Good Civil War strategy games

[Don Corleone]

I know there's the classic Sid Mier games: Gettysburg! and Antietam! Anybody else know of any other ones worth buying? I heard the History Channel civil war game SUCKED @$$.

[lars573]

American Conquest: Divided Nation is worth the $40 it costs. And it covers more tha just the ACW, it also covers the Mexican American war (IE it includes Texas and Mexico as playable nations).

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

I didn't get it, but there was a recommendation for a game based on the Battle of Bull Run that looked a lot like Gettysburg & Anteitem - actually, I played the demo. Pretty good, I just never followed through.

The thread. (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=48601&highlight=bull+run)

The website. (http://www.madminutegames.com/)

[Crazed Rabbit]

I thought Civil War Generals 2 was good back in the day.

Crazed Rabbit

[GeneralHankerchief]

Bull Run wasn't too bad- it kinda reminded me of a less... good Total War game with only the battles.

Robert E. Lee: Civil War General is good nostalgia. Turn based, hexagrammed (is that the right word?) battlefield, funny clips.

[econ21]

Age of Rifles had a lot of ACW battles in it and was pretty good if you like a little retro-gaming. (It was of the Steel Panthers era). You can find it as abandonware and I can say that without feeling guilt as the game designer (Norm Koger) publicly announced his support for abandonware sometime back (the publisher, SSI, had gone bust). The game is turn-based, hex-based, with 3 scales, focusing on the battles. It was pretty realistic (with the oldrules flag) although subject to the usual limitation of IGO-UGO games. One of the best things about it was the editor, which spawned literally hundreds of user made scenarios. I made a Shiloh scenario (at a larger scale than the one that came with the game). I particularly enjoyed the Napoleonic ones (out of period for the game, but still fun). One of the best things about the game was how quick and fun it was to play - rather like Panzer General and Steel Panthers. One some scales, you could fight an exciting battle like Bull Run in a couple of hours (unlike the glacial Talonsoft Battleground games).

There's also an old strategic ACW game ACW: 1861-1865 made available free on the internet by its designer, Frank Hunter. But it looked a little too old school for me - the kind of thing you have to read a manual to play. I guess I've gotten lazy.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

http://www.dhq.nu/hutsell/vgascreenshot.jpg

http://www.dhq.nu/hutsell/vga.htm

This was actually the first game I really played. Enjoyed it very much, it's available for free download here.

[octavian]

http://www.madminutegames.com/

:bow:

[Marshal Murat]

Civil War Generals was a very nice game
It is a turn based, hex map game.
Battles involve small battle clips, then results of battle.

The game is nice if you enjoy both a strategy and turn based tactical game.

I can remeber one game.

I had a couple brigades and a couple artillery. I had more brigades following mine. I established a small line with refused flanks, and let the enemy attack. Then, more men appeared, and I stretched the enemy, and stretched, and stretched. Finally, I amassed my artillery fire, and launched my final column of men into the center of the enemy forces. Smashed it open, and my men followed them off the battlefield.

[TB666]

I thought Civil War Generals 2 was good back in the day.

I second this.
I still got that game on my computer and it still one of the best Civil war games ever made IMO.
I like that the game is very dynamic and the AI is very good as well.

[Zanderpants]

I thought Civil War Generals 2 was good back in the day.

Crazed Rabbit

Oh man, that game brings back memories. I've still got it too. The very best Civil War game, most definetly. I never tried #2 though. It looked good

[Marshal Murat]

#2 is larger scale (Vicksburg) and a helluva bunch more scenarios.
Ships, forts, larger artillery, alot better than five maps.

[BHCWarman88]

I know there's the classic Sid Mier games: Gettysburg! and Antietam! Anybody else know of any other ones worth buying? I heard the History Channel civil war game SUCKED @$$.


Sid Mier Games are Execellent,I got Gettysburgh and I love it. I like to get Antieam off of Ebay or Amazon or something one day..

I buy the History Channel One,and it sucked..

[doc_bean]

There's a civil war mod for Medieval (link (http://lordz.thelordz.co.uk/index.php?id=3,0,0,1,0,0)). I haven't tried it yet so I can't comment.

[TB666]

http://www.madminutegames.com/

:bow:
Second this one as well.
Just got it and it is a very good :2thumbsup:

[Dunhill]

I've just discovered Take Command 2nd Manassas (the Mad Minute Games link posted above). It is in my opinion one of the best computer wargames I've ever played.

It can best be described as a tactical field simulation. You take command of either a brigade, a division or a corp of either side. The battle realism is better than the TW series, and I've been playing TW for a long, long time now (see join date).

I updated my machine to 2 GB of RAM just to play it with all the bells and whistles. In fact, the designers made this game to be easily modded, and frequently post assistance on thier forums on how to mod. It is a far cry from other game developers. These guys actually talk to the players about how to improve the game (http://www.madminutegames.com/MadMinuteBB/index.php).

I can't say enough about how much I like the game. It's only single player at the moment, and there isn't a strategic layer but these are both in the works. At this time folks are madding like mad, for full real one sprie = one man battles of full armies.

I strongly suggest you have a look at this game if ou like the civil war or even the Napoleanic era (all sprites/uniforms are moddable) give it a go.

Cheers,

[Eternal Champion]

I'd also like to plug Mad Minute's 2nd Manassas game. It is everything a CW game should be, right down to sending out couriers to deliver your orders including the delay and hazard (chance of being killed). The AI is very good and the combat system, including moral, experience and leader traits / skill, seems damn near spot on.

