squishband

Me too. I'm either very stupid (read 'too old'), or... Oh I don't know, I've tried everything I can think of and so I guess I've just lost. Time to try to win as the confederates.

Maturin (and others), You have been so right. It's sort of been a pleasure reading all of the posts in this topic, just to revel in your well considered thinking. I did however love Arvenski's 'calm the eff down' comment; it had me on the floor. All in all (and very weirdly), I've really enjoyed sailing with you in this dingy. Richard

I've noticed similar issues attacking artillery.

@David Fair. That sounds like good sense.

As usual, I should have checked whether anyone has started a similar thread before posting 'Concerns about the final result'. Anyway, I think we have the same concerns, and perhaps the same reasons for them.

Thanks for your responses so far. The supply train was just an example and I wouldn't want this thread to get bogged down with it, but it could be anything. I'm also interested to hear how @Rogue feels things have changed (and glad that you are still here despite your dissapointment); it seems to me that you see where I'm coming from, although I'm not there with you yet. Perhaps the focus of my concerns is best expressed as 'I'm not sure people power is the best way to design games: Discuss'.

One of the things I'm becoming concerned about as I play the game and read the forum is what the end product is going to play like. It's my belief that the best works, work best because there is a strong vision behind them; informing every part of the design process. Ultimately I suppose, I think that the algorithm is just as good a way of expressing one's individual understanding of the world and communicating that to other people, as other things that lead to art! Stay with me. Personally, what exited me about UGG, was the fact that there was very little micromanagement. I'm old now and I just can't keep up with an opponent who can always win because they have 'super fast processing power' (I have lots of experience, but I express it slowly). I prefer a game that, if it's at a strategic level, is just that and gives me time to make decisions that I can trust my forces to carry out (more or less reliably). Conversely at a tactical level, I'd like to be able to make almost all of the decisions. I want to be either General or Lieutenant, but not both at the same time. I guess what I'm saying is that I'd like the strategic elements of this game to be discrete from the tactical; if we're going to have a supply train, I really don't want to see it or have to deal with it on the battlefield. My worry about this process (the forum and debates), is that the pressure to please everyone might push the developers towards something that loses sight of the story they were originally trying to tell. Of course I might be quite wrong about what I perceive this to have been, in which case... I'll just go on enjoying myself ;-)

I believe you, I'd just like to know how! ;-)

I sort of keep asking this question in various places (so far to no avail). Will the multiplayer be platform transparent? Currently I'm playing the windows version of the game under parallels on my Mac, will I have to pay for a separate Mac version when it comes out?

In that case it would be good to know what constitutes cover and have an indication of when a unit has taken it..

On a slightly different tack. Twice today I had artillery routed when advanced upon by infantry, even though I had set them to canister and they were ready to fire, they didn't even let off what was loaded before they fell back.

I Interesting point about the need to look away from the battle.

I think these are both interesting ideas.

Will I be able to play against someone using a different platform?

I'm assuming that the AI takes into account the amount of firing and it's rate when updating a units status. If it does then the player will know the condition of its unit, one of the factors affecting its condition being ammunition consumption. If it doesn't at the moment then you might update the algorithm to take this into account and add an icon for 'supplies' or 'ammo', enabling the player to decide to rest their unit, giving it time to gain its breath, recover its morale and be re-supplied, if they so wish. The issue of supply trains might be simply dealt with in campaign mode by having either clear lines of supply meaning that a unit is fully re-supplied next 'turn', or less if the line of supply is contested. I don't think you need to make it more complex than that.