vren55

Thanks Sterner!

That's what I would think because my rig can handle stuff like Total War Three Kingdoms... but again, it depends on the optimization. What's the current refund policy for Ultimate Admiral?

So I have a i5 and a Nividia GTX 960M, would I be able to run Ultimate Admiral? I"m asking because I loved civil war and would love to get into the EA but I obviously don't want to buy it if my current setup can't handle it.

... Um, I personally like William Rosecrans because while Rosecrans screwed up at Chickamauga, the war of maneuver he employed against Bragg in the Tullahoma campaign was freaking crazy good. That being said... I would like to say Ulysses Grant as my second which brings me to my question... why do people seem to not like Grant that much? I mean he got a lot of men killed, but he ultimately cornered Lee and took Vicksburg. His presidential record is ... crap, but as a general he was pretty solid.

Wow, uh thanks sir! And thank you again for bringing this awesome game to us :)

You should advance just a biiiit. Past that fence near the southeast of your starting position, there's a line of trees. Stick like 3 brigades in there and advance onto the point from that way, while making sure not to get flanked and staying in the trees. Assuming you got good arty and good infantry, you should be good.

I really want an Ultimate General Civil War 2 as expanded above or an Ultimate General Napoleon... but you know what would be really cool? Ultimate General: Lord of the Rings or Ultimate General: Game of Thrones. XD You art a minor lord. Assemble thy army, gain access to more regions and then finally become the general or mashal in charge of the defense of Gondor or Kings Landing. XD

There are two stages to the Union Strategy... well okay 3. 1. Throw the 3 stars and 2 stars into a 5 x 2500 men 1 x 15 art brigade into the 1st division that contacts your enemy. You need to hold the Crossroads as HAARRRD as possible and that means the BEST MEN. Just focus on holding and maintaining a cordon. Employ skirmishers to cover your flanks and use cover/fortifications only when necesssary. 2. Assuming you hold your position, you'll get taken to the 2nd stage where you are fighting to hold a series of points in the forest. Only hold the points you need. This should be quite easy due to available fortifications. Just cluster your men around the points you need to defend. 3. I've been using an exploit for Cold Harbour that is... well terrible, but useful. Victory conditions actually mean that you ONLY NEED TO TAKE THE CONFEDERATE FAR RIGHT, which is by the map border and it has a big weakness. Take 2 (Maaaaybe 3) of your best divisions and approach. As you approach, CLIIIIIIIING to the bottom map border and outflank the Confederate far right fortifications. To prevent your own brigades from being outflanked, face a brigade or 2 to the enemy to protect your other brigades edge-clinging into position. Once you're ready, assault, 4 brigades, perhaps 6, in two columns, moving slowly and then charging at the last minute. This will hard-crack the confederate far right which b/c you've outflanked their fortifications, will allow you to roll them off. As soon as you've done so. Stop.

Actually not quite. It IS window dressing, but more randomized and realistic. 1. Yes, but different. You're not going to face a horde of skirmishers or troops with great rifles as soon as you equip your army with good rifles. you might face a larger army with meh rifles. Or a smaller army with good rifles. What it does is it equates equipment and number of both armies to a "battle rating" and then scales by modifying at random, one of those factors (equipment, men etc). 2. Mm hmm. But only if you lose far less men then they do. This is b/c now it works by a "pool" system. At random, the AI gets reinforced between battles (by either men, equipment or etc. you can tell by reading battle reports/intelligence reports). You don't know exactly what they're equipped with and don't know if they'll match you equipment for equipment but you do know an aaaapppoximate (within 5k margin of error) how much TOTAL troops they have at their disposal. The AI can choose to deploy some of this pool to the smaller battles, (within a certain limit of course) or like a real general, deploy em all at the grand battles. You can reduce this pool to decrease the overall number of AI reinforcements, but they will still get reinforced by some rando number to improve their battle rating to match your army. 3. Unsure. I only played Medium. I assume so, but it should be difficult. 4. The experience of the brigades is another thing modified or changed between battles as the AI gets a random # of reinforcements in men, equipment or veterans. Ultimately, what happens with scaling is that you are being scaled against an equivalent army, but you don't know exactly the composition of it. Thus, surprisingly, they've actually made the reconnaissance skill quite valuable because now you have SOME info, but it's enough to tell you you don't have the full picture and thus you probably want more to figure out what they've got.