You can play single scenarios, linked scenarios, or open play that includes moddable OOB's. For guys that talk about huge battles this game supports really huge battles. The standard scale is is 1:10 for Inf, Arty is 1:1, and guys have had the entire OOB for Gettysburg on the map at one time.

[Lehesu]

I shall also shower kudos upon Civil War Generals II. Excellent, elegant hex system, and also the scope feels just right. Grand tactical would be the right word.

[The Scourge]

Just got 2nd Manassas as well .Haven't really had time to get into it as yet ,but it seems like a first rate game from what I've played of it so far .

Always thought that the AI of Civil War Generals 2 ,was what let it down .

[Eternal Champion]

Just got 2nd Manassas as well .Haven't really had time to get into it as yet ,but it seems like a first rate game from what I've played of it so far .

Always thought that the AI of Civil War Generals 2 ,was what let it down .

I still have CW2 on my computer too, and agree that the AI is a little weak.

[ShadesWolf]

Do you have any more guys ?


I had a few of the Talonsoft battleground games that I really enjoyed. Do yoiu know of any more like these type ?

[Dunhill]

If you like counter-based games, then have a look at the ACW titles from HPS. these games are great for PBEM, and there are a few online communities that play these exclusivley. Finding and PBEM opponent would be rather easy.

The AI in the HPS games isn't too bad, but I've not played that much against it. I mostly played via email.

[Eternal Champion]

If you like counter-based games, then have a look at the ACW titles from HPS. these games are great for PBEM, and there are a few online communities that play these exclusivley. Finding and PBEM opponent would be rather easy.

The AI in the HPS games isn't too bad, but I've not played that much against it. I mostly played via email.

I just bought a couple strictly for PBEM as they looked pretty good and the clubs are active. Haven't had a chance to get into them yet, to get a feel though.

[UglyandHasty]

I've just discovered Take Command 2nd Manassas (the Mad Minute Games link posted above). It is in my opinion one of the best computer wargames I've ever played.

It can best be described as a tactical field simulation. You take command of either a brigade, a division or a corp of either side. The battle realism is better than the TW series, and I've been playing TW for a long, long time now (see join date).

I updated my machine to 2 GB of RAM just to play it with all the bells and whistles. In fact, the designers made this game to be easily modded, and frequently post assistance on thier forums on how to mod. It is a far cry from other game developers. These guys actually talk to the players about how to improve the game (http://www.madminutegames.com/MadMinuteBB/index.php).

I can't say enough about how much I like the game. It's only single player at the moment, and there isn't a strategic layer but these are both in the works. At this time folks are madding like mad, for full real one sprie = one man battles of full armies.

I strongly suggest you have a look at this game if ou like the civil war or even the Napoleanic era (all sprites/uniforms are moddable) give it a go.

Cheers,

I try it yesterday eve, and i have just one word, wow ! I'll buy this baby ! Thanks for the link.

[Marshal Murat]

Re-installed CWG 2
Really enjoyed it (again)
I looked around, and actually found enhancements for it (mods pretty much)
Cool, but lacked some of the original parts.

[Mithradates]

Has Mannassas got no mulit player whats so ever, i mean could you play a lan one or is there just no online multiplayer?

[UglyandHasty]

There's no multiplayer yet, but they are working on it. Heard they're about to Beta-test it. I bought it lastweek, and even in singleplayer, its a hell of a game. Battle are so great, its been years since a game keep my on my pc till the late hours.

[Divine Wind]

There's no multiplayer yet, but they are working on it. Heard they're about to Beta-test it. I bought it lastweek, and even in singleplayer, its a hell of a game. Battle are so great, its been years since a game keep my on my pc till the late hours.

Oh god, cant believe you just said that.

Five minutes before i ordered it, my mum said "Its not going to be one of those games that keeps you up till the early hours is it?"

Oh bugger.

:laugh4:

[UglyandHasty]

hahaha prepare to go to bed very late(or early in the morning) ~D If you like, you'll be like (ok just one more hour so i can get that objective), then ( gah one more those darn Johny Rebels!! )

[Dooz]

Boy oh boy, 2nd Manassas is a hell of a game indeed. Just finished the demo (2 tutorials, 1 battle) and I'm blown away. The best battle simulator ever, without a doubt. I'm highly tempted to order the game right away, but I think I'll wait for the next version which might have multiplayer... even though it's such a great game even without multiplayer, I might just get it.


-edit-
If the Total War series games were based on the engine of Take Command (War3D engine), they would truly be the ultimate war games. No more AI gripes, units moving too fast, kill speeds too fast, unrealistic battles... ah, the beauty. Just thinking about it makes me go nuts. I wish TW will eventually progress to a system more like Take Command. Perfection.

[Dunhill]

Once again I'll point you to the Take Command 2nd Manassas thread, where I posted a reply. I get a bit carried away when talking about this game.

It's one of those games where you start playing and what you think has just been a few minutes turns out to have been a couple of hours. It's very immersive. There is even a mod out now that only allows you views from in the saddle of the leader you are playing in the scenario. It's a bit full-on, and I actually prefer the camera freedom a bit, but a very interesting mod none-the-less.

I'm already working with some folks to mod an American Civil War pack including Native American units. We are Grognards, so be sure attention to detail will be spot on.

It doesnt have multiplayer yet, but it is on the list, and I suggest it wont be that difficult to deal with. This game will be a joy to play online.

