The Boer War (TBW)

Started up a 0.6 game. Dunno if it was because of anything you did, but the Boers' initial offensive was more effective this time, seizing Colesburg and coming close enough to taking Mafeking and Dundee. With the arrival of he tropps from Cape Town, hower, the Boers have been driven out of Colesburg and the British forces are currently launching an invasion of the Orange Free State.


It feels slightly odd that transport ships are faster than battleships.
 
Aahhh ! Some actual gamplay reports !

Well I made some Boer cavalries veterans and elites. Since the AI does not know very well how to use cannons they use cavalries a lot and that can show.

In a way it is kind of accurate as the Boers lacked proper artillery (that they needed to imprt BTW).

Waiting for more !
 
About the ships, I have asked for advice but nothing so far so I am still a bit lost as to what to use. So v0.7 is delayed until then.

Transport speed issue noted.
 
I'd be happy to give you more once this stops happening LL.
 

Attachments

  • boer error.JPG
    boer error.JPG
    30.4 KB · Views: 263
Hmm ! I kind of understand your embrassement ! :lol

But did you install the v0.6 patch ?

Anyway I should release v0.7 shortly. But I would to have some actual gameplay feedback prior to that.
 
Not embarassed at all. It wasn't all that clear from the OP that you've got a patch. At least it wasn't to me. Perhaps you should neaten it, if possible, so that there is just one DL besides the biq?

EDIT: Well we're patched and ready to go over here! Unless there's a good reason, I recommend sticking those txt files from the patch straight into the main zip file. But you may have a good reason.
 
From an article I was reading a short time ago in Military Heritage I came under the impression that the Boers were far better troops than the British. The article was named "An Acre of Massacre: The Battle of Spion Kop" by Herman T. Voelkner. But it didn't just cover the battle they roughly covered the entire war up to that time and a little after that.

So maybe you could make the Boers have less, but more veteran troops.
 
Tank_Guy#3 said:
From an article I was reading a short time ago in Military Heritage I came under the impression that the Boers were far better troops than the British. The article was named "An Acre of Massacre: The Battle of Spion Kop" by Herman T. Voelkner. But it didn't just cover the battle they roughly covered the entire war up to that time and a little after that.

So maybe you could make the Boers have less, but more veteran troops.


Altogether British troops were superior in manpower and therefore firepower and training.
Boer troops were much smaller but more used to the terrain and conditions (including diseases) which gave them a different edge.
In the game this shows by giving expensive but solid troops for the British while giving small (therefore cheap, and sometimes with a 1HP malus (cavalry)) units but with definitely ok stats. Kommandos are actually weaker but faster. In my most recent tests this enable the British to advance through the use of compact columns while if they try to send disorganized troops, these are picked 1 by 1. So I think it represents the situation quite OK.

When the art is ready I will release the new and official/playable version. After that most of the changes will likely be balance so units' strength can be discussed longer (all the more since there aren't so many different units).
 
OK, in a very different tone, I got that PM from someone who has obviously a few problems and probably black (at least I hope for him for that would give him, if not an excuse or a reason, at least a hint of explanation).
I will keep his/her log in name secret to prevent people with both a correct knowledge of language and history to hammer at him...

When I got this first I was wondering if there had not been a mistake made in the recipient's name then I got the picture. This was about this beta.
Then I thought I would not reply or reply something like "get lost" because I was getting angry.
Then quickly I realized it was not worth getting mad as this provocative PM was more fun and ridiculous than anything else. Obvious paranoia, basic anti-white racism, poor knowledge of history and writting skills that are less than clear except for an obvious focus (interest ? ;) ) on rape.

But I thought it could be useful for clarifying at least one point and avoiding such issues in the future.

Here is the PM :

??? said:
I find your game very racist. Why aren't the british called white killers or rapist. How can you be a rebel in your own country. The rebels are the british because they went around the world commiting mass rape, mass genocide and mass murder. Black rebels my foot nail white britons come half way around the world rape your and kill your family and kick you off your land and somehow they are rebels. Yeah ok. I am sure in your opinion the jews were rebels towards and the native towards the french hitler. Your a disgusting racist.