Damn i'm fresh out of luck, turns out that it's MY laptop and the particular Graphics card it has that does not support shadowplay desktop capture.

huh lemme check

Welp nvm, might be b/c the 960M version doesn't have desktop capture due to me having laptop

And how would you do that? XD

Speaking of using shadowplay... i don't know how you can do this b/c UG:CW isn't a supported game and Shadowplay refuses to capture unsupported games

That's what I don't get, I put it on Game Capture and selected UGCW application. But all I got was the volume and then just a black screen I'll try Nvidia shadowplay

So since I like playing UG:CW, I wanted to try a Major General Campaign, and then post it on Youtube b/c hell, I'm going to be playing it anyway. The issue is... I can't seem to make the screen capture thing work. Especially with OBS which captures the sound... but not the screen oddly enough. What do you guys use?

Oohhh that makes more sense and seems to corroborate with the limited reading I've done. (also, sorry for the late reply) What I heard about Reynolds that is controversial regards Gettysburg primarily. While he certainly put his men into battle and committed them ASAP (very admirable for a commander and very well done despite his death 1 hour into the fighting) I recall reading and thinking about whether Reynolds had the authority to choose said battleground. Reason being is that Reynolds decision to confirm and escalate Buford's defense of the crossroads meant that he kinda picked Meade's battleground for him. I think that we all can agree that Reynolds was spectacularly effective in defending said battleground in the short time before his death and Doubleday was able to take advantage of the situation Reynolds left him in. The problem is that b/c Reynolds picked the battleground at that location and committed his 1st Corps against a Confederate force that was growing in superiority, these actions directly led to the 1st Corps being basically butchered to the point they were disbanded later on. Some may blame Howard and XII corps for screwing it up, which I also blame, but basically: from what I've read, I interpreted Reynolds actions at Gettysburg as having some some severe consequences that honestly could have been disastrous, and it's only in hindsight and followup from other competent commanders that his decision-making seemed to have paid off. Sorry for seeming like I"m hating on Reynolds. I'm not, I just am surprised he seems to have such a reputation around him to the point of it's like seeing the US Civil War Version of Rommel. I'd still pick him for my Dream Team anyway based on his reliability, character and general competence in comparison to the rest of the Union Generals available. I just only have an inkling about why he's so famous and so well-liked and I'm glad to learn more about him.

Sherman, and McPherson as Corps Commanders?? I agree with your choice of Meade as 4th Corps commander, but the others confuse me greatly. I KINDA get Sherman, but his record is a bit mixed. He's dependable but... prone to odd errors. Eg. Shiloh, Atlanta, even if he was overall a successful general. Mcpherson I just don't get based on his record. Then again, I don't know enough about that officer so I would love to hear your thoughts. And on a side note: Reynolds is perhaps the most confusing generals I've ever read about. He seems dependable and people keep saying he was one of the best generals in the Union army. I know I chose him b/c his record indicates he was dependable. However, he never had any particular battle to shine in and his action at Gettysburg is... controversial.

I don't think I can fill out all the blanks, but here is my Union (85,000) dream team Commanding General: Ulysses S. Grant 1st Corps Commander: George H. Thomas 1st Division Commander: William T. Sherman 2nd Division Commander: Phillip Sheridan 3rd Division Commander: John Gibbon 2nd Corps Commander: William Rosecrans 1st Division Commander: Ambrose Burnside 2nd Division Commander: Joshua Chamberlain 3rd Corps Commander: George Meade 4th Corps Commander: John Reynolds 1st Division Commander: Winfield Scott Hancock Cavalry Corps Commander: John Buford And yeaeh that's all I could really fill out

0.5 Speed is also very useful if you want to fight multiple areas, but still want to keep track of the flow of the battle and make minute adjustments.

