Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
4 
Report this post
Throughout my life, I never put a lot of skill points in technology. I just recently upgraded to a smart phone. If someone could post a video of how to install the files, that would be awesome.
1) In your Steam games list, right click Ultimate General: Civil War and select properties
2) Click on the Local Files tab in the window that opened updated
3) Then select the Browse Local Files option, this will open an explorer window to the location the game is installed attack
4) Click on the Ultimate General Civil War_Data directory
5) Download and copy RebalanceModV1.0.zip to the Ultimate General Civil War_Data folder.
6) You will need a program to unzip the file such as 7zip, winzip, winrar, etc. The next step will vary somewhat by program.
7) Extract the contents of RebalanceModV1.0.zip to Ultimate General Civil War_Data using the Extract here option
8) You should be prompted to overwrite the Assembly-CSharp.dll and the resources.assets files. Allow the overwrites and the mod is now installed.
I hope melee cav is useful without abusing multiple unit melee bug. In base you could convince the ai to bring melee cav by including it in your army and suicide them into your units due to how terrible melee cav were.
For campaign scaling I'd be interested in a more dynamic campaign that didn't just throw infinite men at the ai and have the ai ignore the army strength numbers shown in the campaign screen (maybe it would be to give it more men at start of each campaign but lower the ai min strength per battle) so attrition actually matters.
If anything Melee cav is to strong in the mod currently. It will still lose straight up to infantry in most cases though. In the mod it really depends what perks each unit has and if either is charging, tired, etc. The AI is still fairly bad at using cav, but if anything it is probably too cautious currently. With the current mod changes meleeing with multiple units will not get you a bonus other than the total number of men committed.
I don't really want to start yet another scaling discussion here, but killing large numbers of the AI has very noticable affects on their overall size, experience, and weapons. There is definitely a minimum force size that gets enforced based on the current progress of the campaign though.
The strength numbers shown in the intelligence report are calculated after the last battle and then not updated no matter what you do to your army before the next battle. So they are only a baseline and unit size scaling can easily go above or below the shown range if you add or remove units from your army. The numbers shown on the prebattle screen with recon > 2 are much more reliable. I looked into updating the intelligence report values in the mod but there wasn't an easy way to do so.
It should be possible to limit the reinforcements the AI recieves based on the timeline or other factors, the campaign rework is still very much in the planning stages, so any feedback or ideas are appreciated.
With regards to the campaign, I think giving the ai reinforcements only at the start of a campaign (not after every battle) but much more reinforcements would be a good idea as it encourages fighting the side battles. Currently if you do the side battles on MG the AI can get even more men than if you hadn't due to the random post battle reports. I've even had a time where the ai not only got more men but got better trained men aftet a side battle despite wiping almost all of their army. This really hurts immersion. Lastly the ai straight up ignores army strength in favor of minimum battle strength as the game progresses. This means it is impossible to play a game where you command a small army as well even if you consistently keep the ai army strength at 40 to 50k (cause they will bring 100 to 110k to battle). No, my army was not large. I fought 110k with a 30k army thanks to the game ignoring army strength. It was a ton of micro. (My army was initially 20k after the previous battle ended and with that the ai had 90k troops in the next battle despite an intelligence report of 40k)
On the topic of numbers creating challange I don't actually think more ai numbers does (see previous example). I don't know if there is a better way of simulating challenge. Instead of giving the ai more numbers I think hindering player resources is more challenging. Cause the same micro strategies work basically regardless of the number of troops the ai has as long as you have ammo. The biggest challenge on MG is not enemy army size but lack of manpower, weapons, and reinforcements on the confederate side at least.
What about a post side battle random event "enemy army withdrawls" if you wipe their army that basically sets the next battles in the campaign strengths to 0 but you also get no rewards aside from political points and the post campaign manpower). Their remaining strength carries over to the next campaign. That would help make a true dynamic campaign and sort've patches around the ai not conserving their power. Not sure how possible it is to do that.
The ai could even get a men/training/equipment buff for the subsequent campaign to simulate more resources devoted to the theater (if you crush them in the current campaign). It makes more sense at least for the next campaign than destroying their entire army in a sidebattle and then seeing a magically reincorporated enemy army in the next battle that supposedly takes place the next day. The player can also only get manpower reinforcements in the grand battle.
Exception would be the final campaign which takes place in different theaters. Although there the ai should lose army strength if you win the side battles. Currently there is no point to fight the side battles as it will raise the enemy army strength for the final battle.
Wait, what? You managed to do this? So the multiple-unit-combat-bonus wasn't a bug but concious design, after all? Next thing you tell me is you fixed the ammo perks to actually do anything.
Well, you did fix more than enough things the base game got weird or wrong. So far, the mod is quite impressive. Casaulties are much more reasonable now. The only instant feedback I got is that, just like you mentioned in your OP, cavalry indeed is way too strong now, especially early on. There is just no way to stop charging cavalry, since musket fire does so little damage, and once the cavalry enters melee combat, it wrecks infantry crazily fast.