However, be warned to fully enjoy all the graphics 2 GB of RAM is required. Although gameplay with the low-res graphics is very good. I just like using the high-res, high-variety uniform set.

This game is worth getting, and you can download it relatively quickly.

Cheers,

[Dooz]

Shortly after my last post, I ordered the game. Should be arriving any day now... along with my new computer. ~:)

[Divine Wind]

Yesterday i finally got it! Wahoo!

All i have to say is....Wow

This game is fantastic and a must for any totalwar fans. If you enjoyed the slower paced battles of shogun and medieval, this is for you. I havent been able to stop playing it since last night, the battles are that immersive.

Ive been mainly sticking to the smaller battles so far, as i learn the ropes. Most of my victorys up to this point have been major ones, but as the battles get larger im sure ill have more difficulty micromanaging everything!

Dunhill, may i ask you a few amateurish questions if thats ok?

With Artillery specifically a set of batteries can you direct their fire at all or do they just fire at the highest priority threat?

When using Artillery i sometimes get blocked view icon appearing, however it seems to me that they have a perfect field of fire. I do sometimes have the cannons behind a regiment or two, but surely they should be able to fire over their heads? Is it just better to keep infantry and cannons separate?

[Dunhill]

The cannon fire is very accurately modeled. I suggest you try the "in the saddle " mod. It will show you what even small changes in elevation look like. It's an eye-opener for those of use playing at an elevated angle most of the time. Once you get down to unit level its clear things are in the way.

Cannon need some elevation to fire over units, and will do so. However, they can't just lob shots over units to targets at short range. They will do so at longer range targets. I'd suggest a visit to the MMG forums on this.

I'm still coming to grips with moving larger units. I can handle a brigade, but keeping divisions together with all the assitant indicators off can be a mess. I can never remember who should be with which division if things get messy, and they often do. I'm at about a 50/50 stike rate now, but have been playing on the relatively harder maps. With an open play game and a clearer map at just a division a piece I have a better win ratio, but I still end up having to play past the timer to really win.

Enjoy.

[Gregoshi]

I do sometimes have the cannons behind a regiment or two, but surely they should be able to fire over their heads? Is it just better to keep infantry and cannons separate?

I am currently reading Fighting for the Confederacy by E.P. Alexander, who was commander of Longstreet's artillery for much of the war. He comments about the "firing over their heads" practice. Confederate fuses were of poor quality and as a result, Confederate shells had a reputation for exploding prematurely far too often to make the infantry comfortable with the cannons firing over their heads. He comments on this during his description the cannonade preceding Pickett's Charge. The infantry would get quite angry if the cannon fire went over their head. Even using a simple, but less effective, round shot would get the infantry in a tizzy because they wouldn't know it was round shot. As a result, most of Alexander's cannons had to stop firing once the infantry passed by them.

I can't comment on the Union artillery's view of such tactics, though the Union artillery was considered superior to the Confederates'. At least from the Confederates' point of view, the game seems to have it right.

[Divine Wind]

Interesting points Gregoshi. Yes i agree with you there, i guess if i was one of those chaps walking in line towards the enemy, the last thing i would want is shrapnel from my own artillery raining down on me.

The game does tend to have artillery firing over friendly troops when the enemy is at great range (around 1200 - 1600 yards), which i guess is more historically accurate. But if proximity to your own troops is too close then they do tend to cease fire. This makes deployment of guns fairly critical at the start of a battle, and im still learning this as i tend to place my guns far to close to the enemy.

Since taking your advice, ive started deploying my guns and regiments more like this:

Regiment Gun Battery Regiment

Regiment ----------- Regiment

With this the guns are more secure on the flanks, and they can put down a lot of canister to their front. Is this more or less what they would deploy as?
The game tutorial also explained that putting all your guns in a 'grand battery' was particulary a good tactic, as you could concentrate all your fire too literally obliterate lines in the enemy ranks.

Oh and Greg, if you dont already have this game...get it...youd love it.

:bow:

[Gregoshi]

DW, I do have the demo and really liked it. I just haven't gotten around to buying the full game.

Your deployment seems to address the problems you've encountered but I don't think that is the be-all, end-all solution. Much depends upon the terrain. Alexander spends some time in each battle discussing the placement of his guns. A couple things he tried to do with his placement were:

1) examine the terrain for most likely approaches of the enemy if they are attacking.
2) look for positions that give your cannons a good field of fire on those approaches. Likewise, if the enemy is defending, look for positions with good fields of fire on the enemy defenses.
3) the ultimate is to look for positions where you can get an enfilading fire down the length of the enemy line - whether it be their defensive line or an attacking line. This is possible when there is an angle in the enemy's line, or where battlelines are uneven.

Given the lack of any of the above, your proposed deployment seems to provide your infantry with the extra support they would need in engaging the enemy.

[Redleg]

DW, I do have the demo and really liked it. I just haven't gotten around to buying the full game.

Your deployment seems to address the problems you've encountered but I don't think that is the be-all, end-all solution. Much depends upon the terrain. Alexander spends some time in each battle discussing the placement of his guns. A couple things he tried to do with his placement were:

1) examine the terrain for most likely approaches of the enemy if they are attacking.
2) look for positions that give your cannons a good field of fire on those approaches. Likewise, if the enemy is defending, look for positions with good fields of fire on the enemy defenses.
3) the ultimate is to look for positions where you can get an enflading fire down the length of the enemy line - whether it be their defensive line or an attacking line. This is possible when there is an angle in the enemy's line, or where battlelines are uneven.

Given the lack of any of the above, your proposed deployment seems to provide your infantry with the extra support they would need in engaging the enemy.

During the Civil War point 3 was the primary goal and best postioning of Artillery. Remember during the Civil War time period cannon's were still primarily a direct fire weapon.

This article might help understand the nature of postioning the Artillery battery and batteries depending on the level of battle you are in.

http://www.batteryb.com/artillery_hell.html


Most battles at the Regiment and below will be hard to replicate the artillery placement correctly. During the civil war the Artillery was organized as 3-5 batteries to a battalion - with a battalion supporting the Infantry Division. Its gets a lot more confusing as one goes down in the battle size where artillery was present.

For examble a Division fight would look like this - X being Infantry company size of bigger O being a single artillery piece Artillery


O O O O O O O O O O O O
X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X

They would of ensured that the guns were not directly firing into their own men - primarly focusing on firing from a flank postion when possible. Malvern Hill is an examble how the Artillery was postioned so well that the flanking shot caused the confederate forces pure hell. There would of been infantry units to either flank to prevent the artillery from being over-run by infantry or Cav.

[Gregoshi]

Thanks for chiming in Redleg. I'm glad a true expert is on hand. The article you reference explains some questions I've had while reading Alexander's book. It seems the often the Confederate artillery got the better of the Union's despite the latter's superior quality and numbers. I was beginning to suspect that it was Alexander's bias coming through, the article tells me it was organization, flexibility and adaptability failings that hampered the Federal artillery. Interesting.

Regarding enfilading fire, Alexander mentions one of the great failed opportunities for the Confederates was during Pickett's Charge. The Union lines are often described as a fishhook. Pickett's Charge was directed at the shank of the fishhook and most of the artillery fire came from the same direction as the charge itself. The lost opportunity was with Ewell's artillery positioned at the curve of the fishhook. Ewell's cannons could have provided perfect enfilading fire down the length of Cemmetary Ridge (the shaft of the fishhook) prior to and during the charge. The article Redleg provided mentioned the better organization and adaptability of the Confederate artillery over its Union counterparts. While certainly true, in the case of Pickett's Charge, even it had shortcomings. According to Alexander's viewpoint, the main failing to take advantage of the enfilading fire by Ewell can be attributed to the lack of an overall artillery commander for the army. Each corp and division artillery commanders did their own thing and there was no higher level officer to coordinate efforts at the army level.

Alexander's book is quite interesting on a number of levels - from his descriptions of the battles and his analysis of them, to his many personal experiences during and between the fighting. It gets a high recommendation from me.

All this talk has me wanting to fire up the demo again and maybe even buy the game.

[Redleg]

From what I have read so far I will probably look into the game. If it plays as realistic as some are claiming it will be worth the money to purchase.

If your after some more information about Civil War Artillery - a lot of web sites are devoted to the state artillery units from the north. Just type in a google search with Civil War Artillery units it should provide some interesting articles - many are first hand accounts written within 15-20 years of the battles as the commanders.

[Eternal Champion]

Just as an aside the price has come down in places and the game is a steal at $29.99. This game is every bit as a good as advertised and the developer support is the best I've ever seen. It is by far the best game I've ever played of this era of combat. The lead programer has just posted on their website he's discovered a much improved LOS routine that is faster and less CPU demanding, this alone will greatly improve an already competent AI. It is going to be released in the next and final patch, other developers would save such a large game improvement for the next title. Outstanding support for an outstanding product.

[Gregoshi]

I realized yesterday that the demo I have is for their Bull Run 1861 game and there is a demo for 2nd Manassas, their latest game. Some how I missed that there was a newer game. I downloaded the demo for the new game this morning and I'll have to check it out later tonight. Oh boy, a new toy to play with!

[Dooz]

Ah, finally the game is breaking through the upper echelons. Wonderful, wonderful. Prepare to experience a game unlike any other gentlemen!

[Divine Wind]

Ah, finally the game is breaking through the upper echelons. Wonderful, wonderful. Prepare to experience a game unlike any other gentlemen!

Good..good...our plan for world domination is under way...silly fools..

:laugh4:

I hope you enjoy it Greg, post your views on what you think.

I cant put it down at the moment. Its taking away valuable World Cup viewing time for me GAH! :sweatdrop:

I was thinking of perhaps posting an 'After Action Report' too stir a little more interest. Give me a few days and ill have it posted up.

[Dooz]

[SIZE="1"]
I was thinking of perhaps posting an 'After Action Report' too stir a little more interest. Give me a few days and ill have it posted up.

Yay, I love AAR's, especially for this game because they can be so great. Like these two from the MMG AAR forums.

(56k warning... seriously.)
http://www.madminutegames.com/MadMinuteBB/viewtopic.php?t=3574

http://www.madminutegames.com/MadMinuteBB/viewtopic.php?t=4177

[Redleg]

I downloaded the Demo last night (Primarily because I could not find either game in a store) and found the following.

Indeed the battle simulation is as good or better then any of the others I have ever played to include any of the Total War series of games.

It demonstrates that if one seperates their unit over a wide area of terrian they break.

It without stating it advocates that stragety that a unit is left in reserve.

Ordered the game and can't wait for it to get here.

[Divine Wind]

Indeed the battle simulation is as good or better then any of the others I have ever played to include any of the Total War series of games.

Spot on, wait until you starting controlling a corps, or an army. Its brilliant!


It demonstrates that if one seperates their unit over a wide area of terrian they break.

Indeed, i learnt this lesson very quickly in my first few engagements. Your leader must be in close proximty to your troops, otherwise they lose morale very quickly, especially when engaged by troops or under fire from artillery.


It without stating it advocates that stragety that a unit is left in reserve.

Again a very welcomed addition, and one ive never seen in any other tactical war simulation. Fresh reserves are usually the difference in all engagements. Blocking gaps left by retreating troops, replacing troops low on ammo or morale, flanking the enemy, reserves are managed so well in this game, and even the AI does a decent job of using reserves! I think you will be very happy with this.


Ordered the game and can't wait for it to get here.

Nice one, let us know how your first few battles go.

[Gregoshi]

I've tried the 2 tutorials so far in the Manassas. In general it is pretty good but controlling a division is much harder than controlling a brigade. The AI was giving me some fits sometimes. It seemed at times it would place 2 regiments that they would cross each other like an "X" making one or both unable to fire. I also had instances where I'd watch one of my regiments just wheel left and wheel right like it was trying to decide between 2 targets - and the worst thing about this is that it wasn't firing while doing this. Argh!

I can vouch for keeping the necessity of keeping the brigades together. After fighting the division tutorial for some 15-20 minutes, I had one or two brigades scattered all over the place. What a mess! Aside from organizational issues, trying to learn how to interpret all the symbols on each unit and the information on the tool bar/information area is going to take time. There is a lot to information presented to absorb, so even though the battles unfold slow, it doesn't feel that way sometimes.

I'll have to give the battle a shot one of these nights.

[Dunhill]

I'm not up to the army level command, there is just too much going on. I haven't encountered a game with such a high gameplay curve in a while.

I can do brigade and division easy enough, but hings get hard at the corp level.

The orders take a while, and my couriers keep getting picked off if I'm not careful. That's one of great things about this game, lines of communication. the couriers wont just throw themselves away time after time, but losing just one courier can result in that division not moving. I like how they've given the AI the ability to let couriers take an alternate route if the last one died on the road route. That's attention to detail.

Also when you are on teh field and you decide to go too far in front of your lines and you take a bullet to the head. That's it the battle is over for you. Very cool, they even give you an obituary.

[UglyandHasty]

As i'm a control freak :inquisitive: I always take command of division, and most of the times of brigades also. The more i've manage to control and win a battle with is 5 division. But my ideal corp, the one i can control and be deadly with is 3 division. For me the trick is, when moving i only take control of the division commander, wich allow me to move my division where i want them, and upon arrival i take command of the brigades also. This way i usualy have a very solid front line.


I lost a couple of battle by moving my army commander just behind an attacking brigades(for moral support). So while looking elsewhere, the front line move a bit back and my General is caught. So now, i keep my Gen safe behind, only using the corp commander for moral support purpose. Oh and shame on me, i also lost a battle after 10 minutes, using the army commander to quickly scout behind a wood, while crossing that wood he fell on a Reb brigade. :oops: *note to self: use cav to scout*


Gregoshi, when you want to keep a brigade in line, take command of the officer. This way he wont wheel his brig. at the wrong time. And yes battles are really good and immersive. Plus you begin with the smaller skirmish, a brigade, then the division level, to finish with the corp level.


*edit typo

[Eternal Champion]

Like Hasty said the key is knowing when and where to "Take Command". You have to take command at least one level down and during hot and in heavy action I may have to "steal a regiment" to plug a hole or refuse a flank. I'm hoping that the new LOS ("Line of Sight" it took my a bit to figure that out and should've known) routine due in the next patch will help the AI's already decent decision making ability.

[Gregoshi]

Yes, I think in the back of my mind I knew all of what you are saying, but in the heat of the battle... :sweatdrop: I'm going to have to unlearn a lot of habits from other games - click-click and immediate response from the units. On the flip side, I guess I've also got to learn how to use the chain of command and keep my cotton pickin' hands off those regiments!! :laugh4:

[Dunhill]

It is nice to have a battle that is operating in a realistic time frame.

I enjoy that sinking feeling I get when I see newly appeared enemy divisions coming across a field and having to work out the best response with what I've got. Sometimes that means falling back. The decisions sometimes have to be made in a hurry as the movement to resolve a situation is going to take the appropriate amount of time.

Cheers

[Ciaran]

I´ve downloaded the demo and so far played the Brigade tutorial - and I´m dead impressed. The divisional battle, which is the peak moment was most impressive.
The division tutorial sounds pretty more daunting now that I´ve got to play around with the most basic level. And I´ve not yet used or even seen Cavalry, or artillery.

I only wish there were a Medieval mod for that game available or in the making, that would...blast it all away. Imagine playing battles like Hattin, Bannockburn, Poitiers or Agincourt like that :2thumbsup: Not that it´s bad as it is, but as a Non-American I don´t quite care that much about the civil war.

[Dunhill]

We are already modding for the American War of Independence, so a host of new units are being made, including artillery. We''ve just made an announcement on the MMG forums that we are working hard on this, and be sure it will be grognard quality stuff.

The progress is quite quick as we've got some good sprite modders on the job. I've even seen some Austrian troops modded already. Besides you can mod teh game very much yourself, and the developers post all the time on teh forums to help you do that. So if you don't like the movement, smoke duration, acurracy or range of weapons, limber/unlimber times, etc, etc you can change it in a spreadsheet.

I suggest you ge the full version, artillery and cavalry are very fun. I even think the download is on sale if you hunt around a bit, NWS has an online site that migth be selling it cheap? The Naval Warfare Simulations site.

