A little late but ... a list of options

[Numdydar]

A friend and I are going to start playing a game and we decided that we needed to decide which of the many options the game has to select from we should use. So I completed this handy list of all the options (as of the last patch) along with which ones are on for each of the game types, Basic, Intermediate, and Advanced.

Hopefully some of you may still find this helpfull

https://www.dropbox.com/s/m4fks6syhfmw4 ... ptions.pdf

[Nimrod 9th]

Anything that keeps the discussion going is useful. I ignore the Basic, Intermediate, Advanced buttons and pick the individual options I want. I'd guess after I pick my options I'm a little more complex than intermediate but not as complex as advanced. I enjoy playing with hidden leader characteristics and random leader characteristics. I find it fun to have an excellent Ben Butler or McClellan or Pillow while have having a poor Grant, Sherman, Lee. Plus the hidden aspect adds the frustration (or excitement depending on how you look at it) of thinking a leader may be good because he has a high tactics rating to find out after a battle or two his leadership and initiative stink [&:].

[terje439]

To me the main issue with non-historical general ratings is that the CSA seems to come off worse than they were, and with the severe penalty settings I tend to give myself, poor generals is not a good thing.


Terje

[Tomokatu]

Well I'm a COMPLETE noob to any and all ACW.
It's a field I know little about, so all help, such at your options list, is gratefully received.
I've been gaming for (nearly) 30 years now and I'm competent in Ancients, Napoleonic, ECW, WWI & WWII, and some 18thC (French-Indian Wars, American Rebellion, Prussian-Frederick the Great) but never yet ACW.

This means that I have no background or pre-conceptions about what is going to happen, when and where it ought to happen. I haven't studied the various campaigns and I'm probably the nearest in knowledge and attitude to a contemporary general (US or CSA).

FoF is my first and only ACW game, ever!

[Nimrod 9th]

terje,
I don't disagree. Going with random ratings does hurt the CSA. Not saying everyone should do it. Only saying I enjoy it because it adds an unknown factor to the game. If playing as the North and you see you're going up against Lee or Floyd, you have an idea what your enemy leaders' strength and weaknesses are. Of course the other way around is true too. Seeing Grant or Sherman or Thomas coming at you is much different than seeing Butler or Fremont coming at you. Long story short, I'm just saying I enjoy the random ratings; nothing more, nothing less.

Tomokatu,
Hope you enjoy the game. Being competent at Napoleonic will make it easy to transition to the ACW. Being a complete ACW noob will probably allow you to enjoy the game more than the people who claim to be experts. Experts will probably end up simply doing what Grant or Lee did (or correct the mistakes of Bragg and McClellan). Knowing too much about a conflict can lead you down some unfortunate rabbit holes. Not knowing what the historical guys did or didn't do will allow you to develop your own unique strategies without a historical bias.

[Randomizer]

Well, I am grateful to anybody who produces Scenarios, Mods or Player Aids for any of the games I own so thanks to Numdydar for your consolidated list of FoF options.

Agree in most respects with Nimrod 9th regarding the random and hidden leader characteristics as fun but having George Thomas or Phil Sheridan as card-carrying idiot generals is sometimes hard on the brain. But still fun...

Forge of Freedom is still my favourite US Civil War computer game, even after more than six-years.

-C

[Floyd]

I've onced read a scenario description, forgot who posted it:

Small Campaign (tutorial)-This Campaign feature a small setup and small armies. It's main purpose is to help you get the hang of things on a not so massive level. I never did this one but some like to start with it. Your call.

Coming Fury-This begins in July, 1861. This Scenario begins with fewer armies then the standerd campaign, and you are not as well established. As the North, you have a lot of troops out East, realative to the South, but your full 'war machine' isn't quite going yet and you lack substantial forces in the east. As the south your troops are conentrated in Virginia, but your forces out west, while numerous, are scattered. You face the massive task of creating major armies, building forts, building a navy, organizng forces, getting weapon purchased for your new troops and more all with a measly economy. It's very hard, but if you like a challenge, then try it. Both armies are also poised to fight at Bull Run on the first turn as well.

Coming Fury( balanced economy)-this is identical to the last scenario, except that it helps the suth out a bit. It gives them a better ecenomical start, and while not as realistic, it's a bit easier. This was my second campaign I did, and while i did lose, it was easier than the other coming fury scenario.

Standerd Campaign-This is the general campaign that begins in November, 1861. By this time the north has around 140,000 troops in the Eastern theatre and is well off, and in the West has around 80-100,000. Your divisions are semi established and the war already has some frontlies, etc. While you will need more mork in the west, in the East, you are ready (well, almost) for battle. Your economy is fine and your navy massive. As the South you have around 70,000 troops in VA, a small but reliable navy, as well as two small armies out west along with scattered divisions. Much work is still needed, but you are well on your way.

Southern Steel-My favorite! This scenario is (I'm pretty sure, but I get this and the standerd campaign mixed up) the toughest for the south and one of the most realistic. Troops are all the same as the last one (it too begins in November) but the ecenomics are in favour of the north (as they were). This requires a risk taking player for the south like Lee and a player who can exploit the Northern advandtages like Grant. Forge of Freedom at it's finest.