michaelsmithern
-
Posts
89 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by michaelsmithern
-
-
5 hours ago, colonel1689 said:
Keeping armies to their historic numbers would be great.
Hopefully logistics keeps things difficult for larger forces until infrastructure and depots are established/upgraded.
that sounds rad, and you can burn down depots behind enemy lines to cripple the supply system, making it harder to field larger armies.
-
i think my only real issues with UG:CW were
1. The AI cheats, yeah i get that you need a challenge here and there, but the Union campaign was far easier than the confederate one. You'd have an Enemy who no matter how hard you stomped him into the ground would be back full strength to fight. Which at first was ok, because you get the recruits to replace your losses, but it soon turns into the AI outnumbers you and has level 3 units galore2. i wished for more micro in army management, like for regiment level organization and the such. i think brigade level worked for some battles but for others it was too big, like with gettysburg where it wasn't so much brigade on brigade combat, it was regiments fighting off regiments or even brigades in the 1stMN's case. i'm glad to see that UG:1775 has company level, since it makes more since due to the scale of the game.
I will say my enjoyment of UG:CW went up greatly with the J&P mod. i enjoyed the changes they made.
-
3 hours ago, colonel1689 said:
The Total War series needs a serious contender
Of course, it's been going downhill for a long time, and needs another RTS to step up and take it's place, or at the very least push Creative Assembly to put more effort and "creativity" into their work.
Too me the last great total war was Shogun 2. It's expansions were massive and fun to play, even though Rise of the Samurai is probably the weakest part of that game. It also suffered from lack of unit variety in rosters, but that was the sengoku jidai, a bunch of ashigaru and samurai killing one another with daimyo trying to seize power. Shogun 2 had an overall fun campaign, nice rock paper scissors combat, and a diplomacy that made a little sense, even if the AI aggravated me. I also liked that the endgame essentially was you're too powerful, kill everyone and take control of japan.Recent total wars just seem more focused on "Bigger is Better" which in some way can be true, but i don't feel like i care for the armies anymore. Playing rome2 or the warhammer games tends to leave me bored, since the ai is still predictable and generally will work with factions they hate to come after you. I think while Paradox games themselves have glaring flaws in their news game(CK3 and Vicky3) the AI isn't left up to chance with certain factors, Paradox instead chose to give them "historical rivals" which helps them work towards beating that person first and foremost.
Long winded rant, but i can't wait for this game, i'm happy to see an interactive campaign for this game. i wanted one for UG:CW but, i think it was quick to get that.
-
4 hours ago, colonel1689 said:
We should get another update soon 😊
i hope so, i've been looking forward to it for some time and i can't wait to play it.
-
Love the change so far.
My biggest complaint was it was hard to get brig gens, and well that's been fixed, so as far as im concerned mods good.
-
1
-
-
Anyone know if any new Ultimate General Titles is in the works? I remember the post about the next game being either Napoleon or American Revolution(figured that is basically ultimate Admiral Age of Sail), But i think a standalone game for Napoleon would be neat.
-
Sir, i'll have you know i'm part of the illustrious Infatry.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Aurelius Talhoffer said:
So when is the expected release date? Steam page still says TBA 2019, but it's middle of November already so that no longer seems realistic to me. Was there some other date/timeframe provided by the devs that I missed?
Looking forward to this very much, but I've decided to skip early access. I'm already doing that for Dreadnoughts, one is enough for now
To Be Announced 2019, well you still have a month and a half till you get a positive release time frame. but seeing the way things are now, i'd say maybe summer next year is my guess. not really basing it on anything just a guess.
-
I love the mod, actually makes the game fun again. not that it wasn't fun to begin with i just figured out how to cheese it, anyways no tangents, My only issue with the mod is how slow my brigadier Generals get promoted. I had Colonels who had fought in literally every battle from start to Cold Harbour and had not gotten Brig Gen yet. James Archer who got wounded every other battle, is the only one i can maybe understand, but Jackson barely made Brig Gen before the brig gen i put in charge of my division made Lt.Gen.
