CSA Watkins
-
Posts
450 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by CSA Watkins
-
-
Ultimate General: Gettysburg has the immense potential to support an entire series of epic, blockbuster, Civil War battle games of unique realism, historical accuracy, and player engagement and enjoyment. But there is a problem or two that stands like a roadblock to that success:
I have mentioned some of these problems in previous posts.........snip
**I do not think that the company, with its whole future at stake, has been well served by a group of testers who appear to be, as a whole, enthusiastic, well-read, erudite, experienced game players. And I do not know why they did not do a better job pointing out this fatal flaw.
**One of the critical duties of a good play tester, and I've managed hundreds of them in my career, is to think critically, respond skeptically, be the Devil’s Advocate, share honest opinions freely, and, most importantly, TELL THE TRUTH to the folks in charge without worrying that they will kick you off the team for being too negative.
**I have learned over the years that play tester feedback—good, bad, or indifferent—is worth its weight in gold and is absolutely critical to a design’s success. The UGG designers and developers are neck-deep in alligators trying to drain the proverbial swamp.
****{They cannot see the forest for the trees. That is why they absolutely depend upon a group of well-briefed, well-directed, well-coached, testers--who know what their job is and how critical that job is to the success of the game--to show them the way and act as the acid test for their brain child.}****
******************************************
Randall! EVERYTHING you mentioned in your post has been relayed time n time n time again, to the Developers by the Testers!!!! (Good / Bad/ Ugly about the game).
There is a Closed Forum For Testers n to give Suggestions / Feedback.
I have come across some very educated n informed people concerning the Civil War n its Battle progressions /Hourly / Daily.Here at this Forum n Steam's....
All the thing's you mentioned in you post was mention by me n 1/2 Dozen others, a number of times...Battle Progression, n the lack of it between Phases.
As a Tester, I take your post as a back handed insult with my ability n others to give proper / Historical / Accurate information on Historical Facts. Reporting Glitches / Putting forward
Suggestions for a more enjoyable / balanced gaming experience, etc....
Perhaps maybe you should volunteer to Be a Tester so 'you' can give your valuable feedback.
Its not what you said that's irritating, but how you put it!
Especially this comment!!!!!!
**I do not think that the company, with its whole future at stake, has been well served by a group of testers who appear to be, as a whole, enthusiastic, well-read, erudite, experienced game players. And I do not know why they did not do a better job pointing out this fatal flaw.[/b]
-
In the example you gave:
A Confederate Player is waiting for a Union Opponent .
If a Union Player was waiting he would be in the Avaible Union Player
-
Same Problem Not being able to access Steam Overlay while in Game.
I can access The steam overlay while playing the iPad beta,
or any other steam Game.
I noticed this problem, after the install of patch 1.03 iirc,...
-
Great update news, it sounds really interesting. (I really like the artillery moving a little faster)/(Artillery will be more vulnerable in direct projectile attacks.)
(Artillery vs Artillery Damage increase.)
I would see batteries delivering direct hits, time n time again into batteries without them taking any casualties/damage.
-------
I seen when a battery fires canisters, half +, of the shots strike the ground, trailing forward in front of the cannons.
Visually it look likes maybe 20-30% strikes/reaches the enemy......just an observation,,
Perhaps modify how Canisters balls are Delivered(visually) forward into the enemy.
Unless this is implemented in the game, which I doubt...
>>>At times, trained artillerists would fire the canister shot towards the ground in front of advancing enemy troops, causing the conical pattern to flatten out as the balls ricocheted and skipped off the terrain. This in effect widened the killing zone. An example of this tactic was at the first day of Gettysburg where Lt. James Stewart's Battery B, 2nd U.S. Artillery on Seminary Ridge skipped canister shot at Alfred M. Scales's approaching Confederate infantry, breaking up their attack and forcing them to take cover in a depression.<<< http://www.thefullwiki.org/Canister_shot
-
2
-
-
I had 4-7 Lockups/freezes on custom/campaign. But having run the file (64 bit vcredist_x64.exe ) 'Seems' to have halted
/stopped any freezes so far played through campaign,,1x each side/few custom maps ,,just a couple
momentary hiccups seen, hardly noticeable,,,,
-
Great Tutorial n Help,,,thx.....
