Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

40 Excellent

About MikeK

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

517 profile views
  1. Combining units

    How does it work? Click combine on one brigade and the game decides what to do? Or maybe pick out two that are in the same division and click on both and then they move toward each other, disappear and reappear, or some thing else? I have given the order in battle but have not noticed anything happening. I have read that the weapon type is the majority type after a combination. Thanks
  2. Unit Naming

    (1) I liked the Divs by state idea at first, but found I wanted to reassign brigades around as needed and it didn't feel right nor useful to mix up states. Units that do very well can get unit names. (2) I now use states to designate greener units with the worst weapons (as state militia) e.g. II-4 Law Penn Mil rbf (3) Having commander names in the title is helpful in keeping track of officer casualties and other events. I usually leave the commander name (unless an epic unit) and prefix it with the corps and division number followed by the number of stars it has (4) then after the commander name an equipment code (since for some reason the unit card on the left of the screen does not show that bit of useful into unless it is clicked to expand) such as Lz or 55 or HFe or Pal etc. so IV-2**Jackson Fe is armed with Harper's Ferry rifles, has 2 stars, and is currently part of IV corps, 2nd Division. (6) Shock-purpose mounted are Cavalry" and ranged firearm mounted are "Dragoons" -since they are (7) US Snipers are Sharps, "CS ones Marks or just the name . Skirmishers are Lights or Rangers (8) LR is for long-range arty like the Whitworth One thing I have not yet done is code brigades for whether they focus on firepower or speed/shock/morale I had not thought of coding for those getting vet replacements as those are likely to be almost all 2 stars or more.
  3. What it means with the Bar when i Command a Brigade ....

    I do not know what it means, but historically what it should represent is the main infantry line with the skirmishers spread out in small bunches in front. In the game, of course, skirmishers are able to be detached and go off on independent missions.
  4. It sounds like continued campaigns are locked into a specific easier difficulty level but using the new mechanics? Can those settings be adjusted for difficulty? If not, can Steam rollback the version to a good save-friendly version?
  5. I am curious to understand what you expect or find most players do? For feel as much as practicality, on suitable ground I like to maneuver and engage by divisions and give divisional orders where feasible as it fits the player command level and helps keep troops in good firing lines. I give corps movement orders on occasion, and have dared to give them independent operational directions at times for a realistic touch of command gastritis as I await results. I do like the battle to look and feel as a a battle should. But then i have time to do so, as I play at slow speed as that seems the closest to a realistic pace for the stages of an ACW engagement. One wish is that the pause function was adjustable. As I am often subject to frequent interruptions in play, I may easily forget and tap the pause key rather than click on the speed setting. What I saw in the video is a lot of quick decision-making and micro control at the brigade level to optimize combats. and clicking on units to show their movement directions that is a help for the viewer. What other styles are you seeing.
  6. UGCW Feedback v0.90+

    Please clarify what you just said. It sounds like continued campaigns are locked into a specific easier difficulty level but using the new mechanics? Can those settings be adjusted? If not, can Steam rollback the game code so I can continue my matching set of campaigns as before? Thanks EDIT:L The corps and many units have too much character to cast aside when so far advanced into the war.
  7. Artillery Opinion

    I find no problem in using guns up to Napoleons in the horse artillery role, other than exposure to unwanted infantry attention. It's all a matter of providing cover and support and getting them back from danger appropriately. Bear in mind that horse artillery range is farther than it was in days of more closed formations and less effective firearms.
  8. Civil War books?

    The book cited in my signature from an author whose period studies are always interesting for the type of info on the mechanics and practicalities of battle as well as tactics and doctrine that is especially useful for the wargamer or rules designer (once a paper product, now in video games, but same considerations of how to provide a faithful representation. Most books don't give a fig if a regiment was fighting with skirmishers ahead, kept a reserve, or dug up some cover when paused for a lull, so knowing what the general practices and variation were is quite useful for a focus on the anatomy of battle.
  9. Renaming Brigades

    I would like to name the divisions, and get a much more vivid highlighting of a selected brigade, division, or corps as I try to keep divisions together. My Brigades usually carry the name of the commander (or notable former commander') and corps/ div up front and a little code at the end for weapon type or category (assault or rifles, as above) s
  10. Marksman vs. Firearm training

    Firearms training favors troops slugging it out at close range or assault with muskets where the feel of battle is more like that of Napoleonic wars, though openly classifying troops as cannon fodder would be inappropriate at the time.
  11. Yet with good game mechanics people practice it intuitively as in this game where players do use defensive mobility where the terrain and troops permit it, and the combat dynamics favor falling back to regroup, drawing the enemy into killing grounds, and especially flanking overextended units with fire or more personally..
  12. Particularly on the Confederate side - I try to keep my divisions together on the battlefield, and it would look and work better to see names as well as formation numbers in camp and on the unit cards in battle. As I posted earlier, green highlighting divisions in particular is not the best choice on a mainly green battlefield. . The battle history is already in the game from earlier on - thank you for that as well.
  13. Accuracy of Gettysburg map

    A stream in that location would necessarily be local low ground and likely had a rocky bed, which may have some minor tactical and maneuver significance as well as being a landmark if identifiable. For a game, the landmarks would naturally be of considerable interest.
  14. Skirmisher Scaling

    So this creates two synergistic distortions with a jarring result.
  15. Should be in the guide/wiki