-
2
-
-
On 10/6/2019 at 8:57 AM, Bert66 said:
Agree - this is more of a priority than doing land battles in my opinion.
is it?
you can add nations later, Spain basically already being part of the game. I would rather they focus on the campaign and land battles. at least then i have a campaign to play while they add the nation of (insert random European colonial nation here).
-
it's not about winning the war, it's about the friends we made along the way.
-
1
-
-
I hope so. Listen if i can create an army/navy filled to the brim with scots and their kilts. you damn well better believe i will. the revolutionary war is about to look like braveheart.
Edit: It would be nice to also see the addition of Hessian troops on the british side. and French/Spanish troops on the American.
-
1
-
-
On 7/26/2019 at 8:57 AM, mitth'raw'nuruodo said:
Lack of multiplayer is one of the best things that can happen to a game like this.
It means developers will pay extra attention to AI behaviour, character system, chain of command, (relatively) realistic battle pacing etc that are essential for a game like this.
Total War series is a living example of how introduction of multiplayer gradually and inevitably converts a rich grand deep realistic tactical experience to a frantic fast-faced dumbed-down clickfest with after-thought AI favoured by multiplayer gamers.
To be fair, Vanilla Total War AI has never been "smart" it's been bearable though.
-
1
-
-
Is there plans to put the content on steam for prepurchase? i have been unable to buy the game as the payment system goes through the whole process but just fails to pay for it.
-
I wouldn't say it's "NECESSARY" to add Spain and France. While i do agree they should be a fundamental addition to the game in some forms, such as America receiving aid via the two european powers, and possible regiments to help. Now since the game from what i can see spans from Pre-Revolution to Napoleonic Wars, I again think France should be an integral part of that.
On the subject i'd rather a Napoleonic Game for a focus on more France and Spain vs Coaltion forces. This game I want more time focus on Britain and America.
-
1
-
-
Enjoyed the British Campaign teaser.
I'll leave it to the Developers to post the video themselves, don't wanna steal their thunder after all. But you can find it on youtube.
-
I wonder when we can expect to begin purchasing the pre order packages. I've been happy with the last entries into the series, I see no reason why I wouldn't jump at the idea to get the newest entry early.
-
1
-
-
Will there be Unit Card Representation to the units on the field. Edit: I rewatched the video turns out I was wrong, the marines has a distinct look to them. Which is neat.
My Question now shifts, how fair will the different looking units go? Highlanders with kilts perhaps? it'll be interesting to
-
I've always found that the Union Campaign is far easier the farther down the line you go. Usually, it's an instinct that you know you can't lose to the Confederates in most battles, either from playing the battles to the point where your mistakes of yesteryear are reforged into tactical maneuvers that completely destroy units. or just simple Russian style mass charges.
At around Malvern hill is where I call the campaign won in my favor for the Colonel difficulty. I called it winnable after Fredericksburg for BG. and while my MG campaign is hard fought and most definitely more of a challenge then I expected I believe I'm at the point where the Confederates simply take more casualties than me and cannot stand on it feet. I'm at the battle of Gettysburg, so this should be an easy win for me, especially if I can use Buford's Division of practically all skirmishers to whittle down units on Day 1.
By the time on both campaigns for Col. and BG I've had 5 corps(Col. was full 2500 man brigades and what not. while the BG had around 1800-2000 in each brigade) and really only needed to throw more men at the problems I had. if you know where the enemy is coming in from as well during the first phases you can set up a division to shoot at them and 4 of the 5 brigades that show up usually surrender( you may need to charge here and there, but it is quite easy to beat the reinforcements that come in from few areas).
While I don't think I'll take the same approach, merely because I don't' believe I'll have the manpower to do so, I don't see being overly difficult to win.
