Napoleonic game in the future

[mariovalleemtl]

Beautiful game. Great work. Bravo !

Hope you will do a Napoleonic game with this engine (asap). 

Many thanks to you guys  

[TheCenturion]

Glad to see people enjoying the game!

 

Though I think looking into future games is still somewhat premature at the moment, considering the game is still in early access rather than a final release. Because of that I think Darth should focus primarily on the chosen time period rather than try to look into others which would probably require dramatically different gameplay and tactics. 

 

That said, possibilities are always there should Darth want to expand later on.

[elicas]

Would be good, but would take ages to do it properly. There are a hell of a lot more uniforms, terrain and tactics to be sorted out for a Napoleonics release. Not to mention scale, Leipzig alone had over 600,000 soldiers involved in the battle.

[David Fair]

Hopefully the design team will have the discipline to focus on the Civil War for a bit longer.  Too many designers take a game engine and slap in on a different era with different uniforms.  

 

Napoleonic warfare is a tremendous challenge because of the combined arms aspects of tactics.

 

It might make sense to do the much simpler, and smaller scale, Lace Wars then think about Napoleonic Wars.  My primary interest in history is the Napoleonic Wars; but I don't think the design team has evolved the combined arms mechanics sufficiently with this game engine to properly implement the Napoleonic Wars.

[CmdrMctoast]

Id like to see several dozen civil war battlefields and or a grand campaign combination first then on to another time period.

That way we can be fully engulfed until the next time period comes out.

[TheCenturion]

Just a heads up though, it's surprisingly easy to recolour the game's sprites to red...

[David Fair]

TheCenturion, that was the most depressing post I've seen in this forum.

 

Although I have to agree that the current cavalry implementation would fit more appropriately in the Napoleonic era.

[Townsendvol]

Any game they make I will certainly consider buying at this point. However I hope they perfect the current Civil War game before moving to another project. Get this one polished up and hopefully bring in some $$ and then move to a new one. 

 

I would vote for other Civil War battles before a Napoleonic game but thats just me.  Either would be interesting.  Ofcourse I live in the Southern United States.

[N.C.rebel]

Let's just stay in the ACW first please

[TheCenturion]

TheCenturion, that was the most depressing post I've seen in this forum.

 

Although I have to agree that the current cavalry implementation would fit more appropriately in the Napoleonic era.

 

Heh heh, 'twas only kidding. Slightly. Maybe.

 

I agree on the cavalry part, while my actual knowledge of the ACW is kinda flaky, it was my understand cav in the CW was used relatively sparingly in actual combat. 

[David Fair]

There are a bunch of reasons you don't see cavalry vs. infantry battles during the American Civil War.  Among those reasons are:

 

1) Cavalry in European armies of the Lace Wars and Napoleonic Wars could represent 30% of an army's manpower.  In the American Civil War neither side managed to mount this many men in any of the theaters of operations so you didn't have sufficient mass for European-style cavalry tactics.

 

2) The rifled musket inflicted over 90% of Civil War casualties.  The accuracy and range precluded Napoleonic Wars cavalry charges (men on horses are large targets for someone armed with a rifled musket).  Cavalry basically had the choice when facing infantry of inaction or suicide.

 

3) The terrain and distances of North America at the time of the Civil War are not conducive to mass cavalry tactics.  

 

4) Cavalry carbines had much shorter range that rifled muskets which tended to keep the cavalry away from infantry.

 

5) The cavalry had responsibilities protecting supply lines and performing reconnaissance duties.  These responsibilities tended to keep the cavalry off the field.  For example, at Gettysburg, the Union had 12,000 cavalry vs. 6,000 CSA cavalry.  Union cavalry was distributed on the flanks and protecting the (20 mile distant) Maryland railhead supplying the AoP.  

 

This left the Union about 3,000 men available on the East Cavalry Field. Because the CSA was not protecting a railhead their operational area was confined to the area directly around the ANV.  They also massed about 3,000 men on East Cavalry Field.

 

6) Cavalry was valuable and expensive.  You didn't just throw away the eyes of the army.

 

7) Cavalry raids were often highly disruptive and fruitful.  JEB Stuart made his name riding circles around his opponents.  As logistics became strained for the CSA they needed Union supplies and wasting cavalry on a battlefield had a relatively low ROI compared to higher return projects.

 

8) Brandy Station and the East Cavalry Field at Gettysburg are typical of cavalry battles - cavalry on cavalry engagement with about 10% losses per side.  While the CSA had an early advantage in the war on cavalry operations this was largely due to the leadership qualities of Stuart, and later Forrest.  It took the Union a couple of years to find leaders equal to the cavalry mounts, equipment, and men they were putting into the field.  In 1864 Sherman is quoted, "I know that Kilpatrick is a hell of a damned fool, but I want just that sort of man to command my cavalry on this {March to the Sea] expedition."