SCENARIO: American Civil War - C3C only

I've got two different looks available for the Fortress & Barricades. Tell me which you think looks more period historic.

Please note: I've changed the Swamp terrain from V3.9 to the Marsh terrain from Conquests. I think it makes for a much cleaner look in the deep South.

(The Fortress is western most art on the tip of New Orleans, the Fortress with Barricade is the art to the east).
 

Attachments

  • 2 of 2.jpg
    2 of 2.jpg
    79.8 KB · Views: 351
I'm trying to figure out what you mean by which looks more historic, as they look similar to me (one being a bit larger).

I fully concur with the change to marsh terrain.
 
Misfit, one error on your tree. Industrialization should lead to Ironclads, not Economics.
 
Originally posted by Procifica
I'm trying to figure out what you mean by which looks more historic, as they look similar to me (one being a bit larger).

I fully concur with the change to marsh terrain.



Keep in mind that there are two posts to look at Post #60 and #61. Unfortunately, they are split over two pages. Post #60 shows new artwork for fortress and barricades, while Post #61 shows the standard C3C artwork.

Misfit

PS: I noted the mistake in Prereq. for Ironclads. I'll fix it. Thanks.
 
That looks good, considering most of the Native Americans in ACW are plains tribes.
 
I can't really say which looks more historical, but I like post 60's better.
 
Have you guys considdered making a smaller version of this scenario? I for one cant run the scenario properly because of the size, and im pretty sure im not alone.
 
Originally posted by Yoda Power
Have you guys considdered making a smaller version of this scenario? I for one cant run the scenario properly because of the size, and im pretty sure im not alone.



Yoda Power:

Are you using v3.91 of the scenario? It loads in about 1 minute on a Pentium IV computer. It is C3C only.

V3.8 is PTW and has the same functionality. You can get that at the main ACW thread.

We are still trying to get v4.0 out the door, but at that point we will likely look at shorten versions, like objective city based (we are playing a PBEM now to test that out) or victory point.

A smaller map version might be hard to do unless we chop off everything west of Missouri. That hasn't really been discussed in any detail in any of the ACW threads that I'm aware of.

Regards,
Misfit
 
Originally posted by Procifica
I can't really say which looks more historical, but I like post 60's better.



So did I. I wonder what dreadknought, Last Conformist and Rocoteh will say. I guess it will be after Christmas before we hear back from them.

Misfit
 
Yoda Power, my Pentium III 600 MHz/384 MB RAM pos has about 3 minutes loading time for Civ3 version (3.01), and I'm told the load time is faster with Conquests.

When I'm finished with ACW2, I can explore the concept of making a smaller map version. Such a map would be 160 (23 North to 47 North latitude) X 108 (68 West to 95 West longitude), which would end on a line roughly from just west of St. Paul; Topeka, KS region; Houston/Galvestion region. It would be the same scale as ACW/ACW C3C. This would exclude the Native Americans from the scenario, as well as most of Texas, parts of Minnesota and Iowa, and the frontier forts. It would be about 33% smaller than the ACW/ACW C3C map.


Is there a way to crop off a map in a .bic/.bix/.biq file to fit smaller dimensions?
 
Here is my first draft of the strategy guide. Its written like the graduating address to West Point class of 1861. I figured it was a little more fun to get into the spirit of the scenario.

Its intended as more of "don't do this" than a road map to success. We wanted to have newbies avoid some of the major pitfalls which would make the scenario unenjoyable.

Regards
misfit
 

Attachments

  • west point strategy guide acw c3c.txt
    6 KB · Views: 163
Historical realism just doesn't sound right in that draft for my "title".

While you're not changing the naval OOB in ACW C3C I presume, I will be lowering the # of ships for both sides in ACW2, to give a more accurate reflection of naval weakness on both sides.
 
Misfit_travel,

I think you have done a 100% work!

With regard to Yoda Power I notice that he did
post 1 (one) time(out of 2 300) in the general ACW-thread, launched
April 6 by Procifica.

I hope that the sudden interest for ACW is not connected
to Procificas Napoleon-wars scenario plans.

Rocoteh
 
I'm glad to see his interest in ACW, whether or not the Napoleonic Wars had anything to do with it (I don't see the connection here).

If there are indeed problems with running the scenario on lower end computers, then I'm willing to devote some time to make a smaller version. I'm not sure how much of a difference 160 X 108 would make, but it is smaller than a 140 X 140 map, and only very slightly larger than a 130 X 130 map (16900 for 130 X 130 vs. 17280 for the 160 X 108).

Yoda, what is the largest size Civ3/PTW/C3C map you can usually play on with your computer? And what are the basic specs of said computer? This kind of information would be useful.

If necessary, I probably could chop off a few degrees of latitude from the northern part of the map (44 degrees latitude would be the lowest I could go without chopping off important cities), and I could raise the southern latitude from 23 degrees to 24 degrees of latitude. And, I could move the eastern boundary from 68 degrees west longitude to 70 degrees west longtiude. This would make the map approximately 130 X 100. Still with the same scale as ACW, but only about 1/2 the size.
 
Procifica,

If you do not see a connection, I suggest you
read the Grognards-thread!

Otherwise you can read a PM send to you and
you will save a lot of time.

Rocoteh
 
Originally posted by Procifica
Historical realism just doesn't sound right in that draft for my "title".

While you're not changing the naval OOB in ACW C3C I presume, I will be lowering the # of ships for both sides in ACW2, to give a more accurate reflection of naval weakness on both sides.


I was having a little fun with it. Pick your title, I'll update accordingly.

Misfit
 
Rocoteh: It seems there was conflict between you and Steph/LouLong about 3 months ago, but I don't see anything between you and Yoda Power. I'm hoping we can keep such issues to PM, as it doesn't look good for everyone to read about such problems. I mean no disrespect to you at all, I just think this thread isn't the place.


Misfit_Travel: I'll get back to you on that.
 
Procifica,

This thread was started by Misfit_travel.
I am not interested to hear morale from you.

I have responded your post, that no one called
for, with a personal message.

Rocoteh
 
Top Bottom