AlJabberwock

Sadly items B and C already were taking place prior to this latest patch with clean installs. As irritating as they are, they are not new in my experience. A is something new, I agree. Now it is true that the C and B behaviors were virtually 100% evident on Naval College missions and not always evident in campaign - however, they were quite likely, and make some strategies difficult to achieve. Drunken ship and overly thrifty ammunition officers should be culled - or at least keel-hauled like in the good old days.

V. 1.2.9 Live R 1 I love this game, but it is a shame That all this love goes down in flame! Shadow fleets on maps are ghosts complete While physically they're a deceit. Shown in Lima, but now off Trent How can 'The Moltke' be present? The Stardate is not late enough For transporters and the 'warp' of stuff. 2 The armor-up techs are wonders, aye But why on some it now breaks the die? Sure CA, DD, CL, - all lose their weight But now on BBs might be _more_ great? 3 Torpedoes may show shells instead Whilst on the sea, I could be dead Trying to figure the real tally. Might as well ask Rand McNally... 4 Some pages might agree with one another On Stats, and versions, name and numbers. But going back, now the result is "other"!? What point if truth is oft encumbered? 5 Forshame the collapse of the British Empire, Their fleet is now a mixed-up vampire Their one retrieved region bases no ships, Unfound on any map: no matter loose lips; 113 (in 0 task forces) Fight-noughts use no resources. 6 Verify, delete and re-install Restart yet still hit the wall Of random and intermittent Bugs that are intransigent. 7 Could it be hurried patches Untested and released in batches Make bugs harder to find, Covering our shiny, new game in scratches? Beware the quick fix or new objectives 'Till the current nest is dealt correctives! PLEASE!

Well I hope it works well, and cheers to you for getting it out... I know some of the changes made some existing designs not work so those have to be revisited to see where the trouble is.

Yes! Excellent series that I thanked you for suggesting. You will see me singing its praises in your discord chat, and thank you for answering queries there as well! I should mention that it is quite possible some of it is underlying game mechanics but even forefall also mentions several times in the first half dozen or so battles what appears to be the occasional imexplicable behavior of routing units towards units of his or towards his rear, or standing and -not continuing a volley- but beginning one, while 'routing'. I am still using slightly smaller units than he is (his Brigs look like my largest AFTER he has detached skirmishers), but I will readily say the completely OP look of carbine cav at Cross Keys was outside reasonable expectations, so not surprised that got patched! Still worth a serious consideration, if one also has a melee cav in the cupboard for skirmisher happy missios like Winchester. See you on the Discord! I will still post creen/vids here on what I find when I do a third CSA campaign. ~Al

@pandakraut Thank you for your rapid reply and detailed analysis/suggestions! On background, Steam suggests I have logged about 1400 hours on UG:CW, easily about two thirds of which I can attribute to your guys' Mod. (Thanks for contributing to the delinquency of a geriatric... LOL!). 1)Right - makes sense. These others I respond to in reverse order 3) For #3 I realize I did a rather poor job of giving you a full picture of conditions that I imposed. My own analysis on # 3 is as I am faced with a no-pass on CrossKeys with smaller units (I am currently testing nothing larger than 1150). Since I cannot keep below the 40% force loss, I always draw even though I have held both points. As I adopt two lines at the VP's with infantry and or artillery in the second row, the enemy brigades ARE passing through other brigades (even if only glancingly as they try to squirt through gaps that inevitably open up as things get more chaotic in mid to late mission). It seems to me that both units in this case (the second line units and the reverse-router) DO register contact but only slightly as not much damage is done if any on either side- but units can be seen to be flashing from melee contact. Perhaps these are cases where the spread of the attacking unit is such that slight, barely perceptible contact is already being made with second line units and then they 'squirt through' instead of back because they consider the second line unit to also already be "where they are"? ... But I digress. I had also failed to mention (because it hadn't occurred to me at the time) that I have also nearly uniformly applied the accuracy-buff to all CSA units save the one that originally starts with the melee buff. Based on some comments you have made in earlier notes, these buffs enter into how the AI calculates the 'strength' of enemy units for melee success. This helps explain the extreme frequency with which the AI charges even though my units are in superior position and unit numbers (not unit size). I should have further also said the CSA Brig's are also only mid to high-level 1-stars since they took such a brutal beating on Shiloh that I couldn't afford to get them to 2-star. - but does any of this help explain standing/advancing routing 2-stars? While I understand the long volley finish, what I am describing appears to be more than one volley, and some 'advances' seem hard to explain as retreats if they are not in contact with the unit they are advancing toward. Perhaps my unit composition (acc buff, small-ish size, 1-star) is simply SO enticing on MG/Leg. the Ai is just drawn towards them like a bee to honey or zombies to brains ( ) - or AI 2 star units are vacillating between rout and 'waiver' fast enough they can still stand or advance because they recovers SO quickly from rout to waiver...? I will continue to look at this, and if it is prevalent enough where my particular playstyle/composition is NOT the only determinant, will endeavor to get you a video. 2) Unfortuantely I didn't make a screenie of the weird availability issue, and once the Whitworth (TS)'s show up in the Government window, the problem apprentlly disappears. Since I wiped/reloaded principally for this problem, and noted it a second time, I am pretty sure I am accurately describing what I saw -but as an infinitely fallable old man I cannot _completely_ discount the possibility that I made the same mistake...twice. Doh! Since it may be siimply that 1150 is too small (for me at least) to get through with all wins given the buffs and other financial/career point decisions I have made to this point on MG/Leg (currently running two concurrent, one of each) - I will go back and start a third just MG with a different set of decisions based on your comments about melee buffs. If that doesn't do it, and/or a better 1st day Shiloh win isn't possible, its a size limitation - at least for me - and in the process I will see if I can see the availability issue I mentioned a third time and get a screenie (which as an experienced tester, best practices should have been screaming in my -apparently deaf- ears to get!). ~Al

