Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

PBEM AAR - Discussion

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Forge of Freedom: The American Civil War 1861-1865 >> After Action Reports >> PBEM AAR - Discussion Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
PBEM AAR - Discussion - 11/9/2006 10:37:17 AM   
Gil R.


Posts: 10821
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline 		Since jchastain and I aren't looking at each other's threads, it occurs to me that there should be a third thread for people to ask general questions that he and I might both want to answer. Please do not give away specifics about what either of us is up to -- if a question contains state secrets, just post it in the appropriate thread.

P.S. Once my side trains for the "Espionage" upgrade I'm going to start reading the other thread...
Post #: 1
RE: PBEM AAR - Discussion - 11/9/2006 11:24:24 AM   
Jonathan Palfrey

 

Posts: 535
Joined: 4/10/2004
From: Sant Pere de Ribes, Spain
Status: offline 		Thanks to both of you. It'll be useful to have an example like this when we get the game.

(in reply to Gil R.)
Post #: 2
RE: PBEM AAR - Discussion - 11/9/2006 2:48:12 PM   
marecone


Posts: 469
Joined: 7/31/2006
From: Croatia, Europe
Status: offline 		Yap. Thanks a lot.
This will be fun

_____________________________

"I have never, on the field of battle, sent you where I was unwilling to go myself; nor would I now advise you to a course which I felt myself unwilling to pursue."

Nathan Bedford Forrest

(in reply to Jonathan Palfrey)
Post #: 3
RE: PBEM AAR - Discussion - 11/9/2006 3:08:31 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		Naw, you not seen the two of them play






_____________________________


(in reply to marecone)
Post #: 4
RE: PBEM AAR - Discussion - 11/9/2006 4:41:19 PM   
Joram

 

Posts: 3198
Joined: 7/15/2005
Status: offline 		Why wait, I'll sell my services to the highest bidder! Ooh, better watch out Gil, jchastain is being sneaky!

(in reply to Gil R.)
Post #: 5
RE: PBEM AAR - Discussion - 11/9/2006 7:02:15 PM   
Gil R.


Posts: 10821
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline 		What, is he sending his entire army through Indian Territory in order to take Austin? I wish him luck...

Since I can't see his thread, people should let me know if there are particular types of screenshots he's showing or things he's explaining that I should also do. Otherwise, I'll just post whatever strikes me as worth posting.

Back to jchastain's allegedly being "sneaky." No matter where he sends an army, I can get an army of my own there. The problem, though, is that the South starts off with little railroad infrastructure. In the first turn I have 30 RR points (1 point lets 1 brigade move 1 province), but after that I have just five or six per turn, until I build more railroads. This means that for some points on the map it might take me 2-3 turns to get an army there, so I'd have to hope that my garrisons would hold him off in the meantime. This is one of many decisions one must make, then: does one use Labor and Iron to build more railroads, or to build Mints (which provide more money), or to build weapons?

(in reply to Joram)
Post #: 6
RE: PBEM AAR - Discussion - 11/9/2006 7:52:39 PM   
regularbird

 

Posts: 161
Joined: 10/27/2005
Status: offline 		Gil I asked this under Jchastain thread, so i thought i will post it here also.

Why does FOF start in Nov 61?  There were several battles prior to this date.  Does the player have the option of beginning earlier than Nov 61?


(in reply to Gil R.)
Post #: 7
RE: PBEM AAR - Discussion - 11/9/2006 9:12:04 PM   
Murat


Posts: 803
Joined: 9/17/2003
From: South Carolina
Status: offline 		Maybe that's a typo and it is meant to be Nov '60, just after the election, although there would be more neutrality.

(in reply to regularbird)
Post #: 8
RE: PBEM AAR - Discussion - 11/9/2006 9:41:27 PM   
Gil R.


Posts: 10821
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline 		Murat, we did think of a pre-Fort Sumter scenario, but there are difficulties associated with it, not to mention the fact that if war doesn't break out then 90% of our game is superfluous!

Regularbird, the reasons for Nov. 1861 being the standard scenario include: winter is about to begin and therefore armies can't move around much (assuming one uses the option of slowing winter movement), which gives players several months to arrange their economies and shape their armies as they wish; and, in Fall 1861 the Union's morale was way down after Bull Run, and by starting the standard scenario in this time the South's superior morale will help it to survive if the North tries to use its superior numbers and wealth to make a quick end of things (it wouldn't be much of a game if the Union could win in a few months). So it is mainly for game-balance reasons that we chose November. HOWEVER, there is also a July 1861 scenario that is very different, and has the player fighting right at the outset.

