TM21

ow, I guess I misinterpreted your comment. I focused on the "3 star" part, not on the "general" part... So I thought I should use a colonel as Corps commander. Lol.

I think I'll pass. :-) Thanks for your feedback!

Imho it gives some additional flavor to the commander. Anyway. We'll disagree on this. Placing a brigade at the exact right spot at the edge of a forest for example can be a finicky thing to do. Digging in would in a way streamline the process of setting up a defensive line. Now I'm not talking about trenches like during the siege of Petersburg, mind you. I'm overall looking for more orders/flavor for my brigades. But if the Devs keep it like it is, I'd be perfectly content.

I'm talking about wavering troops, with a low morale, that got away in some order and now are standing idle some distance from the field. I guess their morale slowly gets back, but with a "Rally"-command by (at least) a BrigGen. their morale would rise much quicker. Who needs Commisars when Zhukov or Rokossovski himself comes by to tell you to get your asses moving for the Mother/Fatherland? Difficulty is in the eye of the beholder; I sure as hell would like the option to dig in in a semi-open field, to close of a certain route or whatever.

Hmmm, a button/order that becomes available when a unit is demoralized and is within the radius of the commander. But it may prevent the player making dumb/costly mistakes, especially with the CSA, where men are in short supply. Hmm, okay, so that menu could use a refrasing, because it could be interpreted like I did.

Hello there, long time player of several strategy- and wargames, like CW Generals 2, Total War, Crusaders Kings II etc. The developer of Europa Universalis IV recommended this game in his 2016 GotY-list, so I gave it a try. I am very impressed by the game and I am looking forward to the definitive version! Now, as it is in Beta, it is only fair to the Devs to share my experiences/questions/suggestions (in no particular order): 1) I, the player, play as a character that is tabbed as the “General-in-Chief”. I set up the Army, appoint commanders, buy weapons etc. But get this in my current campaign as the CSA: I left my character out of a couple of battles, cos I was fiddling with the division structure and stuff and thought another division was better equipped for a particular battle. Now, my char is still a Brigadier General and Corps commander, but I could recruit Major Generals like Albert Johnston. So I did, cos I thought appointing a MG would improve my army in a way. But it felt off to keep my char as Corps commander and use Johnston as Division commander, cos there is a difference in rank. So I switched them. So, to use a sports analogy: my char is the General Manager (“General-in-Chief”) and Coach (“Corps/Division commander”) but now has someone above him, who (to continue the analogy) is NOT the GM. And he sure as hell isn’t the Owner. I could of course ignore this and put a BG above a MG, but it doesn’t feel right. So what I’m trying to say is that being tabbed G-in-C right from the get go is a bit inappropriate. If this position was to be awarded to you during the campaign due to your record AND rank, that would be more satisfying. Maybe some system with a Secretary of War as your boss in the CSA’s case, or the historical G-i-C’s in the Unions case. 2) Night turns: I noticed my troops were moved during the night phase of a battle, without my express consent as player. This cannot pass. Or let the troops stay where they were at the end of the day, or give me the opportunity to move (and only move) my troops during the night to another location (with penalties of course to morale/exhaustion). 3) Reassigning commanders to the Reserve List: I’ve read this in another thread, this indeed should be implemented to allow for full customization of my Army. Also, I should be able to give my Army a name, like the Army of Northern Virginia or the Army of the Cumberland. 3) Rally: I would like to be able to rally demoralized troops with my Commander. Gamewise, to rally these troops, they have to be inside the radius of the commander. And yes, this is a CWG2 feature I really miss. 4) Dig in: another CWG2 feature. Let troops dig in. Especially as the CSA, this would give the player more tactical options. 5) Supply system is a bit obscure: how can I tell how much supplies I ideally would need to take with me into battle? It would still be my decision to carry less supplies with me (or more), but now I only have a dollar amount and I don’t have the slightest clue how long it will last during a battle. 6) Unit composition veterans-rookies: correct me if I’m wrong, but AFAIK there is no way to view the V-R splits of a certain brigade. There is the battle experience button, but it doesn’t say for example: Total force: 1.500 soldier > 375 veterans, 600 battle hardened, 525 rookies. If you have this info, you could fine tune the recruitment of each brigade. 7) Mixed arms: now this could be complicated to implement, but sometimes it feels like a chore to fill up depleted brigades. “I need 500 soldiers to get to maximum strength (1500), but I only have 400 guns type X available….” Why not be able to buy different types for those 400 new recruits? I guess it would mess up the calculations of the game, but still… Anyway, these were my observations after some 10 hours of gameplay. Devs, keep up the good work!