California

[Chris Long]

How are California and the West Coast regions handled in FoF?

[AU Tiger_MatrixForum]

Like they were IRL. Not a factor I imagine. All the real action was in the east. There was no trans-continental railroad then, so the far west had little to no impact. Look on the bright side though, USC was still undefeated then.[:D]


Nice quote from the teach btw.

[jimwinsor]

The far far west (ie, New Mexico, California, etc) is not covered in the game.  The furthest west the map goes is Indian Territory.
 
Not a bad design call IMO as the New Mexico theater was too small to be well represented in a brigade unit game.

[Chris Long]

That is what I figured.  But does the Union get an income bonus from taxes and so forth from the West?
[align=left] [/align]

[Grifman]

ORIGINAL: Chris Long

That is what I figured. But does the Union get an income bonus from taxes and so forth from the West?
[align=left] [/align]

Doesn't seem so but you can consider it abstracted in the numbers for practicality sake. The West didn't have all that many people anyway at the time.

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: Grifman

ORIGINAL: Chris Long

That is what I figured. But does the Union get an income bonus from taxes and so forth from the West?
[align=left] [/align]

Doesn't seem so but you can consider it abstracted in the numbers for practicality sake. The West didn't have all that many people anyway at the time.

The Union's War was financed on California Gold and Nevada Silver, so hopefully the far West does show up as a monetary source in the game. If not, it's a serious flaw in the game.

[Gil R.]

As noted above, the map extends as far west as Indian Territory, which is present-day Oklahoma. To have included the entire country would have made the map too large. We do not include money from California, but the Union does not lack for resources, so it doesn't impact the game. (As is being shown in the PBEM AAR, resources come from specific cities and provinces within the game, so having money come from elsewhere would require additional programming that wouldn't add anything to game-play.) However, we most certainly do have the California Brigade as one of our "Legendary Units," so the state's contribution does not go unrecognized.

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

As noted above, the map extends as far west as Indian Territory, which is present-day Oklahoma. To have included the entire country would have made the map too large. We do not include money from California, but the Union does not lack for resources, so it doesn't impact the game. (As is being shown in the PBEM AAR, resources come from specific cities and provinces within the game, so having money come from elsewhere would require additional programming that wouldn't add anything to game-play.) However, we most certainly do have the California Brigade as one of our "Legendary Units," so the state's contribution does not go unrecognized.

Million's of dollars worth of "hard currency" at a time when inflation is eating both sides resources and credability, and you have chosen to "ignore" it? I didn't expect California or Nevada to be on the map (the South couldn't do anything that far away in any case); but I did expect their contribution to show up on the docks at New York or other ports. No wonder the Union is hurting for money. Sad gentlemen, really sad....

[Hard Sarge]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

ORIGINAL: Grifman

ORIGINAL: Chris Long

That is what I figured. But does the Union get an income bonus from taxes and so forth from the West?
[align=left] [/align]

Doesn't seem so but you can consider it abstracted in the numbers for practicality sake. The West didn't have all that many people anyway at the time.

The Union's War was financed on California Gold and Nevada Silver, so hopefully the far West does show up as a monetary source in the game. If not, it's a serious flaw in the game.

Dang Mike, everything in the game is a serious flaw to you

ahhh, the Union has much more money then the CSA, so I assumed some of the West's money was included in the design

some of this, you are going to have to see in "action" and then complain about it and see if it can be corrected, then to complain about everything in the public forum before you see it

[jimwinsor]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

As noted above, the map extends as far west as Indian Territory, which is present-day Oklahoma. To have included the entire country would have made the map too large. We do not include money from California, but the Union does not lack for resources, so it doesn't impact the game. (As is being shown in the PBEM AAR, resources come from specific cities and provinces within the game, so having money come from elsewhere would require additional programming that wouldn't add anything to game-play.) However, we most certainly do have the California Brigade as one of our "Legendary Units," so the state's contribution does not go unrecognized.

Million's of dollars worth of "hard currency" at a time when inflation is eating both sides resources and credability, and you have chosen to "ignore" it? I didn't expect California or Nevada to be on the map (the South couldn't do anything that far away in any case); but I did expect their contribution to show up on the docks at New York or other ports. No wonder the Union is hurting for money. Sad gentlemen, really sad....

