jimcarrel

I stay up late not wanting to go to bed and fight those little wiggly lines of men

I'll have to agree with the current beta skirmishers being rather lousy, seems that they hang around with the calvary units too much and are picking up their tactics. Constant attention to cav and skirm units is getting pretty tedious. I tend to reject building cav units now, but am hard headed about splitting out skirm units and end up babysitting them.

My only gripe against current calvary is that they are just too footloose and fancy free, too much dancing around and not paying attention. My sons at five years of age were easier to mind.

Thats exactly my impression, mine used to get 100's of kills in a fairly long battle, but now it can be in the 50"s. Sorta took the fun out of it.

not a lot, maybe not any. Come to think of it, saves completely nullify the idea of denying "restart" so that's a moot argument.

Yes there is a restart button, mine looks like a cup of coffee every morning.

Thanks Nick!

Just put me down as a wussy then, If restarts are only given to easy mode,,,,, I'm outa here. If you desire such a thing as not restarting then "trust" you self not to do it. Lot of sims are played that way,(make your own rules) but to take away restart will leave you and 20 others supporting the developer.

I don't get much from Parrots, no matter the different ranges... and 24 Howitzers...forget them. A 6 pounder can give 4 to 6 times the kills of a 24 Howitz. Lately even 12 Naps are not much use, at least it seems like it. Right now it appears that the old 6 and 10's are more worth the cost. I can sure remember someone saying they really liked the Parrots, Really?

your right in your assessment. In a previous patch state, the community complained about certain scenario fortifications being too formidable, then after a patch those certain fortifications were nerfed some, as well as those who were already a bit weak, making those even more useless. Seems to me all the maps or scenarios do not have the same amount of cover afforded by fortifications. Seems I should be wrong about that, but not in experiance. I occasionally use fortifications, even though they seem to take too much damage, but they do seem to make morale last a bit longer.

However you want to class this thing called Ultilmate General, Civil War, it has me captivated. My impression is that we are just seeing hints as to how the Dev intends to finish it. We are just looking at the pieces, as the bits begin to come on line, we may be pleasantly surprised. Right now we are just along for the ride in Early Access.

I've run into circumstances, a memorable one was during 2nd Bull Run as Union, where a brigade is doing nothing (with no icons or flanked etc. warnings) and I could not even select them, not even to just get statistic readouts on them.

I see your point, but, if a new user cannot replay with different tactics (resulting in learning) a new user will get frustrated and quit (resulting in spreading of a negative word). Publisher needs new users, more new users results in funding for continued work and producing better game play). Option to replay should always reside with the user.

Thanks to OP for this, ha- I never even noticed this drag on my billfold.

Well, you know at camp when you create them,whether they are green or veterans, ....maybe you are still trying the opening battle with the train station. If that is the case you will just have to slow down until you understand the mechanics and consequences of troop movement. watch all the youtube videos you can stand.

It is a little hard if you only use green troops, you will have to use a couple of brigades of veterans to back up the green ones. You also try to give them the best division and brigade commanders you can.(majors just make your green troops bullet magnets and not very good at even that) Try keeping the worst brigades out of the way, they will get experience just being on the field If using green troops, don't stick them alone try using in 3's so both flanks of group are covered. It can help if you can upgrade rifles once the brigade commanders command stat has gotten over 35 or 40. Even Palmetto's are a better gun than what is originally issued.

So, at this time in development, is there a list of "junk" armaments laying around, it can sure be disappointing to implement a gun-running plan for the building up of good armaments for later use in campaign and then find out you were scammed.

I believe that is exactly what he is saying, When certain things are changed, the engine cannot change what you have in your current campaign, other things changed, it makes no difference.

