pandakraut
-
Posts
2,005 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by pandakraut
-
-
On 10/11/2023 at 6:28 PM, dixiePig said:
There are no USA troops at Burnside's Bridge now. I've played the endgame scenario 3x with same result. Why is this? Is it an artifact of my smaller unit profile - or something else?
This is one of the randomized deployments. Just a dice roll when the phase begins, nothing to do with the player army.
On 10/11/2023 at 6:28 PM, dixiePig said:Artifact: When my Burside's Bridge reinforcements spawned, some of them appeared right on top of USA troops which had flanked me at the south of Sunken Road. Unfortunate ... and kind of stupid. Any solution to this?
Any chance you can get me a screenshot showing where your units were when units spawned on top of them? There is only so much I can do about this kind of thing unfortunately. I try to put the spawns where the player is unlikely to be though.
On 10/11/2023 at 6:28 PM, dixiePig said:Does the game AI 'adjust' the number of AI units in order to reflect the desired Army Total Size? (i.e. more smaller units / fewer large units?)
No, the number of units in battles is static other than the random chance for splits that the mod has added.
On 10/11/2023 at 6:28 PM, dixiePig said:When I direct my ARTY to fire at enemy units, my ARTY units continue to occasionally move into the enemy units, rather than firing at them. Annoying. Anything you can do? I am tempted to simply leave it to 'the game logic' and hope that my ARTY will shoot at the desired enemy units without my direction.
The only time this should happen is if there is a terrain feature blocking the artillery's line of sight. You should get a notification in the top right that your unit needs to move to be able to fire. Antietam does have a ridge around the sunken road that can cause this behavior.
On 10/14/2023 at 10:52 AM, dixiePig said:The initial mini-battle at the bridges used to include a brigade from the Corps which is on the CSA left Flank. Now it is only allied skirmish units (which seems more historically accurate). Is this intentional - or an artifact?
This is intended. Helps limit the amount of damage the player can deal in that phase.
-
On 10/14/2023 at 3:46 PM, gavinreid said:
Hello so I have the 1.9.2 ver with the configuration sheet, but I was wondering if there were any mods out there that 1.) Was worded a little more self explanatory as what going up or down would do, 2) have more things that's you can change like make the stuff editable like where you can make your guys like 3 stars after 1 fight because of there xp, maybe edit it where you get all bonuses at once or 4 instead of 2 and stuff like that. And keep what's already there. I want it so configurable it's essentially a sandbox, ya feel?
The UI mod isn't really setup for that kind of customizability. The options that are available are mostly there to allow you to turn off minor balance changes to get as close to the base game experience as possible while benefiting from bug fixes and quality of life changes.
The J&P Mod has a lot more options, though what you're describing is more like what you would need to use a save editor to accomplish. Customizable perks is something that is currently available in test versions of that mod, so if you wanted to make super perks it could be done. Though the AI would get them as well.
-
On 9/30/2023 at 12:32 AM, Chieftan said:
On MG difficulty, does the AI get a massive boost to condition recovery? I've seen enemy brigades do up to five charges in a row without seeming to slow down in the slightest. This makes it difficult as my troops are all quite asthmatic and struggle to keep pace.
There are no difficulty specific bonuses to stats for the AI. However, on higher difficulties the AIs units will often have very good stats and when combined with the right perks it can lead to a major gap in quality between the players units and the AI's units early on.
For example, if the AI has a 3* unit with 100 in all stats, it won't be any better than a player unit with those stats, it's just that the player will be starting off with much worse units.
CSA units do use a bit less condition than union units, so that won't be helping the situation if you're playing the union. But this is a side specific difference, not an AI vs player difference.
If a unit is doing that many charges in a row, usually it means that the charges are of pretty short duration, which means not all that much condition is used up(especially if the unit has good stats and perks that give movespeed.) One of the changes in the mod is that instead of a 5 minute cooldown whenever you end a charge, only the time spent charging is added as a cooldown. So if the charge ends quickly the unit will be able to charge again quickly.
If you want to provide some more details on the battle and such that you're having trouble with I can try to help with that. Otherwise gonzo gamer's videos on youtube are a very good resource for learning how to deal with charges and it may also be worth considering MG light as a slight step down from MG.
-
Interesting. I'll do some tests and see if I can recreate and find a way to make the AI a bit less inept
-
1
-
-
On 9/19/2023 at 1:45 PM, Margrave said:
Hi Panda,
Has this been figured out since this thread was updated? If not how and which dll file do you add stuff to the store so that line can use skirmisher weapons or vice versa?
thanks
dnspy can be used to make changes to the assembly-csharp.dll in the ultimate general civil war_DATA/managed folder
That can also be used to the decompiled code to a VS solution and then do a compare between the base game and the J&P mod to see how I enabled it.
