quote:

Gen. Cleburne, the Stonwall of the West and one of the Confeds' best Gens. does not give any attributes to his troopies, while other lesser gens. do, can you all do something about that?? Cleburne was smart, had well drilled troops, and brave, so perhaps the Hero, Fast, Volley, Flankers, and one of the Drill/manuever attributes could be given to Cleburne.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Berkut

Feature Wish:

A PBEM game file/email management system like Great Battles of World War 2.

That thing rocks. You are all one big happy Matrix family, right? Surely SSG would let you "borrow" theirs...

quote:

ORIGINAL: General Quarters

Railroad in Fredericksburg:

It is not clear to me why there is not a railroad in Fredericksburg, since there was one (or two) there historically. This limits the impact of hospitals in Washington and Annapolis, and it apparently affects supply, since I had a Union army in Lynchburg that seemed to start starving to death. Since the Union already has trouble holding its own, this seems like an unnecessary impediment.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

quote:

ORIGINAL: General Quarters

Railroad in Fredericksburg:

It is not clear to me why there is not a railroad in Fredericksburg, since there was one (or two) there historically. This limits the impact of hospitals in Washington and Annapolis, and it apparently affects supply, since I had a Union army in Lynchburg that seemed to start starving to death. Since the Union already has trouble holding its own, this seems like an unnecessary impediment.

I believe this RR ran north to Aquia Creek Landing on the Potomac, and didn't link into the RR's from Washington. However it was the major supply line for Union Armies opperating around Fredricksburg, so it should provide some support to the North. And of course it did run South to Richmond, and was Lee's major supply line for both Fredricksburg and Chancellorsville.

quote:

ORIGINAL: briny_norman

I'll sign the petition for a zoom-function - both on the strategic and the tactical map.

And a little thing that irritates me when fighting detailed battles: The way the camera instantly jumps from one unit to the next when the last action has been performed, so sometimes you don't get to see the results of your order (I don't want to miss the cool new animations...!). This is aggrevated by the seemingly random way you jump through your units when giving orders, as you might be thrown form one end of the battle-line to the other without warning and apart from missing out on some action and results of your latest move this jumping back and forth across the map can be quite disorienting. At least, I don't think it makes for very fluent gameplay.

Perhaps the unit 'jumping' could be a little less random and based on your army organisation - next unit is always from the same division etc... That would also encourage realistic battlefield manouvering, ie. keeping divisions together etc...
And maybe you could make so the you don't jump to the next unit before the animations of the current unit has been played through...

By the way, also adding to the jumping effect is the fact that your moves are intermingled with your opponent's, but I really like this feature for other reasons, so I guess I wouldn't want to see it go.

Anyway, that's all I can think of right now. Back to the game!

Cheers!

quote:

ORIGINAL: chris0827

On the day Pope took command McClellan was already retreating on the Peninsula. Pope's troops were scattered all over northern Virginia and he didn't start advancing until august 2nd. McClellan had been given orders only july 30th to prepare to move his army to Aquia harbor.

quote:

ORIGINAL: General Quarters


Yes, thanks for the clarification.

Wasn't there also a railroad that went from Alexandria through Manassas Jct and on to the Culpepper or Orange area, where it connected with a line that did go into Richmond. Maybe it was called the Orange and Alexandria. I think that was more roundabout and therefore more vulnerable, but was a possible full-supply approach to Richmond or southwest Virginia. In fact, wasn't that sorta the plan, insofar as they had a plan, for John Pope's Army of Virginia -- to approach Richmond from the opposite side McClellan was approaching it?

quote:

ORIGINAL: General Quarters

quote:

ORIGINAL: chris0827

On the day Pope took command McClellan was already retreating on the Peninsula. Pope's troops were scattered all over northern Virginia and he didn't start advancing until august 2nd. McClellan had been given orders only july 30th to prepare to move his army to Aquia harbor.

Yes, it is good to be specific about dates, though I am not sure what the date of Pope's advance is apropos of. I was speaking about plans.

From Civil War Day by Day, June 26, 1862:

"A primary command change was announced in Washington. Maj. Gen. John Pope was formally assigned command of the newly created Army of Virginia .... The main tsk of the new command was to protect Washington and, more importantly, to consolidate all land forces in Virginia ... so that they could move overland to aid McClellan and take the pressue off his army near Richmond."

From Shelby Foote:

"On June 27, while Porter was under attack on Turkey Hill," McClellan wired the War Dept, "I will beg that you put some one general in command ...." Lincoln "had already done what he suggested ...." "John Pope was the man ...." "The Army of Virginia, it was called." "... its mission was to move in general down the line of the Orange & Alexandria Railroad ... so as to close in on the Confederate capital from the west and north, while McClellan's Army of the Potomac applied pressure from the east; thus Richmond would be crushed in a giant nutcracker, with Pope as the upper jaw."

The documentary evidence, as far as I have seen it, is not as explicit as the nutcracker image suggests (that's why I called it "sorta the plan, insofar as they had a plan") but it was sufficient for me to suggest this should be a possibility in the game.

quote:

ORIGINAL: chris0827
I should've said "By the time Pope was ready to move it was no longer the plan." You should of course be able to try it in the game. I want the resources available to each player to be as historically acurate as possible but I don't want to recreate history.

quote:

ORIGINAL: General Quarters

Promotions per turn:

Someone posted below, and I agree with him, that the limitation of one promotion per turn is just irritating, particularly at the beginning of the game.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Twotribes

I would like to see a command added that allows containers "under command" to train brigades to at least 2.5 scale. Allow a General to have x amount of ability to train if useing this command, based on one of the ratings he has, scaleing up from terrible at some real low level to superb at some noticably higher level.

In other words, a Division with at least a 2 star could, if given the command and in the appropriate area, begin training brigades under 2.5 up to 2.5 . A General in a Corps or Army could do the same, but obviously since the rating will effect the number of units trainable this would be more efficient at the Division level.

quote:

ORIGINAL: chris0827

quote:

ORIGINAL: Twotribes

I would like to see a command added that allows containers "under command" to train brigades to at least 2.5 scale. Allow a General to have x amount of ability to train if useing this command, based on one of the ratings he has, scaleing up from terrible at some real low level to superb at some noticably higher level.

In other words, a Division with at least a 2 star could, if given the command and in the appropriate area, begin training brigades under 2.5 up to 2.5 . A General in a Corps or Army could do the same, but obviously since the rating will effect the number of units trainable this would be more efficient at the Division level.

They could add a training special ability as well. Generals like MClellan and Bragg had little success in the field but did well in training their commands.