Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

24 Excellent

About Admiral666

  • Rank
    Ordinary seaman

Recent Profile Visitors

437 profile views
  1. Admiral666

    UGCW Feedback v1.0+

    @Nick Thomadis Would it be difficult to add a borderless windowed mode? It's a small thing, but it's a very pleasant one! Alternatively, is there a launch option to set it up? Thanks!
  2. Admiral666

    UGCW Feedback v1.0+

    "Fixed selection rectangle for 4k monitors." Thank you. It has been a long, weary campaign playing without a selection box. Any chance we'll see a UI scaling option, along that same grain?
  3. Admiral666

    General Lee?

    I think you're misunderstanding how this game works.
  4. Admiral666

    UGCW Feedback v0.90+

    Yes, but 1k is frustratingly low. -- often that doesn't even recoup the losses incurred capturing those troops. Yes, some players would game the system and intentionally capture as many enemy troops as possible. Let them. It doesn't need to be a 1:1 ratio, but something more than a 1k cap. What if I captured 10k and still only got 1k recruits? That's exceedingly disappointing. It could be a semi random ratio, or perhaps a mix of recruits and weapons or money. There's definitely room to improve it.
  5. Admiral666

    UGCW Feedback v0.90+

    Yeah, I don't really understand the rationale behind playing on legendary in this game. I've played it, sure. I can win battles, yep. But it's stressful, frustrsting, and exhausting. Ramping enemy troops up to 11 doesn't add an interesting challenge, but instead a grueling one. On a different note, I love that I can now actually capture brigades reliably. What I don't love, however... "5024 prisoners exchanged for 1000 recruits." Surely this wouldn't throw the balance off that much? I've captured roughly 10k men total just after Shiloh (CSA normal) and gotten less than 3k recruits out of it. If you're going to reward me, do so in a consistent fashion. The 1k limit on prisoner exchanges (5 federals for 1 rebel? Terrible negotiators...) has done nothing except prevent me from fully filling out my brigades as I'd like to.
  6. Admiral666

    Artillery Opinion

    I would love to have the option to have horse artillery. I suspect more players would play in that way if they had the option. As it stands right now, it simply isn't feasible to use cavalry in that way. I would love to, though!
  7. Admiral666

    UGCW Feedback v0.78+

    I imagine this has been suggested before, but an Ironman mode for non-legendary games would be very welcome. It's a small thing, but a nice one.
  8. Admiral666

    Let's talk about (campaign) difficulty.

    Hi there. Go ahead and open all the spoiler tags. I have no idea how to remove them when editing posts, and the bottom one isn't even visible when editing. Sorry about that. Ambush Convoy & Stay Alert Shiloh Consistently, the AI is simply not aggressive enough. They don't take the initiative when they have the advantage, often waiting until I have consolidated my position before attacking. However, I do feel that it has improved overall outside of that: there have been far less instances of blatantly stupid or unintended AI behaviors. I don't know that I'll have the time before another patch, but I'd like to run through the current campaign on normal, and then again on Hard to compare. I may continue to report on my progress in this manner, especially if anyone finds this interesting/useful.
  9. Admiral666

    Let's talk about (campaign) difficulty.

    Just finished Shiloh on a new Confederate Normal/BG campaign. So far, it has been more or less easy, but fun! Thoughts on the battles follow: The Potomac Fort Newport News First Bull Run Out of time for the moment. I'll add my experiences up to Shiloh in a following post.
  10. Admiral666

    Let's talk about (campaign) difficulty.

    That's my experience with hard as well: initial challenge eventually folding into tedium. As you say, the grand battles are usually less rough, but only in relative terms. I plan to start a new campaign with the new patch, and I think I'll choose Normal to see how it feels in comparison to the Hard game I've been playing. Based on the feedback thread, it seems the AI has gotten quite a boost. Let's hope!
  11. Admiral666

    Let's talk about (campaign) difficulty.

    @Wandering1 1. & 4. That's exactly the problem. The player should be able to respond to an increase in difficulty/constraints through intended mechanics and systems, not exploits. Along the same grain, higher troop counts, as you said, don't change the equation. Ergo, they are not an effective way of increasing difficulty. Instead, they create frustrating and tedious experiences: being faced by full 3 star armies when you barely have one or two 3 star brigades, for example. 3. I agree that BG/normal becomes easier as one gains more experience with battles and the game. My purpose in starting this discussion was to find a better solution to creating a higher difficulty so that I could leave normal behind without also forfeiting my enjoyment of the game.
  12. Admiral666

    Let's talk about (campaign) difficulty.

    Yeah, I've happily watched it improve since UGCW hit early access. Can't wait to see where the AI is at release!
  13. Admiral666

    Let's talk about (campaign) difficulty.

    I'm actually quite happy with the AI currently. It has its downfalls on occasion, but otherwise it's a worthy opponent. I just feel that tuning it to increase difficulty would be a much better solution than just giving it an overwhelming force of veterans equipped with M1 Garands and Flak 88s. Warning: Ask your doctor before mistaking hyperbole for serious discourse. Severe side effects may occur.
  14. Admiral666

    Let's talk about (campaign) difficulty.

    Gamers. Very vocal about what they think they want. I would welcome greater difficulty in the form of a more aggressive and unpredictable AI opoonent. That would be much more engaging and organic than the current approach, I think.
  15. Admiral666

    Let's talk about (campaign) difficulty.

    Yes, I assumed as much. Preference is telling, however. To be clear, I didn't intend to direct this discussion to testers alone. I'm very curious to hear what the general consensus is. I feel the game experience in Hard/Legendary is somewhat ruined currently. I would argue that the need to find exploits to succeed is damning evidence of that on its own.