Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: Objection to New Change at Burnside Bridge

  1. #1

    Objection to New Change at Burnside Bridge

    Recently the spawn for CSA soldiers has been moved back and CSA are not allowed to go near the bridge. This is the most crucial point for the CSA to defend and not being able to defend it seriously impairs the CSA from victory. Before the Union constantly lost this battle because the CSA would camp their end of the bridge. Although, as the days went on the Union began organizing waves of charges and I began to see them break CSA lines at the bottom of the bridge. My argument is that the early game Union tactics were weak it was not an imbalance made in the map.
    Now that the CSA isn't allowed even near the bridge and the only strategy they can implore is sit on the hill and shoot down into the woods and onto the bridge, it makes a huge imbalance. Where as before the Union had to break CSA lines to get a position in the woods, and now all they have to do now is run accross and sit in the woods and pick off CSA, and the CSA is helpless to charge or move in to assess the situation. Before this change, if the Union couldn't quiet take the point they would still be able to win with their ticket advantage, and CSA had the chance to win with a stalwart defense of the base of the bridge.

  2. #2
    WoR-Dev TrustyJam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    5,133
    We might give the CSA a few more tickets in the next update but we're happy with the change in terms of not letting the CSA camp the base of the bridge. It turned the combat of the map into nothing but a close quater shoot them up sort of experience.

    Now, there's longer ranged combat across the creek as there should be and the CSA's main position is on the heights as it was.

    - Trusty

  3. #3

    CSA Lieutenant General

    dmurray6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Eldersburg, MD
    Posts
    368
    Quote Originally Posted by TrustyJam View Post
    We might give the CSA a few more tickets in the next update but we're happy with the change in terms of not letting the CSA camp the base of the bridge. It turned the combat of the map into nothing but a close quater shoot them up sort of experience.

    Now, there's longer ranged combat across the creek as there should be and the CSA's main position is on the heights as it was.

    - Trusty
    Agreed! Let this modification play out a bit and see how it goes. Remember, this is alpha skirmishes for a reason. I'm not sure if historical accounts of 1 to 2 or "a few" Confederates on the east side of the bridge is enough of a justification to keep that side of the bridge open. In-game, where one Confederate can go, most Confederates will go. This is likely the most appropriate mod, at least for testing purposes.
    Civil War Ancestors:

  4. #4

    CSA Major

    Legion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Baldwin,Louisiana
    Posts
    1,723
    I like the new version (I'm a CSA player) it makes for interesting combat and is a real challenge for both sides.

    The only thing the CSA are missing is the defensive works that were there historically, but other than that it feels right.
    Jesse S. Crosby, 20th Georgia Infantry, July 15, 1861 - May 6, 1864

    Samuel T. McKenzie, 20th Georgia Infantry, July 15, 1861 - September 2, 1862

    Joseph C. McKenzie, 20th Georgia Infantry, July 15, 1861 - October 1, 1863

    Henry C. McKenzie, 3rd Georgia Infantry, June 1, 1861 - January 28, 1863

    Charles R. Beddingfield, 38th Alabama Infantry

    Samuel L. Cowart, Cobb's Legion

  5. #5

    CSA Captain

    Lance Rawlings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    North Carolina, United States
    Posts
    836
    I agree, I like the spawn site. But I'd like to see us be able to counter attack across the bridge again instead of giving us more tickets.
    To the Colors!

    Captain Lance Rawlings
    Company K, 38th North Carolina, Pender's Brigade, A.P. Hill's Division, Jackson's Corps, Army of Northern Virginia
    http://www.warofrightsforum.com/show...lina-Boys-quot


  6. #6
    WoR-Dev TrustyJam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    5,133
    Quote Originally Posted by Lance Rawlings View Post
    I agree, I like the spawn site. But I'd like to see us be able to counter attack across the bridge again instead of giving us more tickets.

    That will make CSA defend the base of the bridge and not the heights.

    - Trusty

  7. #7
    But what is more Union than a mass charge of bodies?

  8. #8

    CSA Captain

    Lance Rawlings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    North Carolina, United States
    Posts
    836
    Quote Originally Posted by TrustyJam View Post
    That will make CSA defend the base of the bridge and not the heights.

    - Trusty
    Well that's because it's the most logical place of defense. If I were there 150 some years ago and the numbers were reflective of what's in-game, the base is the most sensible spot. I believe that the focus should be not on trapping the CS in an invisible box, but rather force them to spread thin. Maybe allow the yanks more players, not just tickets. maybe 45 v 30 or something. If they employed Hardee's Street Tactics, I think they could easily take that bridge and hold it until reinforcements arrived. I mean, this is an awful lot just to try to make the yankee's win. It was their idea to attack a bridge.

    Those are just my thoughts.
    To the Colors!

    Captain Lance Rawlings
    Company K, 38th North Carolina, Pender's Brigade, A.P. Hill's Division, Jackson's Corps, Army of Northern Virginia
    http://www.warofrightsforum.com/show...lina-Boys-quot


  9. #9

    CSA Lieutenant General

    dmurray6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Eldersburg, MD
    Posts
    368
    Quote Originally Posted by Lance Rawlings View Post
    Well that's because it's the most logical place of defense. If I were there 150 some years ago and the numbers were reflective of what's in-game, the base is the most sensible spot. I believe that the focus should be not on trapping the CS in an invisible box, but rather force them to spread thin. Maybe allow the yanks more players, not just tickets. maybe 45 v 30 or something. If they employed Hardee's Street Tactics, I think they could easily take that bridge and hold it until reinforcements arrived. I mean, this is an awful lot just to try to make the yankee's win. It was their idea to attack a bridge.

    Those are just my thoughts.
    I had made a similar point, probably in a different thread, about making it 24 vs. 40 or some other ratio instead of 32 vs. 32 with lopsided tickets. I mean, lopsided tickets must stay because of historical ratio of Federal vs. Rebel, but to see a different player cap per side, I think would be a nice experiment.
    Civil War Ancestors:

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Luxembourg
    Posts
    38
    I would also like to see more union troops on the field. 24/40 would be a nice try.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •