Things that are important to gameplay and History

[Slaithium]

I make these recommendations on two cornerstones: A) The game is post to cover the whole Civil War ( impossible ) that would be 10,000 battles. But what is not impossible is to increase the scope of the existing world ( of course after completing the current scheduled content). To include battles, even if smaller by number of troops still important. So I will categorize them with reasons. B: The Organization of of armies still needs to be tweaked, meaning more emphasis should be give to both a OVER-ALL commander of the army, i.e., a show (Your Created Commander) with its own command traits over the entire, so the Corps can be organized under him. Also, Major Generals, that command Divisions should have there own talents for those divisions. Continuing with game-play it would seem both practical in a historical sense and the play ability of the game in life expectancy to increase other important battles via later after completion of the original content or a XPAC for the game. There is too much content that is being wasted if this is the only content you want to release, as leaves large vacuum to be filled by someone else, which would be a shame because you have created a wonderful game in every sense of the phrase.

Gateway to the West: Fort henry, Fort Donelson, Paducah, and Nashville: All very relevant to Grants advance into the deeper South to divide the confederacy. Those two points make it vitally relevant to the whole scope of the War. ( These can be done via XPAC or for goodness sake not, but willing to pay DLC, for this additional content in game)

Mississippi River Campaign: New Orleans, Vicksburg, Arkansas Campaign and Siege of ST. Louis. These allowed Grant to take the Mississippi River from the Confederates a vital supply line and trade route.

Shenandoah Valley Campaign 1862: Kernstown, McDowell, Front Royal, Middle Town, and Port Republic (excluded others that are already in game) Was a huge momentum boost for the Eastern Theater  for the South and ultimately swayed alot of states to divide and increased the manpower pool temporarily for the South. Brang closer Kentucky, Maryland, Kansas, Southern Illinois and Indiana populations to rally to the South believe they were going to win due to the amount of momentum it resulted in and types of victories they were.

Invasion to The Deep South: Chattanooga, Northern Miss., Atlanta, Florida, and the Eastern Part of Texas are areas that had to be secured to prevent those areas man-power to sent to aide the confederacy. 

Lastly, The Attempt for the West: Early in the war, the Confederacy attempted to bring New Mexico, Kansas, Southern California, Nebraska, and more importantly Kentucky into the Confederacy. These states had manpower, resources, and agricultural importance to help the south sustain a possible long war, moreover more territory if they succeeded. Braxton Bragg, P.G.T. Beauregard,  and Nathan Forest desperately tried to invade Kentucky and create a additional barrier for the South. So important Kentucky created a secessionist Government in Western Kentucky and the state was divided. Hence the many Orphan Brigades that came from Kentucky.

I think this would increase the volume, depth, and the historical replay of the game as it would allow both Union and Confederate Players to grasp more of the magnitude of the War. But that is me, a old history lover. Hope some like this and think it is a good idea. Enjoy the game and have a good day everyone.

[michaelsmithern]

I wouldn't mind campaigns that could be added on after release, but first lets let the developers finish what they have promised before we start adding more onto the workload. 

However with the territories suchas new mexico, kansas, nebraska and so on you can't really do anything about those i suppose, however with kentucky that's where i see some sort of system to be added, maybe it could added that if you win Shiloh, Stones River and the other Western front battles it could open up a new theater for the south to go and fight in kentucky instead of having to defend down south. What i'm getting at is branching campaigns, almost like what gettysburg had with the different sections of the day, but for the campaign so that if you lost at 2nd Manassas as the South it could very well lead to the Battle of Richmond.

[GeneralPITA]

Such grand scope would realistically require several expansion packs and given Darth's distaste for DLC add-ons after his TW experience, I don't see it happening. Seems everyone has a battle they want to see added, but this is a small efficient development team that needs to prioritize. Feedback on mechanics and balance is more useful than proposing a vast expansion. 

Kinda wish people would stop posting this sort of thing. Too many threads like this. 

[Slaithium]

6 hours ago, michaelsmithern said:

I wouldn't mind campaigns that could be added on after release, but first lets let the developers finish what they have promised before we start adding more onto the workload. 

However with the territories suchas new mexico, kansas, nebraska and so on you can't really do anything about those i suppose, however with kentucky that's where i see some sort of system to be added, maybe it could added that if you win Shiloh, Stones River and the other Western front battles it could open up a new theater for the south to go and fight in kentucky instead of having to defend down south. What i'm getting at is branching campaigns, almost like what gettysburg had with the different sections of the day, but for the campaign so that if you lost at 2nd Manassas as the South it could very well lead to the Battle of Richmond.

I know that why I said after they finish, and also you make good point and is a good idea that could be easily implemented.

[Slaithium]

2 hours ago, GeneralPITA said:

Such grand scope would realistically require several expansion packs and given Darth's distaste for DLC add-ons after his TW experience, I don't see it happening. Seems everyone has a battle they want to see added, but this is a small efficient development team that needs to prioritize. Feedback on mechanics and balance is more useful than proposing a vast expansion. 

Kinda wish people would stop posting this sort of thing. Too many threads like this. 

Actually not really too grand only 40 some odd battles / literally 10,000 battles and skirmishes. To only add a few. Lets get real when you advertise a strategy game of the Civil War it is not a unreal expectation. I have also included many posts about mechanics and game-play on the forum and the bug option in game. 

You are going to get posts like this, they are making a game that applies to a almost niche audience. It is going to happen and what I requested or recommended rather is nothing unreasonable. If they have a good product that can sell, as a business they should do it, based on alot of consumer demands. Basic economics as well.

Alot of people bought this game, based on scouring threads over time, and what was advertised, is to re-live, re-write, and command the civil war. Given that was the goal, it insensible for to expect people not to post threads about it other parts of the war and wanting them to be included. Especially from people who are strategy game enthusiasts and history lovers who dream of games like these. 

Good day.

[Col_Kelly]

40 battles is a lot of effort lad, its roughly a bit less than the size of the game when it will be finished. We all love this game in our own way and I understand your wish to see a lot more added to it. Just not possible I'm afraid to have such a large extension. 

The best way for now to help the devs accelerate the development is to report as PITA said on balance/stats/bugs and maybe if things go smoothly we might hope for an extra effort from the team, nothing sure however. 

[Slaithium]

That seems like a appropriate answer

[Wright29]

Must keep in mind that the devs have to keep this as a mainstream game for normal players who don't obsess over the Civil War. Some Total War players might find this interesting. But if they're overwhelmed by the scope, they might find it unappealing. 

Right now between both campaigns, it's pretty easy to casually get 60 hours out of this game if you replay certain battles to try different strategies. If it's 100 hours by the time of release, the devs will have done a great job for the average gamer.