Any Questions? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Gary Grigsby's War Between the States



Message

PyleDriver -> Any Questions? (10/9/2007 4:25:43 PM)

I'd like to invite any and all questions about this game you may have. Just in case they may not pertain to the AAR....I'm sure there out there, fire away...

[8D]
Jon



Duck Doc -> RE: Any Questions? (10/9/2007 7:49:32 PM)

Ok, how are amphibious operations handled? How about cavalry expeditions also? What effect would it have for the North to control the Mississippi from bottom to top? How are blue water operations different than riverine ones? How is the blockade prosecuted? I see there are (?)transport ships in coastal areas; is there a functioning transport network like WaW? What is the most exotic item on the research list? Is this game going to be too much for my pea-brain to assimilate [:D] ?



PyleDriver -> RE: Any Questions? (10/9/2007 8:34:57 PM)

1) Amphibious landings are as AWD. The Transport costs are different. Each transpot has a 25 transport ability, and a 2 amphibious. Inf and Art transport costs are a 4, and Cav and heavy Art 5. Therefore 6 transports are need to land 3 Inf, at the invasion location.

2)If cav has the movement points it can scout, raid or attack.

3)Control of the Mississippi will keep supplies and troops pinned west of the River, and vis a versa.

4)There are 3 river types: Minor rivers, no naval ships; Major rivers, Gunboats and trasports only; Major rivers (deep), all naval ships allowed.

5)Yes, transports need to be in cascade inorder to supply ships and isolated ports.

6)Ironclads are the most exspensive item to build.

This game does need some personal application and desire. There are some genius concepts brought in. Over the last 9 months most have been streamlined into a very playable and exciting game.

[8D]
Jon



Joel Billings -> RE: Any Questions? (10/9/2007 8:54:58 PM)

Controlling the mouth of the Mississippi river will also block trade to ports along the river from overseas. Also, controlling the river gives the Union player an easy way of moving troops and blocks resource movement from east to west.



slybelle -> RE: Any Questions? (10/10/2007 4:52:09 AM)

A few questions:

1)  Does the game maintain detailed unit stats (i.e. what battles it fought it, casualties, major events, etc.)?

2)  Does the game maintain a detailed battle log for all battles fought (i.e. name of battle, leaders, size of forces, casualties, battle outcome, etc.)?

3)  Does the game have "fixed" ending points?  Meaning, when a certain date/number of turns have passed, does it end?  Or does it have a random ending where the events of the game dictate when it will end?  I personally like non-fixed endings so my actions end up deciding when things end.

4)  Foreign intervention possible?  If so, can you explain?

5)  Does the game include historical events?  Are things scripted at all or is everything random and base don actions you take?  I prefer non scripted.

6)  At the conclusion of a battle, what kind of results are shown (i.e. number of casualties, etc.)

7)  When looking at unit information, does it show actual "men" counts or does it use some kind of unit strength points?  I prefer everything showing by number of men since it gives a more personal feeling.

I'm sure I will come up with more later:)




PyleDriver -> RE: Any Questions? (10/10/2007 5:58:03 AM)

1) Independent units arn't, however they can gain experence in battles fought. Their is a casuality screen which tells how many and of which type are damage or destroyed to date.
2)Major battles are recorded with the commanding Generals names, who won, and losses.
3)The game focuses on Lincolns reelection of Nov 64, and goes until Apr of 65 if he looses, if he wins it goes until July of 65. It can even end earlier if a players PP's fall below zero. So I would say non-Fixed endings.
4)No
5)2 different screens; The first one shows side by side losses, and captured artillery. The second shows Leader changes (command points), and leader losses.
6)It shows both.

[8D]
Jon



slybelle -> RE: Any Questions? (10/10/2007 1:23:18 PM)

Thanks Jon.  Just a couple of quick clarificatons.  When you answered 'No' to #4, was that in reference to foreign intervention or hisotrical/scripted events question?  Just trying to better understand specifically my #4 and #5 questions.

Thanks again.



rjh1971 -> RE: Any Questions? (10/10/2007 5:30:39 PM)

quote:

Original slybelle
Thanks Jon. Just a couple of quick clarificatons. When you answered 'No' to #4, was that in reference to foreign intervention or hisotrical/scripted events question? Just trying to better understand specifically my #4 and #5 questions.

Thanks again.



Jon's answer 5 and 6 are for questions 6 and 7.

There is no foreign intervention, only thing is that the Union can blockade the South's ports deriving the CSA of much needed supplies, that are suppose to come from abroad the States. but this cannot be classified as foreign intervention.

As to question #5 events are not script. Losing Richmond has BAD consequences to the South, same bad consequences when being low in PP (Political Points)



Joel Billings -> RE: Any Questions? (10/10/2007 6:50:15 PM)

Also, naval items such as free trade and the ability to buy cheap commerce raiders is negatively impacted by the Union proclaiming the Emancipation Proclamation (making England less likely to help the CSA).