-
While the battle can be done with only 4 divisions, it's highly recommended to go up to AO 9 so you have 5 divisions in your first corps for this battle.
Interesting approach though, did the AI go after your VP at any point? I thought if they captured it the battle ended, but I didn't try setting up behind the fords myself.
-
1
-
-
On 9/23/2023 at 9:59 AM, PersonMcPerson said:
Is there a way to stop the Union from charging at every opportunity? There's nothing I can do against it.
The AI is more likely to charge when it has a size and xp advantage. If you are in better cover than the AI, lower condition, have shooting perks and the ai has melee, or your unit is isolated that also contributes to the chance that they charge. We have also added logic that if one enemy unit is charging, then other nearby units are more likely to charge.
In general you want to keep your units close enough to support each other. Preferably when an enemy unit charges you can focus it with 3-4 infantry units, their detached skirmishers, and hopefully some artillery supporting with canister and/or cavalry running in to get close flank shots. Falling back the charged unit a bit to buy some time and expose the enemy units flanks to fire can also help, but isn't going to stop charges or delay a second charge nearly as effectively as it does in the base game.
Things get harder when multiple units charge at once since it's harder to focus them each down in time. So you want to try to prevent the AI from getting too many units into position to charge. Cavalry and skirmishers on their flanks to distract and slow them down can help with this. Having cavalry to fire at routing units flanks so they take longer to return to the line, or kill them entirely also helps.
It's also possible to adjust the difficulty as well. In the /mod/rebalance/AIConfigFile you can adjust their size and xp, cap the maximum size of specific unit types, and turn off the advanced charge logic.
Can you share what difficulty you are playing on and what battle you are getting stuck on?
Gonzo also has a very useful series of videos
-
1
-
-
22 hours ago, Drizzo said:
. What should I do to be promoted and not waiting for my posts to be approved? How many replies does it take?
I think it's a relatively small number of likes? So hopefully resolved soon
-
1
-
-
18 hours ago, Raymond Sebastien said:
I don't quite understand what the new changes to Perks in the ETA for 1.28.5, other than they will now be manually editable. Will weapons also be moddable in the same way?
In 1.28.5 the perks will give all of the same bonuses, they will just be using the new system. Then in the following release we will redo all the bonuses to take advantage of the new system.
Weapons have their names and descriptions in text files already. The stats are still in the hex, but those are mostly easier to edit than the perks were.
Adding alternate scenarios to existing battles is the closest we can get to new battles unfortunately.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, superbastard325 said:
what is an ETA for 1.28.5?
A test version of it is available on the discord. Battles updated through Stones River, except for the union which is only partly updated.
That patch includes a full rewrite of the perk system so that it is fully customizable through text files. Only recreating the existing perks for now, an actual change to perk bonuses is more likely in 1.29.
While a lot of that work is done, it still needs some testing/documentation/etc and I don't currently know when that will get finished.
-
2
-
-
51 minutes ago, ug_might said:
So i think this is the last modified battle in the mod?
1.28.3 updated through Fredericksburg. Stones River will be in 1.28.5
Good to see some more evidence that players are figuring out legendary. Nice work!
-
1
-
-
45 minutes ago, Raymond Sebastien said:
Question: Why does the "Enfield Pattern 1856" have such a long range, reduced fire rate capability, and reduced melee capability ?
The "Enfield Pattern 1856" was nothing more than a shorter two-band version of the original "Enfield Pattern 1853". It was a infantry friendly" rifle. Would it be more accurate to give it the same stats as the 1853 for maybe 115 fire rate like the DN&C M1841 ?
Have a nice weekend and take care. 😀
It's currently filling the role of the early sniper option for the CSA. There are a few attempts I could make at justifying its stats, but it easier to say that it is not the most accurate fit, but we needed something for the slot.
FYI there is a weapon names text file in the mod/rebalance folder where the name can be changed if you prefer.
-
1
-
-
22 hours ago, superbastard325 said:
Thanks for the tip Panda, but it doenst seem to work very well. Still get a lot of KIA and WIA
Maybe try something like -99? Or -999? I'm traveling at the moment so I don't have any ability to test to confirm a number currently.
-
1
-
-
On 7/11/2023 at 9:43 PM, superbastard325 said:
Panda, can you maybe in next update give an option to considerably reduce or maybe altogether eliminate chances of wounding or killing officers. I know it is not realistic, but it really pisses me off when I put so much effort in training my officers and then they get KIA en masse. I tried modifying it in text file, but putting shitload of zeros at "wound officer chance" doesnt seem to prevent it at all.
The way that value works, making it smaller will reduce the chance of officers getting wounded or killed, but even setting it to 0 wouldn't be that large of a reduction. By default it's only a minor increase that offsets the amount you can decrease the chance through points in medicine.
