Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

J & P Rebalance Mod by JonnyH13 and Pandakraut 11/01/2022 1.28.3


JonnyH13
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 11/6/2022 at 11:59 AM, KurtPanzer said:

Hi, thanks for all your work! I am really enjoying 1.28.3, but it is crashing on opening on my laptop. It works fine on my older PC.

I'm using GOG and the GOG mod version. If I "repair" the game, then reinstall the mod it works fine.

Kurt

Crashing on game startup usually this means that installation was only partially successful. Double check that you have an /ultimate general civil war_DATA/mod/rebalance folder. The crash usually means that the config files aren't being found.

If that doesn't work let me know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/4/2022 at 10:15 PM, dixiePig said:

That section of the UI (the initial selection of CAREER attributes at the beginning of the game) is unfortunately very locked down. There is little to nothing we can change there. While the constraints are arbitrary, I do think they have a decent balance of options. 

Actually:  the initial "balance of options" when selecting a CAREER path is curiously constrained.  Here's how it breaks out. 

You can select a MAXIMUM:

Politics: 3 (but you only have 1 opportunity to select that choice - and it allows only 1 Economy)

Economy: 3 (but you only have 1 opportunity to select that choice - and it excludes Politics)

Medicine: 2 (but you only have 1 opportunity to select that choice)

Training: 7 

Army Org: 2 (a minimum of 1, and - since one of your first CAREER attributes must be AO, this is redundant)

Logistics: 4

Reconnaissance: 4

The Choices

  • Politics and Economy cannot be selected until the last step of CAREER.
  • Politics (3) and Medicine (2) are all-or-nothing.
  • Economy is also extreme.  There is only one choice which allows both Politics and Economy.
  • Training and Reconnaissance options are unbalanced options (either 1 or 3)
  • Logistics is the only attribute which is modestly balanced

No, it's not really 'a decent balance of options'.  

Thanks again for your good work in providing a little more meaning to Reconnaissance in particular and 'common sense' to Training, as well.

Note:  I selected Politics/3 and Economy/1 in the POLITICS step of my BG level CSA initial CAREER setup (there's only one choice for the Politics attribute in the "politics" step ... ? Go figure.)  Result - I have lots and LOTS of money after each battle (Did you change the dynamics there?).  Works okay for buying Officers - since that's more necessary now - but it's still not exactly "balanced".  And I still end up with more cash than I can use.

  • Part of my exploration of the newest mod will be to see how different CAREER profiles work ... Now that Training is weakened and Reconnaissance is strengthened, the CAREER dynamics are quite different

Medicine was another undervalued attribute - and still is. Battlefield Medicine was horrific at that time and disease also took a terrible toll.  Selection of the Medicine attribute might trigger the ability to buy Field Hospitals (to be assigned to an Army or Corps) during the GOVERNMENT phase.  This would give some 'meat' to Medicine.

Edited by dixiePig
clarification & follow-up
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/5/2022 at 1:04 AM, pandakraut said:

I'm not sure if I can get tooltips to appear off of the veteran/recruit checkboxes but will take a look.

Yes, having the replacement Veteran/Rookie numbers appear on-screen as a consistent part of the UI (they should be visible all the time - even if it's just an overlay) would be very helpful during the army building phase.  The other stats are unnecessary - the numbers are critical to the reinforcement process. If you can update the numbers dynamically as the slider moves, so much the better.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bug or Feature?

Newport, as CSA:  Cabell commands 10 artillery, from Potomac Fort.  In the Army Build phase I cannot increase the number of cannons unless I go to Army Org Level 3 (i.e. use both of my Career points for AO). Is this intentional?

Edited by dixiePig
clarity
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, dixiePig said:

Bug or Feature?

Newport, as CSA:  Cabell commands 10 artillery, from Potomac Fort.  In the Army Build phase I cannot increase the number of cannons unless I go to Army Org Level 3 (i.e. use both of my Career points for AO). Is this intentional?

