Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Beruldsen

Members
  • Content count

    24
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4 Neutral

About Beruldsen

  • Rank
    Landsmen
  1. Battle of Washington

    Having played both ... I found Richmond to be much easier in comparison.
  2. Battle of Washington

    Personally ... I think the battle should end on the first day ... it was hard enough and you get the satisfaction of taking Washington.
  3. Battle of Washington

    I went into this battle with roughly 100k as CSA on BG ... I thought I had won the day when I took all the objectives only to find out there is a day 2. How did the Union manage to put 150k on the field when I had wiped out all but 20k of the original army and according to the intelligence reports should have had no more than 115-125 k in total. I probably lost 30k on the first day (not realizing there would be a day 2) but on day 2 the AI focuses on one fort at a time. The first one I had defended with 4 infantry brigades and one arty the odds must have been in the vicinity of at least 10 to 1 ... the fort was literally surrounded by blue. In addition the Union fielded 350 guns which seems stunning since I spend most of the campaign destroying every arty unit I could. All of this seems very contrary to 0.90 where there should be a significant reward for winning every battle and destroying units. I should add I killed 50k in Cold Harbor alone!
  4. In the campaign battle of Gettysburg ... playing as CSA on BG ... I'm limited to 20 brigades for my primary corps. Are all these brigades available on the first day? It appears that only about 12-13 actually arrive...
  5. Union Win

    Sure ... but once you take out a few forts you can move directly into the city ... thereby bypassing most of them (and a surrounded fort is a dead fort). I had a 30k advantage going into the final fort stage (after trenches) so taking out all the forts was never in doubt ... just seemed a lack of creativity in design.
  6. Union Win

    Playing as the Union on Normal (BG) I finally managed to take all those Richmond forts at a cost of half my army ... but it did feel good getting the win. I must say I think all those Richmond forts is a bit much ... I'd seriously request the re-do of the final battle. The first part of taking all the trenches is ok ... but I think once this is accomplished there should be a plummeting of CSA morale ... and then taking a fort of two and finally marching into Richmond and some sort of surrender. But aside from that ... a great, great game! The mechanics and game engine have a ton of potential ... I really look forward to the developers' next endeavor. In the meantime ... time to play as the CSA. In the next day or so ... I'll note more complete comments and suggestions but first I need to get off my saddle and rest a bit....
  7. Forts -- Richmond

    Going into the final battle ... playing as Union on Normal ... I have about a 30k advantage in troops (90k vs 60k). However, after the first round of securing the trenches ... my forces are pretty beaten up. The first fort (on the first day) was easy enough because one of the 2 brigades left the fort to assist in one of the trenches. But no such luck on the second day with the first northern most fort. My first assault was a massacre even with a 5 to 1 advantage. Is there some better strategy for taking these forts ... some magic cannon or something? Any guidance would be greatly appreciated.
  8. Mule Shoe

    In a rather gamey approach ... I attacked the southern most unit on the left and was able to get in the rear. With this approach I didn't have to contend with units attacking my right flank...then it was just a matter of slugging my way in. I still suffered almost 15k casualties.
  9. Mule Shoe

    Playing as the Union ... on BG ... can someone provide some guidance on how to win this battle without losing your entire army. I'm going in with 62k vs 45k . The fortifications seem unbelievably strong. I have 160 guns aimed at one fortified unit and it barely makes a dent. I send in a half dozen brigades and they finally rout the unit but most are routed themselves ... the follow-up brigades are then confronted with fresh brigades and the massacre continues. I'm having a very hard time finding a weak spot in the CSA defense.
  10. With the latest patch ... is it now advisable to build artillery brigades larger than 12 guns? Many topics ago ... I read numerous posts that building anything larger than 12 guns was counter-productive and actually resulted in a negative effect in battle.
  11. Precise scaling factors (on MG)

    What level were you playing? On Normal (BG) I'm sure the scaling was twice my army (44 vs 83)...
  12. I've played almost all the way through as both Union and CSA (Normal Level) and secured victories in all. However, it's still not clear to me if it is worth it to destroy the enemy or conserve my troops for the next battle. This assumes I've already secured the victory objectives. I remember playing as the Union in Chancellorsville and opted to see if I could destroy Jackson's entire force since I had it surrounded. I almost did and I practically wiped out the entire CSA army. Normally, this would be good strategy ... but I'm not sure in the game if it makes sense. I'm sure I captured a ton of equipment but I also lost a number of troops in the process even with a very lop-sided victory. Do the losses you inflict carry-over to succeeding battles?
  13. Scaling, or my issue with it

    Here is my issue with scaling ... I've played both Union and CSA to Chickamauga ... in most strategy games you strive to build big, strong armies. However, from my favorable experience ... this game, as I've done, it is better to build a small Experienced army (Corp). My other corps, when I need them, are for the most part, cannon fodder. I usually disband my other Corp(s) between major battles with the exception of artillery units. I do this since I've heard scaling takes into consideration your total army size versus what you are employing in that battle. I usually go into the major battles with what I perceive to be the smallest army possible (experience versus size). This seems highly counter-intuitive. Nobody, in their right mind, would disband a significant part of their army in the middle of the war ... you'd want them to continue to be trained and gain experience. I agree with RoverGrover above, I understand the need for balance, but instead of matching/spamming your unit composition, the game instead should use a seasoned core composition and then a bunch of raw infantry recruits to create the required balance. It would be fun for example to create an entire division of cavalry as the CSA ... but if you are going to be matched it sort of takes the fun out of it (I have not tried this by the way).
  14. Objectives in Major Battles

    Are these points shown anywhere?
  15. In the multi-part, major battles there are objectives assigned but these objectives are often not part of the securing a victory (for example capturing a bridge/ford in Chickamauga). Is there any penalty for not securing the objective and conversely a bonus if you do? In many cases I'm inclined to preserve my forces for the next phase...
×