New player, many problems

[JInxed]

I purchased the game from Steam and downloaded it without issues.  I then read the Quick Start guide to give me some notion of what was going on.  Generally, I accept the fact that I'm going to make lots of mistakes early, so I set the difficulty to "Cautious" (that is the easiest, right?) and played as Confederates, since they had the initiative.

 

15 games later and the same issues keep coming up.

 

1.) Many small units are much better than a few big units

This is a real problem.  I watched Davis' brigade wiggle around like a worm on a hook to change their facing as various small skirmish units and videttes and what not fired into its flank.  Even more frustrating was watching their morale sink like a stone from being shot in the flank.  And of course, the fact that the Union starts with a lot of small units pretty much guarantees that all my arty gets ganked.  I even watched those videttes pass in the 25m gap between Archer's brigate and Davis' to go kill my arty.

 

Also, I suspect, though I don't know, that this also reduces effective casualties. I'm guessing that there is an attack vs. defense roll that results in a % loss, and that favors small units.  I watched those dumb videttes get shot at by entire line brigades and take 2 losses. Very frustrating.

 

 

2.) Charging mechanism

OK, so you've got the blue boys wobbling and its time to sweep them from the field.  CHARGE!  Fantastic, they break....and you just keep kind of wandering after them even as they pass through the Iron Brigade.  In most simulations the Iron Brigade would have to either stand or break.  But here, everybody just kind of passes through them without fighting.

And by without fighting that's exactly it.  I watched those guys take 0 damage even with 3 brigades mixed up with them. And the guys they charged?  They didn't take much damage either.  Meanwhile my guys were getting shot up as the Union troops miraculously managed to fire into the scrum and only hit guys wearing grey.

 

3.) Cautious?

Like I said, I set the AI to cautious.  But in every game *EVERY GAME* the Union attacks furiously whenever they have numerical advantage.  And they always seem to win, so I guess its a good strategy.

 

OK, I'm getting worked up so I'm going to put this away for a couple of weeks and hope you fix it, or else write a tutorial if I'm just being dumb.

 

 

 

[Husserl]

Welcome to UG:G community! There is no factor that favors small units. A light unit like skirmishers has no chance against a heavy infantry brigade. However, many light units with hit and run tactics, can be a real head ache for any infantry brigade. Units are suffering much more casualties and morale penalties when they receive an attack from the flank or the rear. Charging is a powerful tactic especially for the CS, however, it increases fatigue and costs condition. Falling back units keep reloading/firing.

 

Historically, in the first battle the Union decided to halt the Rebel advance at all cost to gain time for the Army of the Potomac to arrive. The Confederates  took the initiative, despite Lee's order, to seize Gettysburg without waiting the Army of Northern Virginia to fully converge and deploy. That was a mistake and Heath managed barely to advance close to Seminary before the Union I Corps threw him back to Herr Ridge.  

 

So, if you repeat the same mistake with Heth, you will probably have the same outcome, because after a point Confederates are vastly outnumbered and already tired from the hit and run. Regardless the level of the Ai character, the later will always attack if he knows that has the advantage. Your initial strategy in the opening battle should be to protect Herr Ridge. Additionally you can experiment an attack but keep your forces closely, use effectively your General and protect your artillery. Also have in mind that if you lose Herr Ridge, even if you capture all the rest VPs, in the next phase you will start having... only Herr Ridge. You cannot afford losing it, because it is the entry point for the Army of Northern Virginia. This stands only for the opening battle.   

[David Fair]

Husserl,

You are responding to a new customer's feedback - this is Jlnxed's first post.

As an experienced tester and a software development executive here is my reaction to your response to your new customer:

I completely disagree with your statement that, "there is no factor that favors small units".

Multiple small skirmishers units have a fictional rate of fire and speed advantage against a large division.

Additionally they can operate on the flanks of the large division.

The flank and rear algorithm determines the condition and morale of a unit.

Thus there are multiple factors that favor small units.

This is especially the case with skirmishers and videttes.

Note - Multiple Union units were designed and introduced into the game specifically to slow down the CSA advantage in Phase 1.

This decision by the UGG design team was not based on historical formations or tactical reality at Gettysburg.

There is a deep and extensive wealth of content disputing the implementation precisely because of Jlnxed's observations.

Jlnxed observations are spot on:

1) tactically in UGG many small units (particularly if they are skirmishers due to their speed and rate of fire) are better than large formed divisions.

2) Jlnxed description of the charging mechanism is accurate. This is a problem.

3) new players need a setting they can play. Cautious means that the Union will not play aggressively giving players time to learn the game mechanics. The Union AI is programmed to destroy the CSA batteries entering on the edge of the map and skewing the game against new players.

4) write a tutorial. You are getting unstructured and divergent feedback because people don't understand how to play the game and the interrelationships of the variables in the game.

5) listen to your player community. This is not a "tactics" or "history" problem. This is an "implementation and design" decision that should be openly and honestly discussed.

Additionally...

Your history lesson is inaccurate.

It is likely Jlnxed knows this.

Many in your community will know this.

Buford lost a total of just over 100 men from Devin's & Gamble's Brigades at Gettysburg. Calef's Battery suffered minimal casualties.

Specifically:

Devin lost 2 KIA, 3 wounded, 23 missing/POW.

Gamble lost 13 KIA, 58 wounded, 28 missing/POW.

Calef lost 12 men wounded, 13 horses, and no guns lost.

For supporting facts see:

http://www.gettysburg.stonesentinels.com/HQ/HQ-Cav-1-1.php

http://www.gettysburg.stonesentinels.com/HQ/HQ-Cav-1-2.php

http://www.gettysburg.stonesentinels.com/US/2USartA.php

Buford's casualty figures confirm that his cavalry did not "hold at all costs".

But history is not what is happening in Phase 1.

This is why your new customer is legitimately complaining.

Buford can hold against large aggressive CSA divisions.

Videttes and 1st Division I Corps can attack and exploit the CSA rear areas and destroy the CSA artillery.

The game manual is incomplete and not particularly helpful to new players.

These are legitimate concerns.

IMO the designers nerfed Phase 1, specifically:

Union organization structure and capabilities include cavalry and skirmishers deployed as fictional units.

The designer's decision to support tablets impacted the design team's ability to include cavalry mounting/dismounting, skirmishers that deploy from formed divisions, anachronistically slow artillery, and other historical limitations due to design and target market decisions.

All of this is fine - but it should be openly and honestly disclosed.

The game is not a battlefield simulator despite claims to the contrary.

The game is an excellent brigade-level game that is challenging and tremendous fun.

But UGG is not historically accurate and the defense of the design should not be based on historical arguments.

UGG is a really fine game; but, it has some key limitations.

Dealing openly about these limitations to your new customers should be of paramount concern.

Additional Historical Notes:

Historically I Corps held at all costs.

Cavalry charges at this stage of the ACW were suicidal.

Buford's contribution was delay - not blood.

Buford's men fought from the prone position to conceal their positions and strength.

His cavalry forces were withdrawn from the infantry combat.

Heth was under orders not to bring on a general engagement. Heth behaved accordingly probing the Union position because he couldn't surmise the makeup of Buford's forces. Note for example, Buford did not unfurl his cavalry standards which would have conclusively identified his force as cavalry.

Buford spread his guns and men and ordered them to lay down and keep firing. The smokescreen produced obscured the Union cavalry position until elements of I Corps arrived on McPherson's Ridge. Buford's tactics consumed all of his ammunition and he was ordered back to Maryland on July 2 to refit and resupply.

Had Heth realized Buford's ruse he could easily has swept the Union cavalry off of the ridge quickly because the CSA had more than a 3 to 1 advantage in men and a 6 to 1 advantage in guns. I won't even start on the advantages of the rifled musket over the cavalry carbine.

Historically Buford was deployed in 2 cavalry divisions with videttes posted on the right and left flank. By comparison in UGG you have broken two Union divisions into multiple skirmisher fragments each operating independently. As a result they can flank the CSA divisions crashing the morale. Additionally UGG presents the videttes as formed "units". This is complete fantasy as videttes by definition are 3 to 6 men deployed every couple of hundred yards for reconnaissance.

