Merging games

[lightbrave]

Has anybody played Ultimate General Gettysburg(on steam). Wouldn't it be awesome if you could merge these two games together and you actually get to fight the battles. Will something like this be on the horizon in the near future?

[Jim-NC]

It would be interesting to have both. I don't believe that anything like that is in the works for AGEOD games. Here, you control the strategy, your generals control the tactics of the actual battle.

[minipol]

I wouldn't like a total merger. With the battle plan, you already have some influence in the battle.
If they would increase the options, it might be a really interesting addition.

[Gray Fox]

The Total War games play that way. It gets really tedious when you fight a dozen pointless skirmishes every turn. So you would need a "cut to the chase" key.

[Captain_Orso]

Or configure the game so that skirmishes (engagements of less than maybe 4,000 men per side) are simply played out internally as it is now.

The thing that would be difficult to do well, would be the landscapes of the battle areas. You would basically need the entire USA from the Rockies eastward in very high detail --as it was from 1861-1865. If you could buy an electronic map like that, it alone would cost a fortune.

But it would be very cool, only the full campaign might then take nearly as long as the actual war, to play

[lightbrave]

but skirmishes are so fun to play

[Gray Fox]

In a TW game as the Eastern Roman Empire, I fought every single battle (over 100) no matter how small. I won the campaign and never lost a battle. Trust me, it gets tedious.

[minipol]

I used to play TW some years back. Fighting the battles indeed gets boring after a while.
I ended up autoresolving battles at the end of the campaign.