Ultimate General: American Revolution has its own discussion page now

[Skeksis]

I don't know when this happen but it's here now.

Here's the official website, looks different too? fresher.
https://www.ug1775.com/
 

Edited March 23, 2023 by Skeksis

[colonel1689]

Looking forward to this game. Hopefully there will be highland regiments present

[Royal Fusilier]

"Looking forward to this game. Hopefully there will be highland regiments present "

 

I can't imagine that they won't be! Same with the German mercenaries!

[Skeksis]

On 3/25/2023 at 5:02 AM, colonel1689 said:

Looking forward to this game

“A gripping real-time campaign….build your army and navy, construct military infrastructure, and fully command your armies….fully zoom-in and fight massive battles on a battalion level”

“tactical control by zooming-in further” [and zooming out to global view].

If this is the case, no load screens, then this development would put this game into the very high-end market of strategy games. A huge advancement from UA:AoS linear campaign.

Edited March 26, 2023 by Skeksis

[colonel1689]

42 minutes ago, Skeksis said:

“A gripping real-time campaign….build your army and navy, construct military infrastructure, and fully command your armies….fully zoom-in and fight massive battles on a battalion level”

“tactical control by zooming-in further” [and zooming out to global view].

If this is the case, no load screens, then this development would put this game into the very high-end market of strategy games. A huge advancement from UA:AoS linear campaign.

Would certainly set the benchmark.

Would also mean that the whole game world will have been created at the tactical level which would be incredible.

[LAVA]

3 hours ago, Skeksis said:

If this is the case, no load screens, then this development would put this game into the very high-end market of strategy games.

It would clearly place it in a position which is superior to the Total War franchise.

A franchise, I must say, that has wasted it's dominate market share in the last decade with the lack of true innovation.

The potential of this game could take real time strategy to a new level.

[colonel1689]

12 hours ago, LAVA said:

It would clearly place it in a position which is superior to the Total War franchise.

A franchise, I must say, that has wasted it's dominate market share in the last decade with the lack of true innovation.

The potential of this game could take real time strategy to a new level.

From what we have seen this looks like it could be next level strategy/wargame.

I have been waiting many years for a concept like this.

[Epaminondas]

Can't stop being amazed by what such i small team of dedicated people (with very limited ressources) can achieve compared to the massive multi-team giant that is creative assembly now. The depth of gameplay and authenticity of each of their title is a delight for History-nerds & strategy fans alike. The best part being the scope of each title which are more and more ambitious than the previous ones !

[skg02]

What I particularly like in this is the delayed reporting mechanism. That alone will make it a superior system.

The attention to logistics, industry/tech, and troop/officer development look very good. 

If this works it will probably be better than anything Paradox is doing or the Total War series.  

[colonel1689]

The Total War series needs a serious contender 

[michaelsmithern]

3 hours ago, colonel1689 said:

The Total War series needs a serious contender 

Of course, it's been going downhill for a long time, and needs another RTS to step up and take it's place, or at the very least push Creative Assembly to put more effort and "creativity" into their work.

Too me the last great total war was Shogun 2. It's expansions were massive and fun to play, even though Rise of the Samurai is probably the weakest part of that game. It also suffered from lack of unit variety in rosters, but that was the sengoku jidai, a bunch of ashigaru and samurai killing one another with daimyo trying to seize power. Shogun 2 had an overall fun campaign, nice rock paper scissors combat, and a diplomacy that made a little sense, even if the AI aggravated me. I also liked that the endgame essentially was you're too powerful, kill everyone and take control of japan.

Recent total wars just seem more focused on "Bigger is Better" which in some way can be true, but i don't feel like i care for the armies anymore. Playing rome2  or the warhammer games tends to leave me bored, since the ai is still predictable and generally will work with factions they hate to come after you. I think while Paradox games themselves have glaring flaws in their news game(CK3 and Vicky3) the AI isn't left up to chance with certain factors, Paradox instead chose to give them "historical rivals" which helps them work towards beating that person first and foremost.

 

Long winded rant, but i can't wait for this game, i'm happy to see an interactive campaign for this game. i wanted one for UG:CW but, i think it was quick to get that.

[Royal Fusilier]

Same for me. Shogun 2 was the last CA game that I enjoyed. I had such high hopes for Rome 2 but after what I consider a complete fisaco of a game, I pretty much wrote them off. Imperator: Rome was the final straw for me with Paradox. Funny how Rome titles ended my hope for the two big strategy companies for me! UG: American Revolution looks like Game-Labs is going the extra mile to add realistic; thoughtful, and enjoyable mechanics. I check every day for word on early access on Steam!

[michaelsmithern]

i think my only real issues with UG:CW were
1. The AI cheats, yeah i get that you need a challenge here and there, but the Union campaign was far easier than the confederate one. You'd have an Enemy who no matter how hard you stomped him into the ground would be back full strength to fight. Which at first was ok, because you get the recruits to replace your losses, but it soon turns into the AI outnumbers you and has level 3 units galore

2. i wished for more micro in army management, like for regiment level organization and the such. i think brigade level worked for some battles but for others it was too big, like with gettysburg where it wasn't so much brigade on brigade combat, it was regiments fighting off regiments or even brigades in the 1stMN's case.  i'm glad to see that UG:1775 has company level, since it makes more since due to the scale of the game.

 

I will say my enjoyment of UG:CW went up greatly with the J&P mod. i enjoyed the changes they made.

[colonel1689]

Hopefully UG:AR will have a dynamic population mechanic that limits recruitment depending on numbers and loyalty. 

[Royal Fusilier]

1 hour ago, colonel1689 said:

Hopefully UG:AR will have a dynamic population mechanic that limits recruitment depending on numbers and loyalty. 

Critically needed! I would hate to see Napoleonic-sized armies roaming all over the colonies! From what we know, the loyalty mechanic seems very likely to do just what you are hoping for.

[colonel1689]

24 minutes ago, Royal Fusilier said:

Critically needed! I would hate to see Napoleonic-sized armies roaming all over the colonies! From what we know, the loyalty mechanic seems very likely to do just what you are hoping for.

Keeping armies to their historic numbers would be great.

Hopefully logistics keeps things difficult for larger forces until infrastructure and depots are established/upgraded.

[michaelsmithern]

5 hours ago, colonel1689 said:

Keeping armies to their historic numbers would be great.

Hopefully logistics keeps things difficult for larger forces until infrastructure and depots are established/upgraded.

that sounds rad, and you can burn down depots behind enemy lines to cripple the supply system, making it harder to field larger armies.

[colonel1689]

1 hour ago, michaelsmithern said:

that sounds rad, and you can burn down depots behind enemy lines to cripple the supply system, making it harder to field larger armies.

Oh yea  and hopefully there is a naval supply system where armies get supplied from the navy

[daztek]

10 hours ago, Royal Fusilier said:

. . . I would hate to see Napoleonic-sized armies roaming all over the colonies . . .

The scale seems to indicate. Battalion/company rather than brigade/detachment (as in UG:CW).

[colonel1689]

I think the game has division and brigade level management but on the field it's battalion and company control by the looks of it.

[LAVA]

To be quite honest, I have no idea why they created this forum (UG:AR) if they don't have any devs or reps posting here...

From what I understand the Devs are Ukrainian and dis doesn't make no sense.

[Speglord]

Either way, I imagine they probably plan on releasing the first version of the game on July 4, or will at least announce something on that day.

Who knows what they actually have planned, though. The screenshots they've released look really promising. For me, the lack of dynamic campaign beyond army sizes really limited the replayability of Ultimate General: Civil War. But if they can pull this game off, and I think they absolutely can, it bodes well for any future games in the gunpowder era (Napoleonics, Civil War 2, Crimean War, Wars of the 18th Century, etc)

Edited May 12, 2023 by Speglord

[colonel1689]

When the developers mentioned that they were getting the infrastructure ready for early access I presume that ment getting stuff ready on Steam?

[colonel1689]

On 5/12/2023 at 4:21 AM, LAVA said:

To be quite honest, I have no idea why they created this forum (UG:AR) if they don't have any devs or reps posting here...

From what I understand the Devs are Ukrainian and dis doesn't make no sense.

They posted updates on discord and I was hoping they would have kept us up to date a bit more but they will have their reasons.

Chatter was that the game was playable and was getting polished a bit further before early access. Perhaps they have pushed it back to fix more issues. 

[LAVA]

Thanks for the info mate!