Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About mrm5117

  • Rank
  1. mrm5117

    Historical Battle Replays

    I doubt there are but I have thought of and hoped for the same thing. If the combat system is based on percentages and multipliers, etc., it might not be easy to show historically what actually happened withing that framework. This would be fantastic, though.
  2. mrm5117

    Union Strategy at Cold Harbor

    This really works.
  3. mrm5117

    Tips for new players

    I've recently been trying to keep divisions together and when possible moving and forming lines by division instead of current proximity on the field. It takes a little effort but I'm getting some pride from doing so. I'm trying to think about tactical maneuvers in terms of divisions now. Selecting and moving by division also helps to not have extremely long battle lines drawn when you're trying to command a bunch of units simultaneously. The shorter lines allow you to stack divisions as assault waves (or defense in depth) and that's a pretty cool new element I'm now enjoying. I have not, though, tried testing out the differences in command bonus for these divisions being held together versus not. Still hoping somebody gets the time and motivation to do so.
  4. It's a generally regarded maxim that it's a good idea to take the high ground when setting up a defensive position. I don't think anyone will disagree that in general, for battles of this era, better sight lines, better angles for artillery, and slower ascents of an attacker up a hill give the defense an advantage there. I'm sure someone can expand upon this and it might be fun to hear quotes from a military manual of the time. In this game, we can see a quantifiable difference between holding certain areas of a map. When holding a line behind a river of stream, the attackers are slowed down massively by crossing the water and have zero cover while doing so and/or are forced to funnel through a bridge or ford removing their ability to have a broad firing line. You can hover your mouse over the screen and see the %cover and %speed the attacker must overcome. When hovering over a fortification, you can see the melee, cover, and projectile resistance bonuses. When hovering over a field or forest or town, you can similarly see the numerical defensive advantages. However, there is no such way to see the numerical differences between two relative elevations. 1) Does the game actually provide some sort of defender advantage or attacker penalty to attacking up a hill? (has anyone tested this with identical units, weapons, and one side at the top of a hill and the other on the bottom?), 2) how can one see this quantified?, 3) does the game factor in that steeper slopes should have more of a defending advantage than more gradual ones and scale in between?, and 4) if there is no way currently to tell, could a patch be introduced so that when you hover over a hill's slope (or top of the hill?) you can tell its defensive advantages like you can for forests/streams/etc.?
  5. What is the best strategy for victory as the North at the Battle of Richmond? I'm not familiar with this battle historically, so didn't know what to expect coming in. I have become incredibly weary of the game's strategy prompts after getting burned by it many times, for example at Chickamauga being told to advance and capture the crossroads when inevitably you will take huge losses after being counterattacked. In this battle, the prompt says you will be best off rushing to capture the objectives before southern reinforcements arrive. Knowing I could replay from an earlier save, I tried it against my better judgment and was slaughtered in both phases of the opening part of the battle. Battle is not yet over, but I am fairly sure I will lose. On my next play through, I would think to play much more defensively until later in the battle. Really I would prefer not to attack entrenchments at all and just surround the town and outward defenses with my army, entrench myself, and lay siege until they run out of food and supplies. I don't think the game will allow that though! So what is the best strategy here historically or specifically for the game?
  6. mrm5117

    Union Strategy at Cold Harbor

    I took the objective (as the Union) on the 1st day, 2nd phase, of the Battle of Cold Harbor and instantly won the entire battle. It felt a bit cheap because my right flank was crumbling and I was about to have my 4 brigades routed that had just barely taken the objective but the moment that objective was mine the battle was declared won, but I can't complain because I kept drawing this battle in the past and absolutely had to win it to keep command based on my reputation score. I don't like that you have to know what objectives will win the battle on what phase of what day and can't just play through the campaign using your best tactical and strategic judgment, but still a great game overall. Maybe have an option where you can continue the campaign as a new army commander after you are relieved of command or have an option to remove the reputation system? Some of the win/draw/loss objective scenarios are quite complicated toward the end of the battle, but viewing the victory conditions doesn't even explain it well. Maybe there should be more thorough explanations saying that you could hold one of these objectives and all of these to win, or just get this one objective on phase X of day Y.
  7. mrm5117

    Union Strategy at Cold Harbor

    A lot of these battles also have casualty limits to win so sacrificing 3-4 brigades to a frontal assault rout seems like it wouldn’t work. I’ll give it a shot though. Did either side actually have dedicated assault brigades or divisions? I haven’t heard of that. I would hate to go too far from historical just to meet the campaign’a requirements.
  8. I’m playing a Union campaign and haven’t been able to make it through the wilderness campaign through Cold Harbor with my appointment as army commander. I had lots of trouble with the Chickamauga campaign and the Cold Harbor campaign, side battles included which I usually had no problem winning. I’ve been replaying and eeking out draws, but now I head into Cold Harbor with 33 reputation and no choice but to win. So what is the optimal strategy for the Union to achieve its victory conditions at the Batrle of Cold Harbor? I am uneasy assaulting fortifications so now with most battles featuring that I tend to stay defensive.
  9. I’ve been doing a campaign on middle difficulty as the Union. Won or drew every battle except for the one where you have to hold Pittsburgh Landing at the end of the battle. I always hold off the rebels well far from it and as soon as that is the new objective the enemy cavalry gets there and claims it before I can detach forces to hold it. As soon as the CSA claims it with cavalry the battle is over. I had three solid corps and one half assembled corps going into Gettysburg. I also had a high reputation, only spending maybe 20 points on artillery from the government because I don’t want to waste reputation points that exceed 100. My strategy was to go into Day 1 with my smallest, most inexperienced 4th corps knowing that I would take heavy losses and that it was okay to lose day 1 and really make a stand on day 2. I put up a good fight, but kept falling back and ceding objectives to save my corps. At the very end, I was barely able to escape with a division left and no objectives held. Much to my surprise, I was immediately relieved of command instead of being given the opportunity to repel the rebs on the heights south of town on day 2. I felt ashamed. All that work building my army and it was all over. Luckily the game had an auto save right before the battle so I can back and try again, but that was very surprising. Next time I’ll bring a stronger corps and make a stronger stand at the northern and western wedges of town. I guess not spend any reputation points prior to that battle either.
  10. mrm5117

    Hold Line While Fortified

    I have them in the fortification, spread out across the wall. I think the answer is they hold by default, but it's just mentally off that pressing the space bar/hold button doesn't change the icon or ostensibly seem to work. Maybe that button can be grayed out when a brigade is fortified or have the extra symbol appear by default.
  11. mrm5117

    Tips for new players

    I like this idea of trying to keep divisions together. It's difficult in practice, though. I usually end up in the middle of a battle, especially a larger one, just grabbing 3 or 4 adjacent units and forming a battle line. They're not always from the same division or even corps, but when things are chaotic it's what works to control units. If you try to select a division and reform a line mid-battle with scattered brigades, you're likely to expose your flank to the enemy in doing so. There is supposedly an extra command bonus for keeping brigades together - does anyone have a range of numerical command bonus having all brigades together versus not? +10 maybe?
  12. mrm5117

    UG- Civil War 3..??

    Yes the battles and casualties would be smaller, but like jekct1212 said, we would use a smaller base unit size. I think regimental scaled, instead of brigade scale like for UGCW, would be appropriate.
  13. mrm5117

    So, I was wondering... What's next?

    American Revolutionary War, please.
  14. mrm5117

    UGCW Feedback v1.0+

    I just wanted to say here that I absolutely love this game and can't stop playing it.