Recent changes make Fredricksburg battle completely broken

[Commander_Rahl]

The recent changes to the fortification modifiers have made the Mary's heights portion of this battle absolutely unplayable as the Union.   Cover/Fortifications modifier is way to high.   Just watched a one star unit, of 1500 confederates, hold off almost 25000 Union troops, plus 4 brigades of artillery.  While I agree that the battle needed to be made harder, the changes that were made have broken it.   Please consider rebalancing and adjusting whatever was changed, to make it realistic, and consistant with the rest of the game.   

[GeneralPITA]

The stone wall at Marye's Heights has always had a 100% cover bonus. Firepower and morale have been altered, but that's to the CSA advantage.  

[Wandering1]

There are still changes that need to be made to the map in any case. Playing from the Union, there's nobody on the salient at Maryes Heights at the start. Meaning if you're quick, you can push all of your infantry through the breach and start killing their cannons before the computer decides to put somebody on the salient.

It does, unfortunately, take a while to shoot the one brigade on the flag, because cover is non-directional. Not that that brigade really changes much, because as long as you've penetrated the wall, you can rout all the cannons and come back to the guys on the fortifications later.

[Lillibullero]

can someone explain how cover works after last hotfix?

[Commander_Rahl]

34 minutes ago, GeneralPITA said:

The stone wall at Marye's Heights has always had a 100% cover bonus. Firepower and morale have been altered, but that's to the CSA advantage.  

Full cover, or not.   No one star should be able to withstand fire from 12 brigades, and 4 artilllery units.   That just isnt realistic, or enjoyable.   Especially considering that they aren't being effected by charge, or melee attacks.   

[Nick53588]

I just had this happen to me.  The battle is weird from the Union standpoint.  I just pushed forward and to my surprise found the south fortification unmanned.  I pushed that hard and managed to destroy all of the artillery.  However the infantry brigades behind fortifications were impossible to move.  I had 4 brigades charge one with artillery backup and 2 skirmisher units helping out and everyone routed.  That one brigade had well over 3k kills.  

I won convincingly only because the southern flank wasn't defended and I got to hit it hard.  I don't mind fortifications being crazy strong from the front, but it I get behind you there shouldn't be a bonus.

[Hitorishizuka]

There's still no reason to charge Marye's Heights. Circle around to the far north and push down and start enfilading their line. Even if they're resistant to damage they still count as being flanked when you get around and behind them so you'll push them out that way. You have more than enough time to get back to the heights but with your entire army behind theirs by the time the first phase ends on that portion of the map.

[Nick53588]

I tried that and got destroyed because of the swampy terrain and the fortifications in the forest.  This go around I said eff it and just charged forward and found the enemy with their pants down.

I wasn't getting any flanking bonuses against troops in fortifications.  I literally have Mahonne surrounded from all sides and it took 3 different charges to make him surrender.  

[Commander_Rahl]

50 minutes ago, Hitorishizuka said:

There's still no reason to charge Marye's Heights. Circle around to the far north and push down and start enfilading their line. Even if they're resistant to damage they still count as being flanked when you get around and behind them so you'll push them out that way. You have more than enough time to get back to the heights but with your entire army behind theirs by the time the first phase ends on that portion of the map.

Flanking isn't being applied to units in the fortifications.   Melee and charge also aren't being applied correctly.   Whether or not there is an alternative way to get this battle completed, something was messed up in last patch.   Definitely not working as intended.   No unit should be able to withstand fire from a dozen infrantry brigades, and 4 artillery units, with multiple units flanking it.   If this is meant to be a stone wall, then flanking and melee should work normally.   Only fire from the front should get a full coverage bonus.

[Commander_Rahl]

1 hour ago, Hitorishizuka said:

There's still no reason to charge Marye's Heights. Circle around to the far north and push down and start enfilading their line. Even if they're resistant to damage they still count as being flanked when you get around and behind them so you'll push them out that way. You have more than enough time to get back to the heights but with your entire army behind theirs by the time the first phase ends on that portion of the map.

Flanking isn't being applied to units in the fortifications.   Melee and charge also aren't being applied correctly.   Whether or not there is an alternative way to get this battle completed, something was messed up in last patch.   Definitely not working as intended.   No unit should be able to withstand fire from a dozen infrantry brigades, and 4 artillery units, with multiple units flanking it.   If this is meant to be a stone wall, then flanking and melee should work normally.   Only fire from the front should get a full coverage bonus.

[Hitorishizuka]

10 minutes ago, Commander_Rahl said:

Flanking isn't being applied to units in the fortifications.   Melee and charge also aren't being applied correctly.   Whether or not there is an alternative way to get this battle completed, something was messed up in last patch.   Definitely not working as intended.   No unit should be able to withstand fire from a dozen infrantry brigades, and 4 artillery units, with multiple units flanking it.   If this is meant to be a stone wall, then flanking and melee should work normally.   Only fire from the front should get a full coverage bonus.

