.

All good reasons and definitely something to think about.

Soulfly
03-03-2015, 07:26 AM
I choose player messengers over AI ones for a few reasons. One being, what if the AI messenger happened upon or was intercepted by the enemy? What if the route he were to travel on was subject to bombardment? What if something pegged the player's common sense that the AI wouldn't detect? There are numerous factors to think about. I chose 1 over 2 for realism reasons.

And what if nobody wants to play that role and join the fray instead ? I would make that role optional. If you implement this role, one must think about what happens when nobody is filling it out.

Bravescot
03-03-2015, 10:37 AM
And what if nobody wants to play that role and join the fray instead ? I would make that role optional. If you implement this role, one must think about what happens when nobody is filling it out.

If nobody fill the role before the battle starts a suppose an AI could be put in by the Admin of the server. Make the slot available but make it optional.

Soulfly
03-03-2015, 11:23 AM
If nobody fill the role before the battle starts a suppose an AI could be put in by the Admin of the server. Make the slot available but make it optional.

Thats what i meant, next thing would be how the messenger moves...on foot ? horse ? Since cavalry is yet a "maybe" i am still thinking about the idea of a illustrated map seeing the orders/ new positions you receive i would like to keep it simple.

It is somewhat uncertain if the system of a messenger will be used, personally as a general i would prefer talking to my officers via Teamspeak. Just saying that a system like this consumes resources and the result/ use can not be granted

Aniallator
03-03-2015, 12:02 PM
Messengers must have horses... on foot is too slow. Also, I don't think of messengers as dedicated messengers, but rather as aides-de-camp to the general that are tasked with conveying a message.

Hairywarhero
03-04-2015, 02:58 PM
Messengers must have horses... on foot is too slow. Also, I don't think of messengers as dedicated messengers, but rather as aides-de-camp to the general that are tasked with conveying a message.

Yeah i think that as well looks like i'm needing runners any offers? :)

Bravescot
03-04-2015, 06:04 PM
Yeah i think that as well looks like i'm needing runners any offers? :)

Going to be damn hard to keep up with moving battles as a runner though

Hairywarhero
03-04-2015, 08:44 PM
Going to be damn hard to keep up with moving battles as a runner though

i know i'll be sat in the rear chillin :)

Rithal
03-05-2015, 12:31 AM
Going to be damn hard to keep up with moving battles as a runner though

Isn't that the point? :D

Bravescot
03-05-2015, 09:18 AM
Isn't that the point? :D

Finally get to the point the regiment last was and find they've moved along 10 minutes ago.

Rithal
03-05-2015, 06:08 PM
Finally get to the point the regiment last was and find they've moved along 10 minutes ago.

Yes. I'm sure this fate fell upon several unfortunate runners in the war.

Bravescot
03-05-2015, 07:42 PM
Yes. I'm sure this fate fell upon several unfortunate runners in the war.

So this is why I'd prefer riders to runner. I'd sooner have the orders moving quickly to allow the battle to move faster then the runner having to play catch up all the time.

Rithal
03-06-2015, 04:42 AM
So this is why I'd prefer riders to runner. I'd sooner have the orders moving quickly to allow the battle to move faster then the runner having to play catch up all the time.

Of course. Riders would be preferred.

Hethwill_Khan
03-06-2015, 05:28 PM
Greetings.

If the kriegspiel courier system used in Scourge of War/Histwar can be simulated - basically what you describe in options 3 & 4 - would make the dynamics very interesting.

There is no need for "writing" the messages. SoW writes them through order lists options and does a great job.

McClellan
03-06-2015, 05:31 PM
Greetings.

If the kriegspiel courier system used in Scourge of War/Histwar can be simulated - basically what you describe in options 3 & 4 - would make the dynamics very interesting.

There is no need for "writing" the messages. SoW writes them through order lists options and does a great job.

I believe player messages from player officers to a player courier would be better, reason being if you screw up and the orders are misunderstood (happened all the time) it your fault. I like that.

Hethwill_Khan
03-06-2015, 09:57 PM
The orders can be misunderstood especially by humans no matter the source. If it is a courier delivering them does it make a difference ? Message content was generated by some human commander... the bot is just the messenger and can be delayed and even intercepted. Kriegspiel rules are very specific on this. SoW doesn't use them that much, Histwar has them fully.