-
^Now that would be one hell of a game....Sauron,,,yes with the capture/destruction...of an Army than marched on Wash./Richmond....
-
nvm,, dig-in = Fortifying/Buildings breastworks/Barricades in ACW/i.e. Culps hill evening 1st day.../ Little Round Top(20th Maine),, nothing to do with digging.
Confused it with the later war term, with actually Digging.....
-
1
-
-
Well that's a bit different. Even If Jeb rolled in on Wednesday the 1st., the Federals would of known where he was at all times n put in a counter to meet any threat he posed..,
As an example......When Longstreet wanted to move around the right behind Big Round Top on the second Day, 2 things impeded that, besides Lee's refusal.
He had no cavalry to screen his movement. Even if he did have the Cavalry, on Big Round Top there were Federal Signal units with a view for miles around.
Longstreet's every movement/position would of been reported.
As you mentioned....Jeb's Cavalry tried to get behind Meade on 3rd. but met the Federal's cavalry with disastrous results, so i would imagine any other
cavalry movement on any other day would of met with the same results as the 2 Cavalry battles on the 3rd .
I believe iirc, Meade had the VI Corps in Reserves in the vicinity/behind Little Round Top also..
But an interesting idea never the less.......
-
What about a hypothetical scenario where you can add Jeb Stuart and the Calvary to the entire Gettysburg battle? I've always wondered if the outcome would've been different if the Confederates had the use of Calvary throughout the battle.
Mike
The outcome to that Hypothetical scenario.... would be a complete slaughter of horses n Men. Think about it, horses running into massive rifle n cannon fire.
Men in line of battle, n the Batteries would be loaded with Canisters, aiming for the horses to kill them.
Men would be tumbling to the ground getting crushed under their mounts, Poor animals.
The introduction of the Rifled Muskets put an end to that...
If that happened after the battle it would be Horse Steaks all around for both sides.
Perhaps read up on the Cavalry Charges in the East Field, South Cavalry Field, just SW of the round tops, n the slaughter there. A total snafu....
-
1
-
-
@ Hawke
AFAIK..n...IMO....This is experienced with most developers with new Games, going forward with
adding new features/updating. Problems can n do arise. The new Build 1.01(Beta) seems to be working just fine now
Most People that get a new game, will do some research into it before considering buying, They soon realize,
Game-Labs/Devs are quite active on the forums, and are quick to let ppl know whats what,
with problems + always looking for feedback/Suggestions.
People quickly pick up on the dedication this team has with their game(s) that
are in development/Release's/Updating. People like n appreciate this. So when these hiccups happen
all/most are quite satisfied to go with the flow(Roll back)/giving support/understanding that ongoing development of a game is No easy Walk in the Park.
This in itself speaks volumes for the Developers credibility going forward.
-
2
-
-
Using the Alt. Rendering might of fixed it for you. People were still having Freezes during MP games/SP when in Alt Rendering.
Even when exiting game(Which I was having the most problems with, forcing me to using the Task Manager to stop game),
Plus I believe there was a couple things that just didn't seem to work as planned in the game, that needed to be revisited/fixed/adjusted, AFAIK.
The game Has to work as intended. One must think outside the box when catering/selling a product to the masses. Half fixes will
hurt a Product in Reliability/Accountability. Especially to the Developer's Credibility(the quality of being trusted and believed in).
A roll back use necessary. There was no alternative. The Developers tried for ~1 Dayto fix it on the fly.
IMHO the right choice was made, by a long shot......
By rolling it back to v1.0, Two things were achieved.
1- A stable game was again on the market temporarily, working as intended to this point.
2-Now the team isn't being run off there feet, pulling their hair out to obtain a fix(s).
This will give them the time to give it a good going over. Being able to put out another Beta, to gather feedback on stability/working mechanics etc.
