Koro Posted December 5, 2016 Share Posted December 5, 2016 To be fair, it only happens in those two battles that I noticed it but still Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grognard_JC Posted December 5, 2016 Share Posted December 5, 2016 8 minutes ago, Koro said: To be fair, it only happens in those two battles that I noticed it but still This happens in the last part of Shiloh when you play as the CSA if I remember well. It also happens on the right flank of Shiloh in the North. I'm not that sure, but I'll try to "log" it on paper next time I see this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koro Posted December 5, 2016 Share Posted December 5, 2016 Pretty sure the reinforcements come in from just north west of the landing. I think a simple solution would be to move the units back a little so they aren't within firing range the moment the appear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karri Posted December 5, 2016 Share Posted December 5, 2016 (edited) Just finished easy playthrough as Union, and this time kept army organisation low. Had 3 corps, 12 brigades with max 1500 men per corps. All veterans and with best weapons by Antietamn. Won all battles. This time scaling worked quite well, with the exception of unit experiences. Casualties were again very lopsided, but I had to concentrate on the game a lot more as opposed to last time when I just maxed army org and built massive raw recruit brigades. If the AI units get shot to pieces I can understand almost endless limit of recruits and weapons, but not veteran recruits with best weapons. I was in no short supply of weapons and recruits, but money was all the time short(medicine and training at 8 or 9 by the end). Unit experience is still hard to max. I played most battles with the first corps, yet only had three or four 3 star brigades. There's a few scenarios where sudden unit spawning ruins a well fought battle. Edited December 5, 2016 by Karri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grognard_JC Posted December 6, 2016 Share Posted December 6, 2016 (edited) Some quick remarks after reaching Gains Mill in my 4th CSA run. I miss the previous atmosphere of army management. The sounds had more variation, more looping to it, and it was more hypnotic. Going for full ARMY ORGANIZATION might be used in a way I had not seen before, and that I'm not actually doing now : maximizing your number of brigades while keeping your army small in numbers. You can create plenty of small brigades actually, certainly escaping the army scaling problem. I was too idiotic to think of it from scratch and I had rather create my first corp with full 2500 men brigades. The last patch has made the game more challenging : your rescue less weapons than before, and you capture MUCH less weapons than before. So it makes it harder to fill new fresh brigades for free. The money you are not saving this way prohibits you from buying veterans for your old elite brigades, so your best units start to diminish in size quickly. Is it me, or the vets cost more now ? Seems to me the cavalry is much more expensive than it was ? (I could maintain 3x750 charge cav before, now I can hardly spare 1!) All in all, army management and battles certainly have become more challenging. This is very strange, because that's not in the patch notes. Keep up the good work devs ! Edited December 6, 2016 by Grognard_JC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaelsmithern Posted December 6, 2016 Share Posted December 6, 2016 (edited) Alright just got the game and am at the battle of second bull run, one thing i noticed is that in this battle, literally all of the confederate brigades(or divisions as they are referred to for some reason) are level 3, meaning my new brigades can't even make a dent in their lines before getting beaten to shreads. as for troop scaling, this hasn't been much of a problem yet, as i only saw it in the Western theater(reclaming the battlefield on the final stage of shiloh was pretty hard, but i managed it) as for my units i can barely get a level 3 commander(most have died or got wounded) yet the confederates can somehow conjure officers with the best abilities ever? all i'm saying if they had 2000 man units with lower level commanders or historical representations of their commanders(brigade wise) then i'd be fine, but i lost the 2nd battle of bull run, even though i outnumbered them 2 to 1 in the beginning with 2 1 star brigades, 4 2 two star brigades, 1 no star brigade, 2 2 star cannon batteries, and a horse unit(no stars), when the reinforcements arrive i thought it was all over, but somehow the tigers, archer and the one guy with his name starting with a T held off fresh and battle hardened units(these guys were hit hard, but most were above half strength, when i went in for the kill) Don't get me wrong i'm aware it's early alpha and things are due to change, i remember this well from Gettysburg, but this was ridiculous, i couldn't even pull that off if i tried hard enough Edit: After watching my little recording of the battle i noticed i did do some rather idiotic moves towards the end, which cost me the battle, so the 4-6 brigades that held me back were in fact doing pretty well to beat me. As for the Unit experience, hmmm maybe it's to even it out, i do get a lot of reinforcements so i guess it'd make sense that it should end immediately from the player army thrashing the AI. oh well, on to Antietam Edited December 6, 2016 by michaelsmithern Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don't Escrow Taxes Posted December 6, 2016 Share Posted December 6, 2016 On 12/5/2016 at 11:44 AM, Koro said: And is it possible to have a more elegant way of introducing the units in the third phase of Antietam? They just spawn at the bridge and if you have men there, they'll get shot at. Likewise, if you're almost on top of Henry Hill, someone reported to me, that Jackson just spawns a top the hill as well and is able to shoot down on you immediately. It could be made better perhaps I ran into this at Antietam as well, the game even goes so far as to suggest you watch that ford in the river, but if you put a unit there, the Union spawns on top of them and cuts them up real bad right away. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koro Posted December 7, 2016 Share Posted December 7, 2016 On 6/12/2016 at 5:41 AM, michaelsmithern said: Alright just got the game and am at the battle of second bull run, one thing i noticed is that in this battle, literally all of the confederate brigades(or divisions as they are referred to for some reason) are level 3, meaning my new brigades can't even make a dent in their lines before getting beaten to shreads. as for troop scaling, this hasn't been much of a problem yet, as i only saw it in the Western theater(reclaming the battlefield on the final stage of shiloh was pretty hard, but i managed it) as for my units i can barely get a level 3 commander(most have died or got wounded) yet the confederates can somehow conjure officers with the best abilities ever? all i'm saying if they had 2000 man units with lower level commanders or historical representations of their commanders(brigade wise) then i'd be fine, but i lost the 2nd battle of bull run, even though i outnumbered them 2 to 1 in the beginning with 2 1 star brigades, 4 2 two star brigades, 1 no star brigade, 2 2 star cannon batteries, and a horse unit(no stars), when the reinforcements arrive i thought it was all over, but somehow the tigers, archer and the one guy with his name starting with a T held off fresh and battle hardened units(these guys were hit hard, but most were above half strength, when i went in for the kill) Don't get me wrong i'm aware it's early alpha and things are due to change, i remember this well from Gettysburg, but this was ridiculous, i couldn't even pull that off if i tried hard enough Edit: After watching my little recording of the battle i noticed i did do some rather idiotic moves towards the end, which cost me the battle, so the 4-6 brigades that held me back were in fact doing pretty well to beat me. As for the Unit experience, hmmm maybe it's to even it out, i do get a lot of reinforcements so i guess it'd make sense that it should end immediately from the player army thrashing the AI. oh well, on to Antietam Hi Michael. I am not sure what your army looked like at 2nd Bull Run but maybe this will help you in the future: If you start from 10 mins in, it only takes me 10 mins to get up the hill: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drakuel Posted December 7, 2016 Share Posted December 7, 2016 First let me say, excellent game.. Don't wish to repeat what others have already said, far as terrain map to determine hills better. I have played only a few hours but in those hours I noticed that supply wagons seem to have a mind of there own. I set them to go behind my lines and sit, but during battle even though no enemy forces are near them they start driving towards the enemy.. I would think if anything supply wagons should just sit till ordered to not, and if they feel like enemy is too close they should run away from enemy not into them. I have lost two supply wagons this way, just cause they chose on there own to drive into enemy ranks. In the heat of battle I as a general don't have time to constantly babysit a supply wagon ;).. All in all for early access, this game is very polished and a welcomed addition to my strategy gaming library. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andre Bolkonsky Posted December 7, 2016 Share Posted December 7, 2016 4 hours ago, Drakuel said: First let me say, excellent game.. Don't wish to repeat what others have already said, far as terrain map to determine hills better. I have played only a few hours but in those hours I noticed that supply wagons seem to have a mind of there own. I set them to go behind my lines and sit, but during battle even though no enemy forces are near them they start driving towards the enemy.. I would think if anything supply wagons should just sit till ordered to not, and if they feel like enemy is too close they should run away from enemy not into them. I have lost two supply wagons this way, just cause they chose on there own to drive into enemy ranks. In the heat of battle I as a general don't have time to constantly