I wouldn't say the South necessarily had better generals. Lee was very smart but he never knew how to use his victories correctly. The south also had some very good troop quality.
Not that the north didn't have some excellent units but I'd say the overall quality of southern troops was better. They kind of had to be considering that they had less resources then the Union.
Burnside was a particularly bad leader but you had Sherman, Grant, Thomas, Hancock, Buford, Sheridan...and I could name more. So yea Burnside is just one really bad case...that man was an idiot.
That's a tuff call. The union infantryman was called on to assault heav ily fortified postions much more than the rebel. Not that the rebel was not excellent on the assault.. but yanks spent more time attacking stone walls, redoubts , Forts and Hills and less time behind the damn things shooting at an exposed enemy.
@refuckulate420 As a result alot the best and bravest died early on in the war asasulting places like Henry House Hill, The unfinished RR (2nd BR), Fox and Turner's Gaps,The Sunken Lane, Marye's Heights (twice!), Vicksburg Trenches, Port Hudson, Fort Wagner, Missionary Ridge, The Muleshoe Salient, Ringold Gap,Cold Harbor, Petersburg Trenches and many more. The Union infantry men went places most humans would dare not go.. into the teeth of some of the best fighters in the world.
@chapdog82 You just described battles from the entire war not just the early ones. I think part of what happened in the Civil War, maybe all wars, is that fresh units have the "bravery" to make dangerous assults. If a fresh unit makes such an assult during any phase of a war it has the "advantage" of not "knowing any better." Grant pulled many units away from the defenses of Washington City into combat for the later battles os 1864; as a result these units were fresh.
@chapdog82 Units during WW1 would be replenished after taking big losses in a battle. The heavy turnover in replacements could often create a "fresh unit" that could repeat the process again. Maybe?
If a game requires a mod to rock then the game sucks. it's the mod that's good. Clearly the company could be doing much better when people are outdoing them weeks after it's released.
It's because so much emphasis is put on graphics these days that elements of gameplay are found very lacking and unrealistic. ETW is a good RTS for kids or general war gamers but for history RTS fanatics ETW IS FUCKING TERRIBLE.
I really like this game, and I'm pretty7 good at it, except for offensive fighting. My favorite defensive strategy is setting up my artillery in long lines, which are then backed by my infantry, so that if the enemy gets up too close to my guns, I just send up the infantry to save my poor little pixelated gunners.
That's dumb, wasting regiments like that to protect a bunch of crappy artillery. The only way artillery can be even the slightest bit effective in battle is if the enemy charges. Put it so that your cannons don't attack until they're in range with grapeshot and you can take out a good chunk of them in about 80-100 yards and if it's any closer they'll route indefinately.
You aren't thinking. See, the infantry goes out in front of the artillery and defends them while firing at the enemy infantry. Some how through the game, the artillery can still get targets through the little gaps in the infantry lines, so they fire canister through those gaps, and remember, the way I do this, there are like 100 guns set up here. They're all firing canister along with the infantry fire. The enemy just can't stand up to this galling fire and eventually fall back or get routed.
But have you seen what 100 guns firing at a target can do at that range? Morale plummets, your numbers WILL go down over time, and the AI naturally just won't want to go over there unless they have to.
I really do good in this game, except taking enemy cannons is such a horror. If I don't rush my regiments on the double they get cut to pieces by the canister fire. The cavalry does good at taking cannons though but they take stress to quickly.
i like the union more, for they look alot better geared( backpacks and a sleepingbag etc) and i like the colour blue, for some kind of reason the union has better cannons and confederacy has better cavalry, i think its just coincidence that when i face them of the union cannon wins and the confederate cavalry.
The Union could of made a very good flanking run on the confedrate right but they didn't I would have Damn idiot generals what they needed was more people like Hancock and Renolds and Chaimberlin
You can play as either the Union or Confederacy. I always use the Union, just don't like what the Confederacy stood for. And before any Rebs say "don't beileve in states rights?" I beileve in Human Rights first, slavery is, was and always will be wrong.
I have had to game for about a month and a half and it's highly addictive. I did need to install a video card, onboard video, or intel video did not run the game correctly unless I zoomed in enough. After that was fixed with a GeForce7950GT the game runs sweet. Now after hours of playing I have gotten good. Nearly every campaign I smack the Confederates around with ease. The game is a MUST for Civil War buffs.....A MUST!
Total War has never made a proper game about the gunpowder era. (M2TW didn't feature gunpowder until late game and they were terrible units and terribly ahistorical) ETW isn't due out until 2009.
The NTW2 mod is good but only in multiplayer, this game is much better if you don't have another competent human to battle.
