Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

The Collectors Showcase

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by The Collectors Showcase

  1. I am in constant awe of morale settings. Its just amazing. Union units running off the map after 10% casualties, morale blown out after force marches to destinations in the line. Wa Huh? So now how is this a game? Ahhh its a movie sorry. My bad. I love REB's they have cement in their boots. Once on a hill that's were they stay. Nick: you love them Rebs! Overbaked lines, massive overthought. Keep it simple silly, your not sending rockets to the moon.
  2. Its simply a lack of code. You really see the limitations of the off the shelf software. My opinion is there is very little custom code in the game. The effort is great but there's no budget presently for the title. God bless Nick, you just know he's working his heart out, but the game tries to do way too much and fails in the end. Sure, so much fun to play! But I find myself winning as Union 10 minutes in and my units are spent anyway, no morale boost whatsoever. My troops should be fired up at repelling Rebs, but instead they win and then flee he he its a joke really. You see this across
  3. I can tell Nick went in and fooled around again! Unbelievable, he really doesn't want anyone to play the game! Ha ha what a joke, took down union artillery: now Union's got nothing, unbelievable. What a novice game designer, truly. Get a clue fella.
  4. I love surrounding REB troops. Instead of surrendering they all sprout wings and fly away. What a great reward for luring enemies into a well devised trap: none! No tactical reward whatsoever. What a joke. Oh ya Confederate troops never surrendered, my bad.
  5. The game of course in multi-player is broken. the morale setting for Union are absurd. Nick refuses to address it and I think I finally know why: The code is the same for AI and multi-player. Nick knows that most folks are AI REB players and its an effort to please the market that provides the most revenue? This is the only conclusion I can come to. I play but if I play say extremely adept players that have conformed their game play to the Super REB capabilities its a disaster. There is no tactics for a lot of these folks. I just played a game ( Ambush66 ) and he employed the "Ball Of
  6. Nick, Well put, and again your championed by so many of the above. But Its too easy to type out a few sentences by those that would not set you off in a self critical direction, so takes those with a lump of salt. I win as Union plenty trust me. Many of you probably played me, I use my sons account Benukis alot, so you know I've done fine as Union. And why do I insist on Union? Because REB is just too easy to play and win now. You see I like a challenge. But currently the game is pretty much unplayable in Multi mode, the Union morale is just set too low. But lets move on: You tun
  7. Nick, The criticisms you've received as of late have you closing off. Don't do it! Keep your mind open and your passion will be rewarded. Locking the most recent thread you have added is the opposite of what you must do. Now is the time to listen to your customers. I've played Koro, he plays a very methodic game as though he is on the ground in an ACW battle. He's very nice to play. But very few players use the software that way. They play to win! They look for all of the oddities in the system to tailor the game to their needs: not your expectations on how they will play. There ar
  8. I've stopped playing as well: RIP UGG. The game doesn't even work anymore. The best answers are often the simplist ones. The endless noodling with troop ratings was absurd. Trying to create two separate armies that had so many differences made no sense at all. Also I would hope you would reach out to me or others that might seem like tough customers to help beta the new game. At the very least you'll get straight talk that you need for success. Will of course check out the new game when it arrives, for now UGG multiplayer is no longer a viable game between two opponents. Always a
  9. The more I play the more I am just astounded at: 1. How far Union units retreat 2. Union morale is ludicrous 3. I can win half way through but my troops behave as though they have just been routed! No morale boost for success whatsoever. 4. The Union seems to have a sort of leak, the morale just saps and saps no matter how well they do. Way to go Nick! {You'll be hearing from my lawyer on the carpal tunnel syndrome I get from constantly pushing blinking union units forward.}
  10. Hey Nick, Why make scenarios no one would want to play? Why in the world would I want to be Union on the Ewell map? I mean tell me. why? Its a GAME right? Two folks have the chance to win? So you simply tease the sides out a bit. Grow Union on that map so that it can be played. Right now you have maybe 4 maps that are like a chess game. The others are some strange movie like historical re-creation. You've missed the point my lad. Its a game not a movie. I have so much fun losing on he Ewell map against hords of Waffen Rebs: NOT. Do this approach on the Antietam game and you better be a goo
  11. The divergence of both sides is simply too great Union simply cannot attack reb formations. In some cases they can barely advance without blinking. Ewells advance round top scenarios etc, the game isn't longer a tactical excercise it's about Union slowly retreating. It's so sad. Have two players play that are from the forum and just watch the outcome. People are playing differently than what you imagine.
  12. God damn what's wrong with the game? Union loves to charge, backwards! Nick, truly what's the problem? Are you kidding. Ok listen artillery for Union is their asset but what good is it if Union retreats all the fu!ÔéČing time! I mean are you kidding. I advance excelsior brigade, it doesn't fire a shot and it immediately starts blinking: huh? And then moving backwards. Dude you have too much time on your hands. Union ratings are a joke. Union had 27% more troops at Gettysburg yet your multiplayer maps often have more Rebs! I give up man. Just make both sides even so it's a game. Your tinkering t
