|
uPen posted:1.02, run the updater from the launcher. I'm surprised that hasn't bricked our game. I need to check Matrix more often, it seems. Also, I've been taking screenshots but not notes if this ever goes LP. Thank you for your message last turn because the turn before had me yelling to my wife about how I'm bad at games.
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2016 02:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 23:28 |
|
|
All I think it changed was the prices of some cards, mostly Soviet ones.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2016 02:51
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2016 19:29
|
|
|
Triple20 posted:Ultimate General Gettysburg for $3.74 (75%) alea jacta est i guess or maybe to end all wars. for a nice ui though you're SOL because the improved engine they used to pride of nations (which supported texture streaming and poo poo like that and thus is the only game of theirs that runs at a constant solid fps) was never used again because of the backlash against its turn times
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
uPen posted:1.02, run the updater from the launcher. For some reason that stupid thing never works for me. By the way the 1.03 beta is available on the forums.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2016 20:02
|
|
|
Speaking of Gettysburg:UG why hasn't that guy made Waterloo: Ultimate General or whatever yet. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2016 20:46
|
|
|
One of my earliest formative games was Waterloo: Napoleon's Last Battle, which I now understand was kind of a derivative of the Sid Meyers Gettysburg games or something? Anyways I would pay good money for UG: The Franchise.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2016 21:25
|
|
|
Reading their forums, apparently alot of the HARDCORE GROGS were turned off by the game? Because they are grogs I assume.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
I'm surprised there seem to be no mods for UG...? Unrelated: Some new images have been uploaded on the Victory and Glory: Napoleon Matrix page. Release date seems to be March 17. They are still looking for beta testers, it seems. Also, anyone up for a game of Commander: The Great War? It has been patched a couple of times since I PBEMed it last.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2016 22:24
|
|
|
Sure i'll do another game of C:TGW. No preferences on side or start time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2016 22:37
|
|
|
Saros posted:Sure i'll do another game of C:TGW. No preferences on side or start time. Rad, I'm going to pick a weird scenario like 1915 so you don't immediately murder me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2016 22:41
|
|
|
Huh looks like they are opening Commander the Great war up for some pretty serious modding, link. I wonder if we'll get some good mods out of it?
Saros fucked around with this message at 01:40 on Feb 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 00:59
|
|
|
Galaga Galaxian posted:Speaking of Gettysburg:UG why hasn't that guy made Waterloo: Ultimate General or whatever yet. Is it because he's American? There is nearly zero market for "Napoleonic" games here in the US, unless it's part of some huge franchise like Total War. It's worse than the market for Great War titles. It's almost like Americans only know about two wars--our Civil War and WW2. I'd totally expect 10 Ultimate General Some Other Battle From The American Civil War before one covering the Napoleonic Era. ZombieLenin fucked around with this message at 01:10 on Feb 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 01:05
|
|
|
I want a strategic layer above UG.... procedural maps... logistics... recruitment... sieges, taking cities, naval combat, setting up camps / forts.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 01:31
|
|
|
corn in the bible posted:alea jacta est i guess or maybe to end all wars. for a nice ui though you're SOL because the improved engine they used to pride of nations (which supported texture streaming and poo poo like that and thus is the only game of theirs that runs at a constant solid fps) was never used again because of the backlash against its turn times I actually still play Pride of Nations fairly regularly. I have a UK grand campaign meandering along where I will fire up the game two or three times a week, dink around with some mechanics and process a few turns, then leave it again. Full credit to the ageod dev Pocus who is still updating the game in his spare time, 6 years after it was released and backporting engine upgrades from newer titles into the game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 01:45
|
|
|
ZombieLenin posted:Is it because he's American? There is nearly zero market for "Napoleonic" games here in the US, unless it's part of some huge franchise like Total War. That's kind of interesting, actually. I mean, I get there's the ACW for Americans and Napoleonics for Euros as the second-most-sperged-on conflict past WWII, but one'd think it can be somewhat pushed by the virtue of fun uniforms alone.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 08:51
|
|
|
Anecdotally from my own experiences in the American public school system, I can say that most Americans are taught that some French guy named Napoleon existed at some point, and there are some wars associated with him. The only time outside of my AP History courses that I remember discussing it at all was for a week or two during freshman year world history... from what I recall, the gist of it was "out of the ashes of the French Revolution came this brilliant military leader who made himself an emperor, marched to Russia, then at some point was defeated somehow and exiled to some island." And I was the kid who actually paid attention in history class, so your average retention of that memory in the US is probably not very high. We got a whoooooole lot of Revolutionary War and Civil War stuff though! Also America single-handedly won both World Wars, Korea and Vietnam were never discussed at all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 10:29
|
|
|
hey dkotzl...
