Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
AegorBlackfyre

Post your most wanted sequel to ultimate general no matter how insane they are.

Recommended Posts

this is just a fun thread to see what is the community most weird squeal for ultimate general should be :p.

mine are:

-a modern day with modern weapons ultimate general (tanks and the whole thing) maybe set in Afghanistan or the middle east to keep it simple.

-the Boer war general.

- a medieval ultimate general.

and most importantly have fun :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Hjalfnar_Feuerwolf said:

It is still Ultimate General: German Unification Wars. :P

Would/should this go as far as the Franco - Preussian War of 1871? Believe it's during this war, Germany is formally unified as one state under 'The Kaiser*

Then I'm in ;-)

Edited by Colonel Henriksen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Colonel Henriksen said:

Would/should this go as far as the Franco - Preussian War of 1871? Believe it's during this war, Germany is formally unified as one state under 'The Kaiser*

Then I'm in ;-)

Yes, it is the "final" war of the three. First one would be the Second Schleswig Krieg of 1864 (Austria and Prussia vs Denmark), perfect for a tutorial with the Battle of Dybbøl as the ending point. Then the Austro-Prussian War (or Seven Weeks War) of 1866 as a short test if you are able to fight grand battles (Königgrätz!) and finally the Franco-Prussian War from 1870-71.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Hjalfnar_Feuerwolf said:

 

  Hide contents

 

 

Sorry for spam.

 

Of course there is power metal about unicorn invasions. Of course. Perfect song for the intro movie.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to see either World War 2 in the Pacific Islands, Vietnam or the American Revolutionary War. I would probably lean more toward American Revolutionary War.

I chose these over other choices simply because I follow American history and like to recreate historical battles from the country's various wars. Having said that, I would be satisfied with any additional Ultimate General series.

Edited by Captiva
grammar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ultimate General: Civil War 2. Where you actually control your country on strategic level and fight battle on a tactical level based on your strategic decisions., although a lot of the strategy would of course need to be simulated. This is not Victoria, after all, but rather Total War: The American Civil War (though with AI of a different kind entirely). But all strategic stuff that has a direct impact on your armies should be controlled  by the player. Where and when do you send your materiel, best generals and men? Do you, as the south, choose to protect coastal cities with infantry or do you concentrate all your forces for an all out attack on the yankee invader? Etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there was only one Ultimate General, and his name was Napoleon...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Andre Bolkonsky said:

Image result for image of napoleon, David

Nah, there are way too many of these types of games already.  Spread the love around to some other era.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, GAR_Arapharzon said:

Ultimate General: Civil War 2. Where you actually control your country on strategic level and fight battle on a tactical level based on your strategic decisions., although a lot of the strategy would of course need to be simulated. This is not Victoria, after all, but rather Total War: The American Civil War ...

This is where the designer (Adam Bryant) of MadMinute Games which created Take Command - 2nd Manassas wanted to go. We chatted about it quite a lot. Unlike the Total War Series, however,  we were thinking about placing an Operational Level in between the Strategic and Tactical level. At the strategic level you would be allocating resources, for example. At the operational level you would be dealing with armies. At the tactical level you would be fighting battles. The problem though was... how do you do that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/26/2017 at 3:56 PM, Fred Sanford said:

Considering the units created by the player in UG:CW are fictionalized, but resemble historical units, I'd like to expand on that concept-  Call it Ultimate General Staff: National Army.

In UGS:NA, the player is the Chief of Staff/Head of the Army (or really a series of these fellows) for a particular nation.  US, UK, France, Prussia/Germany, Russia, A-H, Italy mainly (or their precursor minor countries/colonies- in these cases a "War of Independence" or "War of Unification" would be a major early milestone/requirement).  The game would last for say 100-150 years in annual turns during peacetime (say 1750-1900 eg).  During peacetime turns, the player gets a budget that he can spend on training units in a standing army, setting up militias/reserves, purchasing weapons, training/promoting officers, all of the management stuff that's analogous to the camp screen now.

Since the player is Army CoS, and not the national ruler, he would have input into some foreign policy decisions (i.e. make recommendations), but for the most part that would be 'over his paygrade'.  Every once in awhile though, war would break out between the player's country and one or more of the others, or even a civil war.  Then the game would generate a series of battles the player would fight through to represent the course of the war in say monthly turns.  There could be multiple wars in the course of a game.

If you are familiar with the naval game Rule the Waves, I'm thinking like this for land combat.

I posted this the last time "next game" suggestions were floated.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, LAVA said:

This is where the designer (Adam Bryant) of MadMinute Games which created Take Command - 2nd Manassas wanted to go. We chatted about it quite a lot. Unlike the Total War Series, however,  we were thinking about placing an Operational Level in between the Strategic and Tactical level. At the strategic level you would be allocating resources, for example. At the operational level you would be dealing with armies. At the tactical level you would be fighting battles. The problem though was... how do you do that?

Clever. 

So, you would have 'regions' or 'Fronts' that you allocate assetts to on a nationwide basis. Within the Front, you would build and deploy your army for battle in an environemnt like UG:CW 'Camp', or send assetts back to the Strategic Reserve to be reallocated next round. Like UG:CW, the battles would be fixed rather than the rather silly tactical random maps found in Total War rather than the hand-drawn, geograpically precise maps you have in UG:CW. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Andre Bolkonsky said:

Clever. 

So, you would have 'regions' or 'Fronts' that you allocate assetts to on a nationwide basis. Within the Front, you would build and deploy your army for battle, or send assetts back to the Strategic Reserve to be reallocated next round. Like UG:CW, the battles would be fixed rather than the rather silly tactical random maps found in Total War rather than the hand-drawn, geograpically precise maps you have in UG:CW. 

Exactly.

A lot more too it though, but I really shouldn't get into details on a public forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, A. P. Hill said:

Nah, there are way too many of these types of games already.  Spread the love around to some other era.

not many done right...

Share this post


Link to post
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

×