-
In other words the R.E.B. Blunt's list is a n excellent strategic and tactical guide. Blunt I suggest to make a new topic and place it in OP.
********
I agree Blunts List is great, those 11 suggestions are very informative/helpful.
That would be a Great Idea! A Strategic n Tactical Thread/Topic....
This would give ppl a place to discuss/learn about the game...throw ideas around.
It would also be a great place to point new Players too. It can be a bit trying when starting/Learning a new game.
There is a lot to learn, It's quite a chore managing your Corps when a full Battle is Raging.
There lots of fun to be had here,(SP Historical Battles/Custom Battles/MP Friends Challenge/UGG Tournament is now underway).
Plus its a learning experience with Military history/ACW...
This is a mature community IMO, with ppl wiling to help others as seen with the different posts in this Forum/Steam's.
This benefits us all, helping new players. Easing new players into the game.
-
2
-
-
I would like to see: The Seven Days Battles......
The Seven Days Battles were a series of six major battles over the seven days from June 25 to July 1, 1862, near Richmond, Virginia during the American Civil War. Confederate General Robert E. Lee drove the invading Union Army of the Potomac, commanded by Maj. Gen. George B. McClellan, away from Richmond and into a retreat down the Virginia Peninsula.The series of battles is sometimes known erroneously as the Seven Days Campaign, but it was actually the culmination of the Peninsula Campaign, not a separate campaign in its own right.The Seven Days began on Wednesday, June 25, 1862, with a Union attack in the minor Battle of Oak Grove. McClellan quickly lost the initiative as Lee began a series of attacks at Beaver Dam Creek(Mechanicsville) on June 26, Gaines's Mill on June 27. The minor actions at Garnett's and Golding's Farm on June 27 and 28, and the attack on the Union rear guard at Savage's Station on June 29.McClellan's Army of the Potomac continued its retreat toward the safety of Harrison's Landing on the James River. Lee's final opportunity to intercept the Union Army was at the Battle of Glendale on June 30.........***The armies that fought in the Seven Days Battles comprised almost 200,000 men, which offered the potential for the largest battles of the war.However, the inexperience or caution of the generals involved usually prevented the appropriate concentration of forces and mass necessary for decisive tactical victories.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Days_Battles
****
Seven Days Union order of battle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Days_Union_order_of_battle
Seven Days Confederate order of battle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Days_Confederate_order_of_battle
-
1
-
-
Pickett's Charge and many other scenarios are greyed out in Custom Battle, is this because I have a version of the game that needs to be updated?
Or do I need to delete the Early Access version of the game and buy the game anew at $14?
***
NO u do not have to pay again. You have already paid the piper before with the early access, so the full/final version is included with that purchase...
You need to (Delete Local Content) through Steam first(Early Access).
Only than go to ur steam folder (Steam-SteamApps-Common) n delete the UG:G folder.
Re-Download Game......This will give you a spanking new clean install of the Full release 'SP- Version:1.0 rev 6363'../ 'MP Version:0.28 rev 6363'....
I have the full version n some of my Custom Battles are also Grayed out. Don't know what the problem is there...
Specifically 'Dawn July 2' Just the first battle is Grayed out/ 'Morning July 2' ... All are Grayed out
I have played through the 3 day battle for both sides...
-
1
-
-
Yes Congratulations on the release of v1.0, This is a nice game, I thoroughly
enjoy it. It bodes well with my hobby/interest in the ACW/Military History.
Hopefully more ACW battles are in the plans by you, and ur team.
Cheers.....
-
2
-
-
Just finished a campaign and looked at the "statistics".......snip
The credibility of UGG as game representative of the ACW is in question with this level of anachronism in the role that cavalry is playing on the battlefield.
Is is possible to get a version of this game without the cavalry?
I'm interested in the ACW - and the cavalry implementation is very very far out of line with the ACW.
It is frustrating because you get a reasonable battle going then the "wonder cavalry" show up and turn the game into pure fantasy.
Totally agree with ur whole post D Fair.
These 4 lines I have Highlighted in Bold
says exactly how I feel.
