SCENARIO: American Civil War Full-Release Version

Did you enjoy playing this scenario?

  • Yes, this is one of the best ever, please send it to Firaxis.

    Votes: 62 39.5%
  • Yes, this scenario is well-made.

    Votes: 26 16.6%
  • Yes, but improvements could be made.

    Votes: 11 7.0%
  • I cannot vote at this time.

    Votes: 47 29.9%
  • No, I didn't really like it.

    Votes: 11 7.0%

  • Total voters
    157
I've completely updated the Scenario Index on the front page of this thread, for those who might be interested. Upcoming changes, bugs, versions, and the basic scenario information at the top all have been updated.

If someone could upload for me the following screenshots, it'd be most appreciated:

1) a screenshot, as the Confederate Player, of Virginia (eastern/central preferred) and surrounding area.
2) a screenshot, as the Confederate Player, of Tennessee/Kentucky (if western and/or eastern is chopped off, that's ok)
3) a screenshot, as the Confederate Player, of the Gulf Coast region, zoomed out. From Louisiana to Florida.
 
I've noticed that the scenario is getting more high marks from people, that's really nice to see. I encourage everyone to at least vote in the poll after playing the scenario, so that myself and the other creators/play-testers of the scenario know how we are doing. Even if you don't like the scenario, please vote so in the poll.

Feedback in this thread is just as good. :)
 
"And 2.12a does have the Home Guards intact?" Procifica

Yes it have and waiting time is zero.

I have 1 200 MHz celeron(not so much these days).
Can others who have installed 2.12a confirm no
waiting time?
 
I am making a 80-turn playtest with 2.12a now.
(Human Union versus computer CSA.)

30 turns so far.
I can assure you that since there is no waiting time
its give play of the scenario a whole new pace.

In the East Manassas and Winchester is under siege.
I have bypassed them and are controlling Westvirginia
and 80% of Virginia.

In the West CSA is under hard pressure and I intend to
cut CSA in to two pieces.

I have played an extreme aggresive strategy and my losses
are enormous.
Due to the gigantic losses situation is quite open and it will
be interesting to see what will follow.
 
2.12a playtest terminated after 55 turns.

CSA managed to regain most of Virginia at game-turn 40.
In the West deadlock and when terminating at game-turn 55:
general stalemate.

With regard to scenario play-balance i think this test was
positive. It shows that AI can respond to overoptimistic
human play. A landing from the sea (with 12 units)
agaist Wilmington was easily repulsed by CSA.

Rocoteh
 
Excellent!! :)

This is excellent feedback for the scenario.

Now, do you think the defense is a little too strong? Or do you think that a less aggressive approach would have enabled you to keep your gains better, than the extreme aggressive approach?

I think I might have to make very SMALL defensive adjustments, to keep balance between attack and defense. Probably will be terrain and city defense factors, being reduced a very small amount.

How is artillery, is it somewhat effective?
 
Version 2.13PRE is up, with the Engineer/Slave costs reduced by 20%, and a few minor defense adjustments to balance the attack/defense better. Also, a bug that didn't allow either side to build divisions/corps/armies/battalions is fixed in this version.
 
Thank you.

I think defense is OK. A less aggresive strategy should
have been better. Now the Union made great early
gains but heavy losses stopped further advance.
CSA could counterattack and regain Virginia.

Artillery is rather ineffective in sieges against cities,but
of great value in field battles. That seems to be OK.

With no waiting time between turns you are now getting
the "one more turn feeling".

That`s perhaps the best rating a scenario or game can get.
 
Well, what I did was I reduced city/metropolis defense from 10/20 to 8/15, that's a very small change. And I adjusted Walls down from 30% to 25%, but I increased Fortress from 20% to 25% to make up for it. This provides a little less defense early on but enables someone to get that defense back later on in the tech tree. Its more incentive to research the fortifications line of the tech tree, in my opinion.

