pandakraut

If you reduce a ship's crew or land unit size, or dismiss a land unit then dismissed men go into reserve. You can then check the box to add up to that many men without a recruitment cost. If you have no men remaining in reserve and check the box, then you will buy veterans for an extra cost that have the same stats as the crew/unit you are adding to.

The battles in the game mostly try to try to replicate the course of the historical battle. Some of them allow you to end the battle early, but it seems that Union Chancellorsville is not one of them. Doing nothing in this phase is always an option, but using the time to destroy as much of the enemy army as possible will save you casualties on the later days. Here is an example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOip0_l29WU&list=PLt-JAMmvyAGnbrADDeAM04mxBsI9FyWQ0&index=27

As always, if you encounter a bug reporting it with F11 will be the most helpful option. Also, if you can specify which version you are playing that would be helpful. Base steam branch? Beta steam branch? Or the Xsolla version?

Just to confirm, you are applying the career points prior to checking the prices? If the points aren't locked in no bonus is assigned. Otherwise, the bonuses definitely work though rounding does sometimes make it seem like the addition of one point isn't doing anything for certain weapons. The only way to see the return from medicine is to compare your post battle results casualties with the number of men in your units in camp.

Ahh, got it. PoI = Points of Interest = Mission

This is only partially accurate. BR was added back to land battles because players were bringing massive amounts of men and trivializing them. With some exceptions, BR still does not apply to naval battles in the latest patch.

FYI the shown limits can be exceeded in almost every battle currently. The limits were effectively removed except for PoIs and battles like Valcour Island because players were complaining that they never got to use their 3rd rates when they captured them very early in the campaign. Great to hear that someone is still winning battles sticking to the BR limits though.

I think the devs have previously stated that reducing armor does result in improved grape performance. It's possible that formula has been changed since then though. Skeksis' comments on armor seemed to be related to boarding and not grape effectiveness? Did you mean to describe that as unintuitive? Blasting holes or otherwise weakening ship planking with round shot prior to using grape does seem like it would result in increased effectiveness? I don't think reducing armor should provide a benefit to boarding, as you've pointed out there are plenty of benefits to using round shot already. This mission has been updated in the most recent patch(xsolla only currently.) You will be given smaller ships prior to the battle that can be customized to fight it.

This is mostly base mod stuff. A lot of damage is tied up in having good stats, officers, and weapons and these allied units have none of those. If you let 6pdrs blast away at anything more than half range they do very little. You can see why in the updated weapon tooltips that show the range damage multiplier. The 6pdrs can do well at canister as Adishee mentioned though. I usually park them up by the middle ford and let them gain stats by shooting the unit there until the rest of the army shows up. Rest assured, experienced artillery crews with better cannon can be incredibly strong. The 6pdr is basically just for that lead up to Shiloh when you are scrambling to field anything you can.

Do you have a historical submod folder under /Mod/Rebalance after unzipping? Full default path below. C:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\steamapps\common\Ultimate General Civil War\Ultimate General Civil War_Data\Mod\Rebalance\historical submod

In battle saves are not supported. You can save between battles on the campaign map.

Maintenance costs do directly impede rewards, fleet quantity and upgrade application, economy is part of the game, all of these costs needs ‘player choices’ and management thus costs should to be displayed and made available to the player to make those choices. You asked for a breakdown, I supplied the information that I could. I'm sorry you found that information unhelpful.

The more experienced a crew member the more the maintenance cost. The bigger the ship, the higher the cost. While more detail is never bad, I also don't feel like it changes the overall gameflow here. If your costs are too high, sell the ships you aren't using. The upgrade description text is already too long and needs to get cut down. The upgrade descriptions are there to give you a general idea of what the upgrade does before you buy the tech. This is mostly useful for newer players who haven't already seen them. Once you've reached the point of doing number precise number comparisons, asking the user to actually buy the tech seems a reasonable step.

With the caveat that I haven't dug into any of this very seriously yet, and don't intend to until the development pace has slowed down. Losses in crew probably reduce performance on a sliding scale. More work than I want to put in currently to provide more details though. Currently unused AI decison making related Several components have this price fed into a randomizer and there are others that have campaign specific evaluations. Someone would probably need to go in and print out the curves to see what exactly is happening. Someone would need to spend far more time researching to explain. This is what the penetration charts in the tooltips display

Yes, you likely just don't have enough reputation to buy it currently.

Reputation is a resource. If you fail battles your reputation goes down. Lose to many battles and have your reputation go too low and you are replaced and the campaign ends. The player is free to leave as much or as little buffer based on how much reputation they want to spend.

Yes, if you force a ship to surrender but do not place crew on it, then finish the mission before it unsurrenders, you will get credit for capturing it.

In this scenario the surrendered ship should count as neutral and be assigned to the players harbor. If it does not that is a bug.

Regarding workarounds, other players have been able to land units on the other side(via the far away beach) to get past the mission. Might not be consistent in working though.

The ? missions, or Points of Interest, resolve when you end the stage. So you want to play through any battles that are available first to build up the number of ships you have access to. Then just before ending the stage you start the PoI and then they'll be available again in the next stage.

Did you Did you select the naval mission instead of the Bunker Hill land battle? You only get the Earlston if you select the land battle.

Prior screenshots were using the 0.6.37 steam beta Below are using 0.6.35, same result. https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2019822411 https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2019822507

Quick run on easy to show all ships captured. One ship with significant hull damage https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2019695252 https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2019695414

Since you mentioned not being able to tell what rate the enemy ships are. You can double left click on any enemy ship to zoom in on it and see it's rate. If you have one of your own ships selected while doing this you also are given the option to manually designate a target by left clicking on the enemy ship. This makes cannon fire considerably more effective.