RE: 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

Hard Sarge -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/16/2006 10:03:12 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

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.


because I don't think your ideas on some of this are any good, you want to add a system/campaign to the game, that you do not know what it was or will do, you want to make chanegs to the game, that you can already do with the settings, you want to say the CSA is unbeatable, when I have shown that the CSA falls very easy



pompack -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/16/2006 10:37:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

...how about a "totally realistic scenario" ...? ... one with the accurate OB and realistic economic assets for both sides. ...In other words, the "real" ACW.


(I took the liberty of slicing a few words out of Mike's original post since (as usual [8|] ), he seems to have irritated some. IMHO, this is too good an idea to get lost in emotional wrangling [:-] )

I think this is an excellent idea! There should be two new scenarios that provide this reality feature for the two stock start-points but I would happily settle for either start-point if we can only get one.



Gil R. -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/17/2006 12:03:08 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: elmo3

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.


This is a good idea, but not for a scenario patch, since it would require dividing the map, which is MAJOR work. We have been toying with producing one or more expansion packs related to particular theaters, though, and would certainly consider your suggestion then. It really depends on how FOF does in terms of sales -- if it does well, we can expand on it with further releases.



Gil R. -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/17/2006 12:13:48 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: marecone

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.


Well, if FOF does well enough to warrant expansion packs, we'd like to produce some tactical battle-only games based on historical battles, if that's what you mean. Or would you prefer randomized battlefields?



Mike Scholl -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/17/2006 12:47:45 AM)

How about a "Fascist" scenario where we can take complaining/annoying Governors out and shoot them.   Wouldn't be very realistic..., but it sure would be satisfying!  :-)



Hard Sarge -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/17/2006 1:12:48 AM)

That I could live with

but I do not think either side had the backing or the strength to do so





marecone -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/17/2006 1:33:41 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

quote:

ORIGINAL: marecone

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.


Well, if FOF does well enough to warrant expansion packs, we'd like to produce some tactical battle-only games based on historical battles, if that's what you mean. Or would you prefer randomized battlefields?



Historical battles would be great. I belive that by doing this you could get more customers as not everybody is happy dealing with politics, economy and such. By doing this you could get those other guys.
If that is too much to ask then just make random battlefields.
BTW, great resource for maps is library of congress.



regularbird -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/17/2006 4:21:18 AM)

I love the completly historic scenario idea.



JaguarUSF -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/17/2006 5:06:08 PM)

I would make new scenarios based on major historical battles. You could place the units in the appropriate positions for the battle so that people could reinact them after pressing end turn, or make it right after the battle so people could start playing after the results. Here are the dates I would recommend, as they show a good variety of dates (about every 6 months):

Early April 1862 (Shiloh)
Late August 1862 (2nd Manassas and eventually Antietam in mid September)
Early May 1863 (Chancellorsville)
Early July 1863 (Gettysburg)
Late September 1863 (Chickamauga)
Early May 1864 (Wilderness and Spotsylvania)



Berkut -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/19/2006 7:56:50 PM)

I would definitely go for a more historical scenario, or at least as historical as I can get it.

However, I haven't played this game against the AI, and serisouly doubt I ever will, so I don't really care about what can or cannot be accomplished in that context. I am not sure how one can make a "balance" argument based on success against the AI (or lack of such success). AIs are stupid, and beating them means little.

What I would like tos ee ideally (and frankly was rather surprised wasn't there at the start) is a set of scenarios for each year, and a couple differnt "grand campaign" scnearios with varying levels of "help" for the South, from no help, to some simple fundamental assumptions scetching out "might have been" plausible scenarios for Confederate victory.

I do not like the "standard" scenario simply making up fictional men so that the South can have a chance. The South managed to survive the north for a couple years without those men, and a superior simulation would represent that without the need to resort to wholly fictional force levels.

JM2C of course.



pompack -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/19/2006 8:20:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Berkut

I would definitely go for a more historical scenario, or at least as historical as I can get it.

However, I haven't played this game against the AI, and serisouly doubt I ever will, so I don't really care about what can or cannot be accomplished in that context. I am not sure how one can make a "balance" argument based on success against the AI (or lack of such success). AIs are stupid, and beating them means little.

