Page 7 of 25 FirstFirst 1234567891011121314151617 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 486

Thread: Your suggestions for 3.0 (based on B&G 2.5)

  1. #121

    Default Re: Your suggestions for 3.0 (based on B&G 2.5)

    I don't know if this has been said but what about a unit of men with repeating rifles, the Henry per say.

  2. #122

    Default Re: Your suggestions for 3.0 (based on B&G 2.5)

    How come the Pennsylvania Bucktails use the 20th Maine flag? How about changing that for the next release.

  3. #123
    Primergy's Avatar Protector of the Union
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Augsburg
    Posts
    2,491

    Default Re: Your suggestions for 3.0 (based on B&G 2.5)

    Texture space is a bit limited, thats why we reused a flag were possible^^

  4. #124

    Default Re: Your suggestions for 3.0 (based on B&G 2.5)

    Quote Originally Posted by Hresvelgr View Post
    Umm... there were no units soley of veterans.
    That's not necessarily true. The "Invalid Corps" were comprised of veterans. Okay, so they were veterans who had been disabled by battle in some form or another, but they were still veterans. But I don't think it would be very fun to play a battle with that corp.

  5. #125
    HissingNewt's Avatar Vicarius
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    2,841

    Default Re: Your suggestions for 3.0 (based on B&G 2.5)

    First off, thanks for making the mod. I've been having a great time with it so far.

    I played the Gettysburg map earlier today and was having issues with it for two reasons. The first was that those rocks on the ground (near Little Round Top or what I thought was the hill) causing major issues for pathing (a sharpshooter unit of mine detoured through the fire zone to get to a hill and guard a Napoleon battery). The second issue is that the ground was very bumpy. It almost looked like there wasn't a smooth terrain option in the map editor used to make that (and maybe there wasn't, I haven't used it). Would it be at all possible to fix either of these issues?

    I was also under the impression that units no longer fought in the close ranks of the 18th century due to the accuracy of the minie rifles and were more like skirmishers. Is that incorrect and there's just no way to truly implement that in the gameplay?
    Last edited by HissingNewt; January 25, 2011 at 05:38 PM.
    "Hullabaloo, caneck! Caneck!"

  6. #126
    Piledriver2311's Avatar Semisalis
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Washington D.C.
    Posts
    480

    Default Re: Your suggestions for 3.0 (based on B&G 2.5)

    Quote Originally Posted by HissingNewt View Post
    First off, thanks for making the mod. I've been having a great time with it so far.

    I played the Gettysburg map earlier today and was having issues with it for two reasons. The first was that those rocks on the ground (near Little Round Top or what I thought was the hill) causing major issues for pathing (a sharpshooter unit of mine detoured through the fire zone to get to a hill and guard a Napoleon battery). The second issue is that the ground was very bumpy. It almost looked like there wasn't a smooth terrain option in the map editor used to make that (and maybe there wasn't, I haven't used it). Would it be at all possible to fix either of these issues?

    I was also under the impression that units no longer fought in the close ranks of the 18th century due to the accuracy of the minie rifles and were more like skirmishers. Is that incorrect and there's just no way to truly implement that in the gameplay?
    The formations in the civil war were still, tight. they changed to a looser one after the war was over, in Europe also.

    From the very first time I fixed my eyes on youuu girl... My heart says follow through..
    TGW BETA TESTER? TGW REASERCH GUY

  7. #127
    HissingNewt's Avatar Vicarius
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    2,841

    Default Re: Your suggestions for 3.0 (based on B&G 2.5)

    Quote Originally Posted by Cassador de evora View Post
    The formations in the civil war were still, tight. they changed to a looser one after the war was over, in Europe also.
    Ah, ok. Thanks for the info.
    "Hullabaloo, caneck! Caneck!"

  8. #128

    Default Re: Your suggestions for 3.0 (based on B&G 2.5)

    It is a minor suggestion, but can you get rid of the label "Foot" when you get regimental information. For instance, the "11th State Militia Regiment... of Foot". The "Foot" part is out of place in the ACW. It would be even more amazing if instead of "State Militia" it said "Mississippi" or "Pennsylvania", but getting rid of the Foot would be good enough.