Size of Cabell and limit of 10 is intended. Not being able to cap off the men in the unit is a side effect. Will see if I can fix it.

Will also get back to you on your other longer posts, just haven't had time for a longer response yet.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, pandakraut said:

Will also get back to you on your other longer posts, just haven't had time for a longer response yet.

Appreciate your patience & diligence in answering.  I realize that I am posting a lot of stuff now, but the newest upgrade is an excellent improvement, and I am very excited about the results.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

General Context:

Weapon 'Base Damage' means ... what?  And how should it be interpreted? (is it related to range? at all?)

I realize that there may be some complex trade-offs.  Guess I'm looking for a reasonable context can perhaps even a simple thumbnail analysis.

Your Hidden Dynamics posts and weapon chart provide some clues, but Base Damage remains a mystery.  Did I miss something?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dixiePig said:

General Context:

Weapon 'Base Damage' means ... what?  And how should it be interpreted? (is it related to range? at all?)

I realize that there may be some complex trade-offs.  Guess I'm looking for a reasonable context can perhaps even a simple thumbnail analysis.

Your Hidden Dynamics posts and weapon chart provide some clues, but Base Damage remains a mystery.  Did I miss something?

Every time a weapon fires it starts with a damage value between what is displayed in the weapon tooltip. Then that value is modified by a whole lot of things including the range damage multiplier, unit size, perks, etc, etc.

So when comparing weapons I usually look at the base damage range and the range damage multiplier. I'll also use this average damage graph to make it easier to visualize the damage when those two values are combined.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1E5ZFCAHEY8EyBkEkWIHOfdFlwaYpSDVA00w9a71jq1c/edit?usp=sharing

Hopefully that helps

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just finished Ambush Convoy as CSA on MG level:  It is much, much harder now that ALL of the Union reinforcements arrive at the same time on the eastern side of the map.  It was much easier to 'divide and conquer' when Union AI forces were split.  On the one hand, the battle is much more of a challenge now.  On the other hand, there is not the variety that there was before.  I re-started Ambush several times (I had to, because it is so tough now) but the Union troops always arrive en masse at the same place and early in the battle.  

A little variety in the entry locations/times there might be fun.  Just sayin' 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/11/2022 at 1:23 PM, dixiePig said:

Just finished Ambush Convoy as CSA on MG level:  It is much, much harder now that ALL of the Union reinforcements arrive at the same time on the eastern side of the map.  It was much easier to 'divide and conquer' when Union AI forces were split.  On the one hand, the battle is much more of a challenge now.  On the other hand, there is not the variety that there was before.  I re-started Ambush several times (I had to, because it is so tough now) but the Union troops always arrive en masse at the same place and early in the battle.  

A little variety in the entry locations/times there might be fun.  Just sayin' 

The main goal for this battle was to eliminate the spawn camp opportunity that the base game allows. We didn't initially set out to add a ton of variety to every battle, more patching the biggest holes in the existing ones, while saving the fancier stuff for the grand battles.

Past that we stuck with the approach that you can get as much out of it as you want to push for. If the player sits back after capturing the wagons the AI will largely leave you alone. If you want to try and get kills you're in for a fight.  

Might add more to some battles in the future. Will have to see how it goes.

For CSA Gaines Mill, we initially just moved the spawn point of the ai reinforcements north a bit so that the player couldn't easily grab the best defensive terrain in the area before the AI can get there. It might work to have them spawn a bit further east as the terrain disadvantage isn't as extreme in that direction. Will see what the ai does in that case.

The expanding map phases are always tricky to handle. Expanding early brings it's own problems, we can't keep the player off the map edge, we want to avoid ai units spawning on top of player units whenever possible. Some suspension of disbelief is always going to be required there.

