ACWGC Forums

Thanks for you support! Post your Feedback and any error that need fixing.

_________________
Brig. Gen. Rich Walker
AotW I/3/4
Scenario Designer:
Franklin, Shiloh, Chickamauga, Antietam, Atlanta, Chancellorsville, Petersburg

Scenario file "099 Five Forks III, April 1st, 1865.scn" is entitled "Five Forks II, April 1st, 1865," which may cause confusion.

Scenario file "120 2nd Battle High Bridge, April 7th, 1865.scn" appears to be a "What-If" scenario. If correct then both 120 and 121, the weather variant, need to be noted as such.

Scenario files "142 Appomattox III, April 9th, 1865.scn" and "143w Appomattox III, April 9th, 1865.scn" are entitled "Appomattox, April 9th, 1865," which is the same title as scenario 138.

_________________
General Jos. C. Meyer, ACWGC
Union Army Chief of Staff
Commander, Army of the Shenandoah
Commander, Army of the Tennessee
(2011-2014 UA CoA/GinC)

Rich,

Love the graphics of the game, very enjoyable to game on. I like the bigger 2D map, just a superb effort on the part of the development team.

My wish list would include the graphics upgrades for all of the gaming titles.

I am gaming the opening battle even though there are not many troops to command it is still playable and fun!

Respectfully,

_________________
Respectfully,

Your Obedient Servant,

General Nick Kunz
Commandant, VMI

Noted, Thanks

_________________
Brig. Gen. Rich Walker
AotW I/3/4
Scenario Designer:
Franklin, Shiloh, Chickamauga, Antietam, Atlanta, Chancellorsville, Petersburg

Thanks

And the plan is to have them all updated by the end of 2018, or sooner.

_________________
Brig. Gen. Rich Walker
AotW I/3/4
Scenario Designer:
Franklin, Shiloh, Chickamauga, Antietam, Atlanta, Chancellorsville, Petersburg

Be sure to try the "Extreme" FOW option.

_________________
Brig. Gen. Rich Walker
AotW I/3/4
Scenario Designer:
Franklin, Shiloh, Chickamauga, Antietam, Atlanta, Chancellorsville, Petersburg

BTW, David Freer and Berto are they main driving force behind the 2D, and Frank Mullins and the Old Banshee team are responsible for all the 3D bmp maps and images (units and leaders).

I did the B&W unit info picture refreash

Remember, from the "settings" tab, you can toggle the unit info from Color to BW. The game defaults to color.

Question, how to you like the new toolbar? And that too can be toggled to show the classic toolbar.

_________________
Brig. Gen. Rich Walker
AotW I/3/4
Scenario Designer:
Franklin, Shiloh, Chickamauga, Antietam, Atlanta, Chancellorsville, Petersburg

As an old player of the Battleground and Campaign series I'm too familiar with the original toolbar controls to shift over to the new design. But I am glad to see innovations being introduced as these more probably will offer newer players and club members something similar to which they have formerly been exposed. I would hope, however, that JTS doesn't intend to make everyone relearn a new control system out of necessity! If a new series should be introduced, that's one thing; but wholesale modification of an existing series would seem to smack of a Microsoft bully character.

I am most thoroughly pleased with the integration of the two (old and new) control toolbars as pertains to the view capabilities!

On another note, the unit information graphics capability to switch between the old black and white and latest color offerings from Frank "Old Banshee" Mullins and team is a pretty nifty addition. It saves the skittish and less-savvy game owners from problems in downloading graphic modes on their own. I would also liked to have seen an inclusion for Frank's earlier, colored, unit graphics series, which would have made an even greater selection possible.

_________________
General Jos. C. Meyer, ACWGC
Union Army Chief of Staff
Commander, Army of the Shenandoah
Commander, Army of the Tennessee
(2011-2014 UA CoA/GinC)

In allowing a complete, 12-turn AI play for both sides on scenario 002, I notice that no supply point losses were recorded for supply hits, of which there were plenty for each side. If there be no difference in how supply point losses are recorded in an AI contest as opposed to a human contest, then I must believe that the lack of supply loss points might be universal.

_________________
General Jos. C. Meyer, ACWGC
Union Army Chief of Staff
Commander, Army of the Shenandoah
Commander, Army of the Tennessee
(2011-2014 UA CoA/GinC)

Some scenarios award supply points, while other don't. Depends on the scenario focus. However, in AI games, scns numbering 200+, I do not award either side supply VPs, because the AI will not usually have the opportunity to capture supply, and it is generally too easy for a human to capture. So since that deviates from the game focus, I generally don't award VPs for supply in AI games. But if anyone disagrees, it's an easy fix, just open the scn in the editor, and give a value to supply. Generally, a value of 1 or 2.

_________________
Brig. Gen. Rich Walker
AotW I/3/4
Scenario Designer:
Franklin, Shiloh, Chickamauga, Antietam, Atlanta, Chancellorsville, Petersburg

Question, how to you like the new toolbar? And that too can be toggled to show the classic toolbar.[/quote]

I dont mind the new toolbar but I would like to see where we can customize it. It has far too many buttons. I get very confused looking at it and go right back to the old one.

Request: PLEASE get rid of the AI button completely. Its too easy to accidentally push thus activating the AI to do the rest of your move. We did that in the Nap Battles series and folks responded favorably. Bottom line: I dont know many that use the AI to do their movement anymore.

The AI button is located on the old toolbar next to the "Resolve Melee" button.

Another request: you have color coded the buttons on the new toolbar but they dont seem to share a similar theme. For instance:

Button for "Strengths" and "Releases" come from two different pull down menus and are not related to each other.

Can I suggest that you just color group them by menu and sub menu

_________________
Colonel Bill Peters
5th Brig, 2nd Div
I Corps, AoP, USA

From one toolbar now to 2+3. That's as far as the toolbar development will go. Although we might tweak things like button placements and colors, user customizable toolbars? No, most likely never going to happen. The limited time we have for CWB will be devoted in future less to UI revisions, more to game play extensions and improvements, including most importantly the AI.

Over the next year, however, the highest priority will be to release updates, all games, bringing them up to current Campaign Petersburg standards in the areas of graphics, UI, etc. So what you see with Campaign Petersburg is more or less what you will get for the other games over the next year or so. More significant changes will come after that.

_________________
Civil War Battles Lead Programmer, http://johntillersoftware.com/CivilWarBattles.html
Panzer Battles Lead Programmer, http://johntillersoftware.com/PanzerBattles.html
Campaign Series Lead Programmer, http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tt.asp?forumid=1515

Aside from upgrading the series as a whole, any new programing time should go to AI improvement, And having said that, I will open a new thread.

_________________
Brig. Gen. Rich Walker
AotW I/3/4
Scenario Designer:
Franklin, Shiloh, Chickamauga, Antietam, Atlanta, Chancellorsville, Petersburg

(Made this post a sticky for now, so it can be located easily)

_________________
General Scott Ludwig
Commanding Officer & Chief of the Armies (CoA) of the Confederate States of America (CSA)

I love Petersburg and have finished a scenario but I do not see the game on the list at the Department of Record.

_________________
Lt. Gen. Bob Hughes
2nd Brigade
2nd Divison
XVI Corps
Army of the Tennessee