******
Besides the Cavalry my biggest beef are those 'Videttes'
The way they were used in Game, instead of there real role in the Civil War('Scouts/Mounted Pickets/Eyes for the Army').
The Videttes when in Game especially MP are used as Battery Busters.
(When the Armies Approach Gettysburg)
This causes an unfair advantage for the Union Player, and is totally out of the
realm of historical accuracy.
I am forced to keep My batteries as close to the main body as possible,
which in turn defeats the purpose of how Batteries were used in certain situations.
If not,
I have to dispatch a Line of skirmishers (Heth's) to protect them if kept together.
It is hard to protect if I want to seperate my Batteries to fire from different positions on the map.
With 1 unit of Skirmishers in the first part of the map/Game.
Also pulling Back troops to Protecting the 4 batteries that arrive later on from the SW 'alone' without any protection,
from the wondering Videttes, and so on n so forth...
*******
http://civilwartalk.com/threads/videttes-and-skirmishers.96805/
Skirmishers were more of a defensive tactic. You throw out a line of troops ahead of your main body to disrupt the enemy and defend against their actions.
A vidette was a mounted scout, usually alone or in a small group, and their duty was to find the enemy and report on their actions and not necessarily to take them under fire.
**
A vedette is a cavalry equivalent of an infantry picket. Pickets would have been out about 500 yards from the main body and,
with cavalry, individual vedettes out maybe another 500 yards from the pickets.
**
Videttes/vedettes would also be mounted when cavalry units are picketing a gap. The pickets would bed down by a fire at night, have a reserve in the rear,
while the videttes rode back and forth between the separate groups of pickets.
In this case, pickets is an appropriate term to describe both the dismounted and mounted groups/individuals if they are on watch.
-
3
-
-
Well, i am not getting angry about it, and I won't loose a night sleep on this. And for playtesting the problem is pretty irrelevant too: just don't use the units. (the AI doesn't abuse them either after all)
I think in the end the best option would be to get rid of the videttes as a whole indeed though.
Yea agree^^
The Videttes when playing MP are a pain in the butt(The Armies Approach Gettysburg) and other maps.. They charge arty, even when getting blasted with Canisters,
n still destroy Batteries. Totally Unrealistic...They are a glaring problem, and should be removed a.s.a.p. imo.
The Union Vedettes make it very difficult to win as ANV.
You need to dispatch a Brigade/Skirmishers to protect. Than later on unprotected Batteries are slowly wheeled fwd from the west to get Harassed n Destroyed by Vedettes.
The ANV is under strength as it is, n having to dispatch Brigades to Protect is a disaster.
Also in SP this thing with the Cavalry running around on Maps at Gettysburg is a Head Shaker. If there is anything that smash/ends
immersion quickly is the arrival of the unrealistic Cavalry at Gettysburg. Unrealistic n Confusing as to Why they are even Present in the Game/On the Field!
1. Get rid of the Videttes asap! They were used as mostly Scouts...iirc...
2. Have Cavalry depicted as they should Historically be. I would have them removed all together,
Unless they were used as Dismounted Infantry/ Batteries If indeed they were used.
The realistic on Day 1 morning Buford had (2?) Dismounted Infantry units. Did Buford bring any batteries to Gettysburg Morning 7/1/63?
-
1
-
-
It's great that you love playing a series of canned tactical phases.
Some of us want to play the Battle of Gettysburg - that's the big deal.
Commanding an army is our goal - and planning and continuity to execute those plans are fundamental to the enjoyment of the game and gaining a sense that we are commanding an army at the Battle of Gettysburg.
UGG advertises itself as a simulator to replay Gettysburg (not a canned series of tactical battles that don't flow from one phase to the next).
Please explain why XII Corps routinely disappears at noon on Day 2 between phases?
Also...
Let's do some logistics math.........snip
******
David Fair you hit the nail on the head there, I couldn't agree more!
Nice research/Great post.
The logistics math you laid out is an eye opener,
the difficulties up against a Corp Commander/Cmnd.General.