Modern South Africa was then divided into globally 3 parts :
- British direct colonies mostly named Cape and Natal
- Boer States (Orange and Transvaal)
- Small African states under British leadership. These are the ones we are interested in here. These states were not independant but were kind of reservations with a semi-autonomous native leader.
In this scenario I decided to give them a chance by making them independant (as well as the Zulus who had been nevertheless already been incorporated into British Natal colony).
Why ? Because it would create some native African civ with its special looks, units and strategies. English or Boer have little interest in creating such troops while native African civs have little else to build. Besides although they were dependant (this can show game-wise by the way British can supply them with European weapons) it is definitely possible they use this mostly whites vs whites war that exhausted both civs to try and regain their freedom through a rebellion.
This rebellion tech allows the building of hidden nationality units as a rebellion is a popular movement (icnluding among natives of the British colonies) and not an official war. This allows the native civs to attack, weaken the white colonists troops without being directly threatened (as their cities could not resist a British column for instance).
A rebellion does not imply an moral value either good or bad but a political fact. You rebel against the current order and in these areas and at that time they were under British order. A rebellion is therefore an official term. Of course they can be called guerilla, freedom-fighters (the later usually if they succeed). I acknowledge the fact the term of rebellion has been wrongly used by some dictators who tried to condemn it morally but this is an over-use of the word.
Of course I could have simply discarded native civs saying they were non-existent and Austral Africa was only made of white civilizations... and from reading your post and for the historical "accuracy" it focus on maybe I should have put a "black female to rape" unit. But honestly these things did not come to my mind. Maybe I should apologize for it ?
Because I actually gave them existing civs and albeit trying to remain true to history I tried to open the game to "what ifs..." by giving these civs an opportunity to rebel = to get rid of the colonial yoke.

Of course you did not complain I was racist towards Muslims or Belgium people when I put their rebellions in the Great Armada scenario... :)

If I become racist your PM will have contributed to it !!
But look at the C3C maps of Africa. They are mostly ignored and I nevertheless made two with precise resources and stuff.

Either get a life or just enjoy playing this scenario where white men kill other white men. :) Or just don't play anything related to black Africa as nothing historical will probably please you in any of them.
 
LouLong said:
Good catch. Wonder where they had gone. Bookmarked them.
Now which one should I choose ? There are many. Any experts around ?
I can give a different one to British and to Germans.

And I am also interested in a transport. As WWII transport don't really fit.

LouLong:
Go with the casemate BB as paddlewheel frigates were obsolete by 1899.

For a transport , I think there is a Lusitannia in war colors you could use as a troopship.
 
Oops, I should have said it. Unit-wise I am full and satisfied (albeit better choices could probably have been made).
I am just waiting for some nice GFX people here to complete my art requests and this will ship (and will probably need some balance testing/finetuning).

Thanks anyway and sorry for the trouble. And indeed I used the BB Casemate.
 
Hi, just a few suggestions...
this might seem petty but its bushveldt carbineers not carabineers... carbineers as in carbine, which was the type of gun that cavalry troops often used at the time. Carabineers sounds Spanish...
Also would you/did you consider an 'Australia' reinforcement city for the British. The Australians, though few in number, were among the best troops the British had because of their excellent horsemanship and familiar terrain in their own country.

Great scenario by the way! :goodjob:
 
Hi, just a few suggestions...
this might seem petty but its bushveldt carbineers not carabineers... carbineers as in carbine, which was the type of gun that cavalry troops often used at the time. Carabineers sounds Spanish...
Also would you/did you consider an 'Australia' reinforcement city for the British. The Australians, though few in number, were among the best troops the British had because of their excellent horsemanship and similar terrain in their own country.

Great scenario by the way! :goodjob:
 
Actually carabineers is... French I am afraid (I know, I know I should go back to my local French civ website !!!). I will change that and it is not petty, it is useful. Thanks for that.
Well, if you enjoy this bug-loaded beta, you will sure like the complete version (2-3 weeks depending on how my slave-artists are doing :whipped: (no I am kidding, they are not slaves they are :love: ).

Australians were indeed among the many skilled horsemen "hired" by the British. But I am afraid I don't have any gfx for them. And IIRC they were in too small numbers to be built as reinforcements (as Bengal lancers and British colonial troops), weren't they ?
 
Australians were not hired by the British to fight in this war, the men who went were enthusiastic, at least to begin with, volunteers. They were quite important in the later, guerilla phase of the war. However they were small in number, and also many fought in British units. Its just something to consider, i would, but then again, i am Australian and like to see them in there.

keep those slaves working hard!
 
This game is racist all the black people are mystical rebels and the white untis are all liberators yeah ok. You invade a country rape the women and your a white liberator but if you defend yourself then your a black rebel.
 
I'm currently playing the scenario and it seems rather easy from the Boers side.

Game Evolution
On turn 33 I've eliminated the Zulus and conquered 2 British Cities. All the other remain neutral (even though demand for money once in a while).

Comments

Found no BUG. What kind of a Beta version is this without bugs????
I will make a formal complaint in the "Bug Union"!!! :eek:

Militia (unit):
State in the civilopedia that they are immobile, giving them zero movement points. I thought this was a bug!!! But not...

Modern Weapons (Tech):
You can get it (which should allow Gatling) BEFORE military Imports (Tech), but you can only build them if you have European weapons (resource) which only occur with Military Imports (Tech). So maybe Military Imports should be a requirement to search Modern Weapons (Tech) and Overseas Support (Tech)?

European Weapons (resource):
It requires Military Imports (Tech) but in the Civilopedia says Modern Weapons (Tech).

.
 
Back
Top Bottom