[Husserl]

Hi David!  Perhaps you misunderstood some of my points.

 

 

I completely disagree with your statement that, "there is no factor that favors small units".

 

There is no matter of agree/disagree here. The game mechanics do not distinguish big from small units and there are not any factors that affect units by size. There are different behaviors met, depending on the type of the units (e.g. skirmish behaviour, etc.), but this is something different.

 

It was not in my intention to proceed in any historical lesson. I wanted just to quick note some historical dimensions which are reflected in the opening battle because it is a unique, special case among the rest of the battles in UG:G. As for the accuracy of my points, I was obviously talking about both side intentions before battle.

 

In any case we are devoted to help the new players. This is a live forum, the threads are evolving and the dialogue is not ended with 2 posts. Our relation with JInxed has just begun and we shall honour it the best way we can. 

[David Fair]

Husserl,

Your distinction between game "mechanics" vs. "factors" is important.

Thanks for the explanation.

This was a communication/semantics issue.

A game manual with more semantics precision would help tremendously.

[admin]

 

OK, I'm getting worked up so I'm going to put this away for a couple of weeks and hope you fix it, or else write a tutorial if I'm just being dumb.

 

Greetings general. 

 

Tutorial will be improved of course. As it is Early access edition - every feedback is useful and important. So thanks for taking time to do it.

[Mr. Mercanto]

Husserl,

You are responding to a new customer's feedback - this is Jlnxed's first post.

As an experienced tester and a software development executive here is my reaction to your response to your new customer:

I completely disagree with your statement that, "there is no factor that favors small units".

Multiple small skirmishers units have a fictional rate of fire and speed advantage against a large division.

Additionally they can operate on the flanks of the large division.

The flank and rear algorithm determines the condition and morale of a unit.

Thus there are multiple factors that favor small units.

This is especially the case with skirmishers and videttes.

Note - Multiple Union units were designed and introduced into the game specifically to slow down the CSA advantage in Phase 1.

This decision by the UGG design team was not based on historical formations or tactical reality at Gettysburg.

There is a deep and extensive wealth of content disputing the implementation precisely because of Jlnxed's observations.

Jlnxed observations are spot on:

1) tactically in UGG many small units (particularly if they are skirmishers due to their speed and rate of fire) are better than large formed divisions.

2) Jlnxed description of the charging mechanism is accurate. This is a problem.

3) new players need a setting they can play. Cautious means that the Union will not play aggressively giving players time to learn the game mechanics. The Union AI is programmed to destroy the CSA batteries entering on the edge of the map and skewing the game against new players.

4) write a tutorial. You are getting unstructured and divergent feedback because people don't understand how to play the game and the interrelationships of the variables in the game.

5) listen to your player community. This is not a "tactics" or "history" problem. This is an "implementation and design" decision that should be openly and honestly discussed.

Additionally...

Your history lesson is inaccurate.

It is likely Jlnxed knows this.

Many in your community will know this.

Buford lost a total of just over 100 men from Devin's & Gamble's Brigades at Gettysburg. Calef's Battery suffered minimal casualties.

Specifically:

Devin lost 2 KIA, 3 wounded, 23 missing/POW.

Gamble lost 13 KIA, 58 wounded, 28 missing/POW.

Calef lost 12 men wounded, 13 horses, and no guns lost.

For supporting facts see:

http://www.gettysburg.stonesentinels.com/HQ/HQ-Cav-1-1.php

http://www.gettysburg.stonesentinels.com/HQ/HQ-Cav-1-2.php

http://www.gettysburg.stonesentinels.com/US/2USartA.php

Buford's casualty figures confirm that his cavalry did not "hold at all costs".

But history is not what is happening in Phase 1.

This is why your new customer is legitimately complaining.

Buford can hold against large aggressive CSA divisions.

Videttes and 1st Division I Corps can attack and exploit the CSA rear areas and destroy the CSA artillery.

The game manual is incomplete and not particularly helpful to new players.

These are legitimate concerns.