Regarding the starting career points, I meant more that the combinations available allow for a decent variety in starting setups. Training is a bit of an outlier, which has caused problems in the past, but overall it works well enough that trying to design a new system hasn't been a high priority.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/8/2022 at 8:04 AM, dixiePig said:

Note:  I selected Politics/3 and Economy/1 in the POLITICS step of my BG level CSA initial CAREER setup (there's only one choice for the Politics attribute in the "politics" step ... ? Go figure.)  Result - I have lots and LOTS of money after each battle (Did you change the dynamics there?).  Works okay for buying Officers - since that's more necessary now - but it's still not exactly "balanced".  And I still end up with more cash than I can use.

Bonus from politics went down from 1.27. BG gives you a lot of extra money to play around with by default though. Politics is what many people tend to be going first at the moment, seems to have taken over from economy and training. Though alternate approaches still work fine.

On 11/8/2022 at 8:04 AM, dixiePig said:

Medicine was another undervalued attribute - and still is. Battlefield Medicine was horrific at that time and disease also took a terrible toll.  Selection of the Medicine attribute might trigger the ability to buy Field Hospitals (to be assigned to an Army or Corps) during the GOVERNMENT phase.  This would give some 'meat' to Medicine.

In addition to returning men directly to units medicine now also impacts the amount of wounded men that recover to become veterans. Certainly not has high a priority as the various money generating career stats, but quite valuable in my opinion. Especially as you start trying to maintain 2 and 3* units.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hey,

I could use some help here on the new 1.28 update.  I get how scaling works in the game in general.  Ive got a question and an issue. 

My question is does inflicting losses on the enemy actually reduce the size of the enemy army, or will the enemy always scale their army to around where you are?

My issue is that im at CSA Gaines mill and while I have a 10k manpower advantage, the enemy brigade size has shot through the roof.  I am fielding 19 infantry brigades of 3-4k(4k is max size) and about 160 guns across 12 batterys.  The Union is fielding their infantry in 6k brigades which I cant break up no matter what as my infantry brigades disintegrate when fighting them.  They have skirmisher units of 800 to 1000 and a couple 2000 man cavalry brigades.

Im on legendary, I tried reducing the aiscale size multiplier but the unit sizes stayed the same.  I am unsure what I am doing wrong here, any help on what is going on, is Gaines Mill supposed to be like this?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, burgundy said:

My question is does inflicting losses on the enemy actually reduce the size of the enemy army, or will the enemy always scale their army to around where you are?

Yes to both questions. Since the mod allows a much larger variance in unit sizes we have added logic to try to keep the AI roughly on the same scale as the player. So since you are using 3-4k units that will upscale the AI into a similar range and combined with legendary on top facing 6k infantry units is not surprising here.

There is a snowball modifier, represented by the AI army size on the campaign map recon report, which will increase the size of AI units if you fall behind on kills. If that number is displayed in yellow or red it will be applying a more significant effect. However, I'd guess that you're pushing the max based on the size and amount of your infantry.

19 hours ago, burgundy said:

Im on legendary, I tried reducing the aiscale size multiplier but the unit sizes stayed the same.  I am unsure what I am doing wrong here, any help on what is going on, is Gaines Mill supposed to be like this?

The AIscalingSizeMultiplier in the AIConfigFile applies after all effects of scaling, so this should work to lower their unit sizes. You're changing the value in the .txt file? In older versions of the mod we used csvs, so if you have those sitting around from old installs they won't work. Should be able to make your change in the file, save, then restart the battle to see the effect. Try setting it to 0.1 just to easily verify you're in the right spot. If you are still having issues with this let me know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, pandakraut said:

The AIscalingSizeMultiplier in the AIConfigFile applies after all effects of scaling, so this should work to lower their unit sizes. You're changing the value in the .txt file? In older versions of the mod we used csvs, so if you have those sitting around from old installs they won't work. Should be able to make your change in the file, save, then restart the battle to see the effect. Try setting it to 0.1 just to easily verify you're in the right spot. If you are still having issues with this let me know.

Lol, guess which file I was using.  I tried the right file and the skirmisher and artillery size went down but the infantry still has 6k brigades.

