New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Forge of Freedom: The American Civil War 1861-1865



Message

Gil R. -> New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/14/2006 11:20:12 PM)

The initial release of "Forge of Freedom" provided just two scenarios: the "Standard" scenario set in November 1861 and the pre-Manassas/Bull Run scenario set in early July 1861. We have always planned to add more scenarios once the game had been released, and now we can begin to focus on this. While it is doubtful that we can add new scenarios to the next patch, there is a good possibility we might be able to do so for the one after that. Since WCS's staff is small, that patch would include just one or two, or perhaps three, new scenarios. So here's the key question: which scenarios would people most like to have?




andysomers -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/14/2006 11:54:02 PM)

I would simply do a spring 1862, spring 1863, and spring 1864 start.

I can provide deployments and strengths if needed.

AS



genie144 -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/15/2006 1:44:30 AM)

I think a "Total Victory" scenario from '61 would be nice.  Or simply make "Total Victory" an option instead of time.

Sam



slybelle -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/15/2006 1:51:27 AM)

I would vote for one that depicts when Sumter happened or even before it.



Gil R. -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/15/2006 1:59:48 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: slybelle

I would vote for one that depicts when Sumter happened or even before it.


This one would involve a lot of programming -- it's not simply a matter of creating new OOB data files, since there would have to be mechanisms for secession, war breaking out, etc. Perhaps down the road in an expansion pack, but not for a patch in the next month or two.



elmo3 -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/15/2006 3:21:35 AM)

An East scenario and a West scenario come to mind. A split along the lines of Wisconsin - Indiana - Kentucky - Tennessee - Alabama and points west being in the West scenario and the rest in the East. Michigan might go either way depending on the best balance for the economics.



jonreb31 -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/15/2006 5:46:10 AM)

I think scenarios for the each year would be the best.



marecone -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/15/2006 10:48:17 AM)

One where you start from the scratch would be nice. Maybe later if it is too much for this patch.
I like the idea for separated theatres.



Mike Scholl -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/15/2006 1:23:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

quote:

ORIGINAL: slybelle

I would vote for one that depicts when Sumter happened or even before it.


This one would involve a lot of programming -- it's not simply a matter of creating new OOB data files, since there would have to be mechanisms for secession, war breaking out, etc. Perhaps down the road in an expansion pack, but not for a patch in the next month or two.



While I still have high hopes of bringing the "Official Scenarios" more into line with historical reality to make them more competative, they will still need to keep some "bennies" on the Confederate side for "balance". But just for a "cold splash of reality" on the face of players who are feeling "too successful", how about a "totally realistic scenario" like you mentioned when describing the "testors first reactions" to the game as "research" had generated it? The one with the accurate OB and realistic economic assets for both sides. The one everyone complained about because the South "couldn't win". A scenario for the "dyed-in-the-cotten" Rebel Players to really challange themselves with---one with no Southern "freebies" and the North not having to fight with "one hand tied behind it's back". In other words, the "real" ACW.



TheHellPatrol -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/15/2006 8:41:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: genie144

I think a "Total Victory" scenario from '61 would be nice.  Or simply make "Total Victory" an option instead of time.

Sam
You got my vote[:D].



Hertston -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/15/2006 9:13:11 PM)

One that has the Brits and/or the French joining the Rebs at the start! [:D]



will b -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/16/2006 12:09:16 AM)

An 1863, through November '64 scenario where the North has to be sucessful enough in surpressing the rebellion (i.e gain enough VP's) to allow Lincoln to win re-election.



Mike Scholl -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/16/2006 1:00:54 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hertston

One that has the Brits and/or the French joining the Rebs at the start! [:D]



To be paired with the one that has Britian joining the Union to help stamp out slavery? It was illegal in the British Empire. :-)



ericbabe -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/16/2006 2:08:47 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl
"bennies" on the Confederate side for "balance". But just for a "cold splash of reality" on the face of players who are feeling "too successful", how about a "totally realistic scenario" like you mentioned when describing the "testors first reactions" to the game as "research" had generated it? The one with the accurate OB and realistic economic assets for


I like this idea quite a bit.