I'll take a closer look the next battle I play but I am 95% sure when I did Fredericksburg I was applying flanking morale penalties to them. Maybe the AI had just did a dumb and started withdrawing their unit from the barricade (which they will do automatically if you threaten to pocket them, so maneuvering still makes sense).

[Wandering1]

3 minutes ago, Hitorishizuka said:

I'll take a closer look the next battle I play but I am 95% sure when I did Fredericksburg I was applying flanking morale penalties to them. Maybe the AI had just did a dumb and started withdrawing their unit from the barricade (which they will do automatically if you threaten to pocket them, so maneuvering still makes sense).

While the southern fortification is not being manned at the start, there's no reason to go all the way north. You can penetrate to the forests behind Maryes Heights through the southern fortification, and envelop that way without getting stuck in the swamps.

[Hitorishizuka]

12 minutes ago, Wandering1 said:

While the southern fortification is not being manned at the start, there's no reason to go all the way north. You can penetrate to the forests behind Maryes Heights through the southern fortification, and envelop that way without getting stuck in the swamps.

If you go all the way north you get to move down in a straight line and not have to worry about flanking forces behind you if you had just created a salient or something. Also, there's house cover to use to outshoot the brigades there on your way in, so you take minimal casualties breaking their formation. The swamps block you only if you don't go far enough north.

[Wandering1]

At least in my max size playthrough, there are only 4-5 corps in the middle section once the map expands to include Telegraph Road. I did post in the feedback thread about an early victory on Fredericksburg, and you can see how many dots I have on the map. That section allows you basically 60-65 brigades (depending on how close some of the Phase 1 divisions are to the border), versus what amounts to maybe 20-25 brigades overall, including artillery.

That screenshot included me essentially posting 4-6 brigades at the bottom edge, facing south to instantly shoot the divisions that spawn closest to the border.

[Commander_Rahl]

24 minutes ago, Hitorishizuka said:

I'll take a closer look the next battle I play but I am 95% sure when I did Fredericksburg I was applying flanking morale penalties to them. Maybe the AI had just did a dumb and started withdrawing their unit from the barricade (which they will do automatically if you threaten to pocket them, so maneuvering still makes sense).

Yes, I believe something was modified in the last patch, that messed up how the cover bonuses are working for these fortifications, in this particular battle.   I've never seen fortification bonuses that act like the ones in this battle.  

[Col_Kelly]

The fredericksburg fortifications are... special in a way and there's a reason to it : Longstreet had a lot of time to prepare and made sure that position was un-assailable from the front. The casualty ratio there historically was 1000 confederates to... 8000 union troops. By far the biggest casualty gap of the civil war. 

This is simply representend in the game. If those fortifications were any lower it's the CSA version of the battle which would be unplayable. Go at either one of the flank to beat the confederates, I can assure you it works. 

[Hitorishizuka]

 

10 minutes ago, Col_Kelly said:

The fredericksburg fortifications are... special in a way and there's a reason to it : Longstreet had a lot of time to prepare and made sure that position was un-assailable from the front. The casualty ratio there historically was 1000 confederates to... 8000 union troops. By far the biggest casualty gap of the civil war. 

This is simply representend in the game. If those fortifications were any lower it's the CSA version of the battle which would be unplayable. Go at either one of the flank to beat the confederates, I can assure you it works. 

*cough*

Quote

We just deployed a new hotfix which includes the following:

Fixes

• Fixed very high cover bonus that could make units almost indestructible in some locations.

The patch notes indicate otherwise.

Edited January 16, 2017 by Hitorishizuka

[Col_Kelly]

The high cover bonus generated complaints about forrests mostly. You stil won't be able to defeat a confederate unit frontally no matter how many troops you send. I just played Fredericksburg and I can assure you that the bonus here specifically is still pretty much similar. 

On another note lad I and other people have found you to be somewhat cocky on this forum and I truly think it doesnt serve you in any way. Maybe you could try modesty and politeness for once. 

[Commander_Rahl]

16 minutes ago, Col_Kelly said:

The high cover bonus generated complaints about forrests mostly. You stil won't be able to defeat a confederate unit frontally no matter how many troops you send. I just played Fredericksburg and I can assure you that the bonus here specifically is still pretty much similar. 

On another note lad I and other people have found you to be somewhat cocky on this forum and I truly think it doesnt serve you in any way. Maybe you could try modesty and politeness for once. 

