Shouldnt National Will drive the time limit? (Full Version)

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



Message

Nick R -> Shouldnt National Will drive the time limit? (12/24/2006 3:35:49 PM)

In playing the game with all its rich complexities I found it rather simplistic to have give the CSA 1 VP for each month past December 1864. I would think that National Will not some contrived VP would determine how long the game could go if you are doing a simultation and not a historical reenactment.

Using National Will to drive the "length" of the game makes more sense to me. A National Will of 4 means "your" Nation is will to continue for 4 years but a will of 1 means only one year. Hence you are incentivized to keep that National Will up.

Could the Devs please coinsider having this toggled as an option?

Any one else have any thoughts?



oldspec4 -> RE: Shouldnt National Will drive the time limit? (12/24/2006 4:03:16 PM)

Sounds like a great idea...I also do not like the current game methodology after Jan. '65.



Hertston -> RE: Shouldnt National Will drive the time limit? (12/24/2006 4:10:45 PM)

From developer comments I seem to recall from another thread the intended issue here was not so much the will of the Union side to continue the war as the increasing and (eventually) inevitable recognition of the Confederacy as an independent nation abroad, and eventually among people in the North as well, just resulting from the fact it was still a reality.

I think the additional VPs are meant to reflect increasing support and diplomatic pressure without suddenly hiking up the chance of British or French intervention in a way that might totally unbalance the game. The Union player knows at the start that all the Confederacy needs to do to win is not to lose, and letting things drag on indefinitely wouldn't be that 'historic', I think. Without that feature it's hard to see how the Confederate player could win without 'breaking' the Union national will via military victories in a way that just wouldn't have been necessary had things continued as a stalemate into 1865 and 1866. You need to set a flexible time limit on how long you need to "not lose" before you "win".



Nick R -> RE: Shouldnt National Will drive the time limit? (12/24/2006 4:41:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hertston

From developer comments I seem to recall from another thread the intended issue here was not so much the will of the Union side to continue the war as the increasing and (eventually) inevitable recognition of the Confederacy as an independent nation abroad, and eventually among people in the North as well, just resulting from the fact it was still a reality.

I think the additional VPs are meant to reflect increasing support and diplomatic pressure without suddenly hiking up the chance of British or French intervention in a way that might totally unbalance the game. The Union player knows at the start that all the Confederacy needs to do to win is not to lose, and letting things drag on indefinitely wouldn't be that 'historic', I think. Without that feature it's hard to see how the Confederate player could win without 'breaking' the Union national will via military victories in a way that just wouldn't have been necessary had things continued as a stalemate into 1865 and 1866. You need to set a flexible time limit on how long you need to "not lose" before you "win".


Isnt all that already accounted for in National Will and Diplomacy???? If not then why not??? Seems like we are trying to "make the game follow history" not simulate what could have happened and that is the part I do not like.



Twotribes -> RE: Shouldnt National Will drive the time limit? (12/24/2006 4:46:30 PM)

With all the other ahistorical enhancements that the South got this one, while actually haveing some basis in fact is just the straw that breaks the camels back for some.

Personally the arbitrary one point per turn while ignoring the actual conditions on the ground is problematic for me. One poster noted where he had basicly captured all but a few provinces of the Confederacy and then lost, realisticly that simply would not have happened historicly.

It is true if the South had held out long enough they may have gotten what they wanted, BUT not if the North is driving through the Confederacy. No way, in my opinion, would England or France after 4 years of NOT recognizing them suddenly decide because a magic date had passed and a few provinces still remained, they would do so.

But as a game artifice I dont really mind that this rule is in place ( except to note it is just one more seeming bias FOR the South). I dont see any need to carry the war past 66 anyway. If the Union cant beat them by then....



Nick R -> RE: Shouldnt National Will drive the time limit? (12/24/2006 5:33:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Twotribes

Personally the arbitrary one point per turn while ignoring the actual conditions on the ground is problematic for me. One poster noted where he had basicly captured all but a few provinces of the Confederacy and then lost, realisticly that simply would not have happened historicly.



I agree completely and in fact is what happenedc to me. I had all of Tenn. Alabama, Georgia, Florida, most of Miss., and some of N and S Caroliana. My National Will was 4, South's was 1 or so. On Diplomacy I had the South beat except for other European.

Then miracle happens I lose!???? No I just dont think so.




General Quarters -> RE: Shouldnt National Will drive the time limit? (12/24/2006 6:04:57 PM)

Somebody needs to suggest an alternative.



jonreb31 -> RE: Shouldnt National Will drive the time limit? (12/24/2006 6:45:36 PM)

So basically you want to change over the National Will to the same purpose of the Victory Points..?



