vren55 Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Hitorishizuka said: I haven't seen it from CSA side yet, but assuming Phase 1 is the same, push hard in the center and split the two VPs. That should let you pocket off the forces to the south entirely and be dealing with a lot less troops once you eliminate them. That also puts you into position to get behind on the left side and then prevent the northern troops from also retreating to the final VPs by cutting off their angle of retreat and pinning them against the river and your blocking forces. You should be dealing with a lot less troops by the time you hit the pike. Basically, don't repeat the mistakes that Bragg made of letting his forces peter out as the Union retreats in good order and tightens their lines until the Pike. You need to eliminate forces entirely and not let them retreat. ... Basically ignore the initial VPs and rush Nashville... Thanks! That should work. What I don't get is why they give us those initial VPs if really winning the battle is taking Nashville. The other question I have is regarding the Battle of Salem Church. How in the world are you supposed to beat 21K 2-3star confederates while only having 19K of really crap nooby Union troops? Edited January 16, 2017 by vren55 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitorishizuka Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 31 minutes ago, vren55 said: ... Basically ignore the initial VPs and rush Nashville... Thanks! That should work. What I don't get is why they give us those initial VPs if really winning the battle is taking Nashville. More like the initial VPs are there to pull Union forces away and diffuse them across the battlefield so you can pick them off piecemeal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandering1 Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 56 minutes ago, vren55 said: ... Basically ignore the initial VPs and rush Nashville... Thanks! That should work. What I don't get is why they give us those initial VPs if really winning the battle is taking Nashville. The other question I have is regarding the Battle of Salem Church. How in the world are you supposed to beat 21K 2-3star confederates while only having 19K of really crap nooby Union troops? The same way you would do it on the minor missions where you're training 1* brigades against all 3* confederates. Use the trees. Early's brigades only come through after you can give the first set of enemies a thrashing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slobodan Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 14 hours ago, Hitorishizuka said: In both playthroughs recently on Normal I've only captured 14pdr James, which amusingly are also rather ineffective. I'm also playing on normal as CSA and in that battle before Chancellorsville (the one where you defend against bunch of 3* Union cavalry and infantry) I captured 7 20pdr Parrots. I'm yet to test them in battle, but I agree that 14pdr James is performing rather poorly (12pdr Whitworth is way better imo). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Thomadis Posted January 16, 2017 Author Share Posted January 16, 2017 A new hotfix is now available! Please read more info here: http://steamcommunity.com/games/502520/announcements/detail/593747215304784465 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OlavDeng2 Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 Gonna test the new patch now! Awesome work! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainKanundrum Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 Great work on the quick patches!! If i wasn't at work would be play testing now.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandering1 Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 Well, rats. There goes the whole open south flank at Maryes Height option now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitorishizuka Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 2 hours ago, Wandering1 said: Well, rats. There goes the whole open south flank at Maryes Height option now. It might still be there. It was definitely cheesy if you were able to just rush the forts as if they weren't there. Them being there at the start doesn't change that the southern most fortification is overstretched, you just might take more losses in the name of expediency. Although, you do have to watch for an annoying thing defenders can do if you're trying it--as soon as one unit in the fort routes, the AI can react faster and immediately put another unit. I suspect, though cannot be sure, that they get the cover bonus immediately. It's most noticeable on Malvern IME, where you can shoot out the left Union flank and they keep cycling brigades who I think automatically get the melee cover bonus, so it's very hard to actually make any headway for awhile until you've really depleted their forces. If it was a true simulation, attackers would be able to man or at least deny the other side of the defenses once defenders were pushed out so getting back in cover wouldn't make a lot of sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aetius Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 The cavalry charge bug against small units in long fortifications. This is 0.74 hotfix2, but from a 0.74 hotfix1 saved game, if that makes a difference. The odd behavior of division orders when you have five homogenous brigades in a division. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vren55 Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 15 hours ago, Hitorishizuka said: More like the initial VPs are there to pull Union forces away and diffuse them across the battlefield so you can pick them off piecemeal. So I tried what you said... hit the centre first and then try to rush Nashville East. It worked... initially but I didn't have enough troops to button down the Union entirely on the south. instead did a bypass for the division I had left behind to slow them down, heading for Nashville west, and then coming around to hit me at Nashville East. It ended up actually worse with my entire confederate army surrounded on three sides. Honestly, I think i buggered my campaign... or got too damn done in by Antietam before they rebalanced it to be a little less ludicrous for CSA. I probably should replay the confederate campaign which is easier now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vren55 Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 15 hours ago, Wandering1 said: The same way you would do it on the minor missions where you're training 1* brigades against all 3* confederates. Use the trees. Early's brigades only come through after you can give the first set of enemies a thrashing. Also, I did use the trees... buuuut for some reason you seem to be up against less infantry than I was. I got done in by 21K and you only had to go up against 19850? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pandemonium Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 (edited) On 1/14/2017 at 2:11 AM, Wandering1 said: Was there supposed to be no supply wagons on the second day of Stones River? Ended up soaking far more casualties than I would have liked on the second day because I ran out of ammo. Stones River practically has all 3* brigades. Which, without the forest cover bonus being particularly high, you see 15000 rank 3s charging your line that you can't defend because you don't nearly have as many troops in the same area. Beat it on normal with around 30k casualties to the enemy's 55k. Very hard because you have no practical way of overcoming the numbers disadvantage due to cover not being godly anymore. This happened to me as well. Weird, I was very successful on day 1, delaying the Confeds advance through the woods and using my skirmishers to allow the brigades to leapfrog backwards (mixed with minor 2-3 brigade counter-attacks on isolated units) to find better terrain, caused him to lose 50% casualties so I outnumbered him on day 2, then no supply wagons mixed with A MESS of my army redeployed without any unit/corp integrity. I ended up sending out cavalry to find Confeds supply wagons so I wouldn't get overrun. Rotated my units through the trenches to keep ammo balanced. Edited January 16, 2017 by Pandemonium Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandering1 Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 1 hour ago, vren55 said: Also, I did use the trees... buuuut for some reason you seem to be up against less infantry than I was. I got done in by 21K and you only had to go up against 19850? This screenshot was on my normal, max size playthrough. On hard and up, army sizes may be larger. 1k does not make that big of a difference though in the grand scheme of things; the computer maybe only has like 10-12k on the field to start with, with 4-5 2000 man squads spawning after the first timer finishes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luckybluemoon Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 v0.74 Hotfix 2 Feedback 1. Retreating problems seem much better. Thank you for that. 2. Skirmishers since v0.74 now no longer remain in HOLD, but remain in HOLD until they fire, then break the HOLD order and retreat. Highly annoying. 3. Broken record time - custom grouping? 4. Selection issue. This started coming up after the first or second major update, whatever one removed the CTRL key from the line drawing process. Sometimes, when I just left click to select one unit, the game will select multiple ones as if I had dragged a tiny box. This creates a headache when trying to grab one unit out of a group of new reinforcements for a cluster of artillery. 5. Cover still seems kind of overpowered. Maybe reduce standing in trees from 100% to like 80%? I personally think you should only get 100% cover bonus in prepared fortifications. 6. Lots of people have discussed wanting to be able to build their own fortifications with their units. My suggestion is to make the cover bonus capped at like 40% in woods, but then it rises as a unit stands in those woods and doesn't move. Of course this increase in bonus would stop if the unit came under infantry fire, and maybe slow if it came under artillery fire. This could simulate the soldiers constructing a patchwork defense and give skirmishers more of a role in battles by delaying attacking units so that the main brigades have time to entrench. Then if a unit rotates its position, it loses that cover bonus as more and more men leave the original line to fire. Just a thought. Thanks for the many updates! I'm so glad there is a game team out there that actively listens to the players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don't Escrow Taxes Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 (edited) thanks for retreat direction changes I will check it out. Next up for me: Your brigade is stationary and receives a charge resulting in melee. Your brigade sort of 'flows' forward instead of standing its ground, often times abandoning its cover and exposing itself to more damage than it would if it simply attempted to receive and repulse the melee charge. For whatever reason your solders decide to advance once they engage in melee when being charged. very frustrating and doesn't seem to make much sense Edited January 17, 2017 by Don't Escrow Taxes 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimcarrel Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Not to be argumentative at all, but the reaction to a charge seems like the usual human reaction to me. If your not routed, then the tendency is to "meet" the charge and then the slight flow is the tendency to go after them if it looks like they are ready to route. These guys are there to fight, once adrenaline hits its addictive and to heck with the surroundings. I would suppose better training and discipline over time could wipe out those tendencies. I personally thought the way the movements occurred during a charge was pretty spot on. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don't Escrow Taxes Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 5 minutes ago, jimcarrel said: Not to be argumentative at all, but the reaction to a charge seems like the usual human reaction to me. If your not routed, then the tendency is to "meet" the charge and then the slight flow is the tendency to go after them if it looks like they are ready to route. These guys are there to fight, once adrenaline hits its addictive and to heck with the surroundings. I would suppose better training and discipline over time could wipe out those tendencies. I personally thought the way the movements occurred during a charge was pretty spot on. Fair and reasonable point for sure and I see what you are saying but here are two answers: 1 -- I'm not sure this happens to the AI, I feel like it only happens to the player, but that observation is anecdotal. 2 -- Ignoring point 1 for a moment, I feel like triggering a brigade to leave its cover by charging it makes charging somewhat overpowered. I typically charge with more soldiers than the enemy has assembled at a given point to gain superiority; if advancing forward and out of cover to meet the oncoming charge is expected behavior, then perhaps charging smaller units into those brigades and leaving others back to take advantage of the now-exposed position taken by the enemy is better? I will keep this in mind and look for it one way or another. At the end of the day I feel like the brigade receiving the charge should be stationary, unless it routs. On another note - not sure how, or if, the "hold" command would interact with this conversation. Good post thx for the reply Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimcarrel Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Concerning your point 1, I must admit that I have never paid close attention to what the AI does when it gets charged, I'm always fixated on my troops success and as to your point 2, as long as your Napoleons can "canister" the enemy and friendly in melee, I can see as to how your question might be applicable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicator Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 (edited) Just great... I played the entire CSA campaign until Stones River and Everettsville and then the battle panels with 'Deploy' button don't appear for me so I can't start any of these... A fix would be welcome. Edited January 18, 2017 by Nicator Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master11067 Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 During phase 1 of Chancellorsville as csa I captured chancellors manor, but when that phase ended I was kinda bummed to find that I get to start all the way back across the map and recapture it. What's the point of it asking me to take Chancellorsville if it just it back to the USA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nox165 Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 Historical battle of shiloh, corps commanders on both sides have no names. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralPITA Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 On 1/16/2017 at 10:44 AM, Aetius said: The cavalry charge bug against small units in long fortifications. This is 0.74 hotfix2, but from a 0.74 hotfix1 saved game, if that makes a difference. The odd behavior of division orders when you have five homogenous brigades in a division. I've think I've figured out why it splits like this. You need nearly an entire corps of cavalry to fill out the formation, but it forms two flanks and another rank in the center (staggered behind the wings). It makes sense if you're charging across open ground with two divisions of cavalry, but that's about the only use. I can't fathom why it's like this, should be addressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andre Bolkonsky Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 Bug issue. Fredericksburg, Union Campaign, Main Assault, the woods on the confederate left just inside the far left breastworks. Paxton's brigade, 564 3-star vets, are surrounded by five full strength 2,500 man brigades, one unit is directly behind it firing into its rear, each volley will inflict 2-3 casualties and the unit cannot be routed. Might be a bug, or the most fanatical defense in human history. Just a heads up, great game. Carry on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobWheat61 Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 (edited) 9 hours ago, Andre Bolkonsky said: Bug issue. Fredericksburg, Union Campaign, Main Assault, the woods on the confederate left just inside the far left breastworks. Paxton's brigade, 564 3-star vets, are surrounded by five full strength 2,500 man brigades, one unit is directly behind it firing into its rear, each volley will inflict 2-3 casualties and the unit cannot be routed. Might be a bug, or the most fanatical defense in human history. Did you expect anything less from the Stonewall Brigade? Sadly, Paxton died at Chancellorsville. Edited January 19, 2017 by RobWheat61 Edit 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts