Gettysburg suggestions

[Hancock the Superb]

I would like to see shorter turn around time for a gun when it is firing cannister. Cannoneers would often skip several steps to get the guns firing faster during a charge, including skipping swabbing, skipping the runner, just pile up the ammunition alongside the gun, don't even turn the gun, etc. They should be able to fire at that point as often as a infantryman can fire his weapon. However, with this, the effectiveness of the shot was a lot different, the barrel winding up, etc. So, there would be more firing, less effectiveness, but a few more people killed/wounded.

[norb]

BdColonel wrote:

8) Could we have artillery loading animations? It's hard telling what your artillery is doing most of the time, as it just sits there. If the little guys were moving about doing the necessary motions while reloading, it would be great.

The animation thing is tricky because they take a LOT of video memory. This is the one place where we play with the numbers all the time. We take away a uniform, add a uniform, remove some frames of animation. It's a lot of stuff. So adding animations is doubtful. Another solution may be to have status icons or some other way of knowing what they are doing when they are just standing there.

[Von_Clausewitz]

Yes Norb, your solution is ok, having a status bar/icon for the artillery would be nice to know how close the canon is to fire. It makes a difference to see if we should withdraw the canon or let it discharge.

About the artillery being captured as a battery and not individual canons, i agree that a battery is not easy to capture but honestly it has to be defended. I mean it is hard to capture by a frontal charge, i agree, hard to capture if defended also by infantry i agree, but when i send my cavalry on a wide flanking maneuver, emerge from behind the battery and charge, i take only one canon and then my cav routs does not make sense to me. And having captured canons and enemy canons a few feet away from each other trying to canister each other is just comical.

I think the best solution would be to make it hard to capture artilelry by frontal assaults but if a player takes the time to plan an assault on a battery position, flanks it or attacks it from the rear with cavalry he should be able to take it completely.

Another feature that was being discussed on another thread that would be nice to have is the option to disable own/enemy guns. If you are about to lose a battery or the enemy is about to recapture their lost guns, it would be nice to have the option to disable the guns. It does not have to be successful all the time or successfull on each canon. you can have a random element there to where you are not able sometimes to disable any guns or you are able to disable a few of them only. This could reflect the fact that sometime you have no time to do it before retreating or that you did a poor job at it.

thank you

VC

[7th Wisconsin]

I would actually like to see cavalry toned down a bit. I don't recall Buford's cav flanking and charging anyones artillery. Or riding down individual leaders. I'd be happy if the only way cav could fight at all would be dismounted. There were way too many times in TC2M where I'd sacrifice a cav regiment to take out some pesky enemy arty. Not historical at all, but ohhh so satisfying.

[BdColonel]

Von_Clausewitz wrote:

i take only one canon and then my cav routs does not make sense to me. And having captured canons and enemy canons a few feet away from each other trying to canister each other is just comical.

Indeed!
And I agree 100% with the ability to disable enemy guns

7th Wisconsin wrote:

I would actually like to see cavalry toned down a bit. I don't recall Buford's cav flanking and charging anyones artillery. Or riding down individual leaders. I'd be happy if the only way cav could fight at all would be dismounted. There were way too many times in TC2M where I'd sacrifice a cav regiment to take out some pesky enemy arty. Not historical at all, but ohhh so satisfying.

Then the behavior of cavalry should be linked to an easily modified stat, such as morale. Or as a special ability, so that modders can add it at will.

If the morale of the unit is high enough, it will continue running over cannons in the battery. If it's low, then the very sight of a cannon's will scare the cavalry away. This way a napoleonic mod would be possible, without deviating from historical accuracy in the original game.

[Von_Clausewitz]

7th Wisconsin wrote:

I would actually like to see cavalry toned down a bit. I don't recall Buford's cav flanking and charging anyones artillery. Or riding down individual leaders. I'd be happy if the only way cav could fight at all would be dismounted. There were way too many times in TC2M where I'd sacrifice a cav regiment to take out some pesky enemy arty. Not historical at all, but ohhh so satisfying.

Just because in a certain battle or war a certain event did not happen does not mean the option should not be in the game. Like I said before we are not trying to reenact exactly what happened, for that you can watch a movie or go to a reenactement. We want an accurate war simulation where historically apropriate tactics work. If a cavalry flanks an artillery battery it should overrun it.

VC

[7th Wisconsin]

And having captured canons and enemy canons a few feet away from each other trying to canister each other is just comical.

Agreed. I have no issue with capturing an entire battery vs. only one gun at a time.

Just because in a certain battle or war a certain event did not happen does not mean the option should not be in the game

My fear is that if the option is available in game, it will be misused. The way most of us used cav in TC2M was not historically accurate in the American Civil War.

...the behavior of cavalry should be linked to an easily modified stat, such as morale. Or as a special ability, so that modders can add it at will.

Aye. This game is being advertised as a historically accurate ACW simulation. Napoleonic tactics differ. Let that be reflected in an add-on or mod.

[BOSTON]

Actually I'd like to see the AI have more stealth, cunning, aggressive and opportunist in all aspects, (like Grant), then you might think twice about being bold attacking artillery. I found it easy to capture artillery batteries, compared to the way the AI goes about doing the same to my artillery. As a result, I don't believe it should be made easier for the human player to gain any more advantage to capturing artillery than you have in the past, it takes away the challange of the game. Do a self examination as to how many times in SP do you lose? Maybe the first time you play the game! After that you are a veteran, you should be smart enough to beat the AI, unless you up the difficulty level of the game, then hopefully your brain changes gears.

Hoistingman4

[BdColonel]

hoistingman4 wrote:

I found it easy to capture artillery batteries, compared to the way the AI goes about doing the same to my artillery. As a result, I don't believe it should be made easier for the human player to gain any more advantage to capturing artillery than you have in the past, it takes away the challange of the game.

Hehhe, that may be true, but you are basically suggesting that since the AI isn't cunning enough, then the player should also have to fight with the user interface


Artillery that is not protected should be easy to capture.

[BOSTON]

BdColonel wrote:

hoistingman4 wrote:

I found it easy to capture artillery batteries, compared to the way the AI goes about doing the same to my artillery. As a result, I don't believe it should be made easier for the human player to gain any more advantage to capturing artillery than you have in the past, it takes away the challange of the game.

Hehhe, that may be true, but you are basically suggesting that since the AI isn't cunning enough, then the player should also have to fight with the user interface


Artillery that is not protected should be easy to capture.

You have to use the interface regardless of what the AI does, all sides are equal with ground rules. The player has the ability to experiment, observe results and come up with a solution to the problem. So you, as the player have the power to be creative, to develop technics that best suit your purpose/goal. Once you figure out the AI, it's strengths' and weaknesses', you develop a stratergy. Have you played chess against a computer? a live opponent? You always should be at least five moves ahead of where you are.

As far as unprotected artillery near the action, some hundred yards away, shame on the computer or the live player if it gets gobbelled up. If you don't care of it, shame on you, you deserve to get your ass kicked.