Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

vren55

Ensign
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    207

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by vren55

  1. vren55
    And Nick, thanks for all your hard work. Can't wait until this patch because after this, I"m going to be making a new campaign!
  2. vren55
    Derpus, there's a solution to that that doesn't need a creator fix. Weight your 1st Division to have MASSSSIIIIIVE overwhelming 2500 huge men brigades. That way you can resist the confederate assault fairly easily through using detached skirmishers to cover your flanks.
  3. vren55
    I kinda agree with Pong. I prefer Federals usually because they allow me a lot more flexibility. While The Soldier is absolutely right in that you get to loot lots of good rifles as Confed, the Federals have so much money you can equip your soldiers with cheaper rifles, while you use the looted high tier rifles for your veteran brigades. Basically, both can loot, but one can loot for your elites while the other kinda has to survive on looted weaponry.
  4. vren55
    Ah thanks Col. Kelly, AP Hill and Buford Protege for answering. Huh, the game's veterancy progression suddenly makes a lot more sense considering...
  5. vren55
    Mind you I think Total War Warhammer is a bit of an exception. It is Genuinely interesting due to the spellcasters. However, the campaign of Total War really... well it doens't suck, but it needs a serious reworking b/c their AI hasn't really changed much.
  6. vren55
    I found Total War and UG:CW occupy different parts of my gaming library. Though i like them both. In Total War, if I want to feel good about myself and build massive shiny armies just to look at the lovely graphics before using some rudimentary tactics to screw the AI, then I play that game. If I actually want a challenge, and I have lots of time to replay, I play UG:CW. It's the puzzle-solver game that feels more XCOM like. If I have to say one major flaw with the Total War games though, I don't play them purely for gameplay these days, I play them to look at shiny units and feel good, which means that I am not interested in getting later expansions/iterations, particularly b/c it's ridiculously expensive and has so much graphics demand. And unfortunately, they're getting progressively more expensive and with higher graphics demands.
  7. vren55
    I basically made a beeline for SOuth Seminary and then cemetary. Take the southern hill and don't bother with the north (until later) then instead of walking up through the town I flanked them. Basically I had some divisions keep the union in the town (not necessarily engaging, but fixing) and then swung three of my best brigades over the open field... they sortof collapsed from then.
  8. vren55
    Chickmauga was more generous than I expected, which was much needed :P. Though I still ended up with a deficit. Granted, Cold Harbour was great for me because I kind of used the same trick I used at Gettysburg... win the battle on the first day and avoid having to make contact with your entire army against the AI's.
  9. vren55
    ... What game are you playing? i'm actually in a fairly desperate strait as CSA, which necessitated me rushing the Old Cold Harbour Point. Reason being is that while I have equipment, my army has only about 47K men in total, no manpower int he barrel.
  10. vren55
    Pretty much. Moreover, you wouldn't want your actual skirmisher units scouting ahead of your army, because they'll get casualties that they can't absorb well. Actual skirmish regiments are also hella vulnerable to cav. Detached skirmishers are too, but it's not a risk if they get one-shotted.
  11. vren55
    Just out of interest, why were some Brigades so well known and frankly didn't break like tinbits. I mean, didn't they all have similar training (or lack thereof)? I'm thinking about the Iron Brigade and Stonewall Brigade here. Was it really due so much to the personality and ability of the Brigade commander, or were there other factors?
  12. vren55
    Yeah my CSA army was 48K as well. However, I've cracked a way to get a Day 1 Victory on Cold Harbour Colonel Difficulty, so I only lost 4994 men. XD Basically you take all of your elite brigades and replenish them to 2000-2500 you deploy them all, you take the point (I found using the forest and then cutting through the middle of the Union formation) take the point, set up a cordon, and delay the Union as long as possible until you win. :D. Note, it's key to get larger brigades with very good morale or else this strategy doesn't work. As for Union My army total was about 85K ish. I won with about half my men deployed
  13. vren55
    Welcome! Don't be obliged to stick to it though (well aside from the Officer advice... that's fairly important and patches have not changed this. plus if you do this, I'll guarantee you'll have an excess of Major Generals by Gettysburg/Chickamauga). The thing about UG CW, which I will always compliment the devs for. Is that its immensely flexible and there a thousand possibilities. My build is very infantry heavy, less micro intensive (b/c cav and skirmishers are micro intensive) but the lack of specialization is... hurting me slightly in the lategame as it restricts my strategies to certain infantry focused strategies. Great for Union... meh for Confederates. Just remember to savescum hard... really hard. Edit. How did you find my guide btw? I'ts like... buried by forum posts lol.
  14. vren55