Who's to say that that contribution is not showing up at the docks of NY or other ports? If you take a look-see at the economic spreadsheet screenshots of the AAR, you'll see certain northern cities (NY and Boston especially) with very large money production stats. Could not some of that wealth presumably be gold from the west you claim financed the Union war effort? Both cities have lots of Mints and Banks, which in the game are the building improvements which abstractly represent money production. And in real life, are the buildings which un-abstractly converts bullion into usable currency and facilitates capital investment.

Anyways, if you find this sort design-for-effect philosophy in a game "sad" well, my advice to you is to pass on this game...it's not for you. It sounds to me like you are looking for (as someone else here put it) a "War in the Pacific" treatment of the ACW...and this game is not it. There are many more design-for-effect abstractions present in this game design (as with it's sister game, CoG) that I predict will similarly disappoint you, and others who demand games with every little niggly detail represented un-abstractly...no matter how complex this causes a game to be.

[regularbird]

Once again I find myself defending my McClellan adversary.  What Mike's points lack in tact they make up for in substance.  From reading the AAR it seems to me that the south is close to equal footing with north in terms of producing money.  Now that can be because JC has made some mistakes in the fiscal department but It still seems rather close and that should not be the case.
 
I love what Eric and company have done and I really appreciate the way they take much time in answering questions and listening to suggestions.  I will forever be a loyal customer because of it, however many folks have been waiting for an excellent ACW game since CWG3 was put on a shelf.  I understand Mike's passion at wanting this game to be perfect.  I know it is not going to fill all of my expectation, no game ever will.  I think Eric will be open to making improvements as he was with COG.
 
Please listen to some of Mike's suggestions Eric he makes excellent points that I am sure will help in perfecting your product.

[Gil R.]

Jimwinsor is, of course, correct. My point was that we don't have money specifically noted as being California money, but the Union's greater wealth in the game reflects historical reality. Reprogramming the game to state "This pile of money comes from the good people of California" would not change game-play at all. But, as I noted above, it was important to recognize that California did have a role in the Civil War, so the California Brigade was included.

[Hard Sarge]

okay, here is the starting money in the game


Union

[Hard Sarge]

and CSA

[Hard Sarge]

now factor in that a Mint will give you a 2 dollar a turn gain, that is a decent edge in money the Union gets ?


plus there edge in Iron and labor

what the Union lacks is Horses, and if Kentucky joins the Union, that is a big jump in Horses for them

[jimwinsor]

And if that starting money is not to your liking, for either play balance or history reasons, it should be pointed out that like CoG the game is fairly easily moddable.  Data for starting forces, leaders, provinces, buildings, etc. are all in .txt files in the game directory...the are not hard-coded in other words...hence if you don't mind getting "under the hood" a bit if the stats above (any many others) can be modded to your liking.  Want more money for the Union?  Just add some Mints in Cleveland (or wherever).
 
I'm a habitual modder myself, which is one of the reasons I like these WCS games so much I think.

[regularbird]

Thanks HS,
 
These numbers do not include the large bonus cash and resources the south gets from blockade running.  Once you add that in I think the advantage basically dissappears.  Is there any way the north can use runners to trade with Europe?  I think after I play a few games I can better evaluate but at first glance it looks like the North has very little in way of advantage.
 
This reminds me of another thought I forgot to mention.  Correct me if I am wrong but it takes horse to make camps, camps give you reinforcements ie soldiers/recruits.  The north had a large advantage in the warm body department so why use horses to be the number 1 factor in determining troop strength?  Just curious.

[regularbird]

Great,

I think I may be doing a little tinkering myself.

[Hard Sarge]

ORIGINAL: regularbird

Thanks HS,

These numbers do not include the large bonus cash and resources the south gets from blockade running. Once you add that in I think the advantage basically dissappears. Is there any way the north can use runners to trade with Europe? I think after I play a few games I can better evaluate but at first glance it looks like the North has very little in way of advantage.

This reminds me of another thought I forgot to mention. Correct me if I am wrong but it takes horse to make camps, camps give you reinforcements ie soldiers/recruits. The north had a large advantage in the warm body department so why use horses to be the number 1 factor in determining troop strength? Just curious.

Well, I have mentioned before, that the Union needs around 4000 men at the start of the game to fill out its bdes, the CSA needs around 220000

questions about the whys and hows, should be pointed towards JC, he was the resource man (and if left to him, I think the numbers would be even lower

plus camps do not stop you from building new units

[regularbird]

Sarge, can you count up the total poulation for the CSA cities and compare that to the starting pop for the USA in the game. I would hope we find a large difference, I am afraid that we may not.