[Dooz]

Hey folks, thought you good people and fans of Take Command might be interested in this.

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=66641



We are already modding for the American War of Independence, so a host of new units are being made, including artillery. We''ve just made an announcement on the MMG forums that we are working hard on this, and be sure it will be grognard quality stuff.
I couldn't find a thread for this, think you could post up a link? I'm very interested.


I suggest you ge the full version, artillery and cavalry are very fun. I even think the download is on sale if you hunt around a bit, NWS has an online site that migth be selling it cheap? The Naval Warfare Simulations site.
$29.99 at this site.
http://yhst-12000246778232.stores.yahoo.net/taco2ndma.html

[Redleg]

Well I finally got the game.

So far I find the brigade fights fairily non-complex to fight. You have to use sound tactics and placement - which makes sense for that level of a battle. Overall the impression I got from the demo has been improved from the two battles I so far have fought to completion.

Now the Division battle - I am having some problems because of the AI and independent Regiment commanders not doing what I want them to do.. Eh gads shoot them. Never mind the confederate forces do it for me.

Artillery placement and use is pretty much dead on from what I know of civil war battles. If you don't place them soundly and provided them support the artillery is basically useless. Now I did successful play the artillery - hell they broke three confederate attacks - but when I concenrated on the artillery my damn infantry broke.

Overall I am impressed with the game. Some more tutorial with the division is needed for me to get a better handle on how to control the division. But the artillery is great. You get them on the flank and they get flank shots into enemy troops - my goodness the havoc they reap and the units they cause to flee.

[Redleg]

Well been playing the Take Command -2nd Manassas for a couple of weeks. Interesting game to say the least. The Corps and Army Battles are excellent.

THe use of Artillery is key to many of the battles - that and well coordinated attacks using mass on the enemy's flank if possible.

If you can not get a flank one can force a breach if you use the concept of "flying Artillery" that the Confederate forces initially used, and use the historical attacker to defender ratio of 3:1.

Hell I even won with General Banks against Stonewall. It took me three times - but finally figured out how to beat Jackson at Chanitily.

I really do wish Medivel plays as well.

[Kekvit Irae]

http://www.dhq.nu/hutsell/vgascreenshot.jpg

Considering I live in the Montgomery area, the artists REALLY need a geography lesson.

[Redleg]

Well Just got finished fighting the first Army battle with Pope.

The first time I tried the battle I tried to fight it as historical correct as possible, and lost. (BTW Pope was an idiot for trying it that way.)

So I began to think about what would the best way to fight this battle if I was in command. So looking at the map the Terrain around Newman seemed to provide some advantage in height. So I tried it that way.

So I took all of Sigel's corps up to the Woods just south of Newman to stage them for the attack. The most of the Cav I sent to the woods to the West of the Mill Road and south of the unfinished Railroad. Leaving one unite of three troops to help destroy any enemy that got close enough (this was key to defeating the Confederate Artillery that was place on the unfinished railroad near the Curshing Farm and Sudley Church.

Now troop placements will take some work - but the key to this battle is the artillery fight. I placed all of my Artillery with infantry and cav protection on the hill just North of Newman. One battery I placed on the edge of the Woods on the hill that looks down the creek bed - the rest I placed in the clearing between the two wood groups along the road and to Curshing Farm. (The Battery on the wooded hill racked up over 200 points for each gun - (other then the one that ran away)).

Now the rest of my Infantry I placed in the woods between Curshing Farm and Newman to hopefully draw the AI into attempting to destroy my guns. In doing this I allowed the artillery to duel and used Sigel's Corps to protect the guns until the followup Corps lead by Heintzel came up. His two Divisions I split - One Division I used to Reinforce Sigel - who by this time was up to his armpits in Confederates (2 of the brigades had broken from the consant assults by the confederates) During the course of the Battle, I placed Sigel's Corps in front of the guns using the Curshing Farm as a base and attempting to keep the Confederate forces West of Sudley Church and West of Crushing Farms in the woods. It is a rough fight but if you cordinate it right, you can hold the conferedates long enough to bring up one of Heintzel's divisions to attack through what is left of Sigel's Corps to hold the Woods. (By This I mean the Woods west of Curshing Farm the Unfinished Railroad and Sudley Church.

I took the second division (Hooker's) and attacked North along Sudley Mill Road catching the conferate forces in the flank that were attempting to destroy Sigel's division.

Then when Reno's Corps came up I sent them futher North to the River Crossing north of the Church to destroy the enemy Cav.

The game ended as Reno began his attack.

[UglyandHasty]

What score did you make ?? I dont remember if i play it yet, i'll look tonight and if yes i'll post my score.

By your long post, i gather you like the game ? Even without multiplayer, its a heck of a game, its so immersive. Like you state, artillery position is so important. I often saved myself with one or 2 well placed batteries. Have you download and install the latest patch ? It have a new LOS system, wich improve considerably the battle and the AI performance.


More and more Shogun and MTW vets are showing up on the MadMinute forum. Must be a good sign :laugh4:

[UglyandHasty]

Its something i post at the MM forum. The situation is, you command King Division, travelling on the road to Centerville(off map).


This is not a AAR. I'll compensate my few writing skills with a few screen shot. Even the screens arent so good :lol: I'm glad with this battle, my first of the week(finally...) and again had a blast ! This is the first time in my 10 years of gaming that i take the time to post a battle summary. Tribute to TC2M !!


