Fishey55

That's a really good question. As an RTS game it doesn't add anything ground breaking and is somewhat boring as a historical game it falls very short. But if I had to market it I would say something like: "Take to adventure on the high seas with challenging game play using beautifully crafted ships from the 1700 & 1800's. Take to the land with detailed ground forces from Marines to Militia all lovingly rendered and capture key objectives" Guess I would stay away from locking into a game genre (no one wants to be labeled even 0's and 1's!) and focus on the strong points like the graphics. Ships, land units and maps will certainly set some standards! Just hope Modding will be available if there is no change from a development side.

If the game is going to claim "Take command in a realistic simulator with hardcore game play" but does not have any intention to add realism then just remove the claim. If its going to live up to the sales pitch then land battles would need to slow down to a more realistic speed. The laws of combat from the day were practiced by all the nations included in AOS and could be applied to the game with little compromise on game play. By eliminating routed and captured units from the battle it would balance out the slower down game play. If there were group formations and orders the number of units breaking or surrendering would go down and when a rout did occur it would take most of the surrounding units with them. I think the appeal is to a different type of player, look at the Total war series, a majority of the workshop Mods are focused around realism not speeding up the RTS game play. Giving each game in that series some decent longevity. Look bottom line, I will play AOS the way its designed just own the decisions and don't sell it as something it has no intention of ever being.

It has been awhile since I visited the home page but on it the claim, "Take command in a realistic simulator with hardcore game play" A pretty bold statement but one I welcome and hope it will be backed up! I posted about land combat but was under the impression this was more of a fast paced RTS like the ultimate general series but with that sort of advertisement I have renewed hope! I just started another campaign and land combat is still way off the realistic simulator, the Bunker Hill battle feels like a 1860's Calvary melee rather than a 1770's land battle. My gripe was units routing would run into and past enemy units, then reform and launch a coordinated attack, usually a flank attack. This is silly and did not happen, ever! Units that run away are either falling back AWAY from the enemy in a somewhat orderly fashion or they are broken/shattered and running away from the battle altogether. Units that are broken or shattered do not come back they are done for the day, They certainly would not return with the ability to mount an attack! Units that surrender in this period would enter into contract to not take up arms against there captor. The 1700's had some pretty strict rules of war which all European nations followed, that is but one of them. No one wanted to serve in the colonies or the Caribbean the troops were not the greatest quality, they would run from the sound of their own guns, seriously! The British did deploy good troops to the US and the US troops became very good fighters mainly because it was their land. Battles were slow and ponderous, movement was methodical and calculated. In the Bunker Hill battle the British AI attack in 1 and 2 units rout come back over and over. Overall it seems there is no advantage to holding the high ground, any unit can capture and use cannon friend or enemy and with equal efficiency and can all run like Kenyans! So many positive things are in place just need to get the mechanics worked out. Slow it down add group formations, add group orders. Unit morale is needed, routing units need to be gone from battle and not able to return until the next fight. Units that need to fall back should do just that fall BACK, if they fall forward into enemy units they are routed. I have screenshots of this happening. Naval battles are also messy and could use formations and orders and where is the raking fire advantage? I'll stop at land for now, work time 😞

When a unit breaks many times it will run behind my lines not their own. They then come back into the battle behind me or flanking me. As the battle progresses and routed units start returning to the fight it begins to look like a swirling cavalry scrap rather then an infantry skirmish. I'm saying if a broken enemy unit runs towards me and not to its own line it should be eliminated. Historically there were different mental states of troops running away, routed units could be rallied. A unit that was broken or shattered would gone for the day no matter where they got off to. Agreed about Sid Mier's Pirates was a great game!

I think you guys may be taking what I'm saying to far. I'm talking about during a battle if a unit is broken or surrenders then its done for the rest of that engagement. If the unit falls back towards its own lines then it should be able to rejoin. The unit commanders already have ratings, land combat is strength and fatigue, why not add an inspiration rating that determines how quickly they could recover during the battle. With the game in mind I'm talking 1 or 2 minutes not hours or days. It's really if the AI that runs away then re-appears wherever it wants ready to fight again, it just feels silly. In all cases the unit(s) would be ready for the next land battle and whatever happened during the days clash would be forgotten. It would actually make land battles a little quicker and make them seem a little more believable. I stopped playing UGCW because the AI would act much the same way but with so many Civil war games to choose from it was easy to move on to something better. With Age of sail the options are pretty slim, especially for a single player game so I'm throwing it out there during early access. S

Land combat is a little more RTS click fest than a 1700- 1800's tactical skirmish. If this is the design intention that's fine just ignore any critiques that follow. First off infantry units swirl around at will with no fatigue penalties whatsoever! and they do so in almost any terrain type.These are not cavalrymen they are infantry and in both the campaigns poorly trained infantry at that, especially in the beginning of each campaign. If a unit in the Caribbean got cut off in a jungle somewhere chances were they would be gone for the day. In AoS routing units will run off into a forest then come back with the ability to launch haphazard attacks in anyway possible! Even if they surrendered they can be freed by a friendly unit and jump right back into battle. This is silly the battles of this period were slow and methodical chess matches and in the US campaign often watched by spectators. When a unit was routed they ran fast and towards their own lines where they could be rallied and brought back into the fray. If they ran for their lives looking for any cover anywhere as far away from the fighting as possible they were pretty much broken or shattered and most likely not coming back. In the US revolutionary war there are accounts of ambushes and flanking attacks but these were planned and coordinated and usually within range of the main body. Formations were also a big factor, the weapons of the day were LOUD, smokey and inaccurate. A well disciplined line was far more efficient then spotty units doing whatever suited them. When the Spanish regular army would fire on the French the noise and smoke was so much they routed themselves. The British commanders started factoring this in during planning. Poorly trained units would often find weapons with numerous rounds packed into their rifles thinking they had fired. The troops sent to the Caribbean especially conscripts were the bottom of the barrel and had to be commanded Full time. I understand this is a game and needs play ability but can land combat get slowed down or made to look more the part? The run command should be a sprint and should be useful for a minute or two not an entire battle. Units that are shattered should melt away for the rest of battle and units that rout and rally should need sometime to gather up their courage while a officer is nearby. Oh and artillery "I've never seen cannon move so swiftly" ~ Gen. Picton? or (Hollywood) Please if anything slow the cannons down! Limbering & un-limbering a 9lbs cannon then wheeling it around without horse over and through everything in its path is a buzz kill! S