Gaines Mill Or as according to Richard Winters, Goddamnit Mcclellan #1 After Shiloh, I and my two Corps were put under the command of the Army of Potomac and I was made one of the deputy commanders of the new Union Commander, George B. Mcclellan. It was probably one of the most aggravating assignments I've ever had. I and my deputies, 2nd Corps commander Barry Hanson, and 1st Corps 1st Division Commander Ulysses S.Grant were being given a lot more responsibility. However, I disagreed with Mcclellan's command style. He was just so goddamn f*cking cautious. He'd assembled 121,500 soldiers and the Confederates according to the reports I captured had only 76-81 thousand! Yet, he believed that he was outnumbered because of that stupid idiot Pinkerton who kept claiming Confederate forces were twice the size of the Army of the Potomac. It didn't help that Mcclellan STILL thought the rebels outnumbered us when I defeated a detachment of Bragg's and secured a river in Virginia. I also managed to seize the Hanover Courthouse and smash the rebel attack at Seven Pines, finally earning a promotion to Major General of the Regular Army. Yet, even with all of this, Mcclellan bloody didn't want to attack Richmond, rather, he wanted to siege it out even when we outnumbered him! By that point, we'd lost any strategic momentum or even initiative. I begged him to attack, but he refused. Instead, the army was attacked at Beavers Dam Creek and while we won that, Mcclellan bloody completely lost it and ordered a withdrawal. I was ordered to hold Gaines Mill at all costs as the Army of the Potomac changed its supply base to the James River. And unfortunately, I was outnumbered. Mcclellan would only allow detachment to engage. I would find out later the rebels under Robert E. Lee had 52,138 infantry and 67 guns. Luckily, I had been working with my friends in washington to improve the situation of my army (Politics 10)and the size of my army (Army Organization 5). I still had certain issues with the Economy 1, Logistics 2, Training 1, Medical 2, and particularly the Reconaisance 0 done for my army. But at this point, I had assembled a sizeable force of 40,300 infantry and 45 artillery pieces that were organized as shown below: 1st Corps: Me, Richard Wingers 1st Division: Major General Ulysses S Grant: The Veterans division with my elite 2 star brigades: The Red Vipers, Baker's Rangers, and other veterans. In total, 8000 men in 4 brigades, primary armament Springfield 1855s, with one brigade of Hapers Ferry variants. 1X 15 gun artillery brigade of napoleons 2nd Division: Brigadier General Stephen Hardin with 1 star veteran brigades. 4x2000 men with Palmetto 1842s, Springfields 1842s, Lorenz's and 1 x10 gun 24 Pounder Howitzers 3rd Division: Brig General: Kelly Walton: 4x2000 1 star veterans with Springfield 1842s. 1 x 10 guns of 10pdr Ordinance artillery brigade. 2nd Corps: Barry Hanson 1st Division: Brig General: Andy Wallace: 1x2000 1 star vet brigade, 3x2000 recruit brigades with Springfield 1842s. 1x 10gun 10pdr Ordinance artillery brigade. 2nd Division: William Brooks: 4x2000 recruit brigades with Springfield 1842s. 1x 300 Skirmishers with Sharps 450 range sniper rifles. My 1st Corps and 1st Division were initially deployed across the river while the rest of my army were near a series of breastworks in front of the mill, on the other side of a creek. Grant had initially deployed the 1st Division this way to try to protect my breastworks, but I realized it would be a better idea if I consolidate all of my forces, so I pulled my divisions back. What I ended up doing was deploying my men following a double-line principle. The first line being those brigades, no star and 1 star, garrisoned into my breastworks, and a second line where reserves, 1 star or 2 star would give supporting fire should the rebels charge. I also put my elite 2-star brigades on my extreme right flank, where the longer breastworks made it more vulnerable. As such, Ambrose Hill's attack failed against my defenses. Even when my brigades fled, I managed to use my 2nd line to reinforce them. I did eventually find out though that my rightmost breastwork was more than useless. I instead had to defend that flank through using my elite brigades to flank any enemies advancing to that position and through putting my brigades into the forest. It also helped that I put my 24pounder Howitzer brigade into the forest behind the brigades. They took some casualties, but inflicted a hell of a lot of kills. The main problem was that while I fended of Ambrose HIll's attacks, DH Hill came to flank me, hard. I was forced to shift my reserves, which had been damaged by the earlier fighting, to delay them as Barry Hanson arrived with my 2nd Corps. Immediately as I had Barry Hanson throw my 2nd Corps recruits into the woods and field at the foot of the hill, Ambrose Hill launched several more attacks at Boatswain swamp. Although my brigades retreated briefly, my artillery held them off though, while I shifted my 2nd internal line of reserves to defeat the attack. DH Hill kept trying to press my right, but my 2nd Corps formed dual lines as well, a line of brigades in the woods and fields on the front, and then a line of damaged brigades behind them, ready to replace them in case of a hole. In this cover, my elite brigades The Red Vipers and Baker’s Rangers did very well, both achieving more than a thousand kills to less than 200 losses. At the end of the day, I held Gaines Mill and Boatswain’s Swamp and could claim a victory. My men were exhausted, but my army had actually taken fairly light casualties. Out of 40,300 infantry and 45 guns, I had lost 6771 infantry and 3 guns, with my elite infantry brigades and my 24 pounder Howitzer brigade getting thousands of kills. Scales’s artillery brigade actually claimed 3000 kills and they weren’t even 1 star veterans. Only later did I find out that I had faced a confederate force of 52318 infantry and 67 guns. But despite inflicting 22198 infantry casualties and 4 guns on Lee’s army, goddamn Mcclellan ordered me to continue the retreat and he wouldn’t give me further reinforcements. I instead had to scrounge out reinforcements myself with my skill in politics and invest heavily into preparing medical care (Medicine +1) and new weapons (Economy +1) because I now had to cover the movement … well, retreat of the Army of the Potomac to Harrison’s Landing along the James River. This would lead to the Battle of Malvern Hill, a strange battle, perhaps easier than most, but at the same time, a difficult battle which would test my skill in coordinating my brigades to the limit.

