Albert Sidney Johnston Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 After playing this UG:CW for the past few weeks, I ran across a copy of Rome II: Total War in my steam library. Deciding to take a brief break from the bloodiest war in American history, I decided to run through a campaign or two on my favorite Total War games. I can't. I just can't go back after tasting the glory that is UG:CW. After all my flanking maneuvers, ambushes, and grand strategy, Total War titles just seem so... shallow. Like playing Clash of Clans instead of World of Warcraft. I feel like I'm just blindly flinging troops into battle instead UG:CW's carefully calculated charges and withdraws. So, is anyone else having similar experiences? Which do you prefer, your favorite Total War title, or UG:CW? 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koro Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 You should put that in a review :). But yeah, I agree, I've mostly lost interest in total war. The campaign map might have kept me going but for Rome II, I don't really like the mechanics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andre Bolkonsky Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 The problem with Total War is it can't decide if it is a strategy game, or a tactical game. Europa Universalis does the strategy part far better than Total War; Ultimate General does the tactical part far better than . . . well, any wargame I've ever seen. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col_Kelly Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 Me discovering the UG series 'I sent one unit on the flank why am I not winning ?' Me opening a total war battle nowadays '.... wtf AI ?' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captain pips Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 the battles of ug with the campain map of total war would be the perfect game for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Sidney Johnston Posted March 25, 2017 Author Share Posted March 25, 2017 5 hours ago, 1stvermont said: The creator of UG use to be a total war modder. Whoa, really?? Do you know what mods he made?? 'Cause if it's half as awesome as this game, I'll install 'em in a second! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koro Posted March 26, 2017 Share Posted March 26, 2017 They are called Darthmod Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Soldier Posted March 26, 2017 Share Posted March 26, 2017 8 minutes ago, Albert Sidney Johnston said: Whoa, really?? Do you know what mods he made?? 'Cause if it's half as awesome as this game, I'll install 'em in a second! Darthmods, hence why some of us call him Darth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andre Bolkonsky Posted March 26, 2017 Share Posted March 26, 2017 v Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nox165 Posted March 26, 2017 Share Posted March 26, 2017 As much as a love total war, I found that it keeps getting worse and worse. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andre Bolkonsky Posted March 26, 2017 Share Posted March 26, 2017 13 hours ago, Nox165 said: As much as a love total war, I found that it keeps getting worse and worse. It becomes less and less compelling, I agree. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Sidney Johnston Posted March 26, 2017 Author Share Posted March 26, 2017 1 hour ago, Andre Bolkonsky said: It becomes less and less compelling, I agree. I mean, I like Total War, but compared to this fantastic game... there's just no comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaM Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 Main problem with Total War is that creators don't actually know what they are doing... they call it strategy game, yet they permanently cut off any strategical stuff off the game, replacing it with some arcade simplifications... every TW game since Rome 1 just removes features from the game so games become more and more dull... I've modded the TW games quite extensively, and i can tell its beyond me how ridiculous some mechanics are... Which is main reason why i cant stress enough how great Civil War is as a War Game.. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wright29 Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 Rome Total War (the first one) was the largest progression and is still playable. Truly a masterpiece of its time. Now, it's a bit laughable and you get the diplomacy of "Please Don't Attack Me" in exchange for "Accept or We Will Attack." Which is really just a non-aggression pact that is phrased hilariously. The problem with total war is that each faction has a best strategy and best army composition for field battles. And you do the same thing over and over and over again. Nothing like the different dynamic scenarios that UGCW puts you in. Want a campaign map? Well then you lose the challenges of the historical scenarios. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
civsully1 Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 (edited) Not a Total War player but since I saw the first reviews of UG CW on YouTube I was immediately interested to the point as I watched players add more and more of their battles I was hooked. Thought I'd just wait until it was finalized then buy it. But I kept watching as new battles were posted and decided to buy the early release anyways. I haven't been disappointed a bit! And I have say that, even though all the bugs and issues are still being worked on!! I haven't touched any of my ongoing wargames like; Strategic Command, Order of Battle, or Panzer Corps because of UG CW. I just hope the Developers do get to and end point to finalize the game and put it out. In the meantime I am really enjoying the game. Edited March 27, 2017 by civsully1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andre Bolkonsky Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 14 minutes ago, civsully1 said: Not a Total War player but since I saw the first reviews of UG CW on YouTube I was immediately interested to the point as I watched players add more and more of their battles I was hooked. Thought I'd just wait until it was finalized then buy it. But I kept watching as new battles were posted and decided to buy the early release anyways. I haven't been disappointed a bit! And I have say that, even though all the bugs and issues are still being worked on!! I haven't touched any of my ongoing wargames like; Strategic Command, Order of Battle, or Panzer Corps because of UG CW. I just hope the Developers do get to and end point to finalize the game and put it out. In the meantime I am really enjoying the game. Is Strategic Command any good? OOB I am playing, and Panzer Corps I beat decades ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandering1 Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 The biggest thing I would say that has huge difference flavors between the various franchises: Total War's combat model works a lot better for the classical/medieval armies, by virtue of the necessity of infantry squares. One can see in UG:CW where melee blobs start dominating because the computer can technically use the entire brigade to fight, whereas in Total War, your melee frontage is still limited by how many ways you're in contact with the other squad. It starts breaking down when we hit Industrial Age armies, because the ranged power creep is in much higher steps than the melee power creep; that is, one side that has Fire by Rank and Platoon fire implemented becomes an order of magnitude stronger than a basic army without Fire by Rank. Total War's model fails entirely when we hit Modern armies, that don't rely on tight formations, but rather looser/skirmisher formations. Since the entire battlefield must be modeled to provide the necessary cover that Modern armies need, that kills the franchise in two ways; one, the amount of work that is needed to model the various cover on the battlefield, which is tremendous for the scale that they're working at, and two, the micromanagement required to properly use cover. This is where the Company of Heroes model shines, where it is intentionally limited to company level tactics in order to allow cover to be used appropriately for modern armies without requiring a supercomputer to run the game. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andre Bolkonsky Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 2 minutes ago, Wandering1 said: The biggest thing I would say that has huge difference flavors between the various franchises: Total War's combat model works a lot better for the classical/medieval armies, by virtue of the necessity of infantry squares. One can see in UG:CW where melee blobs start dominating because the computer can technically use the entire brigade to fight, whereas in Total War, your melee frontage is still limited by how many ways you're in contact with the other squad. It starts breaking down when we hit Industrial Age armies, because the ranged power creep is in much higher steps than the melee power creep; that is, one side that has Fire by Rank and Platoon fire implemented becomes an order of magnitude stronger than a basic army without Fire by Rank. Total War's model fails entirely when we hit Modern armies, that don't rely on tight formations, but rather looser/skirmisher formations. Since the entire battlefield must be modeled to provide the necessary cover that Modern armies need, that kills the franchise in two ways; one, the amount of work that is needed to model the various cover on the battlefield, which is tremendous for the scale that they're working at, and two, the micromanagement required to properly use cover. This is where the Company of Heroes model shines, where it is intentionally limited to company level tactics in order to allow cover to be used appropriately for modern armies without requiring a supercomputer to run the game. Agreed. You play COH? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandering1 Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 4 minutes ago, Andre Bolkonsky said: Agreed. You play COH? Long time ago. My COH2 Record: https://www.coh2.org/ladders/playercard/viewBoard/2/steamid/76561197962086244 Used to be in the top 50 on AT for both sides, until my partner and I moved on to other things. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
civsully1 Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 (edited) On 3/27/2017 at 3:58 PM, Andre Bolkonsky said: Is Strategic Command any good? OOB I am playing, and Panzer Corps I beat decades ago. I enjoy it AB. I feel like with most of the games the AI is more defensively oriented. So it's more it reacting to your moves. But, I think it's a little better than most. I really like the strategic events that pop up during the game. This is innovative as you are required to make a choice when these Decision Events pop up and you must make a choice. Really neat. And the Diplomacy part of the game adds a great twist as well. And you have total control on the direction of your research on everything. It for me is the perfect original Third Reich for the pc. And the impact of weather on operations is huge. Very well modeled. And watch out for Partisans!!! There's a lot to like in the game especially if you're a die hard WWII guy. You can also get a beautiful hard cover bound game book. The best I've ever seen. The only problem with it for me is that they went to all the work to put this together but didn't index it????? So Yes...I would recommend it. And they've just release a major update to the game. I was beginning to wonder if there was a problem. But it was a major update to include....what many want here....multiplayer support. I haven't opened it up yet to see how the update looks because of this darn addicting UGCW game! I am preparing myself for the humiliation of Antietam! Edited March 28, 2017 by civsully1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andre Bolkonsky Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 39 minutes ago, civsully1 said: I enjoy it AB. I feel like with most of the games the AI is more defensively oriented. So it's more it reacting to your moves. But, I think it's a little better than most. I really like the strategic events that pop up during the game. This is innovative as you are required to make a choice when these Decision Events pop up and you must make a choice. Really neat. And the Diplomacy part of the game adds a great twist as well. And you have total control on the direction of your research on everything. It for me is the perfect original Third Reich for the pc. And the impact of weather on operations is huge. Very well modeled. And watch out for Partisans!!! There's a lot to like in the game especially if you're a die hard WWII guy. You can also get a beautiful hard cover bound game book. The best I've ever seen. The only problem with it for me is that they went to all the work to put this together but didn't index it????? So Yes...I would recommend it. And they've just release a major update to the game. I was beginning to wonder if there was a problem. But it was a major update to include....what many want here....multiplayer support. I haven't opened it up yet to see how the update looks because of this darn addicting UGCW game! I am preparing myself for the humiliation of Antietam! Third Reich. The first board game to require a master's in its rulebook. You strike me as the type who knows that Avalon Hill isn't in England. I enjoy Hearts of Iron, but it's not exactly a relaxing game; way too many variables. I keep looking at Strategic Command, and will probably just break down and play it soon. Probably when this is put to bed. Or the next time it goes on sale. Oh, and Gettysburg . . . . Not my first time up Culp's Hill. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Sidney Johnston Posted March 29, 2017 Author Share Posted March 29, 2017 Oh! Oh! Gettysburg! I thought I was the only guy on the planet that owned that game! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
civsully1 Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 14 hours ago, Albert Sidney Johnston said: Oh! Oh! Gettysburg! I thought I was the only guy on the planet that owned that game! Looks like at least the third guy! AH days.....I skipped a day of school to have all the time I needed to set up a game of PanzerBlitz right after I bought it!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andre Bolkonsky Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 4 hours ago, civsully1 said: Looks like at least the third guy! AH days.....I skipped a day of school to have all the time I needed to set up a game of PanzerBlitz right after I bought it!! PanzerBlitz was the first wargame I ever owned. The Russian Campaign and Victory in the Pacific were the best games they ever made, imho. So, this thread should read Ultimate General v. Avalon Hill. And UG, not to mention Steam and all its developers, owes AH one hell of a debt, if you want my opinion. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Sanford Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 6 hours ago, civsully1 said: Looks like at least the third guy! AH days.....I skipped a day of school to have all the time I needed to set up a game of PanzerBlitz right after I bought it!! Fourth! Still sitting in my closet with the rest of my AH games. My first AH game was War At Sea- still have it along with a bunch of others. Anybody else have a copy of Longest Day (MONSTER Game)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now