Good, Artillery is having the desired effect. Have you managed to build Heavy and/or Siege Howitzers yet? These are supposed to be good for city sieges and against strong fortifications. They have low rate of fire and range but high bombard values.

With no waiting time between turns you are now getting
the "one more turn feeling".

That is really good to hear. With 14 votes saying this should be sent to Firaxis, I'm thinking the scenario is finally getting on the right track. :)

I think what's interesting to note is except out west, what happened to you is similar to what happened in the actual civil war history. At least with regard to the Union taking a large part of Virginia, then losing most of it again later on.

To everyone: Rocoteh and I would greatly value anyone else's feedback on this scenario. Any feedback you give helps make future versions of the scenario better for everyone.
 
In the next playtest I intend to use a "slow steamroller
strategy".I had no Siege Howitzers during the last
playtest, but will build now to crush strongholds.

I think it was very positive that AI could repulse the
landing from the sea.Otherwise landings from the sea
could have been a simple human strategy against CSA-AI.

Concerning feedback: Yes send in battle reports (short or
long reports) reflections and opinions.

Your feedback is of great value.
 
Well, Siege Howitzers are further down the tech tree, while Heavy Howitzers can be gained fairly early if you research the techs in the right order.

Heavy Howitzer is 20 bombard, while Siege Howitzer is 25 bombard.

Whenver I upload a bug fix or a new version, Siege Howitzer will have 1 more defense (3 instead of 2) and a cost of 350 instead of 340. This is just to make Siege Howitzer more desirable/more advantageous compared to Heavy Howitzer.

The Light Howitzer is 14 bombard, and is available to the Union at the start of the scenario to build. For the Confederacy, its Artillery Tactics tech which can be researched right away. It also is meant for sieges and against strong fortifications, because of its short range and low rate of fire.

Basically, Howitzers are for sieges and fortifications, and the other "field guns" are meant for regular use against troops.
 
I think it was very positive that AI could repulse the
landing from the sea.Otherwise landings from the sea
could have been a simple human strategy against CSA-AI.

I totally agree with this, I didn't think the AI would be smart enough to oppose a sea-borne landing. Of course, transports can only transport 3 units at a time, so it can take time to amass enough to make such an effort. But the AI reacting quickly to it is certainly VERY positive and is VERY realistic.
 
As I have stated before: ACW is the ultimate scenario
for hotseat or Internet play. For those who want a
short game you can agree that control of key cities
should result in victory.

During the Golden Age of strategy-boardgames
(That is the S.P.I.-era) feedback showed that 90%
of the games were played solitaire.

That was more than 20 years ago and things may
have changed with computer strategy-games.
 
Worked for me, try refreshing your page.
 
Very strange, it still not works.

Never seen this before.
(On this counter.)
Let`s hope that is only my computer
which is the problem.
 
More feedback:

All feedback is appreciated.
You do not need to write long reports.

All battle-reports, reflections, observations,
ideas, thoughts etc. are welcome!

Rocoteh
 
Hoping that work on the larger map is continued...problems like the one below are strategically significant.

Great to see the 76% bug appears to be killed!! Hope to give it a try soon!


Originally posted by Procifica


I'll lower the aggression level of both sides to the lowest possible spot, to reduce razing. If I make the rivers bypass cities, the map would look horrible and unrealistic. :(
 
Work on the larger map is temporarily on hold, because I have very little time to devote to the scenario until my work schedules get more stablized. I've put in over 45 hours this week, and have 38 next week.

My next priorities for the scenario are on the front page, under upcoming changes and updates.

Reminds me, I forgot to update the aggression levels, will do so for next bug fix/small update.

Far as I know, the 76% bug is gone and gone for good. No one has reported any problems with it, and I personally have had none since Version 2.10PRE.

I really want the larger map finished eventually as well, because there is SOOOO much more that I can do with it, as far as city placement and river placement and such. Movement rates on that map will be increased so the scenario takes roughly the same amount of time on both maps.
 
This has been downloaded 4 time(s).

This is what the "counter" says for me.
 
Top Bottom