Holding a critical Position after a Hard fought Battle.
"Resupply/Rotate"
Quote:
Was it preferable to resupply by rotation - yes.
Was it impossible to resupply troops on the firing line - no.
Was it common to abandon key positions to resupply - no.
The developers have done a fine job with aspects of this game - but it is really frustrating watching new features being added (Tilt-Shift) when the fundamentals of the game have such glaring logic and play continuity flaws.
-
When units get trapped between multiple enemies they will receive enormous casualties (simulating a surrender). Cannons will not be able to survive but will be 100% depleted if caught in melee unsupported.
With Arty:
If a arty unit gets get below ~40% effective by taking massive casualties, or being over run/caught between units etc, 0 morale/condition.
I believe that Battery(s) should be destroyed as it is battle ineffective.
Call it whatever surrendered/battle ineffective/ammo depleted etc. Afaik IRL rarely did a Battery ever run out of ammo unknowling, that would list up there as
being incompetent. A battery would in some cased be ordered to expend their remaining ammo only with the immediate order to limber up n exit to the
rear to resupply/redeploy.
A batteries CO/Crew was well aware what ammo it had, and what type was left to use. There is a mention in the Book 'Killer Angels'
iirc, there was a battery in Ewells Corp(can't remember who's thou) that was basically 'wasting' Arty ammo,
contesting a barn near Culps Hill, Lee said tell him to save the arty ammo(As he was told it was getting low)
for the Battle that was to follow.
This would make it easier to understand that it was rendered useless/destroyed. This could be explained in the Game manual/start up guide.
In a real situation where a battery(s) were going to be over run they were limbered up n moved if possible or they were spiked/smashed/disabled.
Seeing it being rolled to the back of the map is not realistic + a waste of resources for the computer to keep track of.
In another Game I play if a soldier is not outright killed(torso/head shot) they can be wounded where he is considered Battle ineffective and are
listed as KIA with 1 loss to your reinforcements.
This could have the same bearing with Artillery Battery(s).
With brigades if the take a loss of >60% they should rout to the rear as They would be listed as a ineffective fighting unit(0 morale/condition).
It should take longer to regenerate/reorganize/resupply etc, I believe thats how it works now?
-
Documentation? The official Patch/update Stickied threads is a great place for feedback/Update log(s). (News and Announcements)
Reorganize maybe, I believe it would help a lot with answering questions. I see most of the topics are represented in one way or
another, but most are in the General Discussion section, with different headings(8 pinned Threads).
Community Driven/Effort sure... IMO 2-3 more Dedicated Sub-Forums would be helpful(there are 4 Sub-Forums now).
Maybe add a new sub-forum(s){Tactics/-Ideas n Suggestions/-Game play Help/-Game Guide(s)/-Game play Rants-},
or something along those lines.
This would cut down a lot of the threads started just to state a fact/ask a question/seek an answer/complain etc. in the general Discussion Forum.
Basically in the wrong areas.
A Forum Mod could move a new threads if need be to the correct specified pinned Thread(section)
where their suggestion/Question/Comment best fits, and it would get the attention it needs.
Are there any community Moderators here, or are all G-L staff?
-
The Tilt-Shift does bring a more realistic look to the fight, but
I agree with guys above, it should be toned down. The blurred effect should be removed.
I like seeing the whole battle/screen with no blurry sides.
The darker shading that the Tilt-Shift brings, is a bit to dark. I like the sharpness/lighting of the whole battle field,
as it is. I will leave T-S it off for now.
Thx for your time,hard work with theses Update(s).
-
That's my understanding of these terms as well, and in this context UGG's AI is quite good with tactics but severely lacking with strategy. That said, there's a new update now so more testing to be done
Ok where would you put Operational Planning?
I believe once the armies met at Gettysburg the Strategic Plans(Both Armies) was put on hold till the outcome could be assessed.
This is why Lee's, and the South's Eastern invasion Strategy Collapsed once a retreat was ordered on the 4 day.
Lee Failed to Put pressure on, and threaten Washington and/or Philadelphia with a decisive win in the North.
The thinking was this would probably force Lincoln to the table to 'negotiate Independence n cessation of hostilities'.
Once the first shots were fired, the Battle was in the Operational Tactical Phase.
Strategy imo is the big Picture, whereas The Battle Of Gettysburg was in the
Tactical Planning or Operational Level which would advance their
overall Strategy with a win, or a disastrous result if a Loss occurred.
This is why I agreed with David Fair that this Game is a Tactical Game. imo....
""" Quote>
The intermediate level, which converts strategy into tactics is the operational level that deals with formations of units.
In common vernacular, "tactical" decisions are those made to achieve greatest immediate value and "strategic" decisions are those
made to achieve the greatest overall value irrespective of immediate return...
-
My conclusion is this is a tactics game - not a strategy game.
The strategy is direct line to VP's.
In January it was suggested that the CSA have a couple of different strategies particularly on Day 1.
Specifically,
Strategy A:
CSA Ewell's Corps stay east of Gettysburg and move directly to Culp's Hill / Cemetery Hill to 1) hold the high ground and 2) take Union XI and I Corps in the rear.
Strategy B:
Split Ewell's forces and half move to Culp's Hill / Cemetery Hill.
Strategy C:
Current implementation.
UGG's AI really needs a strategic overlay or the game is simply too repetitive to remain interesting.
I don't mean to go off topic here....
@ David Fair.I agree this is a purely a Tactical Game,from the moment the Army of Northern Virginia arrived at Gettysburg, to the time of Lee's retreat on the 4th.With Lee's, ANV withdrawal from Pennsylvania that part of the Souths Strategy Collapsed.I am confused here,Perhaps you could elaborate/clarify on what exactly you meant with the post above,on what exactly the difference is Between 'Strategy n Tactics'.I see the 2 words use interchangeably,to mean the same thing.Perhaps I have it all backwards,But from what I read they are 2 completely different operations within a Military context.I believe this is an important point, because this is a Military gaming forum in Generality.******Military tactics can be described as the science and art of organizing a military force, and the techniques for using weapons or military units in combination for engaging and defeating an enemy in battle. Changes in philosophy and technology over time have been reflected in changes to military tactics. In current military thought, tactics are the lowest of three planning levels. The highest tier of planning is the strategy, which is about how force is translated into political objectives or, more specifically, how the means and ends of war are bridged together. An intermediate level, which converts strategy into tactics is the operational level that deals with formations of units. In common vernacular, "tactical" decisions are those made to achieve greatest immediate value and "strategic" decisions are those made to achieve the greatest overall value irrespective of immediate return.....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_tactics
**********
MILITARY STRATEGY AND TACTICSMilitary strategy and tactics are essential to the conduct of warfare. Broadly stated, strategy is the planning, coordination, and general direction of military operations to meet overall political and military objectives. Tactics implement strategy by short-term decisions on the movement of troops and employment of weapons on the field of battle. The great military theorist Carl von Clausewitz put it another way: "Tactics is the art of using troops in battle; strategy is the art of using battles to win the war." Strategy and tactics, however, have been viewed differently in almost every era of history. The change in the meaning of these terms over time has been basically one of scope as the nature of war and society has changed and as technology has changed. Strategy, for example, literally means "the art of the general" (from the Greek strategos) and originally signified the purely military planning of a campaign.http://www.molossia.org/milacademy/strategy.html
******
Essentially, strategy is the thinking aspect of planning a change, organizing something, or planning a war. Strategy lays out the goals that need to be accomplished and the ideas for achieving those goals. Strategy can be complex multi-layered plans for accomplishing objectives and may give consideration to tactics.Tactics are the meat and bread of the strategy. They are the “doing” aspect that follows the planning. Tactics refer specifically to action. In the strategy phase of a plan, the thinkers decide how to achieve their goals. In other words they think about how people will act, i.e., tactics. They decide on what tactics will be employed to fulfill the strategy.*******
UGG Fatal Flaw Discovered:No Historical Accuracy - Film at Eleven!
in General Discussions
Posted