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 11:12
|
|
|
Drone posted:Anecdotally from my own experiences in the American public school system, I can say that most Americans are taught that some French guy named Napoleon existed at some point, and there are some wars associated with him. The only time outside of my AP History courses that I remember discussing it at all was for a week or two during freshman year world history... from what I recall, the gist of it was "out of the ashes of the French Revolution came this brilliant military leader who made himself an emperor, marched to Russia, then at some point was defeated somehow and exiled to some island." And I was the kid who actually paid attention in history class, so your average retention of that memory in the US is probably not very high. I'd rather see a battle other than dumb waterloo, though. The only reason Waterloo gets all the attention is because of the British. Give me Ultimate General: Leipzig or Austerlitz.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 12:32
|
|
|
Ultimate General: Cold Harbor
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 12:46
|
|
|
My great hope is that they do Ultimate General: German Unification. Basically the ACW but fought by professionals. Shame it'll never happen
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 12:58
|
|
|
Drone posted:Anecdotally from my own experiences in the American public school system, I can say that most Americans are taught that some French guy named Napoleon existed at some point, and there are some wars associated with him. The only time outside of my AP History courses that I remember discussing it at all was for a week or two during freshman year world history... from what I recall, the gist of it was "out of the ashes of the French Revolution came this brilliant military leader who made himself an emperor, marched to Russia, then at some point was defeated somehow and exiled to some island." And I was the kid who actually paid attention in history class, so your average retention of that memory in the US is probably not very high. ^^ What he said. World War I was won the moment Americans set foot in France. World War 2, well let me tell you... We came in and helped the hopeless British win the war. I mean, the British were such pussies they could only be bothered to fight at night, while we KICKED rear end during the day. We were never allied with Russia because the evil COMMUNISTS sided with Hitler. Serves them right for having Hitler betray them. They did nothing in the war except have a terrible winter, which hurt the Germans a little. Then they took advantage of THE AMERICAN (it was only us) invasion of France to set up the IRON CURTAIN. We Americans alone took on Japan, and we nuked them because of PEARL HARBOR and "to save American lives." Putting Japanese Americans in camps was bad, but you have to understand that "everyone was racist then," plus it was a WAR and PEARL HARBOR. Before that was the American Civil War. If you are white, and from the South, then this was a war where the federal government overstepped and out ancestors fought heroically for their freedom. If you aren't from the South then, SLAVERY and the EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION at Gettysburg. Other than that, America and CAPITALISM, which we invented, are the most exceptional amazing wonderful symbols of freedom and democracy ever. If, and that's a big if, you learned about Napoleon in your basic American history class, you'd know Napoleon was the guy who sold us Louisiana, and also the French had some revolution to put him in power. The British, just the British, didn't like him so they fought a war with France and put Napoleon on some island. During that war, when the British, at that time being both EVIL and helpless, stopped American ships and forced American sailors to fight for Britain because Americans were better sailors. This is why the war of 1812 happened--we did NOT want to steal Canada--and Andrew Jackson WON the war at the battle of New Orleans. Congratulations, you've learned everything a good American student who never took an AP class or majored in History learned in K-Bachelors degree. Edit I forgot, WWI started in 1917 when Germany sank the Lusitania and tried to invade Mexico. ZombieLenin fucked around with this message at 16:10 on Feb 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 16:01
|
|
|
ZombieLenin posted:If, and that's a big if, you learned about Napoleon in your basic American history class, you'd know Napoleon was the guy who sold us Louisiana, and also the French had some revolution to put him in power. Oh yeah, I remember it being as less "Napoleon sold us Louisiana" as it was "Jefferson bought Louisiana" with very little explanation of the how and why besides "AMERICA BIGGER". People also tend to conflate the Louisiana Purchase with the common and very dubious/racist mythology about how the island of Manhattan was purchased from natives for a couple dozen beads. History education in the US is so hosed. Obviously it depends on what state you're in, but in my homestate (Ohio), the state board of education changed the required history curriculum basically every year to match whatever statewide proficiency test was being introduced, which