Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum


Ultimate General Focus Tester
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

15 Good

About Paul_KT

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    New York

Recent Profile Visitors

366 profile views
  1. When at camp, do people prioritize upgrading equipment (primarily Springfield 1855s) or recruiting veterans to keep experience high?
  2. I rename artillery based on the guns (10lb Rifles, 12lb Smoothbore), it makes it much, much easier to place units where you want them in a battle. Names can be duplicates so no worries there.
  3. How do people arrange their experienced infantry brigades, 1 division per corps, or all grouped together into a single super corps?
  4. I'm also having a problem with skirmishers. Mine fire a volley then retreat out of range a long way, while the AI skirmishers stand and fight. This makes it very hard to use my skirmishers to screen my brigades as they often retreat behind my main line. Do skirmishers need to retreat to reload like they do or should they rely on their dispersed formation to minimize casualties from fire? I'm not sure what they did historically but moving forwards and backwards seems like it would be a nightmare to maintain order. Not sure if it would work, but how about having skirmishers stand their ground like brigades, which makes it easier to form a skirmish line and screen other troops. Then make it easier for skirmishers to use the fall back order close to the enemy to represent them skirmishing backwards.
  5. The new, select multiple units and draw a line helps to avoid overlap, I'd like to see a major penalty to both units when overlapped which would discourage players blobbing. You'd have to work out a way to prevent the AI doing it though.
  6. Played a couple of battles as the Union and so far I love it. The new campaign features are excellent and I love love love the ability to garrison defenses and towns. The vision points makes for an interesting objective points system without the gamey feeling of objective points. For negative feedback, I don't feel the reloading difference between repeating weapons like the sharps carbine and muzzle loading muskets. I'm not sure if this is a bug or the damage is working correctly but the effect isn't being shown on the battlefield. Also movement speed feels too fast at the moment, especially when charging, it's almost arcadey. With the ability to speed up the game I would aim for too slow rather than too fast, that way you can always speed it up! Finally, as others have said, I'd like to see Deaths changed to Casualties on the unit card, not only does it sound better, it's more thematic and represents people with minor wounds moving to the rear as well as soldiers who are unable or unwilling to fight, which makes the high casualty rate make more sense (it's not people killed, it's people no longer willing or able to fight). It's ok to call enemy casualties 'kills' as armies tend to overestimate enemy casualties anyway.
  7. I can understand not wanting the flag in some situations, but in a educational or historical context (which this clearly is) that's ridiculous. Of course Apple are within their rights to sell or not sell any product as they wish, but I think this is a mistake on their part.
  8. It's been done to death, but it's a well known and popular battle. One of my favorite things about Ultimate General is that it's been priced low to sell high, as opposed to most things sold by Matrix games, where they use the excuse of niche to change AAA prices, thus ensuring it will only sell with die hard wargamers. My hope it that UG becomes as popular as Total war, which means making a game that's also going to appeal to a wider range of gamers, and that means well known battles, at least to start with. What I would like to see is new, lesser known battles, as DLC, so you could do some ACW single day battles using the same engine and graphics as Gettysburg, just a new map and unit names.
  9. I've been having real issues getting artillery to shoot at a manual target, even when they are the closest enemy and clearly within LOS of the artillery.
  10. 7 days is an excellent idea. It would give you the campaign style, multi-day battle that Gettysburg has.
  11. I'd love to see another ACW battle as it would be easy enough to get out as the battle mechanics and graphics are already there. Maybe a selection of ACW battles as DLC. From there 100 days campaign (waterloo) would be a good choice as you have multi-day battles over a limited geographical area, with lots of room for what if's and campaign choises. 30 years war would be very interesting, or the English Civil war, but with those most of the battles were 1 day affairs so you lose the campaign feeling you get with Gettysburg and would get from Waterloo.
  12. Any SGS guys on here from the PotBS days? I've been over on the Ultimate General forums for a while now, but I was talking to Captain Dai who said there were a few SGS guys over here, so I thought I'd pop in and say hello. Just seen a few of the youtube vids and NA is a lot further on that I though it was! Looking fantastic and can't wait to get me feet wet again!
  13. Something I've noticed from let's play videos on youtube. When the battle ends there isn't really an opportunity to look around the battlefield and see how things ended. In videos people get around this by pausing the game before it ends. But it would be cool if there was a way to tour the battlefield after the battle to see how you did and where units ended up.
  14. Congratulations Darth and team, you've made an amazing game. Looking forward to what you come up with next!
  15. Love the tilt shift effect, but agreed that it need to be toned down a bit, or even better be something we can turn on and off during a battle. It looks great in screen shots, but not so useful while playing.
  • Create New...