babysit a supply wagon ;).. All in all for early access, this game is very polished and a welcomed addition to my strategy gaming library Agree, across the board. I don't understand why wagons feel the need to wander off like they do. Makes no sense. It's not like they start rolling towards an area where units might need material, either. It just wanders off wherever it wants to go unless you hobble the horses and shoot the drovers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speedkermit Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 I'm not sure the supply system really adds much to the game. To me it's just an irritant, and UG;G was an amazing game even without the supply system. Other feedback - The zoom buttons don't seem to work at all. I can manage to zoom in/out using the mouse wheel. But it's a real struggle. Does anyone else have issue with zooming in/out? Other feedback. This game is challenging. It took me three attempts to take the fort during the first CSA mission, and I thought I was good at wargames! I also think the casualties need to be toned down a bit. Every battle is a bloodbath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEWMEN Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 not impressed not impressed. for the amount of time i waited since rumors stared circulating years ago, complete and utter garbage. its basiclly the same shit like UG Gettysburg. ONly thing new its that customization stuff and officers crap but other than that the game is same shit. i wanted to see atleast some blood and gore in it. i feel as if i am playing total war but a slower version. I am angry. DId you guys just crap this game out over night and fed it us and charged 30 bucks for early access? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lincolns Mullet Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEWMEN Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 (edited) its a great game and all but its missing the violence. Edited December 8, 2016 by JEWMEN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drakuel Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 6 hours ago, JEWMEN said: not impressed not impressed. for the amount of time i waited since rumors stared circulating years ago, complete and utter garbage. its basiclly the same shit like UG Gettysburg. ONly thing new its that customization stuff and officers crap but other than that the game is same shit. i wanted to see atleast some blood and gore in it. i feel as if i am playing total war but a slower version. I am angry. DId you guys just crap this game out over night and fed it us and charged 30 bucks for early access? I think this is a little harsh, but everyone is entilted to there opinion. In my opinion, blood and gore is a fluff feature, that can be added anytime, this is early access and I think there are more important game features that need to still be addressed and polished first. Comparing this to Total War is funny, even with there huge development budgets and team, they produce crap AI and then DLC you for more money for fluff stuff like blood and gore. I think this game is hands above Total war series, that series has been developing this type of strategy format for years upon years, and they still have terrible game mechanics that don't work. This game with far smaller budgets and team have more realistic mechanics already and far better AI already compared to a total war series that has had generations of time to work on and still have not figured it out. Personally I think Total War was better on there older titles, less graphics least the AI was fun. Total War shogun 2 in my opinion had the best AI for there series, since then they have gone backwards.. Pretty to look at , but strategy gameplay out the window. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaM Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 cant agree about total war.. it was and still is a mess of a game.. battle behavior was completely scripted so after a while you knew exactly what will trigger AI response, which made the battles way too predictable and boring. I bought CW just two days ago, while i played Gettysburg some time ago, i think it is wast improvement over previous game. These strategical options you now have make the game a lot different, and quite interesting. Of course not everything is 100% perfect, but that is expected from early access game, game will improve over time.. One of my suggestions for improvement would be to make the deployment phase a bit more active, with more options, based on player army setup and tactics, so he could deploy some units (cavalry/skirmishers) ahead of his main force, which would make these units more desirable sometimes, especially for those missions where you need to occupy something fast (if you have a cavalry division in your army, it would be expected it would be on the spearhead of the advance, therefore would get to fight first) Another one would be probably to do something about units stacking on top of each other which is sometimes limiting to get a grasp whats going on.. Maybe it wouldnt hurt having an option to enable standard army icons for the