Wish List

[slybelle]

Provide game setup option to allow General's deaths to have the same kind of chance happening in Instant battles as they occur within detail battles. Generally speaking, I don't think there should be any limitations to outcomes of a battle based on whether I play instant or detail. That is why I thought the different options were there to satisfy all kinds of players. Should be able to get the same kind of results without being penalized for not completing battles in detail mode.

Overall good game, just would like to see if this is possible.

[Crimguy]

ORIGINAL: regularbird

is there any way to drill down to the city detail screen from the city list screen? if not that would be a nice feature.

city list

I agree - Clicking on the city name should be able to bring you to the city detail. A back button the city detail would be nice to bring you back to the city list when you're done.

[Malagant]

Ability to destroy/remove buildings...perhaps with a chance of it causing unrest and/or loss of standing with governor.

[Sheytan]

Last night I had this happen, I captured a enemy unit equipt with Spencer rifles. I gained this units weapons as my own. The gaining unit just happened to be the only unit in my army in this battle with quality arms. My unit was equipt with Lorenz rifles. I was delighted I captured the Spencers, but dismayed my 50 coins went poof.
 
I request a method that allows you to decide which unit gets the captured arms to use. OR that the game itself ONLY transfer captured arms to units with poorer quality arms(and by this I mean it should seek to replace arms from improvised/musket/minie etc and up, not ignore them and replace better arms) . Losing the Lorenz's like this stank.

[Mike Scholl]

Game probably assumes you will give them to your best unit (the one you bought the Lorenzes for.) But you're right..., losing them stank. You ought to have a choice.

[Sheytan]

It was my best unit [8|]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

Game probably assumes you will give them to your best unit (the one you bought the Lorenzes for.) But you're right..., losing them stank. You ought to have a choice.

[Hard Sarge]

but with in reason, the Spencer is the better weapon

[Sheytan]

no doubt, at any rate heres to hoping this can be fixed in some manner, id have preferred another unit got the captured arms in this case. lack of choice is a problem here. I almost would like to see a detailed arsenel system in the game, in which specific arms are stockpiled and givin out or returned to the armory when a unit gets upgrades. thats the fun sort of micromanagement IMO.

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

but with in reason, the Spencer is the better weapon

[ezjax]

ORIGINAL: Malagant

Ability to destroy/remove buildings...perhaps with a chance of it causing unrest and/or loss of standing with governor.

You can already do some of this already. Read 2.5 Plunder in the game Manual. Tell your military unit to do this by clicking Explosion box next to X.

[steveuk]

Well here is my wish list.  Some of this may have been asked for already so apologies if that is the case.  I always play the CSA so it may be biased in some areas!
 
1) In HW....supply wagons should not start near enemy forces....many times I have lost my only supply wagon because it starts within a move of Union forces.
2) CC...this is a great feature but I think it should depend on the units attributes as to what actions it takes when out of CC. i.e. A unit with the hero attribute would be more prone to charge the enemy while a green unit with no attributes may retreat.
3) Richmond to be named as such and not the James River..... I'm English and even I think it's an insult.
4) Weapons and upgrades only available if this was historical for the side your playing. i.e. Spencer rifles for Union only.....perhaps a more historical patch?
5) In HW....near start is often too near to the enemy A.I. launching it's kamikaze attacks right from the start and attacking player units while still in column.....also see point 1 above.
6) Less kamikaze attacks by the Union A.I.....I win most of my battles even when I am greatly outnumbered because of this dubious tactic.
7) No starting navy for the CSA except for raiders and maybe the chance of being offered a couple of her Majesty's frigates via diplomacy [;)] to kick some Union arse.
8) Union not to initiate combat on the strategic map if it's will to fight is too low or at least withdraw from HW instead of sitting still for three days.
9) Ability to promote/demote generals according to experience (is this implemented in the game already)?
10) In HW....Units if moving along a road to keep on the road...I fail to see even the most stupid units deviating from this......also less deviation in any terrain if the unit is a regular.
 
As I have said before...this is a good game design but with some small alterations...it could be one of the best.