Hi, great updates to the mod (which I have been using since its very early versions). Loads of fun (I can tell because it gets me cursing pretty regularly- lol)! I wanted to list a few things that look to be very minor problems of the bug type, and I have only noticed them since I updated (I had not updated the mod for nearly a year, so unfortunately these could have been introduced any time since the last version I was using from over a year ago....although I imagine they would have been pointed out by now if they were not very recent). I have wiped the mod and the original game and reinstalled again to test if there were any untoward corrupt files and the results were identical. There well may be other things, but after a good 50 to 60 hours, and a number of replays, I find these minor things you may be interested in: 1)There is something not quite right with the bookkeeping on some unit losses when replacing losses in camp. Several times with artillery, cavalry or skirmishers, I have added one man to a unit only to have it not reflect in the unit count (meaning the added 1, takes away a man from the population of the force pool, and it records as one down at the bottom of the unit where a weapon is being used, but the actual count of the unit in the upper right in larger numerals is not showing. Should you hit 'apply' the unit does not appear to increase in size, yet the force pool is reduced by one and a weapon will be taken for the addition of the now invisible soldier. I don't know whether this is a fractional issue, but in these cases one has to add TWO men to get to ONE added to the force total in the upper right, after which the units act normally as they receive replacement. I have not seen this on an infantry unit yet, I don't think, but I have also spied one or two cases where the units' strength count display and its losses display do not pencil...and this DOES include especially infantry units on the battlefield. Again that number will be about one. The latter issue is not as troublesome as the former, where one may be trying to get a specific number of weapons to go with a specific number of men, and inexactitude makes it a an annoyance. 2)Odd and also very minor, but early on (before they are even made available in the Government Screen) when one is looking at the Armory Shop, ,there are either none or some number below 50 Whitworth's with telescopic sights. However,, I noticed when looking for alternative weaponry for my first skirmisher/sniper unit, I could see well over a hundred or even over two hundred Whitworth (TS)'s in the options on the change weapon screen in the upper right. Again, swicthing back to the armory would confirm there were no such units available, but one could still buy them in the options screen... Weird. I do not know for which other weapons this might also be true, but I know the Whitworth is not supposed to be an early game weapon avaible in significant numbers so I only tested for that. 3)This may be specific to buffs to the AI in MG/Leg. but 2 star Brigades (in this last few days I have been playing CSA so these are Union Brig.s) when 'routed' very often simply stand where they are firing away as if the routing legend has no relevance. The units may turn white or flash white or whatever but units will stand for some time continuing to fire, sometimes still advancing, or in a few cases firing and meleeing and then if they DO withdraw from battle, annnoyingly will decide to reluctantly 'rout' recalcitrantly BEHIND my lines even when it would make far more sense to retreat towards friendly lines just from the standpoint of immediate safety... If one is playing the Union where units may be more plentifull this is less problematic since one can afford to detail a 'minder' to deal with the lunatic brigade(s). As the CSA, this becomes problematic when one cannot tell off brigades one to one to watch all the odd units that begin to collect behind the lines (this was particularly problematic in this last run through of Cross Keys where at one point I had three enemy brigades behind the lines needing to be minded. ) AS I said, these are pretty minor and I am ridiculously entertained and enjoying the mod immensely! For that though, I figured I owe you at least mentioning these items since I know often people don't have the time to let you know. Thank you so much for your work and you guys making such an active response to all your comments and questions! ~AL

Nice posts guys, thanks for the video reference points!

Just stopping by to wish this project well. I am fascinated by this period, and am pretty happy with the attention to some of the lesser well-treated subjects this group has looked at (like the ACW and this, the Dreadnought era). If I can be of any help at all, I am ready at a moment's notice. ~Al