Joram -> RE: Shouldnt National Will drive the time limit? (12/24/2006 6:53:00 PM)

Your idea is appealing but JReb has a point.  I've been trying to think of a better alternative but I can't.   It's a good discussion though if anyone can think of a better way to end the game.  One suggestion is to have an option for "No End Date".  I think it's silly but apparently enough people have complained about it that it would at least appease some.



jonreb31 -> RE: Shouldnt National Will drive the time limit? (12/24/2006 7:01:20 PM)

If you really wanted the National Will to affect the victory points of the game you could try modifying it. Currently for each National Will point it adds half a victory point. So if you have 2 National Will it increases the Victory Points by 1.  You could modify it to be only 1 National Will for 1 VP or even 2 VP, it's up to you. Maybe even the Developers could add in their next "feature" patch an option at the start up of a game to increase the effect of National Will.



ericbabe -> RE: Shouldnt National Will drive the time limit? (12/24/2006 8:09:35 PM)

We'll probably add a game option for "no time limit VP's" since enough people have requested it.  A variant we could do might be to give only a chance for the bonus VP every turn based on number of CS cities captured (i.e., if the CS only has 30% of its cities left, then only 30% chance to get the VP). 

Personally I do like having some time limit, since without it the North has no incentive to invade early since it has a large economic advantage -- it could just wait five years to build up a perfectly equipped army, and then invade at its leisure.



General Quarters -> RE: Shouldnt National Will drive the time limit? (12/24/2006 8:25:00 PM)

Yes, I agree that some sense of "time is running out" is historically realistic and should be included -- though it never hurts to have an option for those who want it.



Twotribes -> RE: Shouldnt National Will drive the time limit? (12/24/2006 11:24:27 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JonReb

So basically you want to change over the National Will to the same purpose of the Victory Points..?


Not me. I wasnt clear and I am sorry. I disagree with national Will as well. If a change is made it should be a toggle change that a player has to click.

Though I disagree with the reality of the rule in question, the PURPOSE of the rule is valid. It forces the Union player to fight, it provides a finite point at which he MUST act.

It needs tweaked but at the moment I am unable to see how that could be done and still achieve the basic objective.



regularbird -> RE: Shouldnt National Will drive the time limit? (12/24/2006 11:34:14 PM)

That is a good idea eric, some kind of formula with the cities, but weight should be placed on capitol and port cities.



Nick R -> RE: Shouldnt National Will drive the time limit? (12/25/2006 12:11:22 AM)

Okay, allow me make a suggestion on how I believe it should work.

I believe we all understand the term used in the tactical sense called unit cohesion. In the game it’s called a morale check. Once a unit achieves this it routes.

In my humble opinion, Matrix has created a very clever way of having this concept at a national level. It’s called National Will. I believe National Will should be the “check” the nation does to say whether it will continue to follow a certain direction.

Now, maybe this is not how it is setup currently in the game but I believe it should be used in this manner. Also, currently, at least based on what I read, the only thing that affects National Will is the outcome of battles. What a waste to only use it in this limited fashion. I would suggest that how States “feel” or a State’s “will” should also be a component and should rely on how the Governor of that State “feels”. Now the impact of Governor would be truly felt.

The outcome of battles and perhaps how other Countries “feel” should also impact National Will but battles and their outcomes should not be the only measure of a Nation’s Will.

In this manner, the President must balance and take into account the desires of his Governors as it will affect how his State “feels” which will in turn affect the National Will.

The number of the National Will would then be the number of Years (turns) that the Nation will continue to support those efforts.

So as an example, the South that has the support of its States would be better off from a National Will perspective than the North which has (had) several States and their Governors that were tenuous at best in support of the war.

By the same token, how is it possible, as I and others have stated here for the South to “win” without having the support of England, France, and Europe and having the State of Virginia and North Carolina and just “win”!?? It isn’t a reality, hence it’s a manufactured event. If all we want is a historical reenactment that states the date the war is over (not what I want by the way), then why not just take it a step further and just say the North wins. I want a simulator, which will allow me to “simulate” the war and see if I could do better and not just mimic what was done.

In my decades of playing games like this, I always found it to be “a historical” to be the Commander of say the US in WWII and not have some National Will as a check versus my just making as many military units as I could and just beating the AI. National Will is a great concept and should be used to its full extent.



Twotribes -> RE: Shouldnt National Will drive the time limit? (12/25/2006 7:36:17 AM)

Your premise misses a few things, while southern State Governments were united in LEAVING the Union, they were NOT United in how the war would be conducted nor in support of Jefferson Davis. At least 2 or 3 of the States actively refused to send men to the Confederate Army,keeping those troops in State, hurting the Souths war effort. Most of the Southern States refused a draft or any attempt to "force" troops out of a State for the Confederacy.

The Confederacy was in bad shape at a "national" level. Especially when camparied to the Federal Government it had abandoned. But then what would you expect from States that felt they owed nothing to a Concept of a Government higher than them?



Nick R -> RE: Shouldnt National Will drive the time limit? (12/25/2006 9:10:20 AM)

From my perspective, all the more reason to have some form of National Will or "Cohesion" instead of the very arbitrary 1 pt per turn after . . .



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
6.703003