A House Divided 1861 - 1865 ToT scenario released

Count and threshold are the same, the manual is wrong. It's just threshold, as soon as the 'count' is reached, the event is triggered. Subsequent flags are irrelevant. This was revealed by the ToT staff during the discussion on the threads following the release of ToT on Apolyton back in the day.

Thanks for the clarification, te.

So, either count or threshold can be used in an event, and it will behave like the manual's definition of threshold. I see no problems in that.

The higher movement worked! It took a turn or two before anything changed, but the Confederates suddenly busted out of the seige of Richmond-Petersburg, pushing the Union army back to Fredericksburg, and wiping out the forces that had moved down the Shenandoah Valley and enveloped the Confederate capital from the south and west.

Unfortunately, there is still no sign of movement on the part of the British and French. In the meantime, Sherman captured Atlanta in the nick of time to get Lincloln re-elected so that I can now lose the scenario with honor.

I increased the MF of all ground combat units (only) by 1 except those which started at 1 MF, and those were increased by 2. This means that Seige Mortars have the same MF (3) as other infantry and artillery units, something that may not be desireable, but a MF of 2 would mean that they would 'fort-up' and not move or attack.

techumseh said:

The higher movement worked! ...

Click to expand...

Hi Tech,

This sounds like great news! I was pondering which of the previously mentioned options I should implement. I was leaning towards changing the tile attributes to Airfield but was concerned I might have to rebalance all my attack factors which would have meant another round of thorough testing. If this ends up being the right solution I owe you a debt of gratitude.

techumseh said:

Unfortunately, there is still no sign of movement on the part of the British and French...

Click to expand...

I'm not as concerned about the French/British forces lack of aggressiveness though it would be nice to fix that problem as well. In the end, I added the European intervention event to act as an unwelcome diversion for the Union and not as an invasion force poised to overrun the North. Having to redirect Union forces to deal with the various European forces places an increased burden on the Union's already tight timeframe. A few months time to deal with the European threat can mean the difference between winning and losing the war.

techumseh said:

I increased the MF of all ground combat units (only) by 1 except those which started at 1 MF, and those were increased by 2...

Click to expand...

I presume you mean you increased the MF of the Confederate ground units only and not those of the Union? Could you attach your version of the rules.txt file.

For testing events for Election 1864, here is a set of events that works. In order to keep track of what is happening there are more events than will be needed in the scen.

If you try them, when you end a turn, expect a series of popups where the first one dealing with Group A, Group B and Lincoln's election are the important ones. The rest in each group are for testing purposes, courtesy of a very limited events language.


For example, if you get the following sequences, the popups in red are the correct ones.

3 GROUP A FLAGS ON
2 GROUP A FLAGS ON
1 GROUP A FLAG ON

6 GROUP B FLAGS ON
5 GROUP B FLAGS ON
4 GROUP B FLAGS ON
3 GROUP B FLAGS ON
2 GROUP B FLAGS ON
1 GROUP B FLAG ON

2 objectives
Lincoln victorious. Union saved. War continues.1 objective

1 objective
Lincoln defeated, war over. Union split. Long live the Rebs!


.

tootall, PM me your email address, so I can send you files, etc. Thanks.

Techumseh, as requested I've sent you the information by PM. Thank you for your help!

After several false trails, the non-aggression issue is solved. The Confederate attitude towards the Union in the scenario is set at '0' (true love). When it's reset to '100' (utter disgust), the Rebs go all out to kill the Yanks.

Hi Tech,

This is good news indeed. As I mentioned in our email exchanges, I had to re-build the scenario from scratch maybe a week or more before the release and I obviously forgot to reset the Treaties and Attitudes parameters between the belligerents in the latest .scn file. That finally explains why during your testing the Rebels martial attitude was timid, whereas the opposite was true for me. Thank you very much for your perseverance.

As discussed, I would like to test your recommendation to increase the MP of the ground units by 1. I should be able to retest it this weekend and hopefully release an updated version of the scenario within the next few days.

In addition, I would also like to implement the original 1864 Election event, i.e. requiring the Union player to capture 6 of 9 objectives before November 1864 (rather than the current 3 of 4). Unfortunately, I haven't been able to successfully implement Agricola's recommended formula to date. It's not a show stopper and the scenario will work just as well if I can't fix it but I want to keep trying because I feel the 6 of 9 objectives requirement is more realistic and challenging.

Contrary to fears that higher movement would tip the balance in favour of the human player, in my new playtest game, the Confederates have me very much on the defensive in the East. Control of Harper's Ferry shifted back and forth, until the Confederates broke out on turn 4, threatening several cities in western Pennsylvania. It took me 3 more turns to secure my rear area, then a second attempt to retake Harper's Ferry was pre-empted by another Confederate attack. I can't spare any extra troops right now to join Farragut's expedition to New Orleans, and my riverine forces at Cairo have been under attack as well. It's quite fun!

Let me take a look at the victory events - they should be quite straight forward.

Thanks in large part to Techumseh's and Agricola's invaluable feedback, I've been making many adjustments to my scenario. The process has taken longer than originally anticipated. I would like to do one final full scenario test this week before releasing version 1.1, hopefully by next weekend.