    I would like to point out that in certain missions, you want LARGER divisions. Eg. Cold Harbour. If you're union, you want that first divisiion in your first corps to be max sized... just to hold the bloody point. I'm going to do with same with my confederate playthrough so I can take the damn point on the first day... i don't want to fight a loooooonnnnnng as battle. Edit: MY COLD HARBOUR STRATEGY WORKED!!! Yeah, basically you can weight your 1st division really heavily so you can blast certain Grand Campaign battles in the first day. Cough, Gettysburg, Cough, Cold Harbour (and possibly Chancelloresville).
  15. vren55
    Wait. HOW? instructions please!!!! Dwbi. Normal (Colonel) difficulty is quite challenging. Doable, but often requiring you to experiment a lot with strategy and tactics, and to take risks that may or may not pay off. Expect to savescum like a bastard because it's often the only way to figure out an expedient way to win. Eg. There was one battle (Saunder's Fields) where it told me to hold and I was like... yeah but I found out through 2 attempts at that battle that the missions needs me to counterattack and take the point... Solution: Bum rush the enemy and establish a forward position so that counterattacking was easier.
  16. vren55
    ... I think the victory system percentages needs to be tweaked a bit. I bum rushed the Union at Cold Harbour, I held the Old Cold Harbour point, and yet I drew. Admittedly, I lost a lot of men from my first and 2nd divisions, but nowhere near 40% of my entire army. Either one, clarify that its 40% of the army on the field, or two, alter it so it's actually 40% of your entire army. Edit: That being said, I figured out how to win Cold Harbour on the first day, so yay!
  17. vren55
    Standard for me is (with 9 army organization) 5 brigades infantry 1 artillery. I always have an artillery brigade in a division, the rest composed of infantry. I have varied it slightly by adding 1-2 units of cav per division. But I rarely use cavalry. I never use skirmishers unless they are detached skirmishers. See my guide for more details on officer roles :P as well as equipment and brigade size.
  18. vren55
    I found Saunder's fields a bit annoying because it required me to basically to have failed winning to win it. They should have given us the TWO points we needed to take immediatley because the only way I can find to win it on Colonel, is to be uber aggressive and ensure that you have a foothold in the forest from the start. If you don't, the fortifications the union take are so heavy that there is no way to break through or even flank them. I
  19. vren55
    Well.... I used to prefer the Napoleons but of late they haven't been doing that much damage. It was then I realized this... The Napoleons I equipped with Union and Confederacy, well there were a lot of defensive battles for both in the earlier parts of the campaign, where they often got a lot of kills. This is why it seemed to me the Napoleon looked superior. That changed after I fought Union at Fredericksburg, and I realized... that well in a short ranged context, the Ordinance's cannister shot is going to do the trick at close range (giving charging enemies massive morale penalties) and it has the added benefit of being able to shoot at range. Furthermore, Stones River and Chancelloresville, required a lot of movement for Union and Confederates. Chancelloresville and Chickamauga required quite a bit of maneuver as well. Overland campaign is the same (well for Union) The result is that my napoleons don't seem to be doing as well as my ordinance's... but then again at that point I phased a lot of them out... Because the thing is, the Napoleon is great for defensive warfare where it can just sit there and pound shots and cannister into charging AI armies (Malvern hill, Gaines Mill, 2nd Bull Run, Shiloh, Antietam)... but when you need to go on the offensive, and your lines keep advancing, it's less reliable. This is why you should probably use the Ordinance, it's more flexible.
  20. vren55
    .,. what is this combine brigade everybody has been talkinga bout?
  21. vren55
    Agreed... it's made trying to figure out how to beat them a lot harder...
  22. vren55
    ... any advice for that Koro? i've tried going left. I've tried going right, neither will get me where I want. I feel like I might actually have to redo the battle... and charge the forest itself to establish a good initial position. Edit: Nevermind. I figured out a way. It turned out the best way was to bum rush the union's forest position on the Confed right, establish foothold, turn their flank toward the field.
  23. vren55
    ... no kidding... I mean... god i admire the AI programming so much, but it's sooo frustrating... What kind of Ai actually shifts forces when it just GLIMPSES your units heading left! That reactive capacity is bloody ridiculously good! And so frustrating!
  24. vren55
    Question, for those who can't seem to load in the new patch save... is your game still set to 0.77 beta version, or have you updated? Aka, did you ever go to your steam library, right click properties, find the "game versions/files" thingy, disable beta, and wait until the game auto updated in steam (should instantly start update process)? Because it doesn't seem the beta automatically updates to patch 0.78, which means the autosave will not activate. Once you do the update, you can access the autosave from any previous Union/Confederate battle save.
  25. vren55
    Would love the newsletter idea. Wouldn't be too difficult... you'd just need some kind of blank space to replace the casualties and losses figures... as well as equipment gained, enemy generals killed... maybe something praising the brigade/division that got the most kills.
×
×
  • Create New...