Its the King scenario on first day, at normal difficulty. My first try weeks ago resulted in a mere 84. I know i have to hold the Brawner's Farm and can expect a rush on Groveton. So from the start it is decided, i 'll split my brigades(4) and batteries(4) in 2 groups, one at the farm, the other near Groveton. I know i'm taking a chance with only 2 brigades at Groveton. I'm tempted to stay grouped at the farm, but hey !! an ugly general like to gamble once in a while :mrgreen:

So the battle begin, units slowly crawling on the road toward Centerville. I dispatch them as they come by the farm, one turn left for the farm, the next continue toward Groveton. After 15 minutes, it was clear i had good chance of holding Brawner's Farm, with only 3 Rebels brigades attaking. The situation around Groveton is critical though. The 2 brigades there are under attack by 2 divisions.

Right Flank
https://img278.imageshack.us/img278/3802/1ajk1.jpg
https://img278.imageshack.us/img278/6610/1chj2.jpg
https://img278.imageshack.us/img278/7484/1den0.jpg
Left Flank

The Battle at Brawner's Farm objective is pretty easy. Holding 2 Rebs brigades with only one, my 2nd brigade easily flank and rout the Rebs 3rd brigade on left. After that, its just a sweeping task. Once all is safer(or feel like it), one battery and one brigade will take the road to Groveton.

https://img173.imageshack.us/img173/5578/2apl4.jpg

Desperatly, i try to hold the road between the farm and Groveton open with the 1st Rhodes Island Cavalry, assisted by the 84th New York(protecting Groveton 2 batteries left flank). The cavalry brigade will sustain heavy casualties, even loosing its commander, the Colonel Duffie. But in the end, their sacrifice wont be meaningless.
https://img188.imageshack.us/img188/9687/16apg9.jpg
https://img188.imageshack.us/img188/695/17aaw8.jpg

Its a fierce fight near Groveton. I was expecting a Rebels charge at my brigades, but to my surprise most of their units stop short and shoot up at my mens. Even if the rebels are 3 times our numbers, its a carnage on both side, thanks to my batteries cannister shots.
https://img188.imageshack.us/img188/9190/23bnu5.jpg
https://img188.imageshack.us/img188/1489/24brr3.jpg
https://img188.imageshack.us/img188/2919/26bnk0.jpg

In the end, i faced 3 divisions. I was saved by the terrain. At the farm most of the ennemy artillery had no LOS on me, and i had the height near Groveton.

https://img471.imageshack.us/img471/7371/resultqo0.jpg
Union Order of Battle
https://img470.imageshack.us/img470/4500/31aec7.jpg
Confederate Order of Battle
https://img438.imageshack.us/img438/9282/33ags9.jpg
Overall situation at the end
https://img470.imageshack.us/img470/4328/35aih0.jpg

Hope you like it !

edit. typo & Image

[Redleg]

Pope's first battle which was the attack - 2517
Second battle - which is really a simple defend battle - 1303
The third battle I haven't fought yet.

[UglyandHasty]

Great scores sir ! I havent played those yet, i'm still fighting on the Division level :laugh4:

[Redleg]

I had to give up on the second Banks battle - I have not figured out how to use the cav in a way to get the Union to win that battle.

[Dooz]

Ah, how I love that King scenario. Such fun to play that battle out. Very nice scores indeed... I haven't even ventured to try the more difficult settings. Are the differences great between the easy and normal?

[Redleg]

Ah, how I love that King scenario. Such fun to play that battle out. Very nice scores indeed... I haven't even ventured to try the more difficult settings. Are the differences great between the easy and normal?

I have been playing normal and hard. And there is a big difference between the two. The AI seems to be more aggressive at the hard setting, but its probably because of the number of times it looks at things.

The brigade and Division battles I fight at Hard - Its a better fight and I can control my troops better at the smaller level. The Corps and Army fights that I have done I have maintained at normal - to many troops for me to control with any hope of doing well. The friendly AI doesn't hold the troops on the course of action I had selected to the degree I would comfortable in allowing it to. I have found the AI turns troops to the most obvious danger leaving the flank of its adjacent brigade open to the attack I was wanting to prevent with it.

In all the fights I have done so far - I have placed every division commander under my direct control - and except for the two Pope defensive battles. Every brigade commander I end up placing directly under my control when I decide that that is the point of pentration in my offensive battles, or the main effort for preventing the enemy from breaching my defense.

Makes for lots of switching back and forth across the battle but then I am a control freak.

[UglyandHasty]

There's a good difference between easy and normal, the difference coming from better troops and greater numbers of troops in easy. I've try hard once, got beaten to a bloody pulp. In hard with better troops and more mens, i found the task to be quite hard. I like the fact that the AI dont "cheat" on harder level. The difference in level are made with troops adjustement. So i found out the hard way, that a very good brigade can easily beat 3 below average brigades.


Redleg, the Banks scenario is the one where you have mostly cav right ? If yes, i read that the way to win this scenario is to abandon the artillery batteries at the starting point and rush forward with all cavs to gain the objective. Even though i'm pretty sure any battles can done many different way.


edit... oops beat to it by a few minutes :)

[Redleg]

Redleg, the Banks scenario is the one where you have mostly cav right ? If yes, i read that the way to win this scenario is to abandon the artillery batteries at the starting point and rush forward with all cavs to gain the objective. Even though i'm pretty sure any battles can done many different way.

Abandon the guns - ye gads how can a Redleg maintain his diginity on the battlefield when he abondon's his guns.

All kidding aside - I have toyed with that idea myself - but my main problem is the cav fight is often to quick for my current playing style, which has been concentrated on using the cav to destroy enemy guns on the flank. I have been avoiding using the cav for the most part.