My guess is that people who want to play a total-war game will play the July scenario, while those who want to take advantage of FOF's Civ-like aspects will play the November scenario more.

Once the game is out we will definitely consider other scenarios that are suggested on this forum.

(in reply to Murat)
Post #: 9
RE: PBEM AAR - Discussion - 11/9/2006 9:55:05 PM   
regularbird

 

Posts: 161
Joined: 10/27/2005
Status: offline 		Thanks Gil for the response I was hoping you had a July 61 in there. One more question: I could not help but notice the strategic importance you and HS have placed in Wheeling in the Nov 61 scenarios. I am from West Virginia and have studied a little WV Civil War history I do not think the CSA ever had a presence in Wheeling. The Rebel sentiment in this state was strongest around Charleston in the south of the state. By Nov 61 McClellan had pretty much whipped the CSA from Charleston north. I think the Nov 61 scenario should start with the Union in complete control of Wheeling and Grafton.

(in reply to Gil R.)
Post #: 10
RE: PBEM AAR - Discussion - 11/9/2006 10:39:13 PM   
Gil R.


Posts: 10821
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline 		Very interesting. I'll mention this to the guy who set up the November scenario.

(in reply to regularbird)
Post #: 11
RE: PBEM AAR - Discussion - 11/9/2006 11:36:10 PM   
genie144

 

Posts: 60
Joined: 1/5/2005
Status: offline 		Is wheeling a fort or territory?  For the life of me I haven't seen it on the map...  Am I blind?

Sam

(in reply to Gil R.)
Post #: 12
RE: PBEM AAR - Discussion - 11/10/2006 1:33:31 AM   
Gil R.


Posts: 10821
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: genie144

Is wheeling a fort or territory? For the life of me I haven't seen it on the map... Am I blind?

Sam



No, you're not blind. It's the red city (= circle) just above the box with info on forces in Grafton. It is not in the right place for graphics-related reasons. (The northern part of that river province where it would be is too narrow to feature the city as well as units that would be there, I believe is the reason.)






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Gil R. -- 11/10/2006 1:37:11 AM >

(in reply to genie144)
Post #: 13
RE: PBEM AAR - Discussion - 11/10/2006 1:43:19 AM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		the reason for the importence of Wheeling for me at least, is if you do not get there in time to defend it, it is a easy victory for the Union and then it is winter time, by spring, the Union is going to start stacking forts there, and once it is able to build the forts, it will then start up and down the river, now the CSA is not that strong in the spring of 62, and is going to be HARD pressed to go on the Off, let alone try and storm Forts and Cities

plus if you have a force in Wheelings, the Union gets touchy and tried to drive you off, instead of working on it's defence

Wheeling gives the owner, the chance to make the other side dance to what ever tune you want to play


_____________________________


(in reply to Gil R.)
Post #: 14
RE: PBEM AAR - Discussion - 11/10/2006 2:15:04 AM   
Gil R.


Posts: 10821
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline 		Minor correction: I had said that Wheeling's position is a graphics issue, but it's actually a map-logic and units-placement issue. (I did point this out, but reference to "graphics" is misleading.)

(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 15
RE: PBEM AAR - Discussion - 11/10/2006 5:14:54 AM   
regularbird

 

Posts: 161
Joined: 10/27/2005
Status: offline 		McClellan won the battle of phillippi on the 3 june 1861. 
The western counties of Virginia succeeded from virginia on the 11th of June, forming modern day WV.
In June the same year, after the battle of Scary creek General Wise retreated from the Kanawha Valley.  The CSA made one more run into the Kanawha valley during Lee's Maryland campaign, when the Union sent most of its garrisson north to help against Lee's invasion.  General Loring led a small army and took Charleston after a small scrap and a textbook retreat (still taught at West Point, or so Ive been told) by General Lightburn then a colonel.

It looks to me that where you are showing Wheeling is really were parkersburg is located.  I think you may want to consider leaving wheeling out of the game and place charleston instead.  During the war charleston was a major producer of salt and of course lumber which was important to both armies.  And wheeling is an old steel city with a close relationship to Pittsburg, huge northern sympathies there.

Something interesting to note is that Gen Patton (CSA) and Gen Rosecrans (USA) were business partners in the Coal river lumber company prior to the start of the war.  Patton trained and outfitted the Kanawha Rifleman which I believed someone mentioned in another thread.

(in reply to Gil R.)
Post #: 16
RE: PBEM AAR - Discussion - 11/10/2006 6:54:01 AM   
jchastain


Posts: 2164
Joined: 8/8/2003
From: Marietta, GA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: regularbird

Gil I asked this under Jchastain thread, so i thought i will post it here also.

Why does FOF start in Nov 61?  There were several battles prior to this date.  Does the player have the option of beginning earlier than Nov 61?




Just getting back so sorry for the delay in responding. I see Gil touched on this already but let me add...

1. The reason (as I understand it) for the November start of the main scenario is that the USA has been spanked at Manassas, which helps create some additional parity in the game by assuming the north has already performed a blunder that a player would not do with the advantage of hindsight. Additionally, the armies are largely already formed and the game is nearing winter so that the first few turns aren't overly energetic - giving people more time to setup and manage their economies so as to reinforce that element of the game.

2. Yes, there is a July 1861 scenario. Attached are the military summary shots from that scenario at the opening.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to regularbird)
Post #: 17
RE: PBEM AAR - Discussion - 11/10/2006 6:56:48 AM   
jchastain


Posts: 2164
Joined: 8/8/2003
From: Marietta, GA
Status: offline 		The July scenario has a very different feel as many of the formed brigades have not yet been arganized into divisions and armies as shown in the screenshot below. So the start of the game is much more focused on building containers and organizing the troops. While some will want to have to work through all of that, for our PBEM we decided it didn't add a lot of additional excitement and that we should choose the later start so that we could jump into the fighting a bit sooner.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to jchastain)
Post #: 18
RE: PBEM AAR - Discussion - 11/10/2006 3:14:50 PM   
Houtje

 

Posts: 172
Joined: 6/19/2006
From: Netherlands
Status: offline 		Noticed that Murfreesboro is misspelled as Murfeesboro on the main map. Unless it's a variant spelling of course.

(in reply to jchastain)
Post #: 19
RE: PBEM AAR - Discussion - 11/10/2006 5:20:22 PM   
spruce

 

Posts: 404
Joined: 9/23/2006
Status: offline 		I've got a question - how are you guys deciding where to put divisions (based on strategical judgement). Do they have some action radius after placement ? Do they block moving enemy armies within a certain radius ? Is it working with adjacancy of provinces - or with radius in miles/km ? Do you have to stay close to the capital to not upset the governor ?

I'm curious how this is handled in FOF

< Message edited by spruce -- 11/10/2006 5:23:13 PM >

(in reply to Houtje)
Post #: 20
RE: PBEM AAR - Discussion - 11/10/2006 6:40:37 PM   
Gil R.


Posts: 10821
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: spruce

I've got a question - how are you guys deciding where to put divisions (based on strategical judgement). Do they have some action radius after placement ? Do they block moving enemy armies within a certain radius ? Is it working with adjacancy of provinces - or with radius in miles/km ? Do you have to stay close to the capital to not upset the governor ?

I'm curious how this is handled in FOF


Governors don't enter into it unless a governor specifically requests that a certain number of brigades be stationed in the state -- but then, they can be anywhere in the state.

There's no action radius, since divisions/corps/armies only fight an enemy force entering the province they're in.

(in reply to spruce)
Post #: 21
RE: PBEM AAR - Discussion - 11/10/2006 6:41:16 PM   
Gil R.


Posts: 10821
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Houtje

Noticed that Murfreesboro is misspelled as Murfeesboro on the main map. Unless it's a variant spelling of course.


Thanks for asking. I've passed this question along to the person who would know.

(in reply to Houtje)
Post #: 22
RE: PBEM AAR - Discussion - 11/11/2006 4:43:01 AM   
Gil R.


Posts: 10821
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline 		Hey, look, before jchastain posts again: we both just posted at precisely 9:41:59.

(in reply to Gil R.)
Post #: 23
RE: PBEM AAR - Discussion - 11/11/2006 6:08:53 AM   
AU Tiger_MatrixForum


Posts: 1606
Joined: 10/9/2006
From: Deepest Dixie
Status: offline 		I was reading the Gil-Jchastain AAR's when a question occured to me:
Has the possibility of a Trent Affair type event been included in the game?


_____________________________

"Never take counsel of your fears."

Tho. Jackson

(in reply to Gil R.)
Post #: 24
RE: PBEM AAR - Discussion - 11/11/2006 6:23:50 AM   
Gil R.


Posts: 10821
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline 		I know about the Trent Affair, but what specifically do you have in mind?

In general, I'd say that we did consider having a bunch of random "Event Cards," but these would have delayed release of the game. We might add some through patches (depending on how many other things of higher priority we add through patches).