Soulfly
03-10-2015, 08:31 AM
I believe player messages from player officers to a player courier would be better, reason being if you screw up and the orders are misunderstood (happened all the time) it your fault. I like that.

Sure thing, but you must also think about what happens if nobody wants to take this role and if the effort is worth the result. For me a system where a simple message would pop-up in the officers HUD with a delay considering the distance between HQ and his position would totally be fine, since implementing horses and coding an AI for the courier system is a huge project...of course it would be nice to have a human courier system and many many more features like that, but i think that those would consume too many resources for an unknown effect.

Bravescot
03-10-2015, 09:59 AM
Or you could join the Army of the Potomac where it will be somebody's job to be a courier like it or not xD. But like I said before there could be the option of AI couriers if nobody wants to fill the roll as a player

Soulfly
03-10-2015, 10:29 AM
Thats what i have said, but i am in heavy doubt that something like an AI based system will be implemented...

Bravescot
03-10-2015, 01:56 PM
Thats what i have said, but i am in heavy doubt that something like an AI based system will be implemented...

Well it has been said there is to be no AI in this.

Soulfly
03-10-2015, 02:35 PM
But like I said before there could be the option of AI couriers if nobody wants to fill the roll as a player

I know what they have said about the AI, thats why i have expressed my doubts about your statement here...........

Rithal
03-11-2015, 03:42 AM
I know what they have said about the AI, thats why i have expressed my doubts about your statement here...........

Thats true. You have seen this discussion being thrown back and forth for about a week or so now devs. Now is the time to give an opinion! >:-)

Bravescot
03-11-2015, 08:22 AM
Thats true. You have seen this discussion being thrown back and forth for about a week or so now devs. Now is the time to give an opinion! >:-)

The Devs have nae given us a sign! We must sacrifice a fellow member to them and read his entrails for an answer.

Hairywarhero
03-11-2015, 07:11 PM
would it of been written orders or word of the mouth??

Bravescot
03-11-2015, 08:47 PM
would it of been written orders or word of the mouth??

I think the idea being thrown about is written but nothing is stopping you from yelling at somebody to pass the message on I guess.

Hairywarhero
03-11-2015, 09:53 PM
I think the idea being thrown about is written but nothing is stopping you from yelling at somebody to pass the message on I guess.

there will be alot of F**king and Bas***d being said ;)

Bravescot
03-12-2015, 01:51 AM
there will be alot of F**king and Bas***d being said ;)

The beep button is going to been needed for yourself and Grant

Scotland
10-22-2015, 03:37 PM
Player couriers is a terrible idea! Nobody seems to think about 'trolls'. hardly any battles will be played properly.

Zoranny
10-23-2015, 02:18 PM
Player couriers is a terrible idea! Nobody seems to think about 'trolls'. hardly any battles will be played properly.
*Courier disconnects*
*Message dropped in battlefield*

As cool as this Idea is, I don't think that this system would work well and I don't see a real point in it (except for historical accuracy).
First, you have to find someone who really want jsut to run from A to B. And back. For reenactment I would do this like 2 or 3 times, but just to run and to be not able to do something for the battle I would feel useless. Also, skype, teamspeak, mumble etc. are so common this time, Officers would talk to each other with own tsł channels or whisper-lists, that their would be no need for a guy running across the field. Even if it would be possible they would rather talk. Officers have spyglasses etc. to see enemy movements.

If noone wants to do this job, you have to force someone who'll loose the fun. Also for casual palyers this would be too indeep I guess. :/

I would choose "None"

A. P. Hill
10-23-2015, 02:25 PM
Chewie;5847']I prefer the signal corps :)

I don't think signal corps was used to convey to individual units, they were used to alert corps/army commanders to the movement of enemy activities.

Individual messages by courier were the norm between units engaged.