[UglyandHasty]

hehehe I should have avoid telling you to abandon the gun, my bad ! :laugh4:

I also have some problem with using my cav. In open play i use them almost exclusivly for scouting, or in last ressort, delaying the ennemy advance. And most of the times, my cav got destroyed. The best move i've made with cav is when i took command of the units, but its a lots of micro-management. It cant be done in huge battle. I'll try to play the Banks scenario this weekend, if i can have a breack of "honey's-do-list" ...

[Dooz]

Thanks guys. Don't you wish there was multiplayer in the current version to duke it out with fellow Orgers? Soon enough gentlemen!

[UglyandHasty]

This game is so good that i'll be patient waiting for the multiplayer. I dont expect anything before 2007 though, this way i might have a nice surprise :)




Redleg, the Banks scenario is the one where you have mostly cav right ? If yes, i read that the way to win this scenario is to abandon the artillery batteries at the starting point and rush forward with all cavs to gain the objective. Even though i'm pretty sure any battles can done many different way.

Forget the above Redleg ! Yesterday evening i try the Banks scenario. It took me 30 minutes to brings the 3 cavalry brigades(and the General Banks) on the Groveton-Suddley road. It was a micro-management nightmare, even if i kept the 2 Inf. divisions where they begun. I was moving north toward the objective, near the unfinished railroad, when i hit front face a Rebels infantry brigade. To get there, i had to fight a couple of Confederate cavalry units. So i wasnt in shape to fight that infantry brigade. So i order the cav the move back toward the center of the map, to meet with my 2 Division. I was about to resume moving north with all my troops, when i was saved an humiliating defeat by my son bath time. :sweatdrop: Saved by the bell ! I'll try it again tonight, but by moving in force. Let me know if you beat it :)

[Obake]

Good to see a lot of old friends in this thread and playing TC2M!!!

It's also nice to see so many other in here as well.

I picked up the game about a month ago (thanks to Hasty for the reminder), and have played nothing else since. I haven't even bothered doing much with Open Play yet as I want to get throught the campaign. I'm currently getting ready to start the second Lee scenario after skipping ahead and playing the second Longstreet scenario. All I can say about Longstreet last night is :dizzy2: . I was suprised at the amount of Union troops that were STILL able to mount an effective defense! In fact, while I was rolling up the Union left, Jackson was having his rear end handed to him on my left.

I still find it amazing that two guys working nights were able to put together an AI that beats anything else that I've ever played, and that includes Shogun v1.13!!!

Not sure if Adam and Norb will actually do MP for Shiloh, but I sure hope that they do. There's been a lot of talk about it being either MP or Campaign. Of course I want both, but I firmly believe that they'd get more immediate commercial success (ie funding) from an MP enabled game than they would letting us have a campaign game. Right now it seems that they're in an either/or mode.

Regardless, it's a great game, and I'm looking forward to the future with this one. One last point, for those of you who know him, Elmo is in the process of getting the game as well. He's so firmly looking towards the MP portion of this franchise that he's buying a non-MP game just to support the company in their efforts.

One last thing for what it's worth. I'm posting over at the MMG forums as JohnF if you happen to stop by. I think I'll be spending much more time back here at the Org though where I'm posting among people I've known for years!

[Gregoshi]

Obake! It is great to see you posting here again. It has been way too long since you've graced the Org with your presence. Anyway, welcome back.

I haven't purchase TC2M yet. I spend too much time on the internet in game related forums and websites and hardly any time actually playing. :dizzy2: Go figure. I do like the demo though and hopefully I'll get around to playing this game more seriously.

[Trax]

After playing the demo for two months I finally decided to buy the game and support the cause of producing quality wargames. The download from Paradox is finished now, I dont think I will get much sleep tonight!:2thumbsup:

[Obake]

Hiya Gregoshi!!!!

Good to be back. I expect that I'll be spending more time here than I will in the other forums. As much time as your spending writing (and believe me, I know EXACTLY how much time you spend writing on forums.....) you really need to get this game. As good as the demo is, the full game will blow you away.

The Gibbons scenario "A walk in the sun" is far from the most challenging scenario out there, in spite of the fact that it excellent.

Welcome to the American Civil War Trax! Looking forward to hearing how it's going for you, now that I've "been there done that" with most of the game.

As for myself, I just finished off the last of the historical Manassass scenarios. All I've got left are the hypothetical Banks and Stuart scenarios, along with Chantilly and I'll be done. Then it's on to some serious open play and if I've got the time, I might even do a few ahistorical scenarios and OOB's myself. I put together a rather lengthy post on how I felt MP should be implemented including being able to save custom built armies for use online. I may spend some more time working on that to see how well it would work.

[Dunhill]

For those of you interesed in mods for TC2M, the Rebels and Redcoats mod from Skunkworks is still progressing. There are some very good modders working on the package, and I've been doing a bit of research and splash screens for them.

They seem to be a very professional and productive group. I expect this mod will increase interest in the game. It's such a nice game for the modders to work with, very flexible.

The Skunkworks are also discussing a number of other mods, such as the English Civil war and other such conflicts.

So we've got something to look forward to.

[Dunhill]

The Rebels and Redcoats American Revolutionary War mod has just been released. It shows just how much Take Command 2nd Manassas can be modded, by a relatively small group of people.

Have a look, more mods to come.

http://www.madminutegames.com/MadMinuteBB/index.php

Cheers,