If you want to significantly reduce the chance that an officer is wounded/killed then you would want to use a negative number. -10 would prevent it entirely I think.
-
1
-
1
-
-
I recently did figure out how to change the unit type of detached skirmishers again, so emulating splitting a brigade into two smaller infantry units is possible. This would remove the ability to detach skirmishers though.
Might get worked into a perk at some point, will have to see.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Raymond Sebastien said:
Question: Does the Horse Artillery Perk work with "3-Inch Ordnance" also?
I know the Perk works great with "12pdr Howitzer" and "6pdr Field".
It increases the speed of a 3" just like it would the 6pdr. Personally I don't use that perk on rifled guns, I want the extra shot/shell damage and I don't reposition them much. But I know other players do like it.
-
1
-
-
On 6/29/2023 at 10:01 AM, Drizzo said:
I got an interesting bug recently after the very first battle for CSA (MG difficulty). I only lost about 1000 men and somehow got over 2.5k vets and 1.8k wounded soldiers (see attached screenshot).
Thanks for the report. I've seen one other person encounter this but I haven't been able to recreate it to to fix it yet.
Have you adjusted any of the config files? Did you save or load during the battle? I don't know why either of those would have mattered, but they have sometimes caused problems in the past.
Any chance you remember roughly how many killed/woinded the hover text showed on the post battle report? I wonder if the numbers were already inflated by that point.
Restarting would definitely be better for a normal progression in the mod, sorry for the inconvenience.
-
On 6/18/2023 at 5:44 AM, Raymond Sebastien said:
I was wondering if you have the option to add more historical officers? Seems to me that this is one of the aspects that gives some interesting "historical flavor" to the game, at least according to my personal preferences (I understand that other players might not care, lol).
There are officer name files that can be added or removed from to try and get a random combination to hit. But I can't add anything with a portrait. I haven't been able to figure out how the existing ones are referenced or created.
8 hours ago, dixiePig said:Sounds excellent. Any indication as to when we might see the new release?
Not anytime soon, very limited time over the next few months. A test version might be available to mess around with sooner. The core of the system is already together, but there is a lot of surrounding stuff that needs to be done before it's ready for anyone to use even on a testing basis.
-
1
-
-
On 6/15/2023 at 1:59 PM, LAVA said:
Okay, so as a YouTuber myself, I was wondering is this an unlisted video?
The account is by "simonjons1" but it has no videos listed. Youtube search won't find it, but I can embed it to other forums.
I wanted to PM you colonel, but the PM feature does not work on Game-Labs forums.
Are you part of the Dev team?
The link to the unlisted video was posted by Sterner on the age of sail discord. He's used that account to post other videos in the past.
Not sure why this didn't get posted on a more official account.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Raymond Sebastien said:
So these are percentages? So if my skirmishers have a 100 Fire rate weapon in hand and I select "Musketry Drill" (-5% reload) and then "Zouaves tactics" (-5% reload), the rifle should fire at 110, but if I finally select "Sharpshooter" (+30% reload), the weapon drops to 77 of "Fire rate"?
Yes, that is roughly how it works.
-
1
-
-
-
Medicine only applies at the end of battles, so adding points there wouldn't help with your Antietam casualties. Economy applies immediately to purchases you make, so it would immediately help with buying new weapons to replace your casualties.
-
Hasn't changed in many years. Phillipi is the first battle
-
3 hours ago, dixiePig said:
Clearly, I thought I was directing the ARTY unit to fire on an enemy unit. However, UGCW thought that I wanted to move my ARTY unit on top of the enemy unit. We might agree that's stupid. But it's what UGCW often does.
Is this the scenario where you target is blocked by terrain and you have to move forward to get a clear shot? You should be getting a warning message in the top left that also plays a sound if that happens.
I can see if the arrow color can be changed, it may be an actual graphic not something with a color tag though.
-
1
-
J & P Rebalance Mod by JonnyH13 and Pandakraut 05/06/2023 1.28.4
in General Discussions
Posted
There is a sound when that message displays for me. Kind of sounds like a drum being banged on, there are a couple different sounds that play if you spam the command repeatedly.
The unit is trying to follow the orders you are giving it. Any unit when given an order to fire at another unit that is out of range will try to move to the point where it can hit the target and then fire. Changing the behavior like was done with blocked skirmishers or infantry units is a lot more work, so the notification was added instead.
It's been too long so I don't remember why anymore, but there was some technical issue with using the blocked popup which is why I ended up with the notification option.
Yes, the union units that show up in that phase take part in later phases of the battle. So the more damage you can do, the better off you'll be.
Not much I can really do about this. Those units are way outside of the expected locations of the union line of attack. The only option would be to move the player spawns much further back which puts them at a larger disadvantage to solve an edge case.
Looks like it's determined in an earlier phase, I thought it was at phase start.