Impressions after playing it for a few hours this weekend

[Townsendvol]

First let me say thank you for doing this. I have been looking for a replacement for Sid Meiers Gettysburg for years since it will not run on my new laptop.

 

To the game:

 

1. I love the look of it, very pleasing to look at and realistic enough not to kill imerssion.
2. Love the sound of the game, love the gun and cannon sound effects.
3. I thought the pace of the game was fine, many have commented it seems to fast.  I didnt think so but I dont think an option to adjust the speed would be a bad idea. Also good to give the player choices.
4. HATE the idea of imited ammo for one battle, especially if it is going to hamper the AI which I thought was quiet good.  However adding it as an option the player can choose again not a bad idea.
5. Found that my cannon did not seem to fire alot. Played again and tried to target specific units and that seemed to help. Not sure if the AUTO feature for cannons was working that well.
6. I would like more detailed after action reports, love details and if possible would be much appreciated.
7. Need to ability to build fortifications or dig in on the hills. When units are idle they could be digging in. Certainly was a HUGE part of the real battle.  Also might give some use to units that seemed to be routed. Move them back to hold points you have already taken and let them dig in, in the off chance of an attack by the opponet.
8. Co-op MP would be oustanding.
9. I forgot to add, i would love to be able to break off smaller units from the larger ones for more options.

 

These are my thoughts, I wish you nothing but the best with this game. i was more than happy to give $10 to play it and support your efforts.  I hope to see more battles in the future.

[YvAd]

7  would be incredible. I've yet to play a RTS game that properly simulates digging in.

[dwh999]

there is a thread on Scourge of War which makes the point that for the duration of these battles there would be insufficient time to construct proper entrenchments

[Tarfman]

Its too easy as the confederates. I generally always win as the feds. That's because they are generally the aggressors and the game seems to be balanced in favour of the aggressor. I have also been beaten by the feds several times but never by union forces and I have played against different AI opponents.

[Nick Thomadis]

Incoming patch will fix the CS overpower and AI things that were needed for even better challenge. Cornering the AI should not be easy to do as now. I hope completely fixed.

[David Fair]

dwh999, there is a vast difference between fortifications, entrenchments, and breastworks.

 

Breastworks were prepared by the men usually ad hoc.  Existing stone walls were enhanced with loopholes and backed with dirt to help absorb the impact of artillery rounds.  Dead trees, stones, dirt, bodies all served to help protect the living.  Additionally, there are pictures of the positions on Little Round Top and in Devil's Den that were built up to protect men from fire.  

 

You don't need engineers, trenches, or even a pick and shovel to scratch out protection for yourself.  The breastworks on Culp's Hill during the night of July 1 were sufficiently robust to beat off the CSA attack inflicting 2,000 casualties at a cost of less than 800 men on July 2.  These Culp's Hill breastworks were embellished July 2 & 3 and were determined to be impregnable by General Ewell after his attack on July 2 due to the grade of the hill, the amount of debris available to construct these works, and the number of men defending these positions.  

 

If you look at pictures of Gettysburg you can see these informal breastworks as they existed immediately after the battle.  Your Scourge of War reference point doesn't align with the visual record, first hand accounts, or common sense, 

 

Just because men didn't have time to build "proper entrenchments" it doesn't mean that men weren't protecting themselves with breastworks made from the materials at hand.

 

General Greene (a former engineering instructor at West Point and civil engineer by profession) in particular was actively ordering his men to prepare breastworks that would lead to the slaughter of the attacking rebels on Culp's Hill.  In fact his statue at Gettysburg is surrounded by a crenelated base (representing the breastworks he ordered on Culp's Hill) as he points to where to construct his works.

The gallant defense of Culp's hill by Greene's brigade, and the terrible execution inflicted by its musketry on the assaulting column of the enemy, form one of the most noteworthy incidents of the war. (quote in yellow from the history of the 137th New York Infantry Regiment).

 See:  http://www.gettysburg.stonesentinels.com/Individuals/Greene.php

[Myes!]

Incoming patch will fix the CS overpower and AI things that were needed for even better challenge. Cornering the AI should not be easy to do as now. I hope completely fixed.

 

 

The CSA are still overpowered? 

[YvAd]

What about fortifications/breastworks/digging in, nick/darth? 

[soccercw]

What about fortifications/breastworks/digging in, nick/darth? 

 

I personally don't see a need for this.  The way the game is set with multiple short scenarios, adding something like that would make it difficult to win against a good AI.  It also just encourages packing in a space and camping waiting for the enemy to attack you (sounds like a TW game at that point lol).

 

Instead of "digging in" you should be encouraged to use the terrain.  The "cover" feature is your digging in.  Find ground around the VP (not neccessarily on top of it) that can provide you cover against attacks in the area.  Adding a dig in feature will create all hell in MP when that rolls out as you'll find the campers stacking and waiting instead of being forced to manuever and make the best of the ground around them

[Townsendvol]

I dont think digging in is a tactic that breaks the game, just need to balance it.  SMG did a fine job with it.  It was a part of the battle.  If someone is dug in maybe you attack them head on or maybe you flank them forcing them out of their trenches or from behind cover.

 

To me saying no digging in is like saying you cant have cover from trees because it would be game breaking, no not if done correctly. 

 

But hey I love the game, just trying to add suggestions and hopefully make it better.

[David Fair]

Breastworks IMO fix many of the problems with the game.  Right now i'm getting epic victories in almost every Phase and the AI desperately needs some help.  The AI is driven to attack VP locations resulting in tremendous losses.

 

Additionally breastworks were fundamental to the battle.

On the night of July 3 Lee withdrew the ANV to positions west of Gettysburg and had his army construct breastworks and rifle pits.  Lee's goal was to tempt Meade into attacking these positions in the hope that the ANV could balance its loses from Pickett's Charge.

 

Note that breastworks should marginally enhance the defense.  

We are not talking about fortifications and entrenchments such as Washington D.C. Petersburg, Richmond, Vicksburg, Atlanta, etc...

[MikeK]

By 1864 men and units proactively dug in when taking up a position likely to be held for a time and under risk of fire. But each position is good only once ready for defense and only if occupied. If the position is unready or the battle moves on the investment pays no return, and the troops are worn down by the work - it is heavy manual labor and should quickly wear down Condition more and for longer than just marching.  Of course, some locations have more suitable ground and materials for defensive works - that would matter a great deal.  

 

Defensive works also have only a single configuration optimized to defend from expected attacks.  There are always weaknesses.

 

Mike