California

[AU Tiger_MatrixForum]

C'mon guys...
Give them a break. The game isn't even out yet. Let's see how it plays before jumping all over them about inaccuracies or imbalances. It is obvious they wanted to maintain a playability for both sides in the game. If they wanted to make it TOTALLY accurate, the South would have two chances to win - Slim and None.

[AU Tiger_MatrixForum]

You also have to realize that even though the North had a preponderence of industry and manpower, the North never mobilized to it's full potential like the country did in I and II. The North was VERY divided about the war so a full war-time economy was never possible IRL.

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: AU Tiger

You also have to realize that even though the North had a preponderence of industry and manpower, the North never mobilized to it's full potential like the country did in I and II. The North was VERY divided about the war so a full war-time economy was never possible IRL.

This is true. The Union fought the war "with one hand tied behind it's back"...., and still massively overwhelmed the Confederacy in all forms of production save basic foodstuffs (which the South couldn't get from the farms to the troops).

[AU Tiger_MatrixForum]

I agree. Personnally, I am with-holding judgement on the game until I can play it. I can tell you this: I am REALLY looking forward to getting it. But right now I have more pressing things to deal with such as my loss of two carriers at Wake Island and the AVG getting shot up at Singapore.. [X(]

[Jonathan Palfrey]

ORIGINAL: AU Tiger
It is obvious they wanted to maintain a playability for both sides in the game. If they wanted to make it TOTALLY accurate, the South would have two chances to win - Slim and None.

I don't think this is right. A totally accurate game would give the South the same chance it had in reality: which was probably somewhere between 10% and 40%. If it sells cotton while it can (which a game can reasonably allow it to do) its chance of winning improves. Knowledge of history may give the player other advantages: he may decide to defend New Orleans adequately, for instance. He may improve the railways and make better use of interior lines.

A totally accurate game might still give the North a better chance than the South; but in that case the players can decide to handicap the North in some way to achieve play balance. A handicap should be a deliberate choice by players rather than something unavoidably built into the game.

[Mike Scholl]

"He may improve the railways and make better use of interior lines."


This really isn't an "Historical Option", as 96% of all the RR "equipment" in the nation in 1861 was in the Northern States. The South had 30% of the trackage, but only 4% of the locomotives and rolling stock and maintainence facilities. And Southern Rails were on average quite a bit lighter (as rated in weight per yard of rail), which limited carrying capacity further by limiting axil loading. Making it available in the game is a really big "gimme" for the South.

As chrome, it's not something I object to in a "game" like this. It's something the South would have benefited from if they could have done it, and it's fun to give player's the option. For the North it was already a fact in 1861. And if the South gets Lee, Jaction, etc as a Battlefield advantage, the North should get Hermann Haupt as a Transportation advantage. The Confederates had no-one even remotely comparable.

[Hard Sarge]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

"He may improve the railways and make better use of interior lines."


This really isn't an "Historical Option", as 96% of all the RR "equipment" in the nation in 1861 was in the Northern States. The South had 30% of the trackage, but only 4% of the locomotives and rolling stock and maintainence facilities. And Southern Rails were on average quite a bit lighter (as rated in weight per yard of rail), which limited carrying capacity further by limiting axil loading. Making it available in the game is a really big "gimme" for the South.

As chrome, it's not something I object to in a "game" like this. It's something the South would have benefited from if they could have done it, and it's fun to give player's the option. For the North it was already a fact in 1861. And if the South gets Lee, Jaction, etc as a Battlefield advantage, the North should get Hermann Haupt as a Transportation advantage. The Confederates had no-one even remotely comparable.

look at some of the maps from the AAR, the South can improve there RR numbers, but can not improve the raillines, they can not lay new track

if the CSA has 30 RR points or 9, they are still going to have trouble moving a unit from Tex to Tenn

the Union has a much better RR system

[Grifman]

ORIGINAL: bountyhunter

I must say that I understand the "not a big part of the war" argument, but if you are supposed to be the leader of the nation shouldn't have the whole nation to worry about? There were plenty of factors to deal with out west other than the threat of a Confederate invasion - Indians for one. It's not necessarily being able to invade California as the Confed player but more of having to manage all that territory and politics. We always seem to focus on what happened to historically but isn't the whole point of such games to have the ability to alter history - if it isn't represented then you can't alter it...