I guess what really throws me off is it never feels like I make any progress.  I win battles, inflict a lot of casualties and the other army still dwarfs me.  I cant even achieve parity.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 11/25/2022 at 7:45 PM, burgundy said:

Lol, guess which file I was using.  I tried the right file and the skirmisher and artillery size went down but the infantry still has 6k brigades.

I guess what really throws me off is it never feels like I make any progress.  I win battles, inflict a lot of casualties and the other army still dwarfs me.  I cant even achieve parity.

To some extent that is just legendary difficulty. Intended to be difficulty if not impossible to achieve parity.

There are multiple different configs changes available if you'd prefer it to work differently. You can limit the max size of enemy units or there is also a static mode where the ai doesn't scale at all. Their unit sizes are set amounts determined by the current campaign date(with some randomness on top and adjustments to some battles where the AI has relatively few units and the preset sizes would be far too easy.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a Nice-to-Have for the new re-working of CAREER perks -

Display the current perk status under the CAREER panel.  Specifically:

  • Weapon Recovery (Reconnaissance)
  • Maximum Supply (Logistics)
  • Wound/Death rates (Medicine)

Continue to enjoy the new profile of the game.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, dixiePig said:

Here's a Nice-to-Have for the new re-working of CAREER perks -

Display the current perk status under the CAREER panel.  Specifically:

  • Weapon Recovery (Reconnaissance)
  • Maximum Supply (Logistics)
  • Wound/Death rates (Medicine)

Continue to enjoy the new profile of the game.

Unfortunately that entire section is locked down and I can't add to it. The add point button tooltips is the only part I can modify.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if its just me, but I've tried static mode and found it completely unplayable as CSA.  Straight off the bat at Newport News the Union is an unstoppable steamroller, way OP.  I've tried it on BG to see if its any different.  How do I dial the union down?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/11/2022 at 4:46 AM, KeithD said:

I don't know if its just me, but I've tried static mode and found it completely unplayable as CSA.  Straight off the bat at Newport News the Union is an unstoppable steamroller, way OP.  I've tried it on BG to see if its any different.  How do I dial the union down?

The aiScalingsizeMultiplier still works with that mode. The difficulty selection doesn't affect unit sizing in that mode so maybe try setting the multiplier to .8 and see how that goes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Pandakraut...

Love your work... thx for all you do.

 

I have a special request, if possible.

Can you pack your MOD files in a way that is "WE MOD TRAINER" friendly?

All you would have to do is place the actual files in "MOD" folder, instead of "MOD/REBALANCE" folder?

This will allow WE MOD TRAINER to work.

 

I have played UGCW million times, and using the TRAINER adds certain replayability options that make the game fresh.

If I knew how do it myself, I would... but sadly I don't have the skills.

Thx for your consideration.

 

M.E.G..

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/15/2022 at 1:55 AM, eliasdiaz said:

Has anyone found a bug in this version?

There are a couple bugs that I'm aware of but haven't had time to fix yet. The most serious is that you need to make sure that any units that have an empty officer slot due to the officer being killed or wounded get an officer assigned before starting the next battle. This prevents and end of battle crash.

If you're hitting something that seems like a bug or otherwise having trouble please let me know the details.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/19/2022 at 11:39 AM, megnet said:

Hi Pandakraut...

Love your work... thx for all you do.

 

I have a special request, if possible.

Can you pack your MOD files in a way that is "WE MOD TRAINER" friendly?

All you would have to do is place the actual files in "MOD" folder, instead of "MOD/REBALANCE" folder?

This will allow WE MOD TRAINER to work.

 

I have played UGCW million times, and using the TRAINER adds certain replayability options that make the game fresh.

If I knew how do it myself, I would... but sadly I don't have the skills.

Thx for your consideration.

 

M.E.G..

 

Do you know why the mod folder works with the trainer but the /mod/Rebalance does not? Not sure why it would care about the mods config files at all.

The reason that subfolder is there is so that those files don't conflict with the UI mod that I also maintain.

I'm traveling at the moment, but afterwards I can experiment with moving the files out of that folder to see if it works for you.

Alternatively, which functionality from that trainer are you looking for. While I haven't had any interest in adding cheats, the configs that do exist could already be used that way, so maybe I just add in whatever it does if it's convenient. It's also possible some of these line up with things I use for testing anyways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@pandakraut

Loving the mod as usual. I play it about once as year as things evolve.  Thank you for staying with this. IT brings new life to this game.

 

That being said, I have questions.

 

I feel like every single map, the enemy armor has roughly ~20 skirmisher units.  Is this normal? Cavalry can hardly scout anywhere due to number of skirmishers all over.  Everything feels very congested and there is not much room to move.

A few suggestions / questions / thoughts:

 

1) Skirmishers are too strong in melee. The problem is they are like U-boat wolf packs also. If you charge one with cavalry (which seems to be the only way I have found to deal with them) not only will a single unit cause ~10% damage from a straight up fight to an equal numbers cav unit, they are never alone. You are gonna get shot by 2-3 other skirmisher units and cannons.  The AI is so much better about supporting its units. This makes for LONNNNNGGGG slogs of matches because you have to clear a path using up ammo and troops just to approach the main event. IMHO they personally have far too big an impact on the game in the current form.

2) Have you looked at the timers? I am a more methodical player and I HATE being rushed to fight a certain way. I am forced with a decision often times to fail the mission or grind my troops up taking positions that haven't been softened up appropriately yet. Couple that with the point I Made in #1 with the glut of skirmishers slowing down progress, IMHO this begs looking at.

3) Sharpshooters - I feel like the cost / benefit does not pencil here. They are some of the most expensive units, they require a ton of micro management and they do not seem to have a very large impact on the battle. Not to mention, one mistake and they can get wiped out instantly. 

4) Due to the Carnage in the game as you make it, it feels like Medicine is the main career perk I should be getting. I am assuming that the "restore" keeps their weapons too so I don't have to purchase them again?

5) Cross Key's - This battle borders on not even being worth it.  This is an absolute bloodbath.  Even cycling units through the meatgrinder most of the units even playing in heavy cover in the woods took near 50% casualties.  At one point at the top of the map there is nearly 6 units shooting at one in heavy cover.  3 of which are skirmishers and thats like a slow damage over time just picking away at you.  I won it decisively but even doing so, having ~3-4k casualties for a minor battle is harsh to recover from that early in the game.  After the battle, most of my units were worse than they were before starting the battle because you have to be frugal with veterans.  Artillery obviously improved.

 

Questions:

1) is 12 still the magic # on guns. I looked at your artillery chart and it looks to be the best bang for the buck.

2) IS there a magic unit size that you have found is the most efficient. I have been using max size of 1250 for infantry, 12 guns, 500 cavalry and 250 sharpshooters.

3) Which guns have you found to be best for counter battery fire?  I like to clear out the guns before I make my moves but the 3inchers don't seem to do it despite the range.

4) IS there a way to disable timers?

5) Do you have any plans to adjust cannon strength at different ranges?  I understand nerfing the 24 howitzers canister, but counter battery feels lacking.

6) when if ever is it worthwhile to use the repeating guns (henrys etc.). I want to try them, but due to the prohibitive cost I am very leery of doing that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/23/2022 at 5:19 PM, Gsam said:

I feel like every single map, the enemy armor has roughly ~20 skirmisher units.  Is this normal? Cavalry can hardly scout anywhere due to number of skirmishers all over.  Everything feels very congested and there is not much room to move.

The AI is limited to at most 10 detached skirmishers out at one time. As these get destroyed, new ones will get deployed if enough AI infantry units are available. The AI is limited to one skirmisher per infantry just like the player. There are config options available to change the amount the AI can have out or remove this entirely if preferred. Definitely takes a bit to adjust to, but once you get used to it there are still plenty of options in my experience.

On 12/23/2022 at 5:19 PM, Gsam said:

1) Skirmishers are too strong in melee. The problem is they are like U-boat wolf packs also. If you charge one with cavalry (which seems to be the only way I have found to deal with them) not only will a single unit cause ~10% damage from a straight up fight to an equal numbers cav unit, they are never alone. You are gonna get shot by 2-3 other skirmisher units and cannons.  The AI is so much better about supporting its units. This makes for LONNNNNGGGG slogs of matches because you have to clear a path using up ammo and troops just to approach the main event. IMHO they personally have far too big an impact on the game in the current form.

When engaging packs of enemy skirmishers you really need multiple cav units otherwise you'll get shot to pieces as you've found. Skirmishers have significant melee penalties, but these can be offset if the AI's stats are high enough compared to the players. But from what you've described it sounds more like an issue of engagement timing. I always try to setup situations where my cavalry can melee without getting shot at, otherwise the attrition is just too high. Isolating units or having other units distracting nearby AI units that could fire into the melee is usually how I go about that, but it takes a lot of micro and practice.

I usually deal with enemy skirmishers by drawing them into my main firing line where I can blast them with multiple artillery and infantry units. Their biggest weakness is lack of morale staying power so you can clear them out somewhat quick with this approach. 

On 12/23/2022 at 5:19 PM, Gsam said:

2) Have you looked at the timers? I am a more methodical player and I HATE being rushed to fight a certain way. I am forced with a decision often times to fail the mission or grind my troops up taking positions that haven't been softened up appropriately yet. Couple that with the point I Made in #1 with the glut of skirmishers slowing down progress, IMHO this begs looking at.

In previous versions far far too much time was available. This lead to players being able to achieve extremely favorable results and the campaign being much easier than desired. In the updated battles we have aimed to give the player some time to maneuver or prep an area to assault, but not give them enough time that they can pick the AI apart. Some battles will be tighter than others, and in many it will be harder to kill every enemy unit unless you play more aggressively.

For example, the intention with artillery is that you can still open up a hole in the enemy line, but you then need to send infantry to exploit it, compared to prior versions where the artillery could largely kill everything by themselves. Union 2nd bull run is one of the better examples of this. Previously the battle was extremely easy, and now you actually have to press to achieve the objectives in time.

While I understand that more restrictive timers can be frustrating, putting time pressure on the player results in better overall difficulty and more interesting gameplay decisions in my opinion. As an artillery focused player, I certainly enjoy the slow advance, but when too much time is allowed you just fast forward until everything dies.

I feel like the timers are mostly in a good spot currently, but the timer configs do still exist so if you want a little extra time you could set them to 1.05 or 1.1. Note there are some bugs that exist if the endofDayMultiplier is increased too much compared to the timerRecommended and timerMandatory values, so I'd keep any increases to it to 1.025 or 1.05.

On 12/23/2022 at 5:19 PM, Gsam said:

3) Sharpshooters - I feel like the cost / benefit does not pencil here. They are some of the most expensive units, they require a ton of micro management and they do not seem to have a very large impact on the battle. Not to mention, one mistake and they can get wiped out instantly. 

Definitely a high risk, high reward unit. I've seen plenty of results from people with 2-4k+ kill totals on these units, so I think they can still be quite effective. One thing that can help with keeping them alive is putting them on hold position. This lowers their overall dps but prevents the stealth penalty from firing from stacking up so high which means you can set and forget them more reliably without them getting spotted.

On 12/23/2022 at 5:19 PM, Gsam said:

4) Due to the Carnage in the game as you make it, it feels like Medicine is the main career perk I should be getting. I am assuming that the "restore" keeps their weapons too so I don't have to purchase them again?

I've mostly taken medicine as a 3rd or 4th option. It's useful but early on I need money/weapons/stats more so I'll focus on other options. Restoring 0 or low 1* men isn't too valuable and my few units that are more experienced I do my best to keep casualties very low on. Any men restored do keep their weapons, though that currently only applies to the 'wounded' pool rather than all your casualties. That is something that may get adjusted as it makes medicine worse early game while it still ends up very strong late game.

On 12/23/2022 at 5:19 PM, Gsam said:

5) Cross Key's - This battle borders on not even being worth it.  This is an absolute bloodbath.  Even cycling units through the meatgrinder most of the units even playing in heavy cover in the woods took near 50% casualties.  At one point at the top of the map there is nearly 6 units shooting at one in heavy cover.  3 of which are skirmishers and thats like a slow damage over time just picking away at you.  I won it decisively but even doing so, having ~3-4k casualties for a minor battle is harsh to recover from that early in the game.  After the battle, most of my units were worse than they were before starting the battle because you have to be frugal with veterans.  Artillery obviously improved.

Definitely a tough battle, though I eventually managed to keep my total casualties down to about 30%. The newer units I had taking the brunt of the attacks in the center probably were higher than that though. I had my two best smoothbores sitting behind the center to help blast units that got into the woods out. This battle is immensely easier if you've managed to get 3-4 2*s by that point(I didn't and really felt it.) 

Constantly adjusting your line to draw skirmishers out in the open so you can hit them better, keeping up flanking efforts to the north and south, and having two fire brigades of cavalry to be able to quickly switch between helping out the top and bottom VPs is what eventually worked for me.

On 12/23/2022 at 5:19 PM, Gsam said:

1) is 12 still the magic # on guns. I looked at your artillery chart and it looks to be the best bang for the buck.

There is no magic number anymore. More guns always results in more damage. I tend to use 6-8 early game so that I can swap in better cannon faster as they become available. Moving up to 10-12 later depending on the unit. But that's more good cannon availability for the relatively low logistics investment setups that I use than anything else. 14-16 would pack more of a punch once your unit slots become a larger limiting factor.

On 12/23/2022 at 5:19 PM, Gsam said:

2) IS there a magic unit size that you have found is the most efficient. I have been using max size of 1250 for infantry, 12 guns, 500 cavalry and 250 sharpshooters.

I've gradually moved all my infantry to be bigger. 1500-2k range. Gives me more ability to absorb damage now that it's harder to limit your casualties as much as it was previously. Cavalry vary depending on weapons, but in the 400-800 range. Larger can be very effective as well. Sharpshooters are again limited by weapon availability, but I usually try to end up in the 350-400 range. These numbers are all from the perspective of someone who prefers smaller units, larger sizes can work.

On 12/23/2022 at 5:19 PM, Gsam said:

3) Which guns have you found to be best for counter battery fire?  I like to clear out the guns before I make my moves but the 3inchers don't seem to do it despite the range.

3" are your generic do it all early rifled gun. They can get counterbattery done, but aren't good at it. James, 20pdrs, tredegars, siege, and whitworths will all perform that role much better, but won't be commonly available early game.

On 12/23/2022 at 5:19 PM, Gsam said:

4) IS there a way to disable timers?

No, too many victory conditions break. They can be extended though, some details listed in an earlier response.

On 12/23/2022 at 5:19 PM, Gsam said:

5) Do you have any plans to adjust cannon strength at different ranges?  I understand nerfing the 24 howitzers canister, but counter battery feels lacking.

Common feedback is that smoothbores feel good, rifled guns feel lacking. But there is also consistent feedback from the players that stick with the rifled guns that they are still extremely strong once at 2 and 3 star with good cannon. There was a small generic buff to them in 1.28.3 but no current plans for more immediate changes. Long term there will likely be adjustments as we'd like to redo the entire perk tree, but that's not coming anytime soon.

On 12/23/2022 at 5:19 PM, Gsam said:

6) when if ever is it worthwhile to use the repeating guns (henrys etc.). I want to try them, but due to the prohibitive cost I am very leery of doing that.

I wouldn't rush them, but mid to late game they can be very good on specialized units. Their dps is unmatched for a skirmisher or infantry unit, but they also eat ammo so I wouldn't use them on standard line units. They can crush charges or do a ton of flanking damage very quickly if positioned correctly though.

Thanks for sticking with the mod over the years, hope these answers help a bit and if you have more questions just ask.

  • Like 1
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...