derpus.maximus

It's winnable as long as the cavalry have ammunition. Oh wait, the fifty bajillion ammo wagons that are in every other phase of the battle aren't there. Great.

Anyone else notice how useless VI Corps reinforcements are on Day 1/Phase 1 of Cold Harbor? Even if you double-quick them, they won't arrive at the trench line you're supposed to hold. Insta-lose.

RE weapons, Why not have dynamic prices through the campaign? Make sufficient amounts of weapons affordable at the "right" times within the campaign.

Agree and agree. Knowing that "hey, you gotta capture this VP in this phase, 'cause you're not gonna see it again and you're gonna lose" would be helpful in planning.

Well, you may find it frustrating to see your ENTIRE army outfitted with Springfield 1863s, an entire cav division with Spencers, and so-forth. :-|

Bump. Bigger rewards should be available for the commander who risks more of his army going for the big win.

Sure, I was doing that. But you look at the historical version of the battle in-game, Union reinforcements show up with approximately an hour left, and then you wonder why the discrepancy.

Hi Nick, could you do something about the Cold Harbor Union 1st phase in the campaign? Union reinforcements arrive far too late to have any impact on the battle, and the Union loses if it can't hold the objective.

Suggestion: Can we have different levels of rewards for winning battles? For example, pretty sure you should reward the Union player for swinging for the fences on Day 4 of Gettysburg and trying for Seminary Ridge.

So if you're going to have one wagon per corps, can you at least have an ammo dump site that the wagon can go to get refilled? Again, that would severely penalize commanders who maneuver ahistorically off their supply lines. And it would be more palatable, historically, than having the wagons run away and come back refilled. Because seriously?

So when you say "send it back and get it refilled for free," what does that entail? You mean order it to Rout and then it'll respawn at the edge of the map all filled-up?

Happened during the Union first phase of Chickamauga. Spencer-equipped units hold the bridge; attackers rout through their lines. Makes sense.

THE WHITE HOUSE, 1864 GEN. GRANT: Mr. President, how will we equip our armies for the upcoming campaign? PRES. LINCOLN: Well, you recovered a paltry amount of Spencers from those Indiana regiments slaughtered holding the bridge at Chickamauga. GEN. GRANT: So can we have more? PRES. LINCOLN: No. But you could sell them and buy a bunch of Springfield 1861s. GEN. GRANT: Would there be enough for the whole army? PRES. LINCOLN: No. But I hear you captured a bunch of rifles in the last battle, too. Use those. (╯°□°)╯( ┻━┻

In historical battles, your side typically has access to several supply wagons. Why, then, in campaign, is each corps limited to one wagon with 25,000 supply max? Is this a realistic simulation of the supply situation? Get one wagon captured, and then be SOL? Would be nice to establish an ammo dump and then have several wagons - that would also prevent sides from doing too much ahistorical maneuvering across a big map (i.e. forcing the Union to slog through the Wilderness rather than take its entire army off its supply lines and punch through at one point)

So I'm doing a Union campaign right now and finally got around to playing the historical Cold Harbor battle. I was flabbergasted by how well-equipped the Union army was. In that first phase, the entire Union cavalry force is armed with Spencers. The entire Union infantry is equipped with Springfield 1863s. Even if I had the money to buy enough of that equipment for the army, the game doesn't even make enough of those weapons available. And, of course, if you get the highest-tier weapons possible, then the equipment scaling madness comes into play. Here's the suggestion. At certain points in the game, what if you had the option to equip all your troops with a certain weapon type? It wouldn't necessarily have to be the latest-and-greatest, but at least it'd be something. The tradeoff is that you lost all the weapons your troops were equipping, whether they were better or worse than whatever you had. For example, by this point in 1864 you might equip all your infantry with the Springfield 1861s. The game would remind you, "hey, you're gonna lose whatever they're equipped with now." And then you'd be able to do at least have stuff that's one generation back from the cutting edge. There might be an appropriate money cost to offset players selling whatever fancy equipment they have before the game takes it away.