One request I have is to somehow replace charge damage for cavalry with something else because charge is notoriously buggy in the game and I never use the charge command with cavalry. Actually if there was a way to disable charge in general on horses permanently that might even be better for the AI due to charge bugs (eg ai charging its cav from the corner of the map and arriving on the field with no condition).
I see you increased skirmisher speed and their skimisher move perk is higher, while cavalry only have half of the move bonus. Haven't played it yet but am worried this will lead to uncatchable skirmishers like in base where the skirms could outrun cav (due to terrain penalties cav face).
For artillery the 100% cover bonus seems like it would be really strong against counterbattery fire....
___
For the sniper skimirsher line, have you fixed the bug where skirmishers refuse to fire even if enemies are in range, if the skirmisher is hidden, unless you give them a fire order on every volley? Cause otherwise it's still too micro intensive to use skirmishers that often.
___
Infantry tier 1 seems too lopsided in favor of accuracy and reload speed....maybe give discipline stamina and morale instead of speed.
____
Have you reworked cover? Cause +50% cover if there's still the 200% cap means it is useless for hiding in trees but really strong if hiding in fields. In this case the sharpshooter line would be ironically better for melee brigades. Also Sharpshooter seems too good compared to Elite. 300% accuracy bonus and 20% faster fire vs 200% accuracy bonus and 40% faster fire. I'll take the 300% bonus anytime.
In terms of the player using Cavalry I have found that I take unsustainable losses if I charge even 3 star cavalry into an infantry unit that is in good shape. I mostly use them to clean up routing units because early infantry is not effective at dealing enough fire damage to shatter them quickly.
In terms of design choices, we want cavalry and melee in general to be effective early, but to fall off later in the campaign as fortifications and weapons become stronger.
It should be possible to give units bonuses against certain unit types, but one of the issues with lowering melee values is that the AI uses that value to determine force strength. Lower it to much and they will never charge or even run away.
Unfortunately the way the mod is currently balanced charging is nearly mandatory as the melee is balanced around it's use. I haven't experienced any issues when charging cavalry unless I misclick or a phase change happens(resets all charge timers). The AI ghost cavalry charge bug is certainly an issue, but I have no clue where to even begin trying to fix that. Baiting the AI into charges is also somewhat an issue, though reducing charge durations a bit seems to have helped there.
Currently, skirmishers should not be able to outrun cav unless through difficult terrain, though it should take the Cav longer to catch them if one side has speed and not the other. If the skirmishers have their speed perk, and a general speed perk, and the cav has no speed perks they might be able to outrun the cav but that scenario is hard to setup so I can't say for sure. I can say that in testing we reduced the skirmisher speed bonus and that I haven't had any issues with Cav catching skirmishers since.
I have very little test data on counterbattery fire with or without the cover bonus so it's possible that it needs to get tuned down a bit. The bonus is only a percentage increase of the existing cover so you still need to be in decent terrain to hit 100% cover.
Snipers still don't fire sometimes, I haven't been able to figure out why yet. The update I made is definitely a half measure and snipers still require a lot of micromanagement, but at least they stay where you put them now and will continue firing once assigned an attack order.
The lvl 1 perks really depend on what you want to be doing with the unit. The speed is really helpful if you are going to be in melee or are going to be reinforcing. Since 0-1 star units with muskets are terrible at doing fire damage and only mildly better with the accuracy perk, it's sometimes hard to justify taking accuracy when the speed lets them melee and lvl up faster. In terms of stat optimization lvl 1 accuracy, lvl 2 charge damage is definitely the way to go for a balanced unit. Jonny is in charge of stats, so he's really the guy to talk to here though.
Cover has not been changed, I'm not sure if it can be currently. The 50% cover bonus should be useful for any unit that isn't in heavy forest or towns. Stacking morale resistance can be very strong. In my opinion, some of the perks are really mostly there to benefit the AI and the player would only use them in very niche cases. Jonny's playstyle is nearly the opposite of mine however so he may disagree.
With regards to charges not working, it ONLY affects cavalry. Also I tend to play on half speed. Maybe that is the difference. I have generally not noticed charge bugs on full speed. On half speed there is a 50% chance a fresh cav ordered to charge a unit right next to it will randomly stop moving. I wonder if it is some onupdate or tick bug with half speed. Anyway the failure rate of chages is so high (at least on vanilla) that I almost never use it with cav.
It's very easy to bait the ai into failed charges on half speed in vanilla as it will cancel the charge order if it realizes it won't have force advantage from hidden units that appear. So it charges halfway across a field and stops with no condition or morale left. You then shoot the unit to death, it routs, the ai loses vision on your units and repeats the same mistak when you don't move.
One way to fix charges for the ai might be to delay/lower the condition/morale debuff when charging if possibe. One could say increase the vulnerability of the unit to fire during the period to compensate. The ai uses charge often to move fast which is hilarious as it kills their morale and condition.
Game wouldn't need such large ai numbers half the time if the ai didn't do this.....