Rocco -> RE: Any Questions? (10/10/2007 7:22:14 PM)

I am wondering how artillery is handled in combat (whether it's like AWD with suppression or more like WAW).

Actually I wouldn't mind finding out about combat calculations in general, but I'm sure the aar will get there eventually.

Thanks,

Rocco



Joel Billings -> RE: Any Questions? (10/10/2007 7:38:28 PM)

It's more like WaW, however its attack factor is low enough that it rarely hits, but just softens up the target (other units get a bonus when attacking units already attacked by artillery).



PDiFolco -> RE: Any Questions? (10/10/2007 8:01:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

It's more like WaW, however its attack factor is low enough that it rarely hits, but just softens up the target (other units get a bonus when attacking units already attacked by artillery).


This doesn't look very realistic, ACW arty was still direct-fire as it was under Napoleon, indirect shelling didn't exist and arty wasn't usable to soften targets and keep heads down.



Joel Billings -> RE: Any Questions? (10/10/2007 9:21:49 PM)

The combat formulas are fairly abstract. Artillery was in fact used at long distance (mostly to scare off enemy artillery), which it does in this game. Extra artillery provides an advantage in combat when working in conjunction with infantry/cavalry, but will not by themselves cause a lot of casualties. It's really the interplay of all arms that has to be looked at. Remember in game terms each hit is equivalent to 1300 casualties, so their's a lot of abstraction going on in the combat resolution.



maxstrike -> RE: Any Questions? (10/11/2007 1:00:52 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PDiFolco


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

It's more like WaW, however its attack factor is low enough that it rarely hits, but just softens up the target (other units get a bonus when attacking units already attacked by artillery).


This doesn't look very realistic, ACW arty was still direct-fire as it was under Napoleon, indirect shelling didn't exist and arty wasn't usable to soften targets and keep heads down.



It depends on what you call indirect because indirect artillery isn't the same as line of sight. Indirect fire is any weapon such as a howitzer or mortar that doesn't have its bore pointing directly towards the target. They weren't lobbing shells 12 miles, but they were often lobbing them over walls and hills with smoothbores, howitzers and mortars. Shells with timed fuses were the most used ammunition (timed for air burst). Also case shot was widely used and airburst with a timed fuse (though short ranged but since much of the fighting was in wooded areas, long ranged artillery wasn't really needed in many battles). An important note is that direct fire artillery was a technical improvement over indirect artillery not the other way around.

Artillery was used as often as possible on the offense to destroy defensive positions and reduce the defender's cohesion.



maxstrike -> RE: Any Questions? (10/11/2007 1:08:11 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

The combat formulas are fairly abstract. Artillery was in fact used at long distance (mostly to scare off enemy artillery), which it does in this game. Extra artillery provides an advantage in combat when working in conjunction with infantry/cavalry, but will not by themselves cause a lot of casualties. It's really the interplay of all arms that has to be looked at. Remember in game terms each hit is equivalent to 1300 casualties, so their's a lot of abstraction going on in the combat resolution.


I'm not sure that the 'classic' three pronged combined arms model holds true in the US Civil War and WWI periods. But artillery/infantry combined arms was definitely important.



Joel Billings -> RE: Any Questions? (10/11/2007 2:28:19 AM)

What I was trying to say was that artillery, unsupported by infantry or cavalry could not hold ground and would be subject to being overrun before they could inflict many losses on the enemy. It's working in conjunction with the other arms that artillery becomes valuable. It would seem that the bulk of the casualties caused by artillery was when used at short range in the defensive while supported by other arms. Attacking artillery was most often used to drive off defending batteries.



maxstrike -> RE: Any Questions? (10/11/2007 3:41:25 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

What I was trying to say was that artillery, unsupported by infantry or cavalry could not hold ground and would be subject to being overrun before they could inflict many losses on the enemy. It's working in conjunction with the other arms that artillery becomes valuable. It would seem that the bulk of the casualties caused by artillery was when used at short range in the defensive while supported by other arms. Attacking artillery was most often used to drive off defending batteries.


Your explanation is accurate for the period, and as far as I can tell it appears to be properly abstracted in the game mechanics as a modifier to other arms versus causing direct casualties.

D



Gatto -> RE: Any Questions? (10/11/2007 5:05:15 PM)

Hi,
a new (and maybe silly) question about cavalry. It's easy to understand that cavalry has a main role when playing with FOW: but can cavalry scouting and harassing the ennemy rail network remain unnoticed by ennemy units (especially ennemy cavalry)? Cavalry is a precious resource and it would be very bothersome if it would be easily surprised instead of surprising... Can we use some tricks in order of seeing without to be seen?
Thanks for your attention



jcjordan -> RE: Any Questions? (10/16/2007 2:00:04 AM)

What are the differences between this & FOF?



