Your message in a bottle has finally drifted ashore.
But you're going have to be patient a while longer, because I've just started playing the game again after a break of three or four years.
Ok, well, I've tried playing a couple of times as the Union up to 1863, and heavens it's challenging, although perhaps that's because I am playing with both random and hidden leader traits. I always liked that aspect of other Civil War games, and I can't imagine playing one with all the leaders' abilities know from the beginning. That seems crazy. Not, of course, that this game truly randomizes the leaders' abilities. Grant and Sherman always seem to do pretty well, etc.
Anyway, I have a question - am I right that partisan activity & therefore the need to garrison those areas NEVER diminishes? That seems odd.
And here's another: Which is the recommended side to play for the less experienced player, which I surely am?
I do believe randoms still keeps the ratios of good reb generals to mediocre yank generals.
a lot of the guys I used to play with wouldn't play with random leaders because you have to be at the top of your game as the rebs or the yanks will pick you apart.
if you let the bushwackers run wild you will initially have to garrison more troops. and the need for those will slowly diminish. but never go away completely. think of it as your kids minding you as long as you can see them.
the yanks are favored to win, definitely their game to lose.
Ok, I guess I am ready to give this a try. You can either PM me here or email me at thbroman@hotmail.com to work out details. Latter will probably catch my eye sooner!
avgard, see my PM. treefrog
if you respond and don't get a response then my email is not working so post here and I'll send you my phone number so we can coordinate.