BloodBeag
10-23-2015, 04:50 PM
I think this should be under the server settings as some people will want to just get in and have fun rather than needing loads of people to fill in all the different roles so that any of it could work

VictorFernandes
10-23-2015, 08:39 PM
I don't know about real people delivering letters. So much people *cough*noobs*cough* will roaming around without knowing where to go or what to do which could ruin the game. Voted for Opt.6

yoyo8346
10-24-2015, 12:10 AM
I don't know about real people delivering letters. So much people *cough*noobs*cough* will roaming around without knowing where to go or what to do which could ruin the game.

Isn't that the point though? I my opinion, human error would make the game better. I'm sure letters were always getting mixed up, lost, destroyed, or intercepted by enemy scouts. I've seen one of the developers say they plan on including scouts into the game, so I think it would be cool if one of the scouts' jobs was to intercept and/or kill letter carriers, alongside their normal duties of scouting. I'm currently reading a New York Times best seller called The Widow of the South by Robert Hicks. In one scene, union scouts stop a southern man in the woods around Franklin thinking he's a confederate spy, and kill his mule.

A. P. Hill
10-24-2015, 01:28 AM
The battle being depicted with this first iteration was fought because Lee's orders were dropped, and found by a union soldier. McClellen knew everything about Lee's troop movements.

It would only be logical this is part of the simulation.

VictorFernandes
10-24-2015, 09:52 PM
I agree to that and it makes sense that real people should deliver the letters, however, one thing is a person that knows that has a letter to deliver and he's lost, not knowing where to go or can't deliver the letter due to those scouts, another thing is not knowing that has a letter to deliver and roaming around the map just trying to kill or stay with an infantry, of course this can be avoided with some warning on the screen or something like that

Profender
10-24-2016, 02:13 PM
Votes seem to be in favor of option 1. I like it to be player driven as much as possible.

If a whole system for this is to much work. Option for a notebook for the courier, write down the message you are getting deliver that by voice to whom it concerns.

VOLCUSGAMING
10-24-2016, 02:56 PM
I think the game shall be as realistic as possible therefore : Option 1.

Conway
10-24-2016, 10:28 PM
I think if you need to use human couriers then all coordination between groups will be killed. I know I personally would not be willing to wait around 10mins for someone to come running past some bushes just to say "General says move ahead a lil bit". It takes an unnecessary amount of time to move to the Union firing range in the drill camp so to hell with waiting for people to run across the field to tell me what someone else wants me to do. If you want a system like that use a team-speak or discord and setup commander chat. The game needs to be enjoyable, not just historically accurate. Civil war generals weren't nerding out over the authenticity of their message system, it was a genuine problem. And I just don't see why you'd want this problem in the game when all it will do is cause players time in waiting for orders from afar and making things very hard to coordinate in order to be effective. Its a conceptually cool idea but I don't feel the great masses of people would be into it after actually having to experiencing the wait every time they want to work with the team.

TheBoberton
10-24-2016, 11:00 PM
You could make the same argument against a number of things already present in the game, like muzzleloading firearms.

My own desire is to see this game force people to work within the limitations that existed during the war. Included in that is the limitation on methods of communication that existed in the time prior to the invention of the field telephone.

And if I'm not mistaken, couriers were generally mounted.

Conway
10-24-2016, 11:06 PM
You could make the same argument against a number of things already present in the game, like muzzleloading firearms.

My own desire is to see this game force people to work within the limitations that existed during the war. Included in that is the limitation on methods of communication that existed in the time prior to the invention of the field telephone.

And if I'm not mistaken, couriers were generally mounted.

But like, you can't really simulate disease or infection which is what killed tens of thousands. People are going to use teamspeak irregardless and I don't see what would force people to follow the "General". If you work hard for your company you deserve to lead them and shouldn't have to sacrifice a guy to go and take orders form someone else. If people want to use this then that's fine, but there certainly shouldn't be any penalties for not doing so. Its all fun and games as an officer but you'll get bored eventually of just waiting for orders from someone else all the time as a ranker.

TheBoberton
10-24-2016, 11:12 PM
I was unaware of the casualties inflicted in battle by disease and infection.

And I guess there really isn't a way to force people to follow the orders a general may give, (Or none that I would personally support, at any rate) other than perhaps the shame of potentially having cost your side the battle because you didn't believe in teamwork.

And isn't most of the time spent as a ranker spent waiting for orders anyways?