Hard Sarge -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/16/2006 3:44:58 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

quote:

ORIGINAL: slybelle

I would vote for one that depicts when Sumter happened or even before it.


This one would involve a lot of programming -- it's not simply a matter of creating new OOB data files, since there would have to be mechanisms for secession, war breaking out, etc. Perhaps down the road in an expansion pack, but not for a patch in the next month or two.



While I still have high hopes of bringing the "Official Scenarios" more into line with historical reality to make them more competative, they will still need to keep some "bennies" on the Confederate side for "balance". But just for a "cold splash of reality" on the face of players who are feeling "too successful", how about a "totally realistic scenario" like you mentioned when describing the "testors first reactions" to the game as "research" had generated it? The one with the accurate OB and realistic economic assets for both sides. The one everyone complained about because the South "couldn't win". A scenario for the "dyed-in-the-cotten" Rebel Players to really challange themselves with---one with no Southern "freebies" and the North not having to fight with "one hand tied behind it's back". In other words, the "real" ACW.


Mike
are you saying you can not beat the CSA or are you reading and seeing what is in the game and think that you can not beat them ?

this screen shot is from a Union Game I had, on Col with the CSA on +2 power

I think I was doing pretty well with the Lousy Union



[image]local://upfiles/1438/C4A80021A37848FFB4E7E5F0161DEF44.jpg[/image]



steveuk -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/16/2006 3:58:17 AM)

Thats easy Sarge....look at mine for the CSA [:'(]
Early September 61 and no chance of building a thing!

[image][/image]

[image]local://upfiles/16660/804B80F1E61040C49CBB248F3CF06A90.jpg[/image]



marecone -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/16/2006 4:10:03 AM)

Not sure if this should go here or somewhere else but... could you makea scenario with only one tactical battle? Maybe with options whereyou would have some resources and then buy units, attributes and weapons? Or if it is too much then just tactical battle.



Hard Sarge -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/16/2006 4:37:02 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: steveuk

Thats easy Sarge....look at mine for the CSA [:'(]
Early September 61 and no chance of building a thing!

[image][/image]

[image]local://upfiles/16660/804B80F1E61040C49CBB248F3CF06A90.jpg[/image]


and your point Steve ?

they are saying the CSA is too strong, by your settings, they are not, I show my pic to show that the CSA can be beaten in battle ?




steveuk -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/16/2006 5:17:59 AM)

Yep...thats why I showed mine. Changing the difficulty settings can make the South extremely weak as some people want and the Union very strong. I still reckon I can win this game though....will depend on my blockade runners!
I would still like an historical start available though as the settings which I have it on now are pretty mean on the CSA and far too kind on the Union.



Hard Sarge -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/16/2006 5:33:50 AM)

Roger, ws just trying to be sure of what you were showing



Mike Scholl -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/16/2006 6:35:42 AM)

"Mike are you saying you can not beat the CSA or are you reading and seeing what is in the game and think that you can not beat them ? This screen shot is from a Union Game I had, on Col with the CSA on +2 power".


No SARGE, that's not what I said. I mearly proposed that as long as they were asking for "scenario suggestions" they do one using their original historic research. One who's perameters were based strictly on history, with no attempt at "balancing it" or making it "more equal". Just as a "challange" for Southern Players who wanted to try something really difficult.



Gil R. -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/16/2006 6:38:53 AM)

What about a post-Gettysburg scenario? That would be quite challenging for the CSA player only, but might be worth doing.



Hard Sarge -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/16/2006 9:23:35 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

"Mike are you saying you can not beat the CSA or are you reading and seeing what is in the game and think that you can not beat them ? This screen shot is from a Union Game I had, on Col with the CSA on +2 power".