Yeah, I wish they made a game like Napoleon TW except in the Civil War era for RTW. They'd have to touch up a few aspects about gameplay but it would be cool to have an entire campaign map be 2 or 3 states, the regions could be counties. ANd wherever you recruited regiments from would be realistic but if it was a foreign state you could only recruit militia or whatever.
well, take command is the most perfect game to simulate a real battle. Empire is more spectacular and have more options in her gameplay. But is not realistic in the battles if you compare with take command, like age of empires comparing with total war.
I have an HP pavilion with onboard video(intel video) and a chipset sound card, I have plenty of Ram to run this game, would it run with the video I have?
Check the mb ram on your graphics card, the directx you can run on your graphics card, the speed of your processor, etc. and then search for the requirements of the game, and compare them, you have to even or top the game requirements...
man i tell ya american conquest divided nation is really good at the civil war
Colin69972 1 year ago
the south had the best generals but the norht had DUMBASS generals except Grant who came peritty late
Colin69972 1 year ago
@Colin69972
I wouldn't say the South necessarily had better generals. Lee was very smart but he never knew how to use his victories correctly. The south also had some very good troop quality.
Not that the north didn't have some excellent units but I'd say the overall quality of southern troops was better. They kind of had to be considering that they had less resources then the Union.
refuckulate420 1 year ago
@refuckulate420 ya that is true but Union Generals liek Burnside where kind of dumbies when it came to battles
Colin69972 1 year ago
@Colin69972
Burnside was a particularly bad leader but you had Sherman, Grant, Thomas, Hancock, Buford, Sheridan...and I could name more. So yea Burnside is just one really bad case...that man was an idiot.
refuckulate420 1 year ago
@refuckulate420
That's a tuff call. The union infantryman was called on to assault heav ily fortified postions much more than the rebel. Not that the rebel was not excellent on the assault.. but yanks spent more time attacking stone walls, redoubts , Forts and Hills and less time behind the damn things shooting at an exposed enemy.
chapdog82 1 year ago
@refuckulate420 As a result alot the best and bravest died early on in the war asasulting places like Henry House Hill, The unfinished RR (2nd BR), Fox and Turner's Gaps,The Sunken Lane, Marye's Heights (twice!), Vicksburg Trenches, Port Hudson, Fort Wagner, Missionary Ridge, The Muleshoe Salient, Ringold Gap,Cold Harbor, Petersburg Trenches and many more. The Union infantry men went places most humans would dare not go.. into the teeth of some of the best fighters in the world.
chapdog82 1 year ago
@chapdog82 You just described battles from the entire war not just the early ones. I think part of what happened in the Civil War, maybe all wars, is that fresh units have the "bravery" to make dangerous assults. If a fresh unit makes such an assult during any phase of a war it has the "advantage" of not "knowing any better." Grant pulled many units away from the defenses of Washington City into combat for the later battles os 1864; as a result these units were fresh.
zipsrule 8 months ago
@chapdog82 You probably already know all of this.
zipsrule 8 months ago
@chapdog82 Units during WW1 would be replenished after taking big losses in a battle. The heavy turnover in replacements could often create a "fresh unit" that could repeat the process again. Maybe?
zipsrule 8 months ago
@Colin69972 why did they lose then
AussieRedCall14 11 months ago
With mods, Empire Total War rocks.....shit-head
SuddenPizza 2 years ago
@SuddenPizza
If a game requires a mod to rock then the game sucks. it's the mod that's good. Clearly the company could be doing much better when people are outdoing them weeks after it's released.
It's because so much emphasis is put on graphics these days that elements of gameplay are found very lacking and unrealistic. ETW is a good RTS for kids or general war gamers but for history RTS fanatics ETW IS FUCKING TERRIBLE.
refuckulate420 2 years ago 4
@refuckulate420 empire total war is only graphics this game is complete strategy and its preety fun
atyabbaig 1 year ago
How do you record these videos?
mkj1413 2 years ago
do some fucking reading
DjUmKuE 2 years ago
I really like this game, and I'm pretty7 good at it, except for offensive fighting. My favorite defensive strategy is setting up my artillery in long lines, which are then backed by my infantry, so that if the enemy gets up too close to my guns, I just send up the infantry to save my poor little pixelated gunners.
GettysburgGhost1863 3 years ago
shitty tactic
refuckulate420 3 years ago
Aye, but it works.
GettysburgGhost1863 3 years ago
That's dumb, wasting regiments like that to protect a bunch of crappy artillery. The only way artillery can be even the slightest bit effective in battle is if the enemy charges. Put it so that your cannons don't attack until they're in range with grapeshot and you can take out a good chunk of them in about 80-100 yards and if it's any closer they'll route indefinately.
OrientOranges 3 years ago
You aren't thinking. See, the infantry goes out in front of the artillery and defends them while firing at the enemy infantry. Some how through the game, the artillery can still get targets through the little gaps in the infantry lines, so they fire canister through those gaps, and remember, the way I do this, there are like 100 guns set up here. They're all firing canister along with the infantry fire. The enemy just can't stand up to this galling fire and eventually fall back or get routed.
GettysburgGhost1863 3 years ago
Yeah but you might be lucky if you can kill 1 or 2 guys each shot and that at 500 yds.
OrientOranges 3 years ago
But have you seen what 100 guns firing at a target can do at that range? Morale plummets, your numbers WILL go down over time, and the AI naturally just won't want to go over there unless they have to.
GettysburgGhost1863 3 years ago
I really do good in this game, except taking enemy cannons is such a horror. If I don't rush my regiments on the double they get cut to pieces by the canister fire. The cavalry does good at taking cannons though but they take stress to quickly.
galatian5 3 years ago
Hurrah!!! for the Union :D
i like the union more, for they look alot better geared( backpacks and a sleepingbag etc) and i like the colour blue, for some kind of reason the union has better cannons and confederacy has better cavalry, i think its just coincidence that when i face them of the union cannon wins and the confederate cavalry.
nickflappie 3 years ago
This game may have better graphics but nothing can beat Sid Meier's Gettysburg in terms of Civil War games.
jimster0010 3 years ago
The Union could of made a very good flanking run on the confedrate right but they didn't I would have Damn idiot generals what they needed was more people like Hancock and Renolds and Chaimberlin
u805 3 years ago
American Conquest is terrible...
Harvest8888 4 years ago
American conquest divided nation is a much better game
StreetFightBroadcast 4 years ago
Ohh yes..It`s a MUST.Amazing game!!
kroshkamaster 4 years ago
where can i get the mod u use?
24michiganironbrigad 4 years ago
You can play as either the Union or Confederacy. I always use the Union, just don't like what the Confederacy stood for. And before any Rebs say "don't beileve in states rights?" I beileve in Human Rights first, slavery is, was and always will be wrong.
CCampLI 4 years ago
CCampLI, slavery is wong, I agree, but you'll have to remember that without slavery the entire Confederate economy would collapse.
JohanRegus12 4 years ago
I have had to game for about a month and a half and it's highly addictive. I did need to install a video card, onboard video, or intel video did not run the game correctly unless I zoomed in enough. After that was fixed with a GeForce7950GT the game runs sweet. Now after hours of playing I have gotten good. Nearly every campaign I smack the Confederates around with ease. The game is a MUST for Civil War buffs.....A MUST!
CCampLI 4 years ago
do you have to play as the union or both?
Giustheangyone 4 years ago
You can play as both if you like.
JohanRegus12 4 years ago
cool,but once you've played total war this game just seems corny, no offense
Giustheangyone 4 years ago
Total War has never made a proper game about the gunpowder era. (M2TW didn't feature gunpowder until late game and they were terrible units and terribly ahistorical) ETW isn't due out until 2009.
The NTW2 mod is good but only in multiplayer, this game is much better if you don't have another competent human to battle.
PhatFarm60 3 years ago
Yeah, I wish they made a game like Napoleon TW except in the Civil War era for RTW. They'd have to touch up a few aspects about gameplay but it would be cool to have an entire campaign map be 2 or 3 states, the regions could be counties. ANd wherever you recruited regiments from would be realistic but if it was a foreign state you could only recruit militia or whatever.
OrientOranges 3 years ago
They do now, Empire is great. ^^
Luminahawke 3 years ago
Empire is shit and it's not civil war fool. That game is full of bugs and balancing issues, not to mention a super shitty AI and clone armies.
refuckulate420 2 years ago
well, take command is the most perfect game to simulate a real battle. Empire is more spectacular and have more options in her gameplay. But is not realistic in the battles if you compare with take command, like age of empires comparing with total war.
Palonbolo 2 years ago
yea but you know what when youre defending cedar mountain an the federals attack, youre gonna want that high ground lol oh and reinforcement
CoNsPiRaCy93 2 years ago
@Giustheangyone Actually once you play this game, you realize how dumbed down Total War is for the masses
Kravis63 2 years ago 8
@Kravis63
exactly!
chapdog82 1 year ago
I have an HP pavilion with onboard video(intel video) and a chipset sound card, I have plenty of Ram to run this game, would it run with the video I have?
CCampLI 4 years ago
Check the mb ram on your graphics card, the directx you can run on your graphics card, the speed of your processor, etc. and then search for the requirements of the game, and compare them, you have to even or top the game requirements...
bettes 4 years ago
they gotta make take command overland 1864
24michiganironbrigad 4 years ago
Nicely Done!
6657christian 4 years ago
great job Buckner!.hope you make some more. From JC Edwards on the MMG Boards.
wolfkarel 4 years ago
Hello Buckner, very nicely done for your first video.
Keep them coming. From Chamberlain on the MMG Boards.
Cheers
nyyankees1978 4 years ago
Hey Buckner, looks like the 'old goggle-eyed snapping turtle' was dug in thick as a tick ! Nice video. - from Chantilly on the MMG boards.
kaaduge 4 years ago