Lif

I was going in with 79k and lost 36k (Union on normal). And I really can't say I screwed up terribly. Longstreets Veterans at the end of the battle were huge damage dealers and they got 12 hrs time to wore my men out. But in fact I hold my defences and destroyed the rebells pretty good. I really don't want to fight this thing again. But I tried the next small battle already,...it seems I have little chances of winning now that half my army is lost.

I love Sharpshooters. No unit has more kills.^^ But yeah, otherwise detached skirmishers make much more sense.

I'm not against DLCs if they are worth the extra money. After all DLCs guarantee that Devs will continue on working on this title. If content and price are fair I would buy instantly.

Hm, recently both cavs are kinda stressfull. It's babysitting all the time and a little failure results in high replenishment costs. I like melee cav more, but it's true: You have to pay a lot. Skirm Cav is more or less great situational.

At least they could give... 25% or something like that.

Yeah, I know that and as I said I have medicine at lvl 8 or 9. Same for politics. And economics.

It's a bit sad that so much depends on 1-2 skills, which are op compared to many others. I suggest the devs to balance the skills with priority to allow fair campaigns with diversified skill trees. But I will max. medicine after this battle. After all I also should get 2 skill points after Chancellorsville (at least if my defeat at Salem's church does not count, which I lost because I thought I just have to hold the flag. Did I already say that the display of the (often even changing) victory conditions is probably made the worst of all games I played so far?). vren, please tell me - after the next update - if you managed to refill/replenish all your losses by just the 200k money and 11k men you get after the battle. I'm just curious.^^

Prisoners,... you can't exchange mor than 1000 men. It's a bit unsatisfying because often I have 3000 prisoners.

Sure, a replay would probably end in less than a half of the victims. But this isn't the way I want to beat campaign. To know where the enemy will attack is more or less cheating, also I make Let's Play videos of the campaign, so my followers would be pissed. I have to live with the casualties. I have medicine at 8 or 9. @vren; Yeah 32k is pretty bad, too. All I'm saying is that the rewards can't compensate the losses anymore. Not even half of them. Neither in men nor in money.

Hi, I experienced enormous losses in the battle of Chancellorsville (playing Union on normal difficulty) and wondered if this is intended or if I was just bad in this battle. I deployed 91k men and lost nearly 40k (cavalry, arty and infantry). Until now I hardly had losse >10k men so I was very surprised. So I wanted to ask you how much men you lost in this bloody battle? Even if I were pretty bad in this fight and normally you can win with 20-30k casualties, how on earth are you supposed to replenish your troops with just getting 11k men and 220k money (which is just enough to refill 4 2-star brigades) as reward? And the battle losses get crazier with each update. Since the grand battle before Chancellorsville my army is getting weaker. Not in menpower (until now^^), but in experience. While the enemy gets better troops in each battle your troops are getting more rookie, becausse you cannot effort expensive veterans. The rewards can't catch up to the casualties you get in the last battles, too. If this goes on I can't keep it up. Don't tell me this "You have to be cautious, use cover,..." I do! Anyway, until Chancellorsville it wasn't this much of a problem, just got more 1star brigades again. But now, how should I fill this losses up? What were your casualty numbers?

I won Chancellorsville but lost Salem Church. I only lost because I just hold Salem Church (as displayed as vc in the right corner) not knowing that I have also to inflict 5% more dmg to the enemy. So I inflicted only 4% with the result I lost because of 1%. I was very surprised unless I saw the additional 5%-victory condition afterwards. I have to say this is BS. It's a general problem of the game so far, that the real victory conditions are hidden in the menue. And only because I thought "All I need to do is to hold Salem Church" I lost the battle. The displayed cs are always confusing. Sometimes the displayed conditions in the upper right corner are worthless, because they disappear during the battle or are switched with other conidtions. Sometimes - as in Salem Church - just half of the vc are displayed. It's not a good way to display things, it confuses people. Also what is the consequence of being defeated Salem Church? I won Chancellorsville. Does this cancel my victory? Does it reduce my reputation? Do I get rewards at all for Salem Church? There is no inbformation whatsoever.

I agree that it's sometimes very annoying that Skirmishers don't hold their superior position, especially in buildings. Hopefully there will be a better or extra button to make sure that they don't retreat after shooting.

In fact it tells me to wait for the ironclads, which I ignored.^^

I would love to see an editor. Hohoho, endless lines of Soldiers trying to overrun a heavy fortified hill,....muahaha. If you could design your own battles, I would spend +100 hrs in this game.

Hi, I just wanted to report on my Nansemonde River experience (Union Campaign). I played this mission and won within 3 minutes. I just rushedstraight to the battery fortification with all my troops to find it empty (except for the 3 guns I am told to destroy). I charged in and won this battle instantly after killing those canons. There were a lot of Confeds coming from the west, but they were too late. Is this intended? Somehow it did not feel right. I believe this would have been a very hard mission, if the Confed troops were on position. Of course I gambled with my all-in, but in the end it was an easy win without great losses. I will upload the battle on Youtube in the next days, maybe it will help you.