Did anyone play Fields of Glory

[waldopbarnstormer]

Hi there,

I have been playing the early release for the last two weeks and I am really enjoying the game so far. I spend more time in the camp phase tweaking my army than I do fighting battles probably.

This game reminds me of the game Fields of Glory from the 90s, an rts featuring battles from the 100 days campaign and the battle of Waterloo which I played over and over. Both feature massive armies fighting in real time and not on a hex map. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fields_of_Glory

One feature that I hope UG:CW will build on that FOG did not have is a continuity between battles for example, FOG did not take in to account the results of quatre bras on the forces and dispositions at Waterloo, each battle was a standalone historical fight for the player to test their skills against the historical outcome.

I would like to see the ai have a limited pool of resources like manpower to replace losses from and an order of battle like the player has based on historical starting forces so that if you inflict heavy casualties at Gaines mill then the ai units at Malvern hill are reduced in size rather than facing off against 3000 man 3* veterans.

Waldo

[Slobodan]

3 hours ago, waldopbarnstormer said:

This game reminds me of the game Fields of Glory from the 90s, an rts featuring battles from the 100 days campaign and the battle of Waterloo which I played over and over. Both feature massive armies fighting in real time and not on a hex map. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fields_of_Glory

Loved that game on my first PC   It was revolutionary game for that time with good database for units present in all three armies

Edited December 22, 2016 by Slobodan

[waldopbarnstormer]

The army database was a really good feature giving the regiments in a brigade and a history of the leading generals. Could be a feature to add to civil war a section with bios of the leading generals and of major battles.