NW Completed [1812 European Conquest Campaign] New Poll!!!

[ICEArmy]

Idea on the Financial system.

You can obtain a certain amount of gold per turn (day) depending on how many provinces you own (i.e. you own 3 provinces and each province gives you 25 gold, so after a day or whatever we determine the turn time, you will get 75 gold) also the capitals of each country can give you an amount above the regular such as 50 gold per turn. Also maybe having a trade item in each country (i.e. wine press, salt mine, lumber mill, etc) and that can give you a bit more than a regular province but less than a capital (like 35-40 gold)

At the beginning the battles would only be classical line battles (using only line regiments, no footguards, skirms, cav, arty, engineers) But after you get a set amount which we will determine you can buy a foot guard regiment or skirmisher regiment, cav, arty, engineers with a set number of people.

 

[tico13]

Rules added. Gonna be sweet 

 

[Hugonaut]

Regiment Name:29th Wocestershire Regiment of Foot
Predicted Battle Attendance:20-30
Desired Faction(Doesn't mean you'll get it at all): Italy
Leader's steam profile link: Maj Hugonaut (you have me on steam and im to lazy to go get the link)
EU/NA:NA

 

[Hawkes]

Regiment Name: 14th West Yorkshire Regiment of Foot
Predicted Battle Attendance: Can attend a battle everyday.
Desired Faction(Doesn't mean you'll get it at all): United Kingdom (Yorkshire would be nice. )
Leader's steam profile link: Add Hawkes70 on steam, no idea how to get a profile link.
EU/NA: EU.

 

[Hawkes]

Just a suggestion - you should keep NA and EU campaigns seperate, like Strategus in CRPG (although that's more of a border rather than a complete seperation). EU attending NA lbs and vice versa, might become a bit irritating if they do start to become frequent throughout a EU + NA campaign. It may also be easier to run, and allow more room for more regiments in each campaign.

Oh and with the financial system, run it a bit like Risk in a sense yet scale it down; if you own the whole of the UK, you should receive a bonus amount of wealth (like the continental system in risk).

Upon reading the commander system too, my only worry with this is that, single regiments won't really have alot of power over their own provinces or decisions and would therefore, just be simply puppeteered across the map by their "commander". The system should really involve a democracy rather than 1 dictator, deciding what all the regiments should do - otherwise it's no different to just being told to turn up to an lb, because your 'commander' has moved your troops to somewhere. What I'm trying to get at here, is all regiments involve should have a strong, positive influence on the decisions of their faction. Commanders aren't really a necessity overall. My opinion would be connect all the regiments together in a steam group, and discuss daily actions; allow everyone to get involved.

(No to firing out of line. Small regiments will get massacred from a large regiment that fires out of line in a charge.)

 

[tico13]

Just a suggestion - you should keep NA and EU campaigns seperate, like Strategus in CRPG (although that's more of a border rather than a complete seperation). EU attending NA lbs and vice versa, might become a bit irritating if they do start to become frequent throughout a EU + NA campaign. It may also be easier to run, and allow more room for more regiments in each campaign.

I doubt the fact that on our first run on this we'll have too many EU regiments sign up. So far, 80% of my European feedback has been a bit pessimistic. Some of them will want to see if we can do it before signing themselves up for the next run. And we're not going to be running two campaigns, this is going to be complicated enough without possessing any sort of automated system. If we get enough regiments from each to sign up, we'll try and separate the regiments onto different parts of the map. Like I said, the attacker plays on the continent of the defender. If an American regiment attacks a EU held province, the battle takes place on an EU server. Simple.

Oh and with the financial system, run it a bit like Risk in a sense yet scale it down; if you own the whole of the UK, you should receive a bonus amount of wealth (like the continental system in risk).

Everyone is going to be starting off with their country... I don't know what the point of this would be. It'll also be incredibly difficult to wipe out an entire country altogether since regiments re-spawn at their capital after losing a battle. We think the capital providing money and a single strategical resource that provides more money are enough right now. Maybe if it doesn't prove to be enough, we'll implement this idea in the next run.

Upon reading the commander system too, my only worry with this is that, single regiments won't really have alot of power over their own provinces or decisions and would therefore, just be simply puppeteered across the map by their "commander". The system should really involve a democracy rather than 1 dictator, deciding what all the regiments should do - otherwise it's no different to just being told to turn up to an lb, because your 'commander' has moved your troops to somewhere. What I'm trying to get at here, is all regiments involve should have a strong, positive influence on the decisions of their faction. Commanders aren't really a necessity overall. My opinion would be connect all the regiments together in a steam group, and discuss daily actions; allow everyone to get involved.

This is why faction commanders will be elected. I also expect each commander to be closely working together with his colonels. I would actually encourage the opening up of steam groups for countries to promote communication and teamwork. Now, if a commander is obviously having a grudge against one of his colonels and being generally unfair, then I would step in. Otherwise for the commander to stay in power, he needs to keep his colonels happy, yes? Otherwise they can vote him out of office and put someone else in command. Checks and balances, my friend.

 

[DiplexHeated]

Regiment Name: 63e
Predicted Battle Attendance: 50-70
Desired Faction(Doesn't mean you'll get it at all): France!
Leader's steam profile link: You have me ([63e] Diplex)
EU/NA: EU/NA

 

[jackbee]

Regiment Name: 47th_Lancashire
Predicted Battle Attendance: 15
Desired Faction(Doesn't mean you'll get it at all): Britain
Leader's steam profile link: kensmooth
EU/NA: Mostly EU, few yanks

 

[Lowlander]

Regiment Name: 33rd Regiment of Foot
Predicted Battle Attendance: 20-25
Desired Faction(Doesn't mean you'll get it at all):  UK
Leader's steam profile link: [33rd] Lowlander http://steamcommunity.com/id/Lowlander94
EU/NA: EU

 

[Tambour]

Regiment Name: 3e Régiment de Gendarmerie Impériale (3eRGI)
Predicted Battle Attendance: 15-25
Desired Faction(Doesn't mean you'll get it at all): France
Leader's steam profile link: http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198006837913/
EU/NA: EU

 

[Hawkes]

Just a suggestion - you should keep NA and EU campaigns seperate, like Strategus in CRPG (although that's more of a border rather than a complete seperation). EU attending NA lbs and vice versa, might become a bit irritating if they do start to become frequent throughout a EU + NA campaign. It may also be easier to run, and allow more room for more regiments in each campaign.

I doubt the fact that on our first run on this we'll have too many EU regiments sign up. So far, 80% of my European feedback has been a bit pessimistic. Some of them will want to see if we can do it before signing themselves up for the next run. And we're not going to be running two campaigns, this is going to be complicated enough without possessing any sort of automated system. If we get enough regiments from each to sign up, we'll try and separate the regiments onto different parts of the map. Like I said, the attacker plays on the continent of the defender. If an American regiment attacks a EU held province, the battle takes place on an EU server. Simple.

Oh and with the financial system, run it a bit like Risk in a sense yet scale it down; if you own the whole of the UK, you should receive a bonus amount of wealth (like the continental system in risk).

Everyone is going to be starting off with their country... I don't know what the point of this would be. It'll also be incredibly difficult to wipe out an entire country altogether since regiments re-spawn at their capital after losing a battle. We think the capital providing money and a single strategical resource that provides more money are enough right now. Maybe if it doesn't prove to be enough, we'll implement this idea in the next run.

Upon reading the commander system too, my only worry with this is that, single regiments won't really have alot of power over their own provinces or decisions and would therefore, just be simply puppeteered across the map by their "commander". The system should really involve a democracy rather than 1 dictator, deciding what all the regiments should do - otherwise it's no different to just being told to turn up to an lb, because your 'commander' has moved your troops to somewhere. What I'm trying to get at here, is all regiments involve should have a strong, positive influence on the decisions of their faction. Commanders aren't really a necessity overall. My opinion would be connect all the regiments together in a steam group, and discuss daily actions; allow everyone to get involved.

This is why faction commanders will be elected. I also expect each commander to be closely working together with his colonels. I would actually encourage the opening up of steam groups for countries to promote communication and teamwork. Now, if a commander is obviously having a grudge against one of his colonels and being generally unfair, then I would step in. Otherwise for the commander to stay in power, he needs to keep his colonels happy, yes? Otherwise they can vote him out of office and put someone else in command. Checks and balances, my friend.

Fair enough on the first two points! Yet - the 3rd answer didn't really validate what I was trying to push through; even if you were to elect someone to 'command', doesn't this just strip alot of fun and freedom from the regiments? I'd prefer to be soverign with my own movements, in comparison to having someone do my movements for me. I would route for singular control over your own provinces, and the Commander should only really be more of a general on the actual battlefield. Finances etc should be dictated by every single regiment that is apart of the faction, and the Commander should more or less be there to oversee, not dictate what happens to who. They should take on a more advisory role, and try influence people rather than do their work for them. Just my view - I don't want to be told what to do, and only have control on the battlefield.

 

[Desert]

Regiment Name: 21st Irish Regiment of Foot
Predicted Battle Attendance: 15-20
Desired Faction(Doesn't mean you'll get it at all): United Kingdom
Leader's steam profile link: http://steamcommunity.com/id/The_Deadly_Shadow
EU/NA: NA

 

[tico13]

Regiment Name: 2nd (Queen's Royal) Regiment of Foot
Predicted Battle Attendance: 25
Desired Faction(Doesn't mean you'll get it at all): Don't care!
Leader's steam profile link: http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198012736534
EU/NA: NA

 

[Hefie]

Wow, I love the idea, it would be an honour to join up
Asking my members right now!

 

[Color_Pinkknight]

Just for the sake of beeing a Swede... Sweden wern't on Napoleons side, they where in the Coalition against him .

 

[WhiteEagle]

Regiment Name: 9th Life Infantry Regiment
Predicted Battle Attendance: 15-25
Desired Faction(Doesn't mean you'll get it at all): Prussia
Leader's steam profile link: http://steamcommunity.com/id/SerbianWhiteEagles/
EU/NA: EU and NA (mixed regiment with almost equal member counts between EU and NA)

Thanks

 

[ICEArmy]

Regiment Name: 1er Régiment d'Infanterie de la Légion Vistule
Predicted Battle Attendance: 15 - 20
Desired Faction(Doesn't mean you'll get it at all): Spain
Leader's steam profile link: http://steamcommunity.com/id/icearmy
EU/NA: NA

 

[bkill91]

Regiment Name: 35te Infanterie Battaillon
Predicted Battle Attendance: 15-30
Desired Faction(Doesn't mean you'll get it at all): Prussia
Leader's steam profile link: http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198011646170
EU/NA: NA

 

[bkill91]

also the thing on a Commander, couldn't he just appoint some regiment leaders to a council and they would be there to counter act anything he might do. That way the regiments get a voice in the actions made by the commander.

 

[Stunned Lime]

Regiment Name: 98th Regiment Of Foot
Predicted Battle Attendance: 10-25
Desired Faction(Doesn't mean you'll get it at all): United Kingdom
Leader's steam profile link: http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198047864610
EU/NA: NA and EU if possible