(Perhaps we should migrate this to one or the other thread, rather than both.)

thomas aagaard
10-24-2016, 11:29 PM
Dont Teamspeak and similar undermine it all?

Conway
10-24-2016, 11:37 PM
Dont Teamspeak and similar undermine it all?

Exactly.

TheBoberton
10-24-2016, 11:43 PM
Dont Teamspeak and similar undermine it all?

Yes. Though I imagine there will be events (If events as we knew them in previous, similar games are present in this one) that attempt to enforce not using such tools.

Wildcat
10-25-2016, 02:09 AM
Chewie;5847']I prefer the signal corps :)

unless officers and signallers are willing to learn signal flags I don't think it would work

Wildcat
10-25-2016, 02:10 AM
Dont Teamspeak and similar undermine it all?

not everyone is going to be in the same teamspeak.

Conway
10-25-2016, 02:16 AM
Yes. Though I imagine there will be events (If events as we knew them in previous, similar games are present in this one) that attempt to enforce not using such tools.

But what would be the appeal to that? How would be chosen as General? Events like that seem like someone trying to sit on a fat horse so he can tell others what to do. Teamwork should be about mutual co-operation not some guy telling you off. This is a game after all, not the actual army. I don't know what the appeal of having some stranger tell you and your guys what to do is but if that's what you think oh well. Adding in a team chat could easily negate the whole thing all together and make things simplistic. Not to mention if a general is standing near a friendly force you could easily not hear a goddam thing. "Then make them be quite" you say, but what the appeal to be sitting dead silent, waiting for orders from some guy you don't know and then listening the your officer talk because hes the only one allowed?

TheBoberton
10-25-2016, 02:52 AM
What on earth do your apparent issues with player generals have to do with the use of couriers?

BloodBeag
10-25-2016, 01:18 PM
has anyone actually expressed any interest in playing as a courier? We don't know the player limits yet and if it isn't that high and people are taken out fo combat roles to bring written messages the game won't be as good in my opinion. You need as many human players as possible in combat roles. AI would be stupid and take time out of development

TheBoberton
10-25-2016, 02:02 PM
To be brutally frank, if the limit for player count is low enough that the removal of a small number of players to act as couriers will have a significant effect on combat, there will be no need for them, because there will be no generals to send orders.

BloodBeag
10-25-2016, 02:35 PM
still doesn't answer the question of who would have fun roleplaying as hitler in world war one and being a courier. The option of the general 'writing' or sending orders and then them coming through by a delay is the best option in my opinion.

TheBoberton
10-25-2016, 02:51 PM
At least one member of my company has expressed interest in being a courier. Hell, I think it would be an interesting and enjoyable experience. Just because you don't think it would be fun, doesn't mean others feel the same.

Mercuri
10-25-2016, 03:41 PM
Exactly, I also wanted to play as courrier, I mean not allways, but still want to play this role, I found it something difenrent to the others and also important in some situations. I also want to play as normal infantry soldiers, but the thing is that there will be allways someone wanting to play any role. Just and example: I found the artillery role so fucking boring, I mean, the player who reload the cannons, that is funny? there is allways players doing it in NW or N&S so maybe those players found it funny although it's not for me. Thats the point.

Alexander Greene
10-25-2016, 10:49 PM
Couriers would make things incredibly interesting, immersive, and realistic! If I wasn't the captian of my company already, I would gladly like to be a courier. Your timing and whether you arrive or not can literally change the course of entire battles. It's a cool and fun mechanic to add into the game!

William F. Randolph
10-26-2016, 03:12 AM
Slap a colt and some reigns in their hand and I don't see why the hell not. Though I can see the possibility of ramboing occurring.

Alexander Greene
10-26-2016, 03:42 AM
Slap a colt and some reigns in their hand and I don't see why the hell not. Though I can see the possibility of ramboing occurring.

Eh. I really don't see too much of a risk. I don't think you'll be able to respawn in the game soo...

David Dire
10-26-2016, 04:08 AM
Eh. I really don't see too much of a risk. I don't think you'll be able to respawn in the game soo...

The devs confirmed respawning very early in development.

Mercuri
10-26-2016, 11:35 AM
The devs confirmed respawning very early in development.