It's a game about the Civil War ,not the Indian Wars. There was a major Sioux uprising in Minnesota during the war, but this isn't covered in the game either. Sure you can add a ton of stuff to make the game more "realistic", but we want a Civil War game, not a game about running the US during the war. A game that tries to do everything usually ends up doing most of them poorly. A tighter focued game on the other hand oftentimes succeeds.

[Grifman]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl


Thanks, "Bird". I see I've been savaged by most everyone else for suggesting that the North is being "cheated" of money/resources.

That's not even true. You were "savaged" for making a big deal of CA/NV not explicitly being included in the game. Your concerns about the Union financial/economic advantage not properly being modeled are reasonable and I recognize them - we'll just have to see how it plays out. But calling the game seriously flawed because it didn't explicitly model CA/NV gold is being pedantic to the extreme.

[Mike Scholl]

Yes. The Union had a VERY MUCH better RR System..., and they had the industrial and mechanical wherewithall to support and improve it. The South did not. Which means that the "Centralized Railways" upgrade shown in the AAR is totally bogus. There was nothing the South could have done to "double" their RR Capacity during the war. They simply didn't have the engines or rolling stock to do so, and they didn't have the industrial capacity to produce them. Putting it in the game is a complete "gimme" for the South.

And I don't object to it being there, even though it's impossible. I do object to the Union being badly shorted on money. I'm not asking for total historic reality, but TWICE as many States with TWICE as many people (to understate reality) ought to produce TWICE as much money. That's totally discounting the other economic advantages the North had, and just going on the raw ratio.

[Gil R.]

You know, I should have thought to mention this earlier...: The "power" settings of each side can be set independently, so anyone who wants to give either side a resources boost or disadvantage can do so. In other words, if someone wants to mirror the great resources advantage that the Union had, just give the Union a resources boost and the Confederacy a resources penalty. I'm not saying that would make for a fun game, since the outcome is all but certain -- however, it might be worth trying to see how long one can survive as the South under such circumstances.

Anyone who wants the Union to have more resources should do that, and it's a far simpler solution than taking a month to redraw the strategic map to include the West Coast, or even just adding new code that recognizes particular sacks of money as being from the gold and silver mines in California and Nevada.

[Mike Scholl]

"You were "savaged" for making a big deal of CA/NV not explicitly being included in the game."


I objected because I never ASKED for them to be in the game. I only asked that the "hard currency" recieved from them be modeled in the Game. The South had a VERY limited supply of hard specie available, and almost all of it was shipped to Europe during the first year of the war to purchase arms and equipment (seems the Brits and the French had never heard of "Lend-Lease"). Once it was gone, All Southern money was backed by nothing, and inflation went through the roof. 2000% by 1863.

The North experianced some inflation, but nothing remotely comparable to the South's problems, because they continued to have hard currency available when it was needed. The North in the game is starting out getting 11 "money" for every 9 the South recieves. I suggested that 18:9 would be a fairer ratio, and allow the North not only to build the Armies it did historically, but the Navy and other infrastructure improvements as well. They have to conquer and garrison most of the South to "win" while all the South has to do is "hang on" and hope for Northern Morale to fail. The Union has a lot more to do, and they seem to be short of the means to try and do it. That was my point.

[Hard Sarge]

some little things

the Union starts with 21 RR points, the CSA starts with 9, and the CSA RR system is broken up and not a soild RR line to anywhere

the Manpower edge, ( I have already posted the total numbers) but the Union starts out the game needing 5000 men to fill out it's Bdes, the CSA needs 205000 to fill theres

the Union has about 100 more money then the CSA has, but the Union does not need to use any of it on Diplo if the do not want to, the CSA almost has to put as much as they can into it

(the Union can sit back and watch how the guys overseas react and work on them that way, and if they get into trouble they can always free the slaves to settle the Diplo game)

the only trouble the Union player is going to have (and it is a big one) is they do not fight well on the attack (but they can defend)

and as Frederick the Great said, he who defends all, defends nothing, which is where the CSA is at in the game, the Union can force the battle to them, with out getting into major battles