No SARGE, that's not what I said. I mearly proposed that as long as they were asking for "scenario suggestions" they do one using their original historic research. One who's perameters were based strictly on history, with no attempt at "balancing it" or making it "more equal". Just as a "challange" for Southern Players who wanted to try something really difficult.



well, if we go back to the beginning, I think you would find out that the CSA was alot stronger in the beginning, the game balanceing was to make the Union have a chance, plus all the work JC did on the Ecc would be a waste to take out, but the game would be much richer on both sides, but then, the cost of everything was also much higher

which the hassle is, everything you want is already in the options, set the game to play how you want it to play, and it should do so



captskillet -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/16/2006 1:59:20 PM)

quote:

The one with the accurate OB and realistic economic assets for both sides. The one everyone complained about because the South "couldn't win". A scenario for the "dyed-in-the-cotten" Rebel Players to really challange themselves with---one with no Southern "freebies" and the North not having to fight with "one hand tied behind it's back". In other words, the "real" ACW.


And I bet you Mike that you will find IT IS impossible for the South to win a completely hist. scenario with a decent Union leader.............if the Union had not been saddled with "Little Mac" throughout much of 1862 (and his equally nitwit cohorts Pope and Burnside) it would/should have ended then (specif. @ Sharpsburg for sure)!



Mike Scholl -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/16/2006 3:47:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: captskillet

quote:

The one with the accurate OB and realistic economic assets for both sides. The one everyone complained about because the South "couldn't win". A scenario for the "dyed-in-the-cotten" Rebel Players to really challange themselves with---one with no Southern "freebies" and the North not having to fight with "one hand tied behind it's back". In other words, the "real" ACW.


And I bet you Mike that you will find IT IS impossible for the South to win a completely hist. scenario with a decent Union leader.............if the Union had not been saddled with "Little Mac" throughout much of 1862 (and his equally nitwit cohorts Pope and Burnside) it would/should have ended then (specif. @ Sharpsburg for sure)!



I don't think you'll find a single mention of doing away with the South's leadership advantage in my suggestion. Or even the slight "quality" edge the South had to start with. Just one that starts "basic" with all the advantages/disadvantages both sides faced---and that didn't have to be "adjusted" to be historically correct. Then if a Player wanted to lead the South he would have a better chance to have the real experiance..., and a good means of comparison with other players. Stating you won the "ACW Historical Scenario" would mean something to other players. Or won it with a "+1" or a "+2" to your side. That's what I was suggesting. Not sure why it seems to have hit so many "sore spots".



captskillet -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/16/2006 4:09:45 PM)

Mike I didn't say it was a sore spot and it really doesn't matter to me one way or the other if they make one..........but you keep harping on an Hist accurate sceanario and all I'm saying is that with a comp. Union commander the South SHOULD have ZERO chace to win the war based on said scenario..........only lousy Generalship esp @ Sharpsburg allowed it to go on as long as it did and when Lincoln, etc. wised up and put a commander in charge (Grant) who knew how to use the North's huge material and manpower advantage by latching ahold of the South any and everywhere and not letting up all bets were off!



Mike Scholl -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/16/2006 4:23:55 PM)

Not trying to start a fight, capt. But if it didn't "touch a nerve" of some sort, why are you and sarge "jumping in" to put it down? It was just a suggestion among many others for a possible additional scenario. I don't know if they'll use it or not..., and I'll play the game in either case. I just thought it would provide an interesting challange for the "devoted Rebels" in the playing audiance to "take a shot" at the real challanges that faced Davis and Lee and co.



captskillet -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/16/2006 5:14:26 PM)

Ok Mike have it ur way it struck a nerve............[8|]!



freeboy -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/16/2006 7:36:17 PM)

this is my idea , not that the 62 64 etc ideas are not good too.
I thnk it would be nice to see a delayed hypothetical Southern war, with an improved South that really can put the Union on its heels, and then a more Hystorical Union economy that if they survive the first six months will kick out massive goodies... would be challenging for both sides



Joram -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/16/2006 8:50:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ericbabe

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl
"bennies" on the Confederate side for "balance". But just for a "cold splash of reality" on the face of players who are feeling "too successful", how about a "totally realistic scenario" like you mentioned when describing the "testors first reactions" to the game as "research" had generated it? The one with the accurate OB and realistic economic assets for


I like this idea quite a bit.



I vote for this too. Not because I think I'd play it a lot but it would be interesting to see. I like balance too so I'm fine with concessions but for a challenge, it would be nice to have a "total realism" opening scenario.



Page: [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.171875