What I would like tos ee ideally (and frankly was rather surprised wasn't there at the start) is a set of scenarios for each year, and a couple differnt "grand campaign" scnearios with varying levels of "help" for the South, from no help, to some simple fundamental assumptions scetching out "might have been" plausible scenarios for Confederate victory.

I do not like the "standard" scenario simply making up fictional men so that the South can have a chance. The South managed to survive the north for a couple years without those men, and a superior simulation would represent that without the need to resort to wholly fictional force levels.

JM2C of course.



Certainly agree. I am playing the AI exclusively right now in order to learn the game mechanics. Beating the AI to be expected; I am sure a "balanced" AI game is possible with the range of options, but what is the point? Setting the options to the extremes may provide the balance but it would be relatively useless as a training tool preparing to face (virtually anyway) a live opponent.

I would also like to see a number of different start points, but I would settle for a single, historical start point with historical modeling parameters.



jsaurman -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/20/2006 5:24:24 AM)

Would it be possible to have a strictly naval scenerio?   I know there wasn't much of a southern navy, but it would be cool to have to pick the appropriate admiral (could we just add in another general, who is an admiral, and assign him to a ship?) and then do some sort of detailed battle with ships?  Maybe I'm overthinking this, and maybe there isn't much noteworthy on the naval side besides "Monitor/Virginia" but I'm just throwing out ideas.



elbkhan -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/20/2006 10:55:21 AM)

Agree completely with the 'total realism' scenario - which'll be hard since we all knows its a game and no human player should believe Pinkerton's estimates regarding how many southern troops there are.



christof139 -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/23/2006 4:00:09 AM)

quote:

This is a good idea, but not for a scenario patch, since it would require dividing the map, which is MAJOR work. We have been toying with producing one or more expansion packs related to particular theaters, though, and would certainly consider your suggestion then. It really depends on how FOF does in terms of sales -- if it does well, we can expand on it with further releases.


Hello, I am not a programmer but have modded a few things with a text editor only, but could you just blank-out either the western or eastern half of the map depending on what theater one chooses, and just use the same map with one part 'simply' blanked-out and inaccessible?? You probably have thought of this already anyway, but just an idea.

I am going to buy FoF very soon, and have to say from reading all th eposts that it seems good, and your support is great. Also, Hard Sarge explains much of the workings of the game, especially how to use the settings to get a near historical economic setup.

If Hard Sarge could post the setting he uses for his near historical settings, that would be great for us historo-nerds and flagellationists. [&o] [;)]

I like the idea of 1) East and West campaigns; 2) the different time period starting scenarios so you don't have to play a very long campaign game; 3) a Total Victory scenario without a time limit; 4) maybe some tactical historical battles, but for me i have the old and great and easily moddable TalonSoft games; 4) an option to publicly HANG rather than shoot the pestiferous politicians just for GP [8|].

Thank you for your time and effort, unless you're a Politician. And have a great Holiday Season with some good Bar-B-Q'd Southern cooking with brown sugar and molasses in the sauce.

Chris



Gil R. -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/23/2006 5:04:50 AM)

christof139,
Blanking out part of the map is a very large undertaking. However, if FOF does well, we would hope to have expansion packs, and some of these would definitely be devoted to particular theaters. (We'd also like to do historical battles -- it's unclear which we'd do first.)



Jaypea -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (12/23/2006 5:24:10 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.


I would buy this expansion pack!

As for you question, I don't need any scenarios as I only like to play full campaigns (entire war). This games seems to be short in some regard as it does not include the secession of states (jan 1861 onward).

Jaypea



Viking67 -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (1/8/2007 8:57:55 PM)

A "Day After" Fort Sumter scenario.



Jonathan Palfrey -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (1/9/2007 3:21:05 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joram


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.


I naturally vote for this too. I also think scenarios starting at different points in 1861 (such as we have already) are of some interest. Frankly, I'm unlikely to try scenarios starting in later years or covering only one theatre of war.



Gil R. -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (1/22/2007 6:41:44 PM)

Just to update everyone...

The upcoming patch will contain an updated version of the July scenario that jimwinsor put together. After that, we plan to come out with at least a few more scenarios, which will be issued regularly through patches (and which, I hope, we'll be able to release unofficially for you guys to test before we incorporate them into the game). So, for now it's still just the July and November scenarios, but soon thereafter we'll be able to get out more scenarios. Please continue to make suggestions on what would be most desirable.



Mike Scholl -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (1/22/2007 6:56:59 PM)

For a "starting point" in the Histiorical Scenario, I'd like to suggest the Day after Bull Run.  If the South lost that fight, the "War" might have ended quite quickly (which though accurate would be a dissapointing game.)   After Bull Run came the real mobilization for the North, plus the confidence that gave the South an early "edge" in morale.  It also led to the Europeans thinking that the Confederate Cause might be viable.  Bull Run more or less "set the stage" for the real ACW.



Gil R. -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (1/22/2007 10:14:22 PM)

That's a good idea, especially since so many people appear to prefer starting in July to November, but I don't think there's time to include a post-Manassas July scenario in this upcoming patch, since that would require new research on where all of both sides' forces and commanders were located. Creating a historically imbalanced November scenario is easier, since we mainly need to mess with buildings and production levels.



chris0827 -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (1/22/2007 11:32:11 PM)

February 1862 would be a better starting point than nov 1861. There was little activity during nov - jan. Grant started his campaign in Feb 1862 and McClellan got moving in march 1862. Of course this would be in addition to an earlier 1861 scenario.



Gil R. -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (1/23/2007 4:30:14 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: chris0827

February 1862 would be a better starting point than nov 1861. There was little activity during nov - jan. Grant started his campaign in Feb 1862 and McClellan got moving in march 1862. Of course this would be in addition to an earlier 1861 scenario.


I see your point, but can say that would be a lower priority, since the Nov. start-date makes a lot of sense in terms of giving the player more time to shape his forces, economy, research, etc. I guess that Feb. 1862 makes sense for people who toggle off a lot of those options, but our first priority after this patch will be to create scenarios from deeper into the war.



Mike Scholl -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (1/23/2007 5:27:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: chris0827

February 1862 would be a better starting point than nov 1861. There was little activity during nov - jan. Grant started his campaign in Feb 1862 and McClellan got moving in march 1862. Of course this would be in addition to an earlier 1861 scenario.



Problem with this is it takes too many "choices" out of the players hands. What to build, where to build it, when to build it? I think it's the reason so many players immediately chose the July scenario over the November one---even though the November one was the "Official Start". You can't ask players "not to play"..., it just doesn't work when you toss people into the mix.



chris0827 -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (1/23/2007 5:55:27 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl


quote:

ORIGINAL: chris0827

February 1862 would be a better starting point than nov 1861. There was little activity during nov - jan. Grant started his campaign in Feb 1862 and McClellan got moving in march 1862. Of course this would be in addition to an earlier 1861 scenario.



Problem with this is it takes too many "choices" out of the players hands. What to build, where to build it, when to build it? I think it's the reason so many players immediately chose the July scenario over the November one---even though the November one was the "Official Start". You can't ask players "not to play"..., it just doesn't work when you toss people into the mix.



I didn't mean to suggest that feb 1862 be the earliest scenario just that I thought it was a better point to start one than nov 1861. I still would prefer to play a july 1861 or earlier scenario.



wzh55 -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (1/23/2007 8:44:25 PM)

I would just like to see a game with the option to continue after being told that the winner was..... So far I can finish a solo game in one night and have not lost one yet with difficulty up to 1st Lt. Keep after it. Thanks.



jonreb31 -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (1/24/2007 9:04:21 PM)

I really like the Historical Scenario idea. The South seems too equal to the North in the cases of economy, manpower and technology. It would be a lot of fun if it was as close to history as possible so you could make the delicate decisions the South had to make.



Marc gto -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (1/24/2007 11:20:47 PM)

im with mike on this one



Bombsight -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (1/25/2007 8:05:20 PM)

Hey Gil,
With the present power selections available in set up, you can't acheive the historical production that the North actually accomplished. How about considering in some patch a modification to allow the north to use a power rating higher than +3 to come closer to the actual Northern production?



ptan54 -> RE: New Civil War Scenarios for Future Patches (1/25/2007 8:49:22 PM)

1 - TOTAL VICTORY option.
2 - Just before Antietam (summer 1862).
3 - Just before Chancellorsville (spring 1863).
4 - Just before Gettysburg (summer 1863).
5 - Post Gettysburg, before Petersburg (winter 1863/spring 1864). Very challenging for the CSA, only hope is to inflict crushing defeats on USA near Nov. 1864 and win British and French recognition.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.514893