Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

What would you like added to UGG


R.E.B.Blunt
 Share

What would you like added to UGG?  

229 members have voted

  1. 1. What would you like added to Ultimate General: Gettysburg?

    • Surrendering Units
    • Option for Artillery to target Infantry or Artillery
    • Limited Ammo
    • Dismount/Mount Cavalry
    • Non-stop 3 day battle with no breaks
    • 2v2 3v3 4v4 Multi-player
    • Divisional Generals appear in battle
    • General Lee and General Meade to appear in battle
    • Option to Dig In, Build Barracades
    • Unit Formation Line, Double Line, Skirmish, Column
    • Detach Regiments from Brigade
    • Modding
    • Wound/Kill Generals
    • Option On/Off No Victory Points just Kills to decide victory
    • Historical Battle
    • Limber Artillery
    • Random AI Personality after each Battle
    • Eliminate cavalry/videttes/skirmishers ability to TAKE VP locations
    • Add After-Battle Report of Kill/Death ratio of each Brigade
    • Brigades target more than just one enemy within their firing arc
    • Dress Line left or Right
    • Full Civil War Campaign
    • Partial Theater Campaign
    • Switch sides after each battle
    • Adjustable speed variable (Slow, Normal, Fast)
    • Give bonus to AI Morale and Condition for more difficulty
    • Sandbox Mode, Scenario Generator
    • Other Civil War Battles
    • Combine all Skirmishers and Videttes into two Brigades
    • Nothing game is Perfect!!!
      0


Recommended Posts

What would you like added to Ultimate General: Gettysburg?

 

You can delete your votes and recast votes as new options are added to Poll.

 

Anything I missed?

 

 

Edited: so you can have ---

             multiple choice

             Modding

             Wound/Kill General

             No Victory Points

             Historical Battle

             Limber Artillery

             Random AI Personality after each Battle

             Eliminate cavalry/videttes/skirmishers ability to TAKE VP locations

             Add After-Battle Report of Kill/Death ratio of each Brigade

             Brigades target more than just one enemy within their firing arc

             Dress Line left or right

             Full Civil War Campaign

             Partial Theater Campaign

             Switch sides after each Battle

             Adjustable speed variable (Slow, Normal, Fast)

             Give bonus to AI Morale and Condition for more difficulty

             Sandbox Mode, Scenario Generator

             Other Civil War Battles

             Combine all Skirmishers and Videttes into two Brigades

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also to clarify I think being able to dig in/build barricades is rather senseless in this particular game. Both armies ran into one another and neither  had time to prepare proper digging in/barricades. Having said that it might be good for future games that may involve different battles just not this one in my opinion. 

 

Reisman17

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also to clarify I think being able to dig in/build barricades is rather senseless in this particular game. Both armies ran into one another and neither  had time to prepare proper digging in/barricades. Having said that it might be good for future games that may involve different battles just not this one in my opinion. 

 

Reisman17

 

That is actually NOT true.

 

On the First day Ewell was given orders to take Culps hill, He thought the hill was unoccupied and with no haste walked up the hill to find Union Generals Wadsworth,  later Candy and McDougall standing on top of the hill with well over 3k Union Soldiers. Retreating and almost being captured. At the bottom of the hill Confederates Began to chop down trees in case the Union Counter-attacked and built breast works. The Union was doing the same thing and were cutting down trees to build Breastworks on top of the hill. By the Second day Union had a very good Breastwork defensive line and the Confederates lost the initiative.

 

The Picture is of Culps Hill on July 3rd done by Edwin Forbes

 

*Edited

      

 

 

post-3765-0-17935100-1405292319_thumb.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is actually NOT true.

On the First day Anderson was given orders to take Culps hill, He thought the hill was unoccupied and with no haste walked up the hill to find Union Slocum Division with Generals Wadsworth, Candy and McDougall standing on top of the hill with well over 3k Union Soldiers. Retreating and almost being captured. At the bottom of the hill Confederates Began to chop down trees in case the Union Counter-attacked and built breast works. The Union was doing the same thing and were cutting down trees to build Breastworks on top of the hill. By the Second day Union had a very good Breastwork defensive line and the Confederates lost the initiative.