Now the problem in my Confederate campaigns(all difficulties) is that I run into manpower problems. I always have some money and guns, but not enough troops(go figure) and it definitely starts to show just before Antietam for me or right after since I take huge losses, while there is some respite in Fredericksburg and Chancellorsville, provided I can pull it off quickly, Gettysburg I try and cause as much damage as possible since I know I'm gonna be on the offensive in some battles that will cost me lots of men(and probably the game should I lose). when all is said and done and I hit Washington. that's when the real fun begins because I roll in with 100k(no manpower remaining, little to no money or guns) have to take what is it 5 forts(plus Washington) then defend them from anywhere to 150-200k Union troops. Let me tell you stress levels were quite high the day I spent reloading saves everytime I lost.
can't wait for the next one,
Short answer: UUUURRRRRRAAAA!!!
-
All I'm saying is I hope to get picked for the beta for the next game, simply waiting for the release or even minor footage was hard on me when I heard about a sequel to UGG.
And to JaM, i like your thinking on how a Nap wars should be released followed by American Revolution, it makes sense, and hey you could even add the war of 1812 in there if you wanted
-
1
-
-
for all my campaigns i've never seen Horseshoe ridge at chickamauga.
-
1 hour ago, The Soldier said:
That, I'm pretty sure he's everywhere. From experience, the Division Commander is "present" in every brigade in his division and can be killed whenever any of the brigades in his division takes fire - just a much lower chance than a brigade commander.
I figured but you know it’s just one of my nitpicks that id like to know. It’s not really that important
-
I know it’s gonna be a stretch but I would like to see a more dynamic game, almost like the first one, but with the mechanics from the civil war, with army management and what not, while it would require essentially making the battles really long with multiple routes and even multiple ways of going into them.
Now im gonna simplify my list by making different tabs of what I’d like
- regiments or the ability to split off regiments
- a more in depth army management( I know more micro but hey I like that stuff)
- a more dynamic campaign
- battles that are able to have more dynamic actions
- the ability to choose between volunteers/regulars/ etc( this would be good for Nap wars as you could have highlanders or polish legions or whatever
- a way of knowing which brigade the division general is with or just an option to have him on the screen
- more skills as a commander I really enjoyed the current ones they had plenty to offer and it was hard to choose for some of them which ones I needed to prioritize
i did and didn’t like the points system for getting things from the government because if you lost a battle and didn’t have enough points you’d be shit out of luck and be replaced, doesn’t matter if you have one every battle
- keep cavalry the same please, in UGG they were almost useless but in CW they are very good and I like it that way they play a vital role
and many smaller details that can be overlooked as they are just a personal preference.
if anybody has an addition or what they want to contest I’d love to hear it, disagreements can lead communities forward if they have meaning
almost forgot for a sequel I’d like to see a revolutionary war game, it’d be just nice
however I think an overdone Napoleonic wars game might expand the fan base to those who enjoy the time period and it’ll explore another part of the world instead of covering US history
-
My strategy is simple.... I call it Git Gud.
No, but for real, what i do is i take Nicomedia Hill with arty and two brigades of infantry, and hold it as long as possible. with the recent updates it's concerning whether this is a good move or not considering it always leads to the Union Flanking all the way to the left side of the map and me having to constantly move forces up to fight them off. In the Sunken road i usually station all my arty adn 4 brigades on the right over by the bridge to decimate any union troops that come across, especially early on, since they just spawn on your side of the bridge and can be easily canistered and shot up without the time to react. Finally with the Burnsides bridge, it's 50/50 for me, sometimes my third corps can hold the bridge others they can't for the most part i don't focus on it too much, i just try and hold the enemy back for as long as possible.
loyalist,indians and franch forces
in General Discussions
Posted
Now that's an interesting option, i knew the Indians were involved in the war, from the Iroquis Confederation to the Cherokee and Huron. Loyalist i would hope have a role even without the inclusion of Indian forces as they played a vital role in the southern colonies
Including Indian and Loyalist forces i wonder if they'll have the German and Pennsylvania Dutch troops available as well.