Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Great game so far. Some thoughts.


buhund

Recommended Posts

Hello all,

First of all although it is still early access i am amazed at the game and hope the future changes can only make it better.The tips on this forum made me understand the game better and fired my interest in the American Civil War.  It already sucks most of my free time and every battle is exciting.

As the theme is not very popular in Poland i did my research and found out various fact about the ACW on my own, which turned my attention to backgrounds, course of action and effects of this war. But i digress.

I wanted to share some thoughts (i am sure they might be raised in other threads also) as to the general game play:

1. Progress points - I find them as a way to "personalize" the experience by letting a player decide how can conduct a particular game. Does he focus on politics or medicine etc. However many posters here rightly stress out the importance of having a certain amount of points in army organization. This can be tricky for some when later in game one finds himself in a position that he cannot proceed successfully because of not having enough points in army org. This somehow limits the player in freely choosing the way he wants his army to evolve. I am curious if someone was successful without spending any of the career points into army org. (apart from the ones that are automatically granted during the campaign.) I think the automatic army org. progress should at least give the player fair chance to fight on any level of the campaign - and the decision is left to player if he wants to progress in army.org faster.

2. The skirmishers and cavalry "scouting runs" - I've seen some threads about it and i experience it myself that a successful run "behind the backs" of enemy army is simple way to get rid of enemy artillery. Please correct me if I am wrong, but from what i've read it was unusual for skirmishers to operate independently far away from their "parent" unit. I think setting the max distance that this could be done, and then progressively lowering their morale could limit the overuse of this manouver. This would make easier to "clear" them out and maybe would prevent various problems in possible future multiplayer.

3. I think a small reduction in LOS would be beneficial. Again, just from I've read some skirmishes were purely accidental, as was the actual "flanking". The less LOS would make player advance slower and would make it harder to exploit the AI. I am not an expert on that though, so it is just a thought.

All in all, i think this game will continue to suck all my free time, and i just wanted to share my 2 cents here.

Sorry for a wall of text, and for any mistakes (English is not my mother tounge).

All the best,

p>

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For excellent insight into both sides of the military and political situation in America's Civil War (or "The War Between the States" or "The War of Northern Aggression" as called in the South) read the historical novel "The Killer Angels" which focuses on the perspective of four generals in the Battle of Gettysburg :  Lee, Longstreet, Buford (cavalry) and Chamberlain.  Also featured is Jackson and Stuart (cavalry).  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Killer_Angels

Also a major motion picture based on the novel:   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gettysburg_(1993_film)

I have gamed the Battle of Gettysburg since I was about 15 ... 50 years ago.

Real War Colleges study and game it to this day.

Presently playing Naval Action.

~ HK ~

Edited by HardyKnox
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...