CmdrMctoast
-
Posts
110 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by CmdrMctoast
-
-
Added my input as well.
-
True, but if like Empire's "The American Civil War" (not as detailed of course, as you'd miss too much on the real time battles) then copyright infringement isn't an issue. Several Civil War and Napoleonic games from the '90's and early noughties implemented this (mostly) successfully, but not completly so. Even "The Civil War", developed by the same team who made "Fields of Glory" (the closest I can get to "UG:G") had to make the real time battles simplistic, and awash with problems I might add, and it did not work. Spent the entire game auto-resolving battles. So really, it can only be one or the other unless you have a huge budget from a coffer-filled publisher.
I'm leaning towards the old Civil war Generals 2 gamestyle for unit upgrades and such with a real time startegy type battle engine that they have here, no need for economy management for a nation but strictly a wargame with some sort of management system for 2 warring armies.
-
-
I also agree not to make it like a Total war sceries and im sure the developers would not have the rights to that anyway.
-
I like it all, lets not forget one of the main assets in the War was the capture and
release of slaves as they were deemed contraband of a Warring countries war machine.
Major ethical and political win here for Mr Lincoln in declaring the south a warring country and the slaves there major asset.
( Hard ethical subject to add to a game so rewarding of this in game may be appropriate )
The north would free slaves sending them north where the south would capture free Men and send them south to slavery.
Also I would love to see an experience / tehcnology point % gain or loss depending on units outcome in battle
( replenishement of troops and material, weapons capture, amount of battles seen, training time in bootcamps etc..)
maybe have experience point gains and monetary point gains to be spent souly on upgrading a percentage of the units load out of weopons and manpower.
A lot of what I have read also is of how Militia and Companies from different parts of New England would show up in say Boston
then have to do a force march all the way down to Rode island or New jersey to be shipped to New york it took days for this sometimes in order to fill out a hodge podge brigade that would then train together or in the earlier part of the war rushed into battle.
This is all representative of the civil war and should be a major part of a completel Civil War campaign game.
I also think that a major part of a full blown war campaign would be the addition of the Army Corp of Engineers,
to build up breastworks, bridges, railroad tressles and such and set areas of strength and try to foce battles there.
-
1
-
-
Let me start saying that I love the game.
In real life however, orders to the units would not be transmitted instantaneously as now in the game. It'd be great to add a delay for each order to a unit *based on its distance to the nearest leader*. Is that something that is being considered? It would add a layer of realism of the game and it could be an optional rule. An existing game that does that very well is 'Command Operations'.
I also like the idea as an option if possible, im all for adding another play style to the game.
-
-
No apology needed we all luv the game,, Now get back to work..Tomorrow new patch will come, with much better and active AI along with other improvements. Thank you all for the continuous feedback. Sorry that we cannot and me personally catch up in replies for everything you comment and give ideas about. We read everything though.
-
You can issue orders while the game is paused, then they will all happen when you unpause.
Alot of us do this but in multiplayer that will probably not be an option.
Id like to see a series of way points that can have functions in them, move to point "A" rotate to a
firing position, fire, fallback to "b" adjust position, option to fire or standard function buttons or fallback to "c" hold position etc...
-
Great live show Nick.
-
1
-
-
I really dont like voting for least favorite as I feel they all surve a good purpose and allow all levels of gamers to play.
with that said determined is just plain fun to play, all out slugfest.
Cautous is easiest and is bottom pick for me.
I do play random most of the time and do like Blunts Idea, as that would make it more realistic as to "you never know
who is sitting over that ridge to counter your attack".
Random is fun sometimes but soon as you find out what personality they are it is easy to counter accordingly. An idea would be for each battle you progress to, a different personality will fight the battle. That could beef up the challenge a bit. So you do not know what to expect from battle to battle.
-
Spot on with the comments but I adjust my play style to always try different things from game to game and
battle to battle with the intent to not repeat my outcomes, be redundant or utilize exploits.
I will as time goes by try to expose exploits and point them out to have them ironed out of the game but im having
way to much fun right now.
-
Would love an option to have a full scale PC map with the entire 3 days of battle and the 4th day an option for battle continuence or retreat.
doesnt seam to far fetched for an option setting on the PC'S.
-
I would like to see a dig in or breastworks option with a form of penalty and or bonus, move a unit to the rear command him
to dig in for the next battle phase if he stays out of combat and does not move he gets a slightly higher
recovery bonus for the next battle phase, if he is attacked before the end of battle he would have a slight defence
bonus but be somewhat more fatigued.
this was an option in Civil War Generals 2 and I loved the feature.
Any thoughts?
-
I have done this as well early on with as expected mixed results on different settings but have not tried it lately
but also love to watch it play out.
I also find it useful for a general stability check of the AI.
Try all the levels and post some observations as you do and if there are any anomolies you find.
-
I agree with this whole statement.
I'm not a fan of consolidated artillery brigades because:
1. They concentrate too much fire in too small a segment of the field,
2. If routed you lose too much fire power from a single event, and
3. I think there is a better mechanism to manage the artillery.
I'd like to be able to "attach" a battery to an infantry division. This would increase the close-range firepower of the infantry division without the problems outlined above. It would also be more historically representative or how ACW artillery fought.
An interesting idea as an option.
-
Option for indirect or direct fire at a specific target or location as is in some games but im not sure if this was a viable tactic back then..
-
Nice post with some interesting topics.
I agree that arty at times when at 100% for a period of time bugs me a little bit.
I also agree with the line of sight being spot on and also click a target at times to let arty adjust position for attack
but have noticed sometimes it will traverse a great distance into trouble if not careful.
I like the skirmishers in the game but they may need a bit more tweaking and wouldnt want them removed.
Breastworks I would love the option to have at the end of the day before exiting a command to tell a unit to implement this option
and have a visible representation of this the next morning and agree with a slight % infraction on the troops.
I also wouldnt mind having a unit fallback from battle and start to dig in hoping to accomplish a decent dig in for the next battle sequence.
-
1
-
-
Game stability first then multiplayer later on, patience is key and all our wishes will come true.
Enjoy the ride as the game is in its infancy.
-
1
-
-
What they said, rinse and repeat, hit at angles but always moniter your troops, when they start to get worn out rotate them in and out
if at all possible, fire a volley hit fallback have next one in back advance forward.
-
The recent patch has slowed things down a lot... its killed it for me personally but i can respect people want to have it that slow. Personally i think this game is going to shape up to please certain fans unless they intend to add something to speed up the battles or slow them down for instance. I think the game will end up being very realistic and appeal to people who can sit and play at a snails pace and somewhat be able to like the slow gameplay but for the rest its unplayble atleast for myself.
I am also worried for the future of the game.
Cheers all.
so far they have listened to us all, it takes time and incremental moves and sometimes you have to make a move to the other extreme to find the correct balance someplace inbetween, I am not worried at all about the games future as it has one for sure.
I am for a speed in between these last two patches.
-
Right now the game is a Indie game.
For it to be a Historical ACW simulator it would have to change a lot of things that make this game unique. I have mixed feelings. At first when I played this game I wanted it to be more and more like Sid Meiers Getttysburg. I wanted more Generals in the game. I wanted Brigades to surrender. I wanted to be able to detach regiments from Brigades. But the more I play it I don't really care about that anymore. I love the nostalgic feeling it has. It is not perfect but nothing is.
If I could get one thing in this game to make me shut the hell up. It would be a awesome detailed After Battle Report. Describing the kill/death ratio of every Brigade from the first day to the last. Be awesome if I could after the Battle of Gettysburg if I could see how much ass I kicked or how much I got mine kicked.
When I spend hours on a game I want some kind of reward. The way it is now it just plain sucks You win, You lose. I am telling you if you guys added some kind of script that did this I would never ask for anything else again!
But that would not help improve the game.
I like the whole battle report idea and alot of us have mentioned this as well in testing, but lets get the bugs out first..
-
i would like to see an option to review the map of the coming battle ( maybe similar to your textbook or similar style ) just not showing the enemy reinforcement entry locations but just the known order of battle locations for troops on the map.
-
1
-
-
I love this new Elevation Map.. this explains a lot now, why my arty wasn't firing right.
Not sure if its good idea but could we have elevation number on every second line?
Sometimes in the heat of the battle is hard to find which is what and you need it to trace line back a bit.
It would help if we had elevation written on every line, or every second? 50/100/150. or whatever difference between them is.
And every 100 feet , line would be twice as thick as normal one.
I like the thickness idea and I wouldnt mind having the lower elevation designated also as I like knowing where to have them fallback for cover or have the lowest elevation line a different color or thickness for fast reference.
But I am happy with it as is as well.
"Multi-player Madness" or "The HORROR that is Scenario 1"
in General Discussions
Posted
I think there needs to be a Cause and affect Implemented, If a player uses his forces in an
Unhistoric manner wich is what is happening then that should trigger unhistoric events like the early arrival
of Confederate cavelry, Multiplayer games will always show exploitable weeknesses and with such there should
be triggers to counter those moves to make the game far more enjoyable for both sides.