What you're reporting is not very convincing. Hard Sarge -- who knows the game better than anyone with the exception of its programmer -- and I both have suggested multiple times that this issue is linked to
difficulty level, but you instead changed the power setting. This is fairly significant, since as the manual states clearly, "Power" provides +25% production from cities, while "Difficulty" is described in part, "Each level of difficulty adds 20% to every category of income each turn for computer-controlled players, gives computer opponents increasing bonuses in combat, and subtracts from every category of net income each turn for human-controlled players." Now, there is a world of difference between giving economic bonuses to cities and giving them to
all provinces. Moreover, those combat bonuses are significant, because they make the enemy tougher. You've complained a number of times about how easy it is to capture brigades, and you've even taken the extreme measure of restarting games when you feel that you've captured too many. Well, at the higher difficulty levels that won't be a problem.
Also, up above you wrote:
1st Turn Power + 0 CSA resources = 191, 93, 30, 100
1st Turn Power +2 CSA resources = 264, 118, 43, 139
That's a big jump.
First, are those numbers the stockpile that the CSA starts off with, or its expected income for the following turn? If the former then Turn 1 resources are largely irrelevant. As you know, both sides begin the game with a stockpile, so what matters is how much comes in as the game progresses. (By the way, why are those numbers so high? When a human plays the CSA in the November "Standard" scenario he gets just 100, 50, 25, 90.)
As for your screenshot showing weapons, I have no way of interpreting that without knowing what
your weapons production has been like. As the North, you should be using your money/iron/labor resources to produce many more guns, and much better guns. That should be somewhat evident in late 1862, when the screenshot was taken, but should be much more evident by mid-1863 (when the AI usually begins to flee, based on your reports).
Overall, as I noted previously, when one feels that a computer game is too easy one is supposed to increase the difficulty level. You still have not played the game at a level anywhere close to what the overwhelming majority of players use, so while your complaints may be valid for the tiny minority who play at beginner level, you have not demonstrated that they are relevant to most players. (Again, I understand your philosophical objection to AI bonuses, but you shouldn't expect WCS to conclude that the game is flawed because of what you're reporting. Most players use beginner levels to get the feel of a game and then ratchet up the difficulty, and few if any finish those games. You've probably played more total turns of the game at 1st Sgt. than anyone else ever has, so you're seeing a problem that others haven't. Or, to be more accurate, you're seeing something that others -- including myself -- have seen, but you are seeing it far more frequently.)
To quote the ending of my previous post: "...we don't feel that the product is flawed if it can be easily beaten at a low difficulty level. And until it is proven that the CSA AI collapses and hightails it to Richmond at higher difficulty levels and when faced by a Union opponent using a normal strategy (which includes thinning out its armies by sending some forces by sea to the eastern and southern coastlines) we will have no reason to conclude that this is a serious AI flaw."
Michael Jordan plays ball. Charles Manson kills people. I torment eager potential customers by not sharing screenshots of "Brother Against Brother." Everyone has a talent.
