Praise and Suggestion ~ Warning long

[George40]

Let me begin by saying how much I enjoy ACW and how smart at many levels the design is (both game design (supply, command, etc.) and graphics). Thank you to the whole AGEOD team.

That said, I would offer an observation regarding game play that would not fit all players needs, but might help make future games off of this engine more broadly accesable. I have come to realize that I spend the majority of each turn doing two things:
1. moving brigades forward to assemble them into useful/usable units (i.e., divisions), similar with leaders
or
2. Attending to a profusion of small commands attending to the massive raider/cavalry war in IT, Mo, Kansas, IA, and IL. Many of these units are 1 or 2 Regiments in strength.

As a result I spend relatively modest time on the really exciting stuff of manuvering main armies to to action.

I wondered if a structure in which recruitment was done to locations or organizational units (divisions/corps) would be more useful. So when the new aritllery appeared (after an appropriate delay, it would already be in Hood's Division). Similarly one could set a recuitment center in which new units would appear and then distribute them if you preferred. Similarly, it would be nice to place recruitment orders for a full division and have it show up (needing further training) already assembled.

I would also suggest putting all commanders who are not currently being used into an off board pool that you can simply draw from to place new leaders on the map. Once on the map they would have to be moved around normally. It would help with clutter and micro-management.

Similarly, I would love to see an option to have the western raider activity abstracted to a off board box in which one could place appropriate raiders and counter insurgency troops and have the thing auto resolved each turn. I appreciate others would not like that and probably love running the individual regiments over western Missouri (heck I enjoyed it for a while), but the amount of time that this effort that will not substantively effect the outcome of the war takes, cuts into really being able to play the game for me.

I have been war gaming for 30+ years and I appreciate that these ideas would not suit everyone. They might not have suited me before the demands of children and career cut into my gaming time so much. They are just thoughts about how to make this great product/experience more accessable to customers who can't devote the amount of time to the game that it takes to have a feeling of making progress to a conclusion.

Thanks to the AGEOD team again for the great product and really amazing level of support and community interaciton.

[soloswolf]

Hi George,

I do like the ideas around recruitment that you mentioned. As far as the off-map section for leaders, I usually do something like that just by having some reserve leaders in imortant cities. (As an aside, if you drop them inside the city, they will stop cluttering your screen)

I do dig the raider scene though. I agree that it is troublesome to thwart your enemies raiders, but I like sending my own in, so I call it even.

[pepe4158]

Yeah George we all have some type of ideas to improve this good game..yours are good too.
My #1 wish.....above all others, would definitly be some type of multiplayer through an independent server, similar to what I think is it gamespot (?) does.
Hmmm I always thought Pocus could get them to take him on consignment, but quess not?...as I always see all types of different manufacturers games on multi-player servers.
Usually they are all RTS....but sure think this game would be close enough to qualify.

[turska]

And on the screen where are the combat casualties listed... I'd like to see number of casualties also from attrition and while we are adding things. Add number of troops in the armies also there.
Like:
Total 100 342 Casualties from combat, Total 34 673 Casualties from attrition and Total current strenght is 498 445 Men.

[hattrick]

And on the screen where are the combat casualties listed... I'd like to see number of casualties also from attrition and while we are adding things. Add number of troops in the armies also there.
Like:
Total 100 342 Casualties from combat, Total 34 673 Casualties from attrition and Total current strenght is 498 445 Men.

Hi,

Nice suggestion, lets go one step further and put the attrition losses onto the objective screen for both sides for the whole campaign, let them cost victory points also.

Attrition losses had such a large impact on fighting of this period they should be counted in the score.

[veji1]

Well my main regret with the game now is the lack of a proper Log of what took place. I would really love a log of the main battles that would be a simple Chart

Battle / Date / Victor / losses on each side / Leaders lost

where you could sort them the way you want them to have a record.. ideally you would have a map in this log, a bit like the minimap that tracks units, that would help you locate the battles.. this would really enhance the feeling of reenacting history, like reading a historical atlas..

[Banks6060]

I know there is are a VERY limited number of things that this game could do to improve because it's right about perfect for me.

I WOULD like to have that leader pool

I WOULD NOT like the western raider box. I live out here in western Missouri and find it neat to reenact all the tiny engagements that took place here so I vote not to changing that.

I still wish that you could put leaders with brigades...WITHIN divisions. That would be nice.

[GShock]

Warning, Long?

You've never read one of my bibles if you think your post is long!

[saintsup]

It would be nice to place recruitment orders for a full division and have it show up (needing further training) already assembled.

I would also suggest putting all commanders who are not currently being used into an off board pool that you can simply draw from to place new leaders on the map. Once on the map they would have to be moved around normally. It would help with clutter and micro-management.

That's two ideas I like very much

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Coregonas]

The game has several phases:

1) ARMY Build-up
2) Initial skirmishes & positions
3) Great Army Moves & Battles
4) CSA Army disintegration
5) RUN to conquer! Yes, We can?

Seems If you are playing Jabberian an extra o) HIT & RUN, Marines are coming! - all around the way could be added since the start.

Once mid 62 that "reinforcement" and creating divisions "ARMY BUILD UP PHASE" changes totally.

I believe that part of the game is beautiful to play ALSO. I personally like it the MOST. GAME gains in EPIC then during the second and third phases... Once this phase is finished... game is generally else wined or lost, depending on the year achieved.

If one feels like that INITIAL phase is not very interesting, perhaps playing 62 scenario campaign could be a more interesting startup for playing. Phase 1 is mostly skipped, although some is to be done still.

[Rafiki]

This thread belongs in the "How to Improve" forum.

Indeed

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[SojaRouge]

I would also suggest putting all commanders who are not currently being used into an off board pool that you can simply draw from to place new leaders on the map. Once on the map they would have to be moved around normally. It would help with clutter and micro-management.

I would suggest to add 2 or more available "Redeploy commender" tokens each turn.
So that would make 3+ redeployments per turn instead of 1, and would balance the harassing task of moving them all around.

[arsan]

I would suggest to add 2 or more available "Redeploy commender" tokens each turn.
So that would make 3+ redeployments per turn instead of 1, and would balance the harassing task of moving them all around.

You already have this. Just look at the options menu and select the level you prefer