Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About James7504

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Hiya I have slowly been working my way through the CSA campaign and have noticed the AI seems to have some issues. I have only played a few battles ,s I continue my campaign, in the last week or so and have noticed a difference in the AI. (Playing medium difficulty, not hard and not easy) Example: Antietam - As the CSA I made a line from the hill on the left, through the trees to the dunker church. After the initial 10 minutes there was never a union presence on my left and my cavalry happily raided the entire Union rear, eventually I felt safe enough for my entire left flank to roll up the union, with little trouble. There was not a single assault on the Dunker Church. Units wandered into the open ground near the Dunker church and were slowly shot down, but not a single charge was made. No assault was made on the sunken lane until quite late and it was stopped by three units of detached skirmishers deployed infront of the sunken lane so I had line of sight in the area with the house. The only assault I had to really fend off was the bridge on the right, though the bridge further to the south also had units none tried to cross. Also the end battle numbers is the Confederacy supposed to have a larger army than the Union? Seemed odd that the final numbers on the battle screen had me with more troops. Fredricksburg: The union did not attack my right flank at all, not a single shot was fired by me or them. I sat in my defensive line expecting an attack and nothing happened. On my left flank the union sat just out of rifle range, bombarding me with artillery and I thought that was great, but my line was never threatned, there were 2 single unit charges attempted at the centre of my defenses that I blew away and the occasional one or two units trying to move around my left that also were blown apart. In the centre the enemy did not attack so I moved the bulk of my centre around to attack the enemys right in the town and rolled them up easily. In the last phase the union finally made a good attack but my 1000 man new units with farmer rifles held them long enough to atop them taking any objective (no enemy rushed the objective when my right unit routed and opened the way). Wheres as I noticed when I started this new playthrough that the AI was really doing well, the very first battle was tough and the AI consistently performed quite well, I really struggled taking the supply posts before 2nd Manassas the Union AI was going great. So just letting you know if there has been a patch recently or something the Union Ai is struggling, atleast on those major battles. On a completely different note, the game is awesome. I played every Darthmod for Total War and loved them and this game is awesome. If I can make some small suggestions for the next game. . . 1: Leader abilities - just like the units have skills/traits, you choose as a leader levels up It would be awesome for the leader themselves to have some small bonuses when commanding a unit or division. Jackson having fast marching and good defence. Stuart being a Cavalry leader with Cavalry skills. Just so that each leader has a little variety and has an effect on the field even when they are not represented at the Corps Level. Plus famous or renowned leaders could pop up with a special trait. IE Stuart as a unit commander or division commander may give a small % Speed and % Stamina per officer level he gains, If stuart commands a division and has a 8% bonus to Stamina and Speed, and then you have forrest commanding a unit in that division and he gives a further 4% to his unit then you have an effective Cavalry division command structure. 2: My General starting with a trait already, I don't like that, I would like to choose my own traits/abilities plus have a bonus ability because I am the player and I want to be super awesome . 3: Uniforms: Being able to select uniforms. Not for Civil War maybe but if going Napoleonic then having a selection of type/style/colour for Jackets, Pants and Headdress would help to make each unit individual, greater attachment for the player to units, and allow easier identification on the battlefield. Yes on the battlefield you may only be able to see colour differences and helmet but I still think it would be cool. There was a BRILLIANT game called Age of Rifles that had this feature and it was great. 4: Bonuses/recognition for units. If a unit gets the most kills in a battle maybe a unit citation that gives a little morale boost? Taking a lot of losses without routing, capturing a lot of enemy troops or artillery pieces, most melee damage and campaign pennants and so on. The award of a unit pennant or citation that adds a small bonus and shows on the unit card. So that each unit slowly gets a bit of recognition and point of difference and further attaches the player to the unit. Maybe something for the officer too, different random small bonus when his unit gets a citation based on the unit being commanded (ie +3 morale and Melee)? 5: Horse Artillery, smaller size and more expensive due to the horses but can keep up with the cavalry. Thanks for the game, completely enjoy it, well done
  2. James7504

    Officer suggestion

    Hiya, for a start, did not steal anything, I think its a good idea and so do a few other by the look, I would assume quite a few of us from Total war want that roleplay/management system expanded. I see some awesome ideas about that here. As was said further up the Rome Total war leader system was good - giving positive and negative traits, the addition of retainers that add a bit aswell sounds good to me too. I happily played every darthmod, I still think the only playable version of empire total war is with darthmod.
  3. James7504

    Officer suggestion

    Hiya, enjoying the game very much, just wanted to make some suggestions. As a wargame like this lacks some replayability I wanted to suggest adding an extra management/roleplay element to it by extending the officer system. Officers - are really awesome, how about a single small random bonus for each officer like reload speed, morale, charge etc(or historical, ie Jackson gives his division 5% speed and stamina etc), and that skill gets just a little better each rank. Maybe a random chance of a second skill based on the troop type he leads - if he serves a few battle commanding artillery he may gain artillery experience and earn a specific artillery bonus? Experience in each troop type leading to leveling as a leader of that particular troop type - with perks based on the troop type. So a skirmisher skill tree, cavalry skill tree, artillery skill tree etc. Allow our officer to work down any and every tree if he so pleases - cavalry experience can convert to skirmisher exp at a reduced rate so my cav officer can get a skirmisher perk he wants? How about the officers having traits like the player does that add a 1% bonus per point on top of player and division commander bonus? Instead of all units being able to be the same size, unit size depends on the officers rank/skill. So though the player ranks up and can add more units to a division/corps, the officer leveling up allows the unit he commands to have more men. Battlefield promotions - we lose officers in battle, how about promotion to captain through an act of valour? That would give us a few captains (with a bonus special perk? small plus to morale because he is a hero perhaps?) we may want to level up rather than just buying all our officers. The addition of medals that can be granted to officers after a battle and/or won randomly during an intense fight - ie unit loses 60% but doesnt break during a battle, officer gets a medal - and that medal gives a reduction to the cost of buying veterans for the unit that officer commands? Corps officers who administer, so you have slots for specialist support staff you attach as your generals staff as you level up, your aide-de-camp, supply officer, chief scout, medical officer etc give the player a bonus to his medicine or politics, logistics recon etc. But you can lose these guys if your leader gets shot at in combat, or maybe off map political events where you have to choose between two options. Divisional commanders on the field, higher bonus for units of that commanders division when that commander is with his division, but the general of another division only gives 1/3 bonus to a unit not of his division (maybe upgradable skill using officer xp?) while the general you play gives his bonus to any/all equally - same with supply wagons. Example: you have a captain who can use his xp to buy perks, he has been commanding artillery so he has artillery xp, he spends that on rank 1 reloading skill - he gain experience the next battle but not enough to get his next rank - he cant buy rank 2 reloading until he gets major so he can save his xp or buy another rank 1 skill. Next battle he fights well and gets awarded a medal, this medal allows him a single use upgrade cannons at 5% off. He levels up a lot and commands a division, his perks now affect any unit in his command radius on the battle map at 100% for units in his division and 30% for non-division units. Another captain is created through a battlefield promotion, he has a special + morale perk on top of any skills he will acquire, which means he is a little more valuable that a bought officer - and you will want to rank him up. Because your division performed a mission within a certain time frame you received a medal you can give to any officer that grants a plus to logistics skill. tl:dr experienced based skills/perks system for officers that deepens the management/roleplay part of the game. Maybe add traits like the player does for officers also, logistics/medecine which apply to the unit commanded by the officer. I know it would be a huge job, just a suggestion that would probably appeal to the type of players interested in strategic gaming.