Truuuue... i dunno I don't really care for speed. My biggest concern is hammering and anvilling the crap out of my enemy with the best possible troops and so I gave the edge to Trainer and Logistics. Tactics could be useful admittedly.

Agreed... hell i played Washington and succeeded after Intelligence Report was implemented, making things easier. I had to b/c my army was just not big enough. When I did finish Washington, I needed 136 K infantry 1500 cavalry and 110 guns. and went up against 188505 Union infantry 7799 of their cav and 757 guns. Ofc I lost lots. 60681 infantry, 44 guns and 909 cavalry. The Union lost... ridiculous amount of troops. 109727 infantry, 297 guns and 5040 cavalry, I also captrured 3040 of their troops.

You'd need 5 brigades of 450 range skirmishers... which he doesn't have so I call BS .

you probably get the 2000 men upgrade but you don't need 4 corps. Not even at Antietam do you need 4. You just need the requisite 3 (I think it's 3 required). And even at that yeah... you only need the 1st corps stacked to entirety. THe 2nd corps wouldnt reach the fighting before your 1st corps finishes objectives. THis is b/c all you really need to do is Human Wave the crap out of the northernmost foritifcations, attack with green brigades first (lined up 3 wide, 4 deep, bunched up is better) by doing the right click and pull command ordering all brigades to march right up to the enemy fortifications, then charge order them. After that, rest a few secs, repeat with the fresher brigades on the 2nd fortifications (always remember to move arty up while doing so) and then push into forest with the remainding brigades,w here you can just sweep down to the Stony Ridge.