As a general rule I just click on a spot, but when hard pressed for time I may try to route a road path, usually more for supply wagons and cannons (they are slow anyway) especially in a major fall back of entire forces. (can't be losing cannons and wagons just cause I need to get out of the area)

Yes, A.P. and I just noticed someone in the support forum asking questions pertaining to selecting brigades. It just dawned on me this morning that while most players have, at the least, an abstract concept of OOB's while in camp (building corps and divisions towards a purpose), once you deploy troops on the field, a planned order of battle goes out the window simply due to the method of getting troops on the field. We have had discussions on combining divisions, (what's the separation?), separating and rejoining skirmishers (again separation or even, where are they?) . Maybe I am just getting too picky and am wanting something way different from publishers concept, but I don't think so. Just look at what we have right now. I consider it as more on the sim side than the game side. (and content of patches seem to indicate that) And again, I may just be dreaming and totally off track. In my opinion, modern day battle can be more fluid due to instant communications, a brigade in modern times could literally end up anywhere on the field, but way back yonder in time, there was a definite battle plan that once put forth either succeeded or failed. If the guy in charge couldn't stick to the plan he was shown the door (fluidity was not condoned, whether in reality it could work or not). I'd just like a more historical way of getting troops on the field.

At the risk of future reputation. I'm going to use Union Campaign and River Crossing battle as example for this . Considering the intermittent conversations we've had about moving troops to a desired staging area, it seems that since we all appreciate micromanaging (or at least most), that is our current problem. I think that the game engine is always in what I will call "Brigade Mode". For example, when you start the battle, more than likely (but not always) you want to move brigades not as a whole, but in two different groups. Possibly a small feint to the West of the river near the top VP and the majority of brigades south down through the valley and then across the river to Southern VP. In order to do this the game engine is focused on individual brigade selection and movement.."Brigade Mode". Let us say you want to move everything you have down the valley to the South and then across the river to the Southern VP. You can select everything you have and draw a desired layout on the East side of the river near the lower VP, but the problem with that is that individual brigades take a straight path resulting in them going in a straight line through areas that you don't want them to go. In order to accomplish this movement in a strategical way, you have to individually select each brigade and draw a path for them. (and I might add that it rarely results in a military type movement) You cannot select everything you have and designate a movement path for the whole force, by columns, to follow. (for example, down through the valley to the South). Furthermore, you cannot individually select a group of brigades and move by defining a path for the selected group of brigades (in column) to a desired location. First off, in reflection, this can probably only apply to battle start (original staging area), but what I'm proposing is a key to enable "Brigade" or "Force" selections. I'm just not sure what the ramifications would be if enabled through entire battle. "Brigade mode" or default mode would allow selection of individual brigades (as it is now) and drawing individual paths. A new "Force mode" that would allow picking all brigades in the staging box or a group of individually selected brigades and moving that selection ,by columns, by the path drawn. I freely admit this has pros and cons. It could thrill micro-managers by hurting your commands by you forgetting which mode you are in (which could be negated by making Force mode a one time use after clicking, in other words you click the Force mode command and it is abandoned once path is drawn, but then if path is incorrect, you'd have to remember to click Force again or it wouldn't work, this would be a con) I've not seen anything like this suggested and I may be totally out in la-la land (a.k.a. just a load of ka-ka), but I can sort of see some posts kind of suggesting a need for this type of control, it could possibly sort out some of the movement problems. As far as including this type of control, I pretty much think it is the same mechanic as selection of files in a folder... using the shift command or the control command when choosing desired files. So it shouldn't be impossible (but is it profitable? and the collective column movements are not currently within the program) ...just sayin', incoherent? ridiculous? Personally, I absolutely adore this thing called Ultimate General Civil War at this stage of development.

I think at was maybe two patches ago that code was amended to try to alleviate stacking two brigades together, I don't think it totally corrected it, but many times you can see it in action. A brigade will sometimes try to adjust itself to "not be in conflict" with the position of the other. Your right about when a brigade senses the enemy brigade about to break it will sometimes go headstrong push to get to them... 'tis the fruits of battle, you lose control and so do they. I kinda like it, I mean you did want something of an artificial intelligence.

More than likely commander deaths are controlled by an algorithm similar to a roll of the dice using the units amount of hits during fighting. I mean it can't be too complicated, there are already enough calculations going on.

I think he mistakenly posted in wrong forum

oh, you young recruits.......