IMO the designers nerfed Phase 1, specifically:

Union organization structure and capabilities include cavalry and skirmishers deployed as fictional units.

The designer's decision to support tablets impacted the design team's ability to include cavalry mounting/dismounting, skirmishers that deploy from formed divisions, anachronistically slow artillery, and other historical limitations due to design and target market decisions.

All of this is fine - but it should be openly and honestly disclosed.

The game is not a battlefield simulator despite claims to the contrary.

The game is an excellent brigade-level game that is challenging and tremendous fun.

But UGG is not historically accurate and the defense of the design should not be based on historical arguments.

UGG is a really fine game; but, it has some key limitations.

Dealing openly about these limitations to your new customers should be of paramount concern.

Additional Historical Notes:

Historically I Corps held at all costs.

Cavalry charges at this stage of the ACW were suicidal.

Buford's contribution was delay - not blood.

Buford's men fought from the prone position to conceal their positions and strength.

His cavalry forces were withdrawn from the infantry combat.

Heth was under orders not to bring on a general engagement. Heth behaved accordingly probing the Union position because he couldn't surmise the makeup of Buford's forces. Note for example, Buford did not unfurl his cavalry standards which would have conclusively identified his force as cavalry.

Buford spread his guns and men and ordered them to lay down and keep firing. The smokescreen produced obscured the Union cavalry position until elements of I Corps arrived on McPherson's Ridge. Buford's tactics consumed all of his ammunition and he was ordered back to Maryland on July 2 to refit and resupply.

Had Heth realized Buford's ruse he could easily has swept the Union cavalry off of the ridge quickly because the CSA had more than a 3 to 1 advantage in men and a 6 to 1 advantage in guns. I won't even start on the advantages of the rifled musket over the cavalry carbine.

Historically Buford was deployed in 2 cavalry divisions with videttes posted on the right and left flank. By comparison in UGG you have broken two Union divisions into multiple skirmisher fragments each operating independently. As a result they can flank the CSA divisions crashing the morale. Additionally UGG presents the videttes as formed "units". This is complete fantasy as videttes by definition are 3 to 6 men deployed every couple of hundred yards for reconnaissance.

Just have to add one point that you may have forgotten to add. As you no doubt are already aware, Buford's men were armed with 7 shot Spencer Repeating Carbines. Though Heth may have still been able to sweep over him via overwhelming numbers, the carbines vastly increased rate of fire would have made this difficult.

I never heard of Buford not unfurling is Cavalry Colours and ordering his men to keep up intense fire to produce a smokescreen. That's really interesting. I wonder if he also did this to add to the deception that he had under his command a far larger force? 

I realize that this does little to add to the actual conversation. I just couldn't help myself lol.

[JInxed]

Hello Husserl -

 

Just a note to let you know that I'm an avid armchair historian and wargamer who has been enjoying ACW games and miniatures for many, many years.  I began with TSR's "Terrible Swift Sword" and spent many a long weekend pushing cardboard counters around.  I've got more than a nodding acquaintance with the era, the tactics, and the battle in particular.

 

This hardly makes me special.  Anyone willing to pay $10 for the privilege to be a beta tester has got to be enthusiastic about this kind of game, and reading through these forums I see that there are very knowledgable people here.

 

My comments are my attempt to help.  It would be very easy to shrug, accept the $10 loss, and make a mental note never to buy your products again.  But there is enough here to make some effort worthwhile.

[soccercw]

Just have to add one point that you may have forgotten to add. As you no doubt are already aware, Buford's men were armed with 7 shot Spencer Repeating Carbines. Though Heth may have still been able to sweep over him via overwhelming numbers, the carbines vastly increased rate of fire would have made this difficult.

 

 

The only two regiments in the Army of the Potomac with Spencer rifles were the 5th and 6th Michigan (which they used effectively on the East Cavalry field).  Many different ordnance records of Buford's units show that his men were armed with a mix of Sharps, Maynard, Burnsides, and other carbines.

[David Fair]

Mr. Mercanto,

As soccercw points out I did not add the "Spencer myth" to my post because it is not accurate.