  13. The new patch is excellent and brings both Union and Reb back in line. Great even games, I'm impressed. Good job Nick! Huzzahhh! Now time for a new game with custom code added and leveraged out to different genres! Time to cash in on all the hard work you've done. Compliments, Brian
  14. We played plenty, and you lost. Here's another idea: lets play marbles: you get five I get two. Then when I lose lets switch and then you get two and you lose. Isn't that fun? What a great analogy for Ultimate General. My turn I lose your turn you lose. And that's a strategy game? Are you kidding? Poor Union they had no idea they were so inept, I guess that's why they won. The game is completely broken, you know it and others do too. Sad was fun some patches ago: even a challenge. What a joke.
  15. Ahh just the Man I wanted to talk to: rumor has it you partially responsible for the present mess. Someone lent too eager an ear to you during the myriad of patches? What we have here gentleman is a mess of a game now. Now don't get me wrong I'm going down with the ship out of sheer love for the game, but damn Union is hosed almost all of the time. Archer goes from 1200 to 400 fellas and hardly budges an inch while Iron Brigade rushes to the rear for a hardtack break if Davis sneezes. You seem a bit defensive to me. Guilt? Knowing that the game has been reduced to such a state. Was fine a c
  16. Did you know that the South had more factories than the north? And that the North was very a very poor agrarian culture? The North lacked the quantity that the South had hence they defend many parts of the Gettysburg map in Ultimate General with fewer of the same number of troops? Did you also know that the South had a lot more artillery than the North? And get this, they ran faster, not just to battles, but in battles! At least 40% faster! Little known facts, truly. And they rallied after taking 75% casualties. Bruce Catton, Shelby Foote: you know nothing compared to the Author of Gettysburg
  17. Sadly: because the bulk of customers will be those yearning for a competitive environment in which to hone their skills. Simple fact. No big deal, just a fact. But this is a choice and hey Nick's passion for history wins out, great! But revenues are the lifeblood. Maybe some meeting engagements that bulk up union a bit. Who knows. Just some feedback based on hours of gameplay. Great game of course! I love it. But what I don't like are zombie Rebs that know no rest :-) Cheers! Brian
  18. Sadly having spent well over 100 hours playing the game recently I can only conclude that Nick seems to be bent on keeping historical accuracy rather than an even sided meeting style game. Which is his choice, but will it pay the bills? That's the problem. No matter how you play the Union their chances of success are below average. Which is actually historically correct. So really no historical problem there. But what percentage of players are more concerned with a game that they can win at utilizing both sides? I certainly don't lose as Union and say: " That's awesome, I lost, what a grea
  19. Thanks much Nick, I'll just wait. Busy with my own business. I can certainly appreciate the limited time you must have for your own tasks! I'll try to be patient, big fan, and you know I love the game. Cheers!
  20. I understand your busy working hard , but what you have is a broken game. Union is absurd. The more I play the more I see how broken the stats are. But oh well maybe you are busy on other projects.
  21. Again a too polite way to describe a serious weakness in the game. I play this map all the time as Union, it is difficult for sure, it illustrates the problem with Union vs Confederate moral. Confederates are programmed as cyborg warriors. Never dying or running off the map even after losing half their strength. Union units basically cannot attack. The morale is so low They can Only defend, or block its that simple. You can win as Union but you have to be Very shrewd and experienced and on top of it all Lucky! I don't bother playing confederate anymore as it's just too easy. Union is for a
  22. Example: Chance To Change History In Multiplayer. I was doing great handling loads of Rebs as they moved onto the map. But just never got any aid all the way to halfway through the game, I simply could not hold out. So what was fun and challenging turned into a game that simply ended for me half way through. Now hear me out, Clearly there is a Randomizer for reinforcements to enter the game. That's great! And so cool. Problem is the code needs more work. Union is weak still so a slight skew towards Union? Or something that rewards geography area occupation? Or VP retaining? The Randomizer sim
  23. Good job on toning down the Rebs and tuning up the Union, now we got a great game for multiplayer going! Confederates still a bit too strong, but much better than before.
  24. I'm glad to see we have some consensus on the cyborg Confederates. If you read my other posts for multiplayer it's really out of control. Confederates have been rated with morale fit for Waffen SS legions while the Union is rated as a petty band of Polish partisans. Maybe this could be fixed? The game is however, supercool and a format of gameplay that is above the rest! So kudos for that. Other than the mis-match in ratings for both sides the game is thoroughly enjoyed.
  25. The update doesn't install correctly? I have two other friends with the same experience of the game as I had after steam updated the game. Will try the above, thanks for that. But what about other players that don't know to do this? Shouldn't the update install work?
  • Create New...