PyleDriver -> RE: Any Questions? (10/16/2007 3:02:04 AM)

I'll post some screen shots later so you can see for yourself... What occurrs is that unspotted units do not appear to your foe. Only cavalry scouting and units that have been engaged in battle will be seen. If units are pulled from the front and return the next month thier unspotted once agian. FOW opens this game to a level of suspense in not knowing where enemy troops are concentrated.



Grotius -> RE: Any Questions? (10/17/2007 9:00:57 AM)

Looking forward to it. Since you invited questions, I have a whole bunch; feel free to disregard some if this is too long a list.

1. How many leaders are modeled in the game? I don't recall leaders being modeled at all in WaW.

2. More generally, how important are individual leaders?

3. Are there leader portraits of any sort? I liked this aspect of Ageod's game; it made it feel more "personal."

4. How important are divisions, corps, armies? Again, I don't recall army organization being a big feature of WaW.

5. Is the supply system like that in WaW? I liked the way it worked in WaW, with the 'complex supply option' (or whatever it was called) turned on.

6. Do you have the same strategic movement/tactical movement system as in WaW? I liked that too.

7. How about WaW's neat tech system -- is any of that present here?

8. Any role for espionage?

9. Are there scenarios, or just one campaign?

10. What sort of victory conditions for the grand campaign?

11. How long do you think a full single-player game would take? How about PBEM?

I'm excited about this title, as I almost invariably enjoy Gary's games. I'm tempted to apply to beta-test, but I'm in another beta and probably should focus on that one...



PyleDriver -> RE: Any Questions? (10/17/2007 5:46:46 PM)

Her you go Grotius:

1) There is over 1000 leaders in the game.
2) Success or falure revolves around leaders. Proper appointments of Theater Commanders (TC) and Army Commanders (AC) have huge bearings on the game. Leaders gain initiative for offences, commitment of troops in battle ( just because the units are in the area, dosn't mean they enter the battle), and resolution of battle ( leader attack or defence factors are added to units in combat).
3) No portraits in the game, but you'll get to know your leaders personally. If you loose a key leader in battle you may just want to cry...lol...
4) Units attached to Unit Commanders take on there abilities. Example; Jackson has a 4-4-4 rating which is 4 attack, 4 defence, and 4 infantry. He also has a 3 artillery rating. Infantry has a 1 movement, and artillery has a 2, without leadership. But attached to Jackson 4 is added to 1 for infantry and 3 is added to 2 artillery. Meaning with initiaitive Jackson now has 5 movement points under is command. He turns into a very moble hard hitting Corps. If he is unspotted, and is in combat with say a 2-2-2 commander, he will give a +2 for leadership and a + 3 for unspotted for a total of + 5 firing, brutal...
6) Supply is the same but different. The only way supply is moved by the player is by building a depot. Production and usage is the same.
7)Theres no teck table in WBTS.
8)No espionage, but there is partisan activity.
9) There are 1861, 1862, and 1863 scenarios.
10) If Linclon is elected it ends in Apr of 65, if he isn't elected it ends in Jun of 65, or earlier if one sides PP's (political points) fall below 0.
11) 20 to 30 hours as the CSA, 30 to 40 hours as the Union. PBEM depends on how often you opponent returns turns.

I hope that answers your questions...

[8D]
Jon



Grotius -> RE: Any Questions? (10/18/2007 4:41:34 AM)

Yep, that answers my questions. Thanks!






Adam Parker -> RE: Any Questions? (11/3/2007 4:05:21 PM)

How about system specs - same at WWAWD?

Will 512mb RAM cut it?

Thanks,
Adam.



Joe D. -> RE: Any Questions? (11/4/2007 5:37:32 AM)

How does this game compare to other (computer) Civil War games?



hmssws -> RE: Any Questions? (11/7/2007 6:11:35 PM)

Joe,
I am not trying to be rude....I will suggest that you make your question more specific.......Worded as is, it is virtually impossible to answer, as there are many games out there....it will compare to each one differently.....and differently on specific features......Regards, Hank



Joe D. -> RE: Any Questions? (11/7/2007 7:47:26 PM)

Fair enough, but I only meant w/other software, not board games and the like.

TC2M is too tactical and in real time; I assume this game -- like all Grigsby games -- is turn-based, so how 'bout AACW?



elmo3 -> RE: Any Questions? (11/7/2007 9:57:29 PM)

Sorry if this has been asked but is there a PBEM replay so you can see what your opponent did in his turn?



hmssws -> RE: Any Questions? (11/8/2007 3:45:23 PM)

Definatly turn based.....I believe based on the World At War Engine.....I don't own that game, as virtually all of my titles are War of Northern Aggression games......So I suspect you know more about it now than I do, assumimng you have played WAW.......Reading the AAR threads should help you out a lot....they are pretty informative......regards, Hank



Joel Billings -> RE: Any Questions? (11/20/2007 2:19:27 AM)

Yes there is a turn replay so you can see all events that have happened during the last complete game turn. There's also an event log that allows you to review all the text messages for several turns back.



Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.265625