The Picture is of Culps Hill on July 3rd done by Edwin Forbes

Culps_Hill_July_3_Edwin_Forbes.jpg

Culps and little round top were the only ones that were dug in so really don't need this option really especially gettysburg maybe other battles like cold harbor, Petersburg, etc and everything 1864-5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was going to add this to the 'Artillery LoS' thread but here is equally appropriate. Whilst there may be problems with artillery determining a realistic LoS in some parts of the map that's really just a bug. Once fixed I think making best use of artillery will still be difficult as you often can't get a good handle on what a battery will be able to see from any given location. I've found in some of the scenarios - fighting for Cemetery Ridge for example - that artillery over right at the west of the map (playing Confederates) will merrily fire away whilst batteries on ridges and hills just across the valley stay silent. Some of this might be explained by bugs with the LoS determination so may improve in time but the effect is that I spend my time micromanaging the placement of batteries just to find somewhere they could fire from.

 

What would help would be a 'ghost move' type option. So instead of LMB click dragging to move a battery you'd Alt+LMB to drag a ghost version of the battery to a new position. Once you'd stopped moving for a second or two then the LoS for the chosen position would be determined and shown as a colourful overlay (red and blue for example) so you'd know whether moving a battery to that location would be useful or not. Conceptually someone in command has sent a staff engineer to survey the ground in order to get the artillery in a good location. Being the case it would therefore be fair to impose a speed penalty on the battery when it moves for real to reflect this, so you'd have a choice of making slower relocations to places you know should work or faster moves to places that might not.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Game Labs so when will be added new upgrades (Surrendering Units,Unit Formation Line, Double Line, Skirmish, Column ,Wound/Kill Generals,Divisional Generals appear in battle, capture enemy cannons,General Lee and General Meade to appear in battle)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Game Labs so when will be added new upgrades (Surrendering Units,Unit Formation Line, Double Line, Skirmish, Column ,Wound/Kill Generals,Divisional Generals appear in battle, capture enemy cannons,General Lee and General Meade to appear in battle)

 

This poll was not created by Game Labs or any of the developers. Instead it is a mere venue to show to the developers of UG:G what we the players of this game would want to make this game better and more realistic.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd add to this list:

Eliminate cavalry/videttes/skirmishers ability to TAKE VP locations.

(It is one thing to have them hold VP locations - but Videttes sneaking around in the back of the ANV to capture Herr's Ridge is really annoying.

I'd suggest modifying:

"No Victory Point" to "Option to turn VPs on and off".

(Players learning the game need VPs to understand how to proceed/learn the game).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd suggest modifying:

"No Victory Point" to "Option to turn VPs on and off".

(Players learning the game need VPs to understand how to proceed/learn the game).

 

I really like that idea. That is the premise of what I meant to say. You just worded it better.

 

*Edited

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To play devil's advocate: why should the devs be looking to add things to the game?  They'll have a design document produced and a direction/features in mind, surely their time is better spent refining those rather than constantly adding new things.  You're never going to please everyone and a lot of early access games have gotten bogged down because of that (project zomboid springs to mind.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To play devil's advocate: why should the devs be looking to add things to the game?  They'll have a design document produced and a direction/features in mind, surely their time is better spent refining those rather than constantly adding new things.  You're never going to please everyone and a lot of early access games have gotten bogged down because of that (project zomboid springs to mind.)

 

Oh trust me I agree with your statement. I was just growing tired of seeing all the different threads out there of everyone posting pretty much the same things; asking what they want, but on different threads (I am guilty of same thing). Asking for what we would want to make the game better and putting it in a POLL is more of constructive feedback so that once the Developers say "OK, we have worked out the bugs, the game is fully released. Oh look! The fans have already created a thread on what they would want us to work on next. Wait a second these are not bad ideas!"

 

Hopefully the Devs do not take it wrong that we don't appreciate the work that is currently done. Cause we sure in the hell do. But instead say "Wow, these people really do care about this game!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to add an option:

 

Having brigades be able to target more than just one brigade within their firing arc.  That, at least in some way, would make people who want regimental control slightly happier while also extending the functionality of the larger brigades, both for union and confederacy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...