To date here are the new changes I've applied:

•Thanks to Techumseh, replaced the old summer/winter terrain graphics with, I believe, a more natural and realistic looking set.
•Reset the Treaties and Attitude parameters to fix the previous lack of Confederate unit aggressiveness
•Added +1 MP to all infantry, cavalry and leader units.
•Added + 1MP to Light Artillery and Freight units
•Reduce the cargo capacity of the 'Clipper' unit from 3 to 2
•Added the Navigation and Flight technologies to reduce the trade unit gold payoffs.
•Doubled the number of Confederate Privateer units that get randomly generated
•Modified the 1864 Election event. It now takes 6 of 9 cities to meet the 'Win' requirement (rather than the original 3 of 4)
•Added the new 'Battlefield Advances' technology as a requirement to access the 'Repeating Rifles', 'Machine Tools' and 'Heavy Artillery' advances path
•Made a few small other adjustments to the Tech Tree ('Armor Plating' no longer a prerequisite for 'Field Artillery')
•Confirmed in ReadMe that it is permissible to re-home your units in Confederate and Border States cities
•Inserted House Rule #6, which forbids relocating Lincoln
•Inserted House Rule #7, which forbids re-homing of freight units
•Relocated the French Georgia intervention to the Gulf of Mexico region
•Refocused British military deployment in Canada
•Modified British New England invasion
•Added new European Frigate in British/French ports if European Intervention is activated
•Added the ModifyReputation event to reset the French/British negative attitude to 100 whenever European Intervention is activated
•Updated ReadMe with all latest changes and credits due.

tootall,

After a month or two's break from Civ2 I decided to give A House Divided a go. It has definately got me back into the Civ2 mood! Here is a little feedback. I think most of the points have been made already and you have found solutions.

- In the first year or so the Rebels pose virtually no threat to the Union and don't attack. (Sounds like this has been solved).

- Sending masses of Freight Trains across America and the Atlantic is a tedious task. I would prefer to see a more limited number of high pay off Freigh Trains than have to produce hundreds! As soon as I had completed the tech tree in September 1862 I just put the tax rate up and the science rate down and fortified all my ships in harbour so I could concentrate on the land war.

- At no stage was my trade threatened by the Rebel navy. This would have made things more interesting.

I'm currently in August 1863 and have captured Richmond, Petersburg, Norfolk and Raleigh in the East, Memphis, Corinth and New Orleans in the West and I'm fighting a big battle for Nashville and Chattanooga. The Rebels began to fight back around December 1862 and from that point on the scenario became a lot more interesting. I'm going to try and complete it today.

A House Divided is a very well made scenario and I look forward to trying it again once you have made the changes you mention in your above post. I have had a lot of fun playing it. Thanks!

PS I have kept all of my saves if you would like me to send them to you.

Just listened to the Gettysburg Address whilst the battle raged on the map. Surprisingly poignant for a bunch of pixels killing each other! Nice touch!

McMonkey said:

...After a month or two's break from Civ2 I decided to give A House Divided a go. It has definately got me back into the Civ2 mood! Here is a little feedback. I think most of the points have been made already and you have found solutions.

Click to expand...

I completely understand your need to take a break. I have to admit I'm eager myself to put the finishing touches to this scenario and move on to other projects.

McMonkey said:

- In the first year or so the Rebels pose virtually no threat to the Union and don't attack. (Sounds like this has been solved).

Click to expand...

Yes, unfortunaley, as I indicated in a previous post prior to releasing v 1.0, I had to rebuild the scenario from scratch but forgot to reset the Treaties and Attitude parameters. Thanks to Techumseh's dogged perseverance he located the problem and I've subsequently reset these parameters for version 1.1 and you should see a very marked difference in terms of the Rebel level of aggressivness.

McMonkey said:

- Sending masses of Freight Trains across America and the Atlantic is a tedious task. I would prefer to see a more limited number of high pay off Freigh Trains than have to produce hundreds!

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, I've taken the opposite approach to what you are suggesting. During Agricola's testing he was actually producing HUGE amounts of gold with his freight units, so much so that it was, in my opinion, causing a massive imbalance in the intended game flow. That's why I added the Navigation and Flight technologies in the tech tree in my next version to reduce the amount of gold payoffs attributed to trade units.

McMonkey said:

- As soon as I had completed the tech tree in September 1862 I just put the tax rate up and the science rate down and fortified all my ships in harbour so I could concentrate on the land war.

Click to expand...

I've added a new 'Battlefield Advances' technology that can only be accessed by events in the game, i.e. you have to capture a specific number of cities. Until you've received this new tech you cannot access the 'Repeating Rifles', 'Machine Tools' and 'Heavy Artillery' technological path.

McMonkey said:

- At no stage was my trade threatened by the Rebel navy. This would have made things more interesting.

Click to expand...

In version 1.1, I've doubled the number of confederate Privateer naval units that can get generated, though my testing is still inconclusive about this truly being a threat to Union shipping. I'm not certain whether I will be able to find a solution to resolve this, other than creating even more privateers units.

McMonkey said:

Just listened to the Gettysburg Address whilst the battle raged on the map. Surprisingly poignant for a bunch of pixels killing each other! Nice touch!

Click to expand...

I'm glad you appreciated it. I like, whenever possible, to add a special event related to the period in question. I did a similar type of thing in my Battle of Iwo Jima scenario with regards the capture of Mt. Suribachi.

McMonkey said:

I'm currently in August 1863 and have captured Richmond, Petersburg, ...

Click to expand...

I'm curious, when you captured Richmond and Petersburg, had you already researched the 'Machine Tools' and 'Heavy Artillery' advances and built US Canon Rifle and US Siege Mortar units to capture the cities in question?

Yes I had those techs by September 1862. Without them the capture would have been much more difficult.

Just completed the scenario in January 1865 with the capture of Mobile. I think if I had put more effort into sending troops south via ships to support my limited attack on New Orleans I could have completed the scenario sooner. The Rebels blowing the railroads slowed my land armies down considerably, nice touch!

I thoroughly enjoyed this very well made scenario and will play it again when the new changes have been applied. I think with a more aggressive AI from the start it would have been perfect. The fact that it took me until January 1865 with the easier files shows that it is a challenging scenario to complete in time. This will have to go on my list of all time favourite scenarios. Bloody good work Tootall!

I have included my saves for your reference. I kept notes on my progress but in written form. If you need any info give me a shout.

Hi McMonkey,

Whew! I'm glad to hear you had the techs, though you were able to develop them much quicker than I thought players could. Without the Canon Rifle and Siege Mortar units it should be much much more difficult to capture these cities, or win the game for that matter. It just reinforces my belief that adding the 'Battlefield Advances' tech to slow the progress down is the right way to go.

I think you will find the greater Confederate aggressivness a game changer in terms of your playing style, i.e. you won't be able just to walk up to them anymore without seeing frequent and aggressive counter-attacks on their part.

I'm obviously very pleased to hear you enjoyed the scenario. It gives me an extra incentive to finalize my testing this week so that I can release v1.1.

I'm not certain your save files would be compatible with my rules files anymore. I did send you a PM message back in March with my email address if you want to share your notes.

I've made a series of modifications to my original scenario design thanks in large part to the feedback from Agricola and Techumseh. Their testing and observations made light of some design flaws and playability issues that had escaped my attention during my own original testing. As such I would like to extend a heartfelt thanks for their aid. Here is list of the primary changes:

• Thanks to Techumseh, replaced the old summer/winter terrain graphics with, I believe, a more natural and realistic looking set.
• Reset the Treaties and Attitude parameters to fix the previous lack of Confederate unit aggressiveness
• Added +1 MP to all infantry, cavalry, light artillery, leader and freight train units.
• Reduced the cargo capacity of the 'Clipper' unit from 3 to 2
• Added the Navigation and Flight technologies to reduce the trade unit gold payoffs.
• Tripled the number of Confederate Privateer units that get randomly generated
• Made small modifications to the Confederate and Border States unit starting set up.
• Modified the 1864 Election event. It now takes 6 of 9 cities to meet the 'Win' requirement (rather than the original 3 of 4)
• Added a new 'Battlefield Advances' technology as a requirement to access the 'Repeating Rifles', 'Machine Tools' and 'Heavy Artillery' advances path
• Made a few small other adjustments to the Tech Tree
• Confirmed in ReadMe that it is permissible to re-home your units in Confederate and Border States cities
• Removed from the event file many of the previous repeating messages
• Inserted House Rule #6, which forbids relocating Lincoln
• Inserted House Rule #7, which forbids re-homing of freight units
• Relocated the French Georgia intervention to the Gulf of Mexico region
• Enhanced British military deployment in Canada
• Modified British New England invasion
• Added new European Frigate in British/French ports if European Intervention is activated
• Added the ModifyReputation event to reset the French/British negative attitude to 100 whenever European Intervention is activated
• Added a new Appendix B: City Improvements and Wonders to ReadMe, in addition to updating the document with all latest changes and credits due.

I hope these changes will enhance the players overall experience of the scenario. You can find all the new game zip files and screen shots at http://sleague.civfanatics.com/index.php/A_House_Divided_1861_-1865

I believe these changes will make the difference between a good and an excellent scenario. I look forward to playing again.

I thought I'd have another go at this excellent scenario. I lost another game when the Democrats won the '64 election. I need to sharpen my research priorities to get rifled cannons earlier, and start building the rail line to Chattanooga much sooner. It's really lots of fun.

Late in '63, the Confederate attacks fall off again. It's the same problem, the Confederates stop disliking the Union, so they don't attack. They were down to 40, so I used the cheat menu to put it back to 100, and the rebels were back in action.

I'm trying this event to convince the Confederates that the Union must be attacked:

@IF
RANDOMTURN
denominator=10
@THEN
ModifyReputation
who=Union
betray=8
@ENDIF

This will periodically reset the Union reputation to 'despicable'. It should alter the Confederate attitude to the Union and keep it at full dislike.