in my generation's case led to literally each. and. every. year. being pretty much exclusively about the Civil War or Reconstruction. If I had a dollar for every time we were shown a Ken Burns documentary while the teacher hosed around on the internet, I'd be a wealthy man. Though I think my school district was a rarity in that we did also get quite a lot of Native American history, since the area I grew up in (the Ohio river valley) had a ton of that. Unfortunately that was mostly focused in the pre-high school years and I can barely remember any of it anymore, but I do remember we talked about it quite a bit, and I can't really remember any of it being questionable content. I'd always been interested in history, but I learned more about the 19th century outside the United States from playing Victoria: An Empire Under The Sun than from the actual classroom environment when I was in high school. I distinctly remember being 16 and starting to play that game and going "wait, so THAT'S what Prussia is?" Then I went on to get a degree in history and moved to Europe. Thanks, Paradox. ZombieLenin posted:I forgot, WWI started in 1917 when Germany sank the Lusitania and tried to invade Mexico. Oh and World War 2 started on December 7th, 1941 and there was literally nothing before that. Nothing. Drone fucked around with this message at 16:19 on Feb 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 16:16
|
|
|
We were basically taught "Germany invaded Poland, America didn't like it, so America landed on Normandy and took out the Germans"
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 16:23
|
|
|
"And I would have gotten away with it tüü if it wasn't for der Amerikaner!" 
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 16:53
|
|
|
ZombieLenin posted:Is it because he's American? https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2015/05/01/the-flare-path-may-day-mayday/ Nick: We are experimenting on a new enhanced game engine version for a next title that will simulate The Battle of Antietam. This engine will make the next game visually superior to Ultimate General: Gettysburg and will use a sandbox system in which you can play the battle from the start to the end, having full control of the army. It’s too early to provide a release date and also we haven’t yet decided if this new title will be sold separately or as DLC. Additionally we would like to start looking at other settings. The American Civil War is an exciting era for which we aim to provide many battles using the UGG engine. On the other hand, it is very niche. So we need to start expanding to a broader strategy audience as well.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 16:56
|
|
|
Man, I wish Heroes of Normandie would go on sale. At $30 I requested a Steam refund because was really just too lacking as a game (felt more like a puzzle than anything). But if it were $14 or so I would pick it up no problem. Huh, I just realized that makes me sound like an incredible miser.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 16:58
|
|
|
COOL CORN posted:Man, I wish Heroes of Normandie would go on sale. At $30 I requested a Steam refund because was really just too lacking as a game (felt more like a puzzle than anything). But if it were $14 or so I would pick it up no problem. Well, judging by your wargame purchases... Oh, btw, I have an idea for some ASL-on-SA stuff. Might have to steal your amazing write-up from your thread.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 17:04
|
|
|
Frankly I can't understand why any of you boring old grognerds care about anything that happened before 1939 at all 
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 17:13
|
|
|
Megadyptes posted:Greek. I think I remember him saying he wants to do Napoleonics in some interview but the next game will be about the battle of antietam,
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 17:17
|
|
|
COOL CORN posted:Man, I wish Heroes of Normandie would go on sale. At $30 I requested a Steam refund because was really just too lacking as a game (felt more like a puzzle than anything). But if it were $14 or so I would pick it up no problem. I felt the same way. Though by the time I'd actually gotten to play it it was too late to return it. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 17:26
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:Oh, btw, I have an idea for some ASL-on-SA stuff. Might have to steal your amazing write-up from your thread. Cool! Steal whatever you want, or if you need someone experienced as a Player 2, let me know.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 17:51
|
|
|
I have learned more via joke posts in this thread and Paradox games than I ever did in the public education system. Hell, in high school we never even covered that time that Denmark reformed the Norse faith and conquered all of India. But seriously, that first sad paragraph is 100% true.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 18:02
|
|
|
In the UK it's pretty much the exact opposite. We get taught about the Tudors and 1066, and then pretty much everything else is European or world history. It's slightly shocking how little British people know about World War One considering how important it was to the world (and especially Europe).
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 18:30
|
|
|
AceRimmer posted:Hmm, wonder how this game will simulate the McClellan factor. I remember reading, possibly in this very thread, that every Antietam game artificially locks down a part of your forces because it would be too easy for the Union to win otherwise. I managed to pull out a win once in the Antietam model or Take Command Second Manassas where Union forces were un-restricted... against the AI. I imagine, however, in the context of a video game at least, that yes... It would be nearly impossible to pull off a confederate win where both sides are human, and the Union player is given immediate access to all the reserves McLelan had at Sharpsburg. That is unless you can make a game that adequately models the Civil War generals lack of command and control, where (as often happened) the best laid plans for an overwhelming coordinated attack turns into units attacking well defended positions piecemeal. Drone posted:Oh yeah, I remember it being as less "Napoleon sold us Louisiana" as it was "Jefferson bought Louisiana" with very little explanation of the how and why besides "AMERICA BIGGER". People also tend to conflate the Louisiana Purchase with the common and very dubious/racist mythology about how the island of Manhattan was purchased from natives for a couple dozen beads. Your absolutely right, which is why it's such a big "if" to learn about Napoleon at all. Before I took AP European history (in 1994) the only thing I remembered about Napoleon was that he was the guy who sold Louisiana to Jefferson to pay for "a war." And I was one of the kids who paid attention in History class. ZombieLenin fucked around with this message at 18:35 on Feb 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 18:30
|
|
|
ZombieLenin posted:That is unless you can make a game that adequately models the Civil War generals lack of command and control, where (as often happened) the best laid plans for an overwhelming coordinated attack turns into units attacking well defended positions piecemeal. It's not really a game so much as a flaming piece of garbage but I have good news for you about this!
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 18:39
|
|
|
Dark_Swordmaster posted:It's not really a game so much as a flaming piece of garbage but I have good news for you about this! Graviteam???
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 18:48
|
|
|
Dark_Swordmaster posted:It's not really a game so much as a flaming piece of garbage but I have good news for you about this! Yeah, there's the problem. You can try in both Take Command and Scourge of war, but the AI acts funny and it's not fun. I've had this fantasy of running a game with the Scourge of War engine that try's to simulate a real battle, where all the generals (down to the regiment) are humans. In this fantasy game everything is "real time" and the only times commanders can physically speak (IM or Skype or whatever) is when the commanders are literally in earshot. Actually the game engine might confine you to brigade sized units. Otherwise the only method of communication is through courier, and using touch screen or scanning, the messages have to written by hand. Furthermore, mini-maps and the map are disabled, and the players are given just a printed map. Point of view must also be frozen to the commander eye level. Then, in one day, try to fight a battle like one of the first two days at Gettysburg or really any one day engagement, even a random encounter, and see what happens. Oh, and in game "time" is disabled. Everyone has to use a real life not atomic clock controlled time piece. It would be interesting because: 1. Some players like Corp commanders and commanding generals will not be using any troops at all. 2. It would mimic real life difficulties in coordination 3. Impatient people with no orders may do their own thing, and thus the battle will grow organically. I know, I know, impossible you say! A grognard can dream can't he? ZombieLenin fucked around with this message at 19:20 on Feb 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 19:18
|
|
|
If it weren't garbage and we had enough people SoW would do almost exactly that. The writing is a stupid idea (I can't read my own poo poo) but we can just honor system agree to use couriers onlPROBE TO YOUR REAR AND REPORT BACK TO ME
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 19:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 23:28 |
|
|
This would be fun in so many settings. "Sorry sir, that platoon got lost because somebody bled on the map" 
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2016 19:26
|
|