Stonewall47

So I started a new job a few weeks ago that has sapped my time. I came back to the game after two patches and feel a bit lost. I resumed my Union campaign and have started Parker's Farm a few times, each time being less satisfied than the last. First, you can't see who is firing at you in the fortifications. That would be fine, if my troops would have the ability to at least fire in the direction of where they're taking hundreds of casualties. Then, I move them out to find 5-6 brigades that whittle my 3 star units to a nub pretty quickly. So, I restarted and tried the offensive from the start. I stayed in cover, maneuvered well and still seemed to take a crazy amount of losses for being in cover and having elite troops. Am I missing something?

While I agree with the sentiment, I don't think that's the OP's intent. I actually would love to see UG:CW have DLC, simply so I can give Nick and the Dev's more money for their work.

I could be wrong, but I doubt Game-Labs will do DLC anytime soon. Nick comes from a Total War modding background, which I would guess leaves him with a bad taste in his mouth towards DLC. In case you aren't familiar, TW would release a half-done game, then proceed to charge for features/factions/story modes that should've been in the game to begin with. I think the goal is to make the game "complete" the first time around. Again, this is mostly conjecture based on past experience, but just my two cents. For what it's worth, I think that the final game will have a significant number of battles. Probably close to 30 for both sides!

Ok, I will go back and try to micro better! Personally, I would like the hold order to have to be toggled. Example, I move Stonewall Brigade into line and hit the hold command. They stay put. I see a brigade in their firing arc is mauling one of mine. I order Stonewall Brigade to fire on them. they remain in the same place, fire and don't stop until ordered otherwise or the enemy unit falls back. Even when said unit falls back, my brigade remains where it was initially ordered. They only move when I say, or when I undo the hold command.

So, if I tell 4 brigades to hold, they won't wheel? What about when told to attack an enemy brigade? Does that eliminate the hold order? May have to put more testing into it. I notice this more often in large battles, so it may just be a case of the mirco being too much to keep track of.

They did it while the "Ultimate General" cursed them for their stupidity. I think some clarity may help. I've seen the hold command make my units behave oddly (not fire, or turn to face enemies, ect). I would like to know exactly what that command is meant to be. I don't think it quite works like Total War's, which is what I'd like. I just finished a Confederate campaign. I feel like that it was weighted better than the Union. Antietam and Fredericksburg both saw me inflict heavy casualties on the Union, but both battles felt touchy at times. The Union advance across Burnside Bride nearly broke my line, which would've turned the tide decisively against me. Also, a heavy attack on my left at Fredericksburg nearly shattered my defenses there. Overall, the Confederacy has a harder time. I was constantly trying to scrape together money or conserve troops because I knew I was barely breaking even in the long run. I would like to see something to help balance it out a LITTLE. It's hard to maintain experienced brigades because of a lack of resources, but I honestly don't have a solution. Maybe they get a discount on veterans? Maybe the Union gets a small boost in equipment costs? Just musing.

So I have complained about the auto-charging before and realize what it is. If you tell a brigade to attack with a right click, it seems like sometimes they will follow their target if they fall back. This led to my most elite brigade charging into a union mass at Antietam. Following this moronic move, they then proceeded to rout into the enemy mass and be annihilated. Fun.

That's fine in theory, but it doesn't make a whole lot of sense in the game, maybe the devs should just scratch that first phase and move straight to the full attack.

You were right. The first day only had 10k. The problem is, they never attacked any part of my line. I fast forwarded through the whole phase and never once saw a blue regiment. They ended up with 70k on the field, left it with less than 30! Also, after the second phase, my reinforcements were reset, even though I had staged a brilliant flanking maneuver...

I think the scaling may need to be readdressed in the next patch. The disparity here I think is a bit too massive. I reported this as a bug as well.

If you read any non-fiction, just try to read some reviews. There are quite a few books that confuse "history" with "mythology."

I'm not asking for the high end rifles to be kept in massive quantities, I couldn't create regiments because I lacked the standard rifle, which to me, is kind of dumb especially as the Union. As far as accuracy, I don't really care too much about that. It's a game predicated on the chance of an alternate history.

Merry Christmas Generals! Make sure you take a moment to ENJOY the holidays!

Just played through the Union campaign on Normal. Here are some thoughts: I really like the new scaling system, however, some tweaks may need to be made. I won 2nd Bull Run with only two corps. Granted, I smashed the Confederates at Malvern Hill, but it still seemed a bit too easy. I think the side missions are perfect. Most of them feel like they could go either way if I make a mistake, enemy numbers seem good and the missions are pretty diverse. I'd like to see more guns in the armory. Not different types, but just quantity. I would often run out of the Springfield 1842, (like before every major battle) which really shouldn't be that big of an issue. I reported this, but the "Defend Pittsburgh Landing" phase saw me fast forward through it because the CSA never attacked me. They never even came close to my lines. For most of that phase, I could only see one brigade. Overall the AI seemed to be more passive. It could be that I've gotten better, but I'm sure the devs will be able to determine if it's something they did. I've read a couple places here about scaling back the casualties. While I like that idea in theory, I would think it would mean the every battle and skirmish will have to be redone to make sure there is adequate time. Fredericksburg wasn't all that fun. Maybe it needs to broken up into three phases? The hill, Mayre's Heights and then the Post Road (I think that's what it's called). I took the Heights, the CSA moved north to flank me, so I just pinned them there and sent skirmishers to take the road. Again, the scaling kind of messed this one up for the AI. I outnumbered them by 20k. I think maybe making it a three part battle and losing one of the battle nerfs may help.

My problem is often trying to select a single unit and getting two. Most often, Ill want to pull my artillery back, when I try to select them, I get them and the infantry unit right next to them.