ACW Campaign Balance 1.07

[Tanaka]

That railroad has been annoying me for three years I don't know how many times I've looked at maps of Tennessee from 1860/61, none of them agree with each other and some have rails going through Dover, some have them going near Dover, some have nothing there at all

Because one of your maps has the Memphis, Clarksville and Louisville RR going near Dover (realistically, within the hex), which plainly isn't the same line as the one going through Nashville, and because I already made the change before you put your retraction out, I'm just going to leave the change in, and say that it's the M,C&L line. The soldiers can just walk the short distance to Dover.

- BNC

Understood. Here is the link to the full map at the US Library of Congress if interested: Map of United States military rail roads, showing the rail roads operated during the war from 1862-1866, as military lines; under the direction of Bvt. Brig. Gen D. C. McCallum, Director and General Manager.

It is very nice you can zoom in and out and move it around:

https://www.loc.gov/resource/g3701p.rr0 ... 72,0.526,0

[Tanaka]

What I cannot figure out is why the Union morale is so much higher than mine (almost 100% while mine is around 60%-80% even though my fighting spirit is higher than theirs. I have nothing to stop them. They are just mowing me down. I feel like something is off. Since the last few patches I struggle a lot more playing as the Confederacy than I did before even against the AI and I cannot figure out why?

[OldCrowBalthazor]

Tanaka. I see that you sold your cotton. Generally that short term gain in money will be ruinous later on for the South because Cotton Prices will be low for export.

Not sure what is going on with your FS degradation.
Any other data would help, though it looks like a lot of it could be casualty based.

[Tanaka]

Tanaka. I see that you sold your cotton. Generally that short term gain in money will be ruinous later on for the South because Cotton Prices will be low for export.

Not sure what is going on with your FS degradation.
Any other data would help, though it looks like a lot of it could be casualty based.

I did yes. I used to take this option and I did not have such a problem. That's why I thought maybe something had changed. I definitely will not be taking this option again. MPP's are fine but morale is not. Too difficult. My FS is fine but the Union FS is not but no morale problems for them. That's what I don't understand...

[Tanaka]

Also just curious why Chattanooga and Knoxville are not deployment cities for the South? But Selma, AL is? Make it very difficult to defend this area having to rail everything in...

[BiteNibbleChomp]

Also just curious why Chattanooga and Knoxville are not deployment cities for the South? But Selma, AL is? Make it very difficult to defend this area having to rail everything in...

Population. I used the 1860 census to build the map, bigger than ~20k means a city, less than that a town (settlements are <1k). I made a couple of exceptions to make the game work properly, Little Rock and Cairo being the most obvious, but that's really it.

Both Knoxville and Chattanooga were well below 20k, and having to march/rail units from Atlanta reflects the logistical difficulties the CS had in the area fairly well, so I don't see any particular reason to add either as a city.

- BNC

[Tanaka]

Also just curious why Chattanooga and Knoxville are not deployment cities for the South? But Selma, AL is? Make it very difficult to defend this area having to rail everything in...

Population. I used the 1860 census to build the map, bigger than ~20k means a city, less than that a town (settlements are <1k). I made a couple of exceptions to make the game work properly, Little Rock and Cairo being the most obvious, but that's really it.

Both Knoxville and Chattanooga were well below 20k, and having to march/rail units from Atlanta reflects the logistical difficulties the CS had in the area fairly well, so I don't see any particular reason to add either as a city.

- BNC

Gotcha thanks. I like your suggestions in the Steam forum to give the South some help! Looking forward to the patch!

[sokulsky]

What I cannot figure out is why the Union morale is so much higher than mine (almost 100% while mine is around 60%-80% even though my fighting spirit is higher than theirs. I have nothing to stop them. They are just mowing me down. I feel like something is off. Since the last few patches I struggle a lot more playing as the Confederacy than I did before even against the AI and I cannot figure out why?

Union player could:
- beat up some of your units (IIRC destruction of some or multiple units under the same HQ lowers morale of the rest)
- have superior supply lines (e.g by moving 2 HQ's together instead of single HQ-offensive move)
- have superior infantry tech you did not have money to invest into
- have superior HQ value (either through leadership tech or by leader itself or both)
- got significant edge in NM

[Tanaka]

What I cannot figure out is why the Union morale is so much higher than mine (almost 100% while mine is around 60%-80% even though my fighting spirit is higher than theirs. I have nothing to stop them. They are just mowing me down. I feel like something is off. Since the last few patches I struggle a lot more playing as the Confederacy than I did before even against the AI and I cannot figure out why?