(in reply to AU Tiger_MatrixForum)
Post #: 25
RE: PBEM AAR - Discussion - 11/11/2006 6:31:51 AM   
AU Tiger_MatrixForum


Posts: 1606
Joined: 10/9/2006
From: Deepest Dixie
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

I know about the Trent Affair, but what specifically do you have in mind?

In general, I'd say that we did consider having a bunch of random "Event Cards," but these would have delayed release of the game. We might add some through patches (depending on how many other things of higher priority we add through patches).


By that I mean a random occurance that increases or decreases relations with a foreign power. For those readers who don't know, the Trent Affair nearly started a war between Great Britain and the North over an overzealous Naval Captain who stopped, boarded, and took into custody, from a British mail packet, two Confederate commissioners to GB. Lincoln's masterful handling of the affair averted war. "One war at a time," he said.

=Reader's Digest version of the events=

< Message edited by AU Tiger -- 11/11/2006 6:38:51 AM >

_____________________________

"Never take counsel of your fears."

Tho. Jackson

(in reply to Gil R.)
Post #: 26
RE: PBEM AAR - Discussion - 11/11/2006 6:41:11 AM   
jchastain


Posts: 2164
Joined: 8/8/2003
From: Marietta, GA
Status: offline 		THE FOLLOWING IS JUST MY OWN PERSONAL OPINION -

I'm not on the dev team so I have none of the history, but my perspective on it is...

There are not "events" per se. Personally, I'm fine with that and I would lobby against adding them. With RANDOM events, either:

(1) they are very powerful - in which case it feels less like a strategy game. Who wants the winner or loser to be determined to any significant extent by which players gets luckiest with events, or

(2) they are not especially powerful and have very little impact in which case, why bother?

Where events make a lot of sense is where there are historical happenings that are really required for game balance that are otherwise not modelled in the game, but those are generally fixed (or loosely fixed) events rather than purely random one. So, in a WWII game if you don't model the entire political and diplomatic system, then you need an event to trigger the US entry into the war at or near the proper historical time since that is such a major occurance for game balance.

So, I'm not real big into random events.

The Trent Affair is an example of events of type 1 above. If it randomly occured, it would be a major handicap. Personally, I wouldn't want to win or lose the game simply because you did or did not roll a 1 on a six sided die and therefore none of my gaming decisions matter. In FoF, it is possible for the European powers to enter the game. And there is a random element to it. But it is also heavily influenced by the strategic decisions made by the players with the pathway to intervention being long enough that it is highly unlikely that it could occur through random events without someone making a stretgic gaffe. Personally, I think that's the way it should be. But again, that is just my own opinion.

(in reply to Gil R.)
Post #: 27
RE: PBEM AAR - Discussion - 11/11/2006 6:43:04 AM   
jchastain


Posts: 2164
Joined: 8/8/2003
From: Marietta, GA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: AU Tiger

By that I mean a random occurance that increases or decreases relations with a foreign power.


Sorry, I too thought you meant something akin to an "event card". Yes, the game does have random events that increase or decrease relations, though the likelihood of it occuring is driven by your strategic investment in diplomatic activity.

(in reply to AU Tiger_MatrixForum)
Post #: 28
RE: PBEM AAR - Discussion - 11/11/2006 6:45:24 AM   
AU Tiger_MatrixForum


Posts: 1606
Joined: 10/9/2006
From: Deepest Dixie
Status: offline 		Excellent argument against.

I wasn't advocating one way or the other, I was just curious. You are right, it is best not to have events like that, but can you implement a cheat code triggering that, and just send it to me? ;-)


_____________________________

"Never take counsel of your fears."

Tho. Jackson

(in reply to jchastain)
Post #: 29
RE: PBEM AAR - Discussion - 11/11/2006 6:48:55 AM   
jchastain


Posts: 2164
Joined: 8/8/2003
From: Marietta, GA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: AU Tiger

Excellent argument against.

I wasn't advocating one way or the other, I was just curious. You are right, it is best not to have events like that, but can you implement a cheat code triggering that, and just send it to me? ;-)



Funny you should mention that. In the game, you can upgrade weapons and equip your troops. During the beta, I was a big advocate for a cheat code that would give all your brigades M-16's. I thought it would be fun on occasion to just overrun the map just for fun. But it never happened. So you have to work at it if you want to walk through the streets of the enemy capital.

(in reply to AU Tiger_MatrixForum)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Forge of Freedom: The American Civil War 1861-1865 >> After Action Reports >> PBEM AAR - Discussion Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.656