Mr Larp

Happy birthday!

wait, how did you get to chickamauga? Is it in the public beta?

I think that would be better, but I still like the former system better because it would not hand the player a "victory" for taking the objectives but destroying themselves in the process.

I think the game would be greatly improved if we revert back to a victory system similar to UG Gettysburg. The system used now is far more arbitrary and does not measure the magnitude of victory/defeat. To illustrate my claim on the system being arbitrary, let's look at the "draw" conditions for the battle of antietam (CSA). To get a draw, the player must hold Sharpsburg and lose less then 55% of their army. A player that holds Sharpsburg and loses 54.99% of their army, and gets a draw. But if they lost 100 more men and inflicted 30k more casualties, they would actually lose the battle, according to the current victory system, despite the battle clearly going better than before. In UG Gettysburg, the victory system rewards the player for making such advantageous trade offs by measuring casualties inflicted and important places held, against casualties sustained and important places not held. Also in the current victory system, victory conditions are considered absolute, losing as many soldiers as you possibly can to fulfill those conditions is considered better than not fulfilling them and obliterating the enemy army. The new system acting as if all victories/defeats can't be more decisive than another is also a significant step back. It makes no sense that defeating and destroying the enemy does not give you more reputation, money, or recruits than simply defeating them. If defeating an army gives you a higher reward from the victory system, then why not destroying it? In UG Gettysburg, you did not just get a bland "Victory" every time you improved your skill in the game. I think this is a great game with even greater potential, and I will waste many hours playing it regardless. However, It would be fantastic if the developer found a way to achieve the advantages in the UG Gettysburg system to this game.

I completely agree, except maybe have a fraction of shattered troops desert for good, as it's pretty reasonable that some will be too demoralized to return to the army (especially if you take into account that desertion was common during the civil war when morale was low)

Good point. However, some enemy attrition based on casualties inflicted would be a very interesting and doable feature once the ai becomes more intelligent and casuality rates are reduced to more realistic levels.

I think the casualty count screen would improve if it showed all of the soldiers lost in battle, rather than just those captured or killed/wounded. Since shattered troops are lost permanently, I think shattered soldiers should be labeled "missing" and captured soldiers be labeled "captured" (to tell the difference between the two) What do you think?