Union player could:
- beat up some of your units (IIRC destruction of some or multiple units under the same HQ lowers morale of the rest)
- have superior supply lines (e.g by moving 2 HQ's together instead of single HQ-offensive move)
- have superior infantry tech you did not have money to invest into
- have superior HQ value (either through leadership tech or by leader itself or both)
- got significant edge in NM

Could be true. This might be what's happening. I can't have HQ's everywhere covering everything and he seems to have more of them but for the most part my HQ's match up with his. He has pretty much shredded every brigade I have in Virginia that has HQ and we are the same in tech though. He might have better HQ tech not sure as I don't think that is displayed like unit tech is? Isn't NM the same as FS? Mine is much higher...

How does my opponent have 50% FS but 100% morale? I have 80% FS and much lower morale? Maybe it is because of all of the brigades destroyed...

[OldCrowBalthazor]

@Tanaka, it's really important to have Infantry Warfare tech as soon and as fast as you can get into it.
That will have a big impact on individual infantry unit more, regardless of FS.
I bet your Union opponent went all in with that tech.

[Tanaka]

@Tanaka, it's really important to have Infantry Warfare tech as soon and as fast as you can get into it.
That will have a big impact on individual infantry unit more, regardless of FS.
I bet your Union opponent went all in with that tech.

We are both level 1 infantry tech so evenly matched here. I am terrified of when he brings corps to bear!

[OldCrowBalthazor]

@Tanaka, it's really important to have Infantry Warfare tech as soon and as fast as you can get into it.
That will have a big impact on individual infantry unit more, regardless of FS.
I bet your Union opponent went all in with that tech.

We are both level 1 infantry tech so evenly matched here. I am terrified of when he brings corps to bear!

What about Infantry Tactics? That's the ones that really can boost Infantry morale.

[Tanaka]

@Tanaka, it's really important to have Infantry Warfare tech as soon and as fast as you can get into it.
That will have a big impact on individual infantry unit more, regardless of FS.
I bet your Union opponent went all in with that tech.

We are both level 1 infantry tech so evenly matched here. I am terrified of when he brings corps to bear!

What about Infantry Tactics? That's the ones that really can boost Infantry morale.

Not sure about that one you may be right. I don't think there is a way to see that on the enemy unit display is there? You just see the 1.

[sokulsky]

G'day everyone,

Over the last couple of weeks I've noticed a thread on steam discussing the current status of game balance in the Civil War campaigns has been seeing some activity:
https://steamcommunity.com/app/1966130/ ... 201768039/

We're currently working on a new patch for the game, so if you feel there are any changes that should be made, now is a great time to share them (or if you think everything is fine the way it is, that's worth sharing too!). The more opinions I receive the better positioned I am to make the game even better, so I thought I'd share this over here and give everyone the chance to comment

- BNC

Any chance for current list of accepted changes?

[Tanaka]

@Tanaka, it's really important to have Infantry Warfare tech as soon and as fast as you can get into it.
That will have a big impact on individual infantry unit more, regardless of FS.
I bet your Union opponent went all in with that tech.

We are both level 1 infantry tech so evenly matched here. I am terrified of when he brings corps to bear!

What about Infantry Tactics? That's the ones that really can boost Infantry morale.

So my ACW opponent finally confessed his secret to me. How he was blowing me away in morale despite his FS being at 50%. And you were right. He put all of his chits into infantry tactics. I guess that is the secret to this game like all chits into trench warfare is for the WW1 game. Learned my lesson!

[sokulsky]

Hello,

Please note:

Code: Select all

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=11919&t=392244&p=5131046#p5131046 

The proposition would be to exclude Union handicap (-200 NM) as Union losses in 63' tend to drastically increase if CSA player knows what to do (camp under high HQ on solid terrain more than a turn and wait to beat off the offensive move, then disengage which generates very high NM losess for Union and more than equalises MPP difference right now (as Union player needs to invest much more in navy) - been there, done that as CSA efficiently, it was done against me - since this game is about prepped attacks mostly rather than daring offensive moves, it really works great against Union player right now).

The proposition would be also to drop down entrenchment values on some terrain types by 1 OR cut some CSA MPP income (or increase Union mpps) as currently moving forward by Union in equal skill player vs player game is incredibly difficult (historical level progress is unachievable).

[BiteNibbleChomp]

Hello,

Please note:

Code: Select all

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=11919&t=392244&p=5131046#p5131046 

The proposition would be to exclude Union handicap (-200 NM) as Union losses in 63' tend to drastically increase if CSA player knows what to do (camp under high HQ on solid terrain more than a turn and wait to beat off the offensive move, then disengage which generates very high NM losess for Union and more than equalises MPP difference right now (as Union player needs to invest much more in navy) - been there, done that as CSA efficiently, it was done against me - since this game is about prepped attacks mostly rather than daring offensive moves, it really works great against Union player right now).

The proposition would be also to drop down entrenchment values on some terrain types by 1 OR cut some CSA MPP income (or increase Union mpps) as currently moving forward by Union in equal skill player vs player game is incredibly difficult (historical level progress is unachievable).

I've replied to your original post.

- BNC