And this cover bonus is supposed to be applied from 360 degrees, so that the units in the fortifications can't be flanked, or attacked from the rear with bonuses?   Is this fortification supposed to also affect melee charges and attacks?   I've never seen any fortifications or cover in this game, that had any effect on Melee attacks and charges, but the one at Mary's heights are resistant to damage from all directions, and to melee and charge attacks.   How is this in any way realistic, or consistent with the rest of the game?   If the battle needs to be more balanced, then give the Confedrates more numbers and better units.   Don't give them fortifications that don't follow the rules that are consistently applied elsewhere in the game.   

[Col_Kelly]

Fortifications give melee bonuses in lots of other places if not all the time (not 100% sure about this). At Malvern Hill, Gaines Mill or Newport News for example. Its just that the fortifcations at Fburg are better than most of those you encounter elsewhere. 

One trick is to go far south and 'occupy' the most southern brigade fortified there with a charge while you run 3/4 units around them (u've got space for it). Even if you don't have flanking damage (which I'm not sure about btw) you can still surround that unit and shoot it out of position. Done it several times. Hitori's tactic to go far north sounds like a good plan as well. 

Some other players have complained that fredericksburg was too easy for the Union so it's hard to tell sometimes. 

[Commander_Rahl]

4 minutes ago, Col_Kelly said:

Fortifications give melee bonuses in lots of other places if not all the time (not 100% sure about this). At Malvern Hill, Gaines Mill or Newport News for example. Its just that the fortifcations at Fburg are better than most of those you encounter elsewhere. 

One trick is to go far south and 'occupy' the most southern brigade fortified there with a charge while you run 3/4 units around them (u've got space for it). Even if you don't have flanking damage (which I'm not sure about btw) you can still surround that unit and shoot it out of position. Done it several times. Hitori's tactic to go far north sounds like a good plan as well. 

I have consistently been able to take all other fortifications in this game, when applying much less pressure to the fortifications at Fredricksburg.   Literally had 18 full brigades of units attacking a single one star unit, with artillery and flanking support.  That is just too much of a fortification bonus, and is completely inconsistent with other heavy fortification locations offered elsewhere in the game.   Really should be lowered to more realistic levels.   If battle needs to be balanced, it would be better to add more and better quality confederate troops.

Edited January 16, 2017 by Commander_Rahl

[Hitorishizuka]

22 minutes ago, Col_Kelly said:

The high cover bonus generated complaints about forrests mostly. You stil won't be able to defeat a confederate unit frontally no matter how many troops you send. I just played Fredericksburg and I can assure you that the bonus here specifically is still pretty much similar.

 

3 minutes ago, Commander_Rahl said:

And this cover bonus is supposed to be applied from 360 degrees, so that the units in the fortifications can't be flanked, or attacked from the rear with bonuses?   Is this fortification supposed to also affect melee charges and attacks?   I've never seen any fortifications or cover in this game, that had any effect on Melee attacks and charges, but the one at Mary's heights are resistant to damage from all directions, and to melee and charge attacks.   How is this in any way realistic, or consistent with the rest of the game?   If the battle needs to be more balanced, then give the Confedrates more numbers and better units.   Don't give them fortifications that don't follow the rules that are consistently applied elsewhere in the game.   

Rahl, I would suggest replaying it post patch and see if you get the same results also on your save. If you do, I would agree that something needs to at least be looked at again. Some fortifications being "special" simply doesn't jive with the way information is presented in this game. There's no way to know based on the information presented to the attacker that these fortifications are actually superior to others. For example, compare against the Confederate defenses at 2nd Bull Run, where they historically held as well. Those things aren't really that impressive.

 

22 minutes ago, Col_Kelly said:

On another note lad I and other people have found you to be somewhat cocky on this forum and I truly think it doesnt serve you in any way. Maybe you could try modesty and politeness for once. 

So, what, you're talking about me with your buddies or whoever off forum or in PMs and namedropping like that is supposed to mean something? That's not particularly respectful nor convincing. If you have something to say, own it by yourself.

[Commander_Rahl]

3 minutes ago, Hitorishizuka said:

 

Rahl, I would suggest replaying it post patch and see if you get the same results also on your save. If you do, I would agree that something needs to at least be looked at again. Some fortifications being "special" simply doesn't jive with the way information is presented in this game. There's no way to know based on the information presented to the attacker that these fortifications are actually superior to others. For example, compare against the Confederate defenses at 2nd Bull Run, where they historically held as well. Those things aren't really that impressive.

This was played post the emergency patch.  Yesterday evening, right before I started the thread.

[Hitorishizuka]

Just now, Commander_Rahl said:

This was played post the emergency patch.  Yesterday evening, right before I started the thread.

There was just another patch a few hours ago that contains what I quoted. Did you play post that one? (Was it a late announcement and had already been up?)

[Col_Kelly]

Rahl, If you truly think so make a bug report while in game, as I told you Maryes Heights can be beaten and in several ways. Considering you have a huge number advantage there the scenario would be too easy otherwise. Give more troops to the confederates and its no longer the battle of Fredericksburg.