They confirmed that the soliers will be able to respawn in their regimental flags, but did they mencioned the general staff? Make no sense for my to have respawn for the general staff. And I imagine that courriers will be part of the staff

Alexander Greene
10-27-2016, 12:17 AM
The devs confirmed respawning very early in development.

What about late in development?

General. Jackson
10-28-2016, 05:37 AM
What about late in development?

Also has been confirmed numerous amount of times...

Seems like a really immersive and fun option to see! I would like to learn more about these HQ's however

The only thing that I would worry about is trolls or a member of another regiment dislikes the other regiment so instead of delivering the orders so he f up the regiment he doesn't like, he will run into the enemy and get killed.

James_McKen
10-28-2016, 12:32 PM
The only thing that I would worry about is trolls or a member of another regiment dislikes the other regiment so instead of delivering the orders so he f up the regiment he doesn't like, he will run into the enemy and get killed.

If that happens then that sort of adds to the experience. Im sure couriers deserted or decided not to deliver their messages in battle due to the simple fact they didn't want to be killed going to the front. Personally I think having an actual human courier makes things much more interesting and would add a whole new dimension to the game.

Alexander Greene
10-29-2016, 01:36 AM
If that happens then that sort of adds to the experience. Im sure couriers deserted or decided not to deliver their messages in battle due to the simple fact they didn't want to be killed going to the front. Personally I think having an actual human courier makes things much more interesting and would add a whole new dimension to the game.

Definitly. Sure, you could have an AI do it for you but what's the fun in that? The fun is in locating the company that the courier needs to go to.

Conway
10-29-2016, 03:34 AM
If that happens then that sort of adds to the experience. Im sure couriers deserted or decided not to deliver their messages in battle due to the simple fact they didn't want to be killed going to the front. Personally I think having an actual human courier makes things much more interesting and would add a whole new dimension to the game.

How does getting absolute destroyed add to your experience in a game?

James_McKen
10-29-2016, 04:02 AM
How does getting absolute destroyed add to your experience in a game?
Not receiving orders does not always mean you will get destroyed, but imagine how much more beautifully chaotic battles would be with miscommunication and unreceived orders. In fact I think misinterpreted orders or lost orders would cause battles to go completely different then anticipated, but I don't think it would lead to everyone being completely destroyed unless the company commander is stupid enough to position his company so poorly he has no support.

The Fearless Hussar
10-29-2016, 03:55 PM
well we should always consider the size of the servers when the game gets realeased. i know nothing specific is said but hundrends of players per Server max means you wont have servers with over a thousand people(it will be a lot less than that correct me if i am mistaken). bear in mind that an actual company should have about 100soldiers so a full regiment with 10companies would have about 1000troops. of course this rarely happened during the Civil war due to losses in battle, attrition, desertion etc but there are examples like the 26th North carolina(not 1k but close to 1k i think 800+ at the beggining of the battle of gettysburg). so ok lets say that we got Companies with 10-30people considering the size of the Companies around in the forum(i dont deny the fact that some are even bigger). so you got 2teams usa and csa and lets say a Server with max 600 people(thats already a lot of people) so 300usa and 300csa and most Companies are around 20-30people. this means that you have about 10-15companies per team which is about 1 regiment. With 1reg on each side the most High ranking guy would be a colonel or a brigadier General at most. If i am not mistaken most brigadier generals and regimental comanders(colonel and under colonel) went on the field with the soldiers with only a few exceptions(e.g. the division commander dies and a BG takes his position temporarily) so why do you even need a courier system? I mean that you wont be a LtGen or a MajorGen at the rear of the Lines so you need to get letters so you know what is going on in the battle. The most High ranking guy WILL BE IN THE BATTLE so he knows First hand what is going on so i doubt he needs a lets say captain to send him a message telling him that a company is being flanked. he most probably knows it cause he is there and will be able to turn the regiment that way so he can face the flanking movement. So in General it is a matter of DO WE REALLY NEED COURIERS? and not HOW COURIERS WILL BE. of course you could say that the regimental commander is not seeing the men on one end of the regiment. and here i ask how is this possible? it isnt because you will have a reg with people in 2lines. try putting 150people in a Line and stand at the one end of the Line you'll still be able to see the last guy on the other end.even with one Line of 300people it is still possible. The last thing you could say is that battles in game will be micro-reenactments of Real Companies or regiments so you have 2 or even 3 regs with about 100+ each. This is the only case i see the usuability of a courier cause you have 2 or more independent units on the field. This isnt very realistic but you could say it is ok. Last thing you could say is that you are a prussian commander of a company in the late 19th century so you can act independently. But this didnt happen very often during the American Civil war. The basis of command was the regiment not the company and very few Companies would act independently of the rest of the regiment and those were mostly sharpshooter Companies or skirmishers who would act independently only for a short period of time and then return to the regiment(of Course you can find exceptions were Companies may be entirely independent but these are rare). So only in the case you have every company acting independently from the others or you have more than 1 regiment only then you need couriers.

yoyo8346
10-29-2016, 04:02 PM
How does getting absolute destroyed add to your experience in a game?

You clearly value winning matches more than having an experience or having fun.

TheBoberton
10-29-2016, 04:48 PM
well we should always consider the size of the servers when the game gets realeased.

That is a concern that has been addressed indirectly earlier in the thread, when couriers affecting the combat power of a company was brought up.

Regardless, I find optimism to be preferred to pessimism on such matters. If we're always asking ourselves "if" instead of "how", we won't get anywhere.

Conway
10-29-2016, 06:37 PM
You clearly value winning matches more than having an experience or having fun.
I 100% do not. The only reason why I have 2900 hours in NW is because I like to have fun. My regiment has never done a competitive match.
But losing constantly is not fun, I don't see how its enjoyable to anyone and certainly I've never seen it benefit any regiment ever.
Part of the appeal to playing with a group is to fuck around sometimes and enjoy yourself. If there was no "General" to give orders then what would be the point in couriers?
Use team-chat if you need too, it works just as well and means you don't need some-guy off in the boons trying to find the other companies. I imagine running on a horse all day
would get repetitive after a while, especially if you're on your own the whole time. It defeats the appeal to playing with others, not to mention you won't fight until the end of the game probably.
Someone mentioned the re-spawn mechanic earlier, I don't think thats a good idea. It takes away from the risk an officer takes, if your men come back then there is less of a risk in losing them.

General. Jackson
10-29-2016, 11:11 PM
Lads, stop throwing rocks at Conway. He's just expressing his opinion as he's entitled to it and so are you however don't label him and tell him what he thinks and feels. It makes this discussion turn into a flame war.

He's also got a very valid point, I'd sure be very pissed off if I had some dumbass who doesn't like me make sure not that me and my 100 men get obliterated when we run into enemy infantry supported by skirms, cav and artillery. Now think about how big these freaking maps are, it takes forever and they are huge. When all the other units are assaulting the artillery and me and my men look retarded out in the weat field on the other side of the map because no one communicated to us. There's so many possibilities to why it could go wrong and the negative affects that it has on players.

In cases like these we need to think like it's all good in theory but why would you go with the risky method as a small team implementing something that the players could love or hate. If they hate it, it puts you back lots of time. If they love it, ok cool. If you added the safe method of it popping up on the screen after some delay, the players may love it or some may dislike it but it still gets the job done.

If you want something realisitc, when the general goes to type up a message to send that will pop up on your screen, make it like it doesn't come through all the time.

TheBoberton
10-29-2016, 11:41 PM
Would there not be the same concern with player generals?

And frankly, I'd be more pissed by any system that randomly decided to not send orders, than anything that a player based one could do. You can replace player couriers.

General. Jackson
10-30-2016, 11:09 PM
Would there not be the same concern with player generals?

And frankly, I'd be more pissed by any system that randomly decided to not send orders, than anything that a player based one could do. You can replace player couriers.

The person with the highest rank will be selected to play as a general. If his rank is truly large it means that he has a large amount of men following him, if he's got a large amount of men following him it means people actually like him to muster that many men. If the general doesn't want to get a bad reputation as a leader, he will perform. His unit with be tainted if he trolls or lacks.

TheBoberton
10-30-2016, 11:17 PM
And would the same not apply to the members of a general's staff, such as the couriers? They will represent their parent units just as much as a general will, no?