[ezjax]

ORIGINAL: steveuk
9) Ability to promote/demote generals according to experience (is this implemented in the game already)?

If it helps. Advance settings let you demote any general above 1 star. When the leader is selected look at his navbox and you will see a 4star box with a down arrow under it, click this opens up the demote screen.

[steveuk]

ORIGINAL: ezjax

ORIGINAL: steveuk
9) Ability to promote/demote generals according to experience (is this implemented in the game already)?

If it helps. Advance settings let you demote any general above 1 star. When the leader is selected look at his navbox and you will see a 4star box with a down arrow under it, click this opens up the demote screen.

Thanks ezjax...I thought I had read something on demoting a general somewhere. My main problem is promotion though. I am mid-way through 63 now as the CSA and have a stack of 1 star generals. The end of turn promotion to 2 star has only came up once since beginning of 62? not sure if this is correct but I now only have around ten 2 star generals. As they are division commanders it seems there should be more as the majority of my div's are without proper command.

[Malagant]

Actually I had friendly cities in mind, though I suppose I could send some troops around destroying my own buildings if I felt the need.

I had been thinking of removing superflous buildings that I don't want in particular cities (i.e. being able to decide WHICH building I can remove in my own cities)

ORIGINAL: ezjax

ORIGINAL: Malagant

Ability to destroy/remove buildings...perhaps with a chance of it causing unrest and/or loss of standing with governor.

You can already do some of this already. Read 2.5 Plunder in the game Manual. Tell your military unit to do this by clicking Explosion box next to X.

[Paper Tiger]

Display the weapons for a Seige Artillery unit in the same way as for everything else. So anoying having to go looking around the units to find out what each one has before you upgrade.
 
Increase National Will for capturing Capitols. Increased VP for state capitals and more so for the National Capitol.
Sort VP's for battles. +1/-1 medium battle, +2/-2 decisive Max effect +6/-6 but not limited to the last 3 battles. So if you are at +6/-6 and lose a decisive it does not drop to +2/-2 just +4/-4

[Paper Tiger]

Change the way randomised general ratings are assigned.
For 61 give CSA a large bonus, USA a negative
for 62 a smaller bonus/penalty
63 even.

[chris0827]

ORIGINAL: Paper Tiger

Change the way randomised general ratings are assigned.
For 61 give CSA a large bonus, USA a negative
for 62 a smaller bonus/penalty
63 even.

That would enrage the rabid confederate fanboys.

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: chris0827

ORIGINAL: Paper Tiger

Change the way randomised general ratings are assigned.
For 61 give CSA a large bonus, USA a negative
for 62 a smaller bonus/penalty
63 even.

That would enrage the rabid confederate fanboys.

Are you sure you didn't mean "That would delight the rabid Confederate fanboys."?

[marecone]

1. When general dies then maybe player should lose some of the national will. Something like a penalty because it is not a small thing when nation hero dies
2. 90 day militia. All of us forgot about it and it played some part in ACW
3. Reports in form of newspapers. First check this link:
http://www.sonofthesouth.net/
Go through few numbers. Those look great. Maybe you could contact them to borrow us their papers or do your own thing.
For example: Insted "Rebel Major victory" in report it could write something like: Today Confederate States army under General N.B. Forrest whiped Union forces near Frederiksburg. Union lost close to 5,000 men and our boys suffered 2,000 casulties...
Maybe a picture too.

[regularbird]

The attacking force should always be the force moving into an area, the defending force should be the one that currently is located in an area. 

Currently if you are in the provice and do not own the province you are the defender.

[dude]

ORIGINAL: regularbird

The attacking force should always be the force moving into an area, the defending force should be the one that currently is located in an area. 

Currently if you are in the provice and do not own the province you are the defender.

and what really sucks in regards to this is when you are in an enemy province and THEY move in to counter attack you... you wind up as the attacker with the AI force fully entrenched (after just marching in??)

I really dislike the AI getting to be fully entrenched especially if they've moved into a province I've been stationary in (whether it's my provinece or not.)