  9. #129

    Default Re: Your suggestions for 3.0 (based on B&G 2.5)

    if theres gonna bey a new launcher why not maik a option that you can also lauch the tar mod

  10. #130

    Default Re: Your suggestions for 3.0 (based on B&G 2.5)

    If you wontmmake Richmond a large city can someone point me in the right direction so i can do it myself?

  11. #131

    Default Re: Your suggestions for 3.0 (based on B&G 2.5)

    Also not have the brigade headquarters and/or the general store generate negative approval and the only let us recruit two of the cavalry for garrison duties. its extremely frustrating.

  12. #132
    Hinkel's Avatar Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,120

    Default Re: Your suggestions for 3.0 (based on B&G 2.5)

    Quote Originally Posted by Confederate Viking View Post
    If you wontmmake Richmond a large city can someone point me in the right direction so i can do it myself?
    There is a tutorial about it in the empire mod tutorial forum. I think its a 4-5 hour non stop working sesdion for an advanced esf editor. Dont know how long it takes for a newbie
    --------------------------- The American Civil War for Total War ------------------------------

  13. #133

    Default Re: Your suggestions for 3.0 (based on B&G 2.5)

    thanks appreciate it

  14. #134

    Default Re: Your suggestions for 3.0 (based on B&G 2.5)

    My suggestion. Well actually a whi
    ch tho get new swords and. The. General s at doing history
    Moves with. The sword

  15. #135

    Default Re: Your suggestions for 3.0 (based on B&G 2.5)

    But. When. Come s 3.0 out
    Last edited by rohan97; January 27, 2011 at 04:35 PM.

  16. #136
    Hinkel's Avatar Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,120

    Default Re: Your suggestions for 3.0 (based on B&G 2.5)

    Quote Originally Posted by rohan97 View Post
    My suggestion. Well actually a whi
    ch tho get new swords and. The. General s at doing history
    Moves with. The sword
    Then you have to make animations for it... then we will include it in the mod, when you make the animations.

    Quote Originally Posted by rohan97 View Post
    But. When. Come s 3.0 out
    2011
    --------------------------- The American Civil War for Total War ------------------------------

  17. #137

    Default

    breach loading rifles (though the Springfield trapdoor wasn't in service until 1873), breach loading canons, gattling guns, more artillery per unit like say 5 or 6 guns per unit (most casualties in the civil war were from artillery), and other stuff

    i would like to see the chassepot, zundnadelgewehr, and the snider-enfield

    also, would it be possible to animate and make an option for soldiers to go into the prone position?
    Last edited by Primergy; January 28, 2011 at 10:27 AM.

  18. #138

    Default Re: Your suggestions for 3.0 (based on B&G 2.5)

    Thanks for all feedback but please edit your posts if you have additional things what you want to say instead of three posts in a row.

  19. #139
    jackwei's Avatar Primicerius
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    3,244

    Default Re: Your suggestions for 3.0 (based on B&G 2.5)

    Faction music on the campaign map:- For an example songs like the Bonnie blue flag for the CSA and Hypm of the Republic for the Union States??

    If you could get permission i still think the supply and manpower limits model used in APETI would of been very good to use in this mod as it would feel very realistic knowing how much supply and manpower you have as the south and north in the civil war, plus it would make it easier to make risky decisions that could cause the war to go in your favour or go against you.

    If it were possible to have richmond and Washington as large cities on the map and it would be nice if possible a new building of the White House and one of the dome of capitol hill could be build. For Richmond a white house of the confederacy and virginia capitol hill. If it were possible with the tools with have now i think that would look very cool.
    Last edited by jackwei; January 27, 2011 at 08:44 PM.

  20. #140

    Default Re: Your suggestions for 3.0 (based on B&G 2.5)

    I know you tried to work on this, but England needs to be less aggresive or not have any armies in North America. They kept declaring war on the US despite their stance being "Friendly" and having a trade agreement. I don't care about a challenge but it is just no fun fighting the British while trying to conquer the CS.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •