UGCW Feedback v1.0+

[Hitorishizuka]

Finally brought my ongoing CSA campaign to a close, pretty much a blast the full way through. Minor annoyance at how ineffective cavalry is once the trench systems really start existing everywhere but then they got to star a bit in Washington again, so that was fun.

[A. P. Hill]

Congrats! 

[jamieva]

Still got routed units getting stuck in water.  Played as union on Kettle run. i pushed the rebs to the creek at the top left.  They routed and then they got stuck as they routed.  2 confederates units went outside the map area, still routing.  

[kjchan]

Is this a bug?  So we have the Sharps 1859 carbine for cavalry, presumably a breechloading rifle right?  It has a fire rate of 100.  But then you get to the "better" breechloading carbines like the Burnside, but the fire rates are much lower.  Is the 1859 bugged, or are the better carbines bugged?

[The Soldier]

5 minutes ago, kjchan said:

Is this a bug?  So we have the Sharps 1859 carbine for cavalry, presumably a breechloading rifle right?  It has a fire rate of 100.  But then you get to the "better" breechloading carbines like the Burnside, but the fire rates are much lower.  Is the 1859 bugged, or are the better carbines bugged?

Burnside trades rate of fire for range and accuracy.  As do the short rifles like the 1862 CS Richmond and the 1862 Enfield and other carbines like the Frank Wesson and the Maynard.

[Aetius]

Ambush Convoy has a problem if you kill or capture the two Union escort brigades too quickly. If you haven't captured the three supply wagons when the second unit surrenders or is captured, the battle immediately ends in a Draw. Presumably this is because there are no other Union forces on the map, but it's a negative outcome for what, up to that point, is clearly a very successful fight.

[Albert Sidney Johnston]

1 hour ago, Aetius said:

Ambush Convoy has a problem if you kill or capture the two Union escort brigades too quickly. If you haven't captured the three supply wagons when the second unit surrenders or is captured, the battle immediately ends in a Draw. Presumably this is because there are no other Union forces on the map, but it's a negative outcome for what, up to that point, is clearly a very successful fight.

The real question is how the heck did you manage to capture the escort brigades before the reinforcements even showed up?!

[A. P. Hill]

Probably used that control key hack!  

[Alex.Reiter]

Hi Generals!

 

-Unit movement is now faster. Good thing, made game more smooth.

-Even the game sound ambience is amazing, it would be great, that different rifles make slightly different sounds, echo sound would not be bad.

-Make captured/dropped weapons available right in the unit purchase screen.

-Distant combat backround  or are we fighting the whole Grand Campaign alone?

-How many bodies do one fallen men visualize? Hundred? Two? Random?

-Multiplayer, maybe even for GC.

-Availability with some guns and cannons are too low. Always wanted to try horseman with sawed off, but never find so much. Also, trying to have sniper skirmishers is sooooo hard, because there are no rifles! Cannons are rare too, not interested to buy 2 cannon unit.

-Option for friendly fire. Using my Napoleon as super-shotgun, towards 2000 men,fighting in melee, killing only enemy troops is not very realistic.

##Because graphics are simple but clear and beautiful, you must focus on sound to make immersion and you have done the right thing. All I ask that you raise the bar even little, adding distant backound fighting ambience, rifle sounds, that differ little each other (Or did every gun sound the same?), add echo from firing sounds. After these, the immersion is suberb!##

 

Edited August 27, 2017 by Alex.Reiter
Some typos

[Alex.Reiter]

3 minutes ago, Alex.Reiter said:

-sorry, my mistake

 

Edited August 27, 2017 by Alex.Reiter
wrong button

[Fred Sanford]

The scaling still seems weird to me.  Playing a hard campaign as the Union, and going into Stones River the Intel reports says the CSA is 64-69k (see screenshot).  Yet the deployment screen shows the CSA as just under 84k.  What gives?

[Aetius]

On 8/25/2017 at 9:14 PM, Albert Sidney Johnston said:

The real question is how the heck did you manage to capture the escort brigades before the reinforcements even showed up?!

I've been experimenting with all-cavalry builds. Two full brigades of shock cavalry hit each escort brigade, along with a rifle cavalry unit. They both surrendered almost immediately.

[Aetius]

I just ran into a serious bug. I played poorly in Supply Raid, and was wiped out. When I came into the camp screen after the battle, all my unit stats except for Command were -21474.

There's a couple of secondary bugs - notice that I received $60k, instead of $41k, because I rescued supplies from my supply wagons ... that were captured by the enemy. I also apparently rescued 120 Springfield 1842s from an unknown source - I think one of my supply units that was captured. Essentially, the game results seemed to be treating me partially as the Confederates - possibly because units were captured on both sides?

I'm going to try to fight the battle again, and see if it recurs.

Edited August 29, 2017 by Aetius

[ross42899]

The color of the lines showing firing range still annoys me. It's way too dar for me at times (especially at morning/evening battles). I would really appreciate it, if the color could be tweaked a bit or give us an option to select our prefered color.

Also some thing I would still like to see in the future:

 

- add more accurate looking Lutheran Seminary building (Gettysburg map)

- add Cemetery gatehouse (Gettysburg map)

- add more accurate looking Dunker Church (Antietam map)

- add non campaign versions of battles of Washington & Richmond (custom battles)

- add option to change players avatar/General's portrait

- add more historical accurate portraits of historical Generals (instead of placeholder images)

- fix double General Gibbon reward in campaign

- Officers level up way too fast during campaign. after sometime you have way too many Major Generals. It should be rebalanced a bit, so you will have less Major Generals.

 

[Fred Sanford]

58 minutes ago, ross42899 said:

Officers level up way too fast during campaign. after sometime you have way too many Major Generals. It should be rebalanced a bit, so you will have less Major Generals.

Some time ago, I suggested the ability to "sell" back officers for additional rep.  If you think about it, it's actually realistic- your character develops a *reputation* for developing and mentoring junior officers for higher command.

[Fred Sanford]

Another suggestion: develop the existing minor battles so that they may be fought on the opposite side, and mix them randomly into the campaign. 

[Hjalfnar_Feuerwolf]

I don't know if this was already reported, but I have a double "Stonewall" Jackson. In the First Battle of Bull Run the virginian brigades were seriously mauled and I merged them. During the final stage of the battle Jackson was wounded commanding the merged brigades. After the battle I gained him as Brigadier General and he is now commanding my 1st Division of 1st Corps. For some reason the wounded Jackson also spawned in my barracks and as always after major battles, was instantly healed and available as CO.

They have the same portrait, rank and name (Thomas Jackson). (Screen taken after Battle of Shiloh)

Edited August 30, 2017 by Hjalfnar_Feuerwolf

[The Soldier]

Probably got him when the divisional commander Thomas Jackson at 1st Bull Run was wounded and then (because of the bug) was put into your barracks in a Wounded state and then he recovered after Shiloh.  Supposedly that bug was fixed, though I've seen some people with it come up.

[Aetius]

Gettysburg issues from my recent playthrough:

1) I have AO 9, so I have 24 brigades per Corps. Only one brigade from the fourth division of II Corps was able to join the fight in the last phase, and the entire fourth division from III Corps was left out of the battle. If we can only bring 18 brigades into the second and third Corps slots, they should say so - particularly since the reinforcement Corps slots don't show up until halfway through the battle.

2) The reinforcement Corps slots only show up halfway through the battle.

3)  The Confederate armory rating was at 50-55%. Despite that, I captured 4113 Fayettevilles, which means they had at least 41k of 85k troops armed with Fayettevilles (this is on Legendary).  If this is 55% armory, I'm curious as to what 95% armory would be - M16s and M203s? On Legendary, should the armory be up in the 90% range by Gettysburg?

4) I also captured 2766 Tylers and 452 C.S. Richmonds. Based on my playthrough, it appears that the AI Confederate weapon supply goes like this, from start to 55%:

Re-bored Farmer -> Harpers Ferry 1855 -> Tyler Texas -> C.S. Richmond -> Fayetteville

Which, quite frankly, makes no sense at all. The Tyler is a Tier 2 rifle, similar to the Mississippi and MJ&G - it should not be rated above the Springfield 1855, let alone the Harpers Ferry 1855. The Harpers Ferry 1855 is apparently available to the Confederacy in large numbers (and the Union as well). I haven't seen a single Enfield, which was one of the most common weapons used by real-life Confederate troops, and only a handful of Springfield 1855s.

5) The intelligence report had the Confederate force level at 64-69k. In previous battles, where the force level has been much higher, they've come in with fewer troops than the force level. This time, they came in with 85k troops, 16k more than they had available. Clearly there is a minimum troop level for each battle which ignores the manpower pool and grants free troops to the AI. It also didn't have an effect on experience as far as I could tell, as all the Confederate brigades were three stars. (The experience levels in the intelligence report did drop about 20 points after the battle.)

6) The aggressiveness problems of the AI really show in the major battles, especially here at Gettysburg and Chancellorsville. They just kept throwing themselves at my lines, even after it was clear they were heavily outnumbered and out-gunned. This eventually made it easy to surround their forces and destroy them almost completely for a very minimal cost. 

[Nick Thomadis]

Another update has just become available!

Read the blog:
http://www.ultimategeneral.com/blog/patch-v105-offering-two-new-custom-battles-plus-improvements

Have a great weekend, Generals!

[Hitorishizuka]

6 hours ago, Nick Thomadis said:

Another update has just become available!

Read the blog:
http://www.ultimategeneral.com/blog/patch-v105-offering-two-new-custom-battles-plus-improvements

Have a great weekend, Generals!

Interesting...

Any more detail you can provide on what specifically was changed with combined divisions? Did you finally quash the 'free' weapons part of it? That was probably the last holdout, the stats were already balanced across.

Poor Wiards, guess your day in the sun has gone.

Hopefully good changes for Gettysburg, did feel a bit gypped with how easy it was to push for a Phase 1 win.

Same for 2nd Bull Run for the North, though even with relatively sparse initial forces it'll probably be doable just because of the terrain and how much of the enemy forces it's possible to ignore.

[Nick Thomadis]

On 2/9/2017 at 2:40 AM, Hitorishizuka said:

Interesting...

Any more detail you can provide on what specifically was changed with combined divisions? Did you finally quash the 'free' weapons part of it? That was probably the last holdout, the stats were already balanced across.

Poor Wiards, guess your day in the sun has gone.

Hopefully good changes for Gettysburg, did feel a bit gypped with how easy it was to push for a Phase 1 win.

Same for 2nd Bull Run for the North, though even with relatively sparse initial forces it'll probably be doable just because of the terrain and how much of the enemy forces it's possible to ignore.

Combined brigades delivered more damage, some mechanics on them were just not working right so players realized and exploited. Now they should be working better, hopefully.

[PIerrick de Badas]

the games get a 9/10 on french videogame magazine Canard PC

[Hjalfnar_Feuerwolf]

Just noticed with a slight shock the GameStar, the biggest german PC games mag, hasn't done a test yet. I am urging all my friends to write them so they test UG:CV. This game deserves credit and the devs a load of money, dammit.

[daztek]

 

Hi, AI gets confused by skirmishers, which makes it easy to fox. Sometimes AI brigades will clear skirmish lines but usually get trapped in static long range firefights. Another trick it can't deal with is, as soon as the AI charges, if the target detaches skirmishers the charge stalls as the target is blocked and the erstwhile chargers are trapped in a firefight with condition loss from the charge. So it is easy to exhaust the AI and have it waste all its ammo with deft use of skirmishers

Also, any plans for getting the AI to detach and use skirmishers?

Overall, fantastic game! Spending hundreds of hours on this

And looking forward to the next game using this engine