map so player could see the battle situation from that perspective too. Anyway overall, i like the game, cant wait for further updates. (and kinda hope one day you make similar game with Napoleonic Era!) edit: one graphical suggestion,but maybe that was already discussed in the past - what about changing the firing animation for infantry brigades so only first three ranks would actually fire? i think it would look a bit more realistic than men from second line firing through men in the first line if brigade double line deployment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andre Bolkonsky Posted December 9, 2016 Share Posted December 9, 2016 On 12/8/2016 at 9:16 AM, JEWMEN said: not impressed not impressed. for the amount of time i waited since rumors stared circulating years ago, complete and utter garbage. its basiclly the same shit like UG Gettysburg. ONly thing new its that customization stuff and officers crap but other than that the game is same shit. i wanted to see atleast some blood and gore in it. i feel as if i am playing total war but a slower version. I am angry. DId you guys just crap this game out over night and fed it us and charged 30 bucks for early access? If you buy an early access game, and want to get mad fifteen minutes after playing it, that's really on you, Jewmen. You are welcome to your opinion. Forgive us if we do not share it, or your need to spew profanity to make your point. I've been playing it for a week, it's the closest thing to table top miniatures I've ever seen, and I'm bloody well impressed. But I'm not looking for something to fill the screen with blood and gore and replicate the failed Total War model. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgganimal Posted December 10, 2016 Share Posted December 10, 2016 I was playing the 2nd Battle of Bull Run as the Union and I expected Longstreet's Corps to show up on my left flank, but he never did. I feel like half the battle is missing. I pushed back Jackson's Corps, took the objective, and the battle ended. I even left some units on my left to delay Longstreet, but they weren't needed. Where is the rest of the Confederate army? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitorishizuka Posted December 10, 2016 Share Posted December 10, 2016 31 minutes ago, mgganimal said: I was playing the 2nd Battle of Bull Run as the Union and I expected Longstreet's Corps to show up on my left flank, but he never did. I feel like half the battle is missing. I pushed back Jackson's Corps, took the objective, and the battle ended. I even left some units on my left to delay Longstreet, but they weren't needed. Where is the rest of the Confederate army? You may have just won before they showed up. How many phases did you take before you got to the VP? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilious Posted December 11, 2016 Share Posted December 11, 2016 On 12/8/2016 at 6:17 AM, Speedkermit said: I also think the casualties need to be toned down a bit. Every battle is a bloodbath. You have to remember casualties are killed and wounded, when you look at Gettysburg Fredricksburg ect there were some very heavy losses when you included wounded into the numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgganimal Posted December 11, 2016 Share Posted December 11, 2016 8 hours ago, Hitorishizuka said: You may have just won before they showed up. How many phases did you take before you got to the VP? Maybe two? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitorishizuka Posted December 11, 2016 Share Posted December 11, 2016 Just now, mgganimal said: Maybe two? I don't think they hit the field yet. I was at the start of phase 2 and didn't see them either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koro Posted December 11, 2016 Share Posted December 11, 2016 They don't show up until very late phase two but if capture me point early, they don't show up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitorishizuka Posted December 11, 2016 Share Posted December 11, 2016 Just remembered to report this one: Extra recruits from captured enemies appears to be capped at 1k/battle, no matter how many people you actually captured. It seems roughly 1:1 in terms of captures-recruits until then but going over seems capped. Not sure if intended, just seems weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koro Posted December 11, 2016 Share Posted December 11, 2016 50 minutes ago, Hitorishizuka said: Just remembered to report this one: Extra recruits from captured enemies appears to be capped at 1k/battle, no matter how many people you actually captured. It seems roughly 1:1 in terms of captures-recruits until then but going over seems capped. Not sure if intended, just seems weird. It is intended. While it used to go 1:1 and prisoners were much easier to capture, you could come away from battles with thousands of extra men, throwing the campaign off balance. So chance to have units surrender was tuned down and a cap was made. It's much harder now to capture them though and I don't think it would break the game to raise it but that's why it's there anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts