AGEOD Forums

It may be that CW2 is best for solitaire play, not PBEM. Here are the reasons why:

1. No way of really knowing what settings your opponent is using.
2. No way of preventing changes in the settings once the game is underway.
3. No way of preventing endless reloads - sorry, but it has to be said.
4. No way of preventing one's opponent from using the slider to allow unlimited recruitment of new units as opposed to the historical setting.
5. No way of preventing an all East approach; and no house rule can really stop this because players can always haggle over what is too much and what is too little.

It occurs to me that the lesion allowing this approach is the unfettered recruitment of new units in various states without consideration of time. Just because Virginia fielded let's say 100 regiments during the war, and the game allows 1000 to be raised, there needs to be a limit on how many can be raised per month or year. Surely this data is known from historical sources. This would prevent fielding Virginia's entire contribution to the war in the first year, instead of spread over 4 years - and this would make a huge difference and maybe solve the problem.


Finally:

1. The manual is in desperate need of updating or the WIKI needs work; either will do. I am amazed at the pearls that experienced players like Ace always seem to know which are otherwise not documented.
2. This is a diamond in the rough which I really want to work - not ready to give up quite yet.

Marquo

Well, making strong statements is a fun way to get a discussion going. Why not.

marquo wrote: 1. No way of really knowing what settings your opponent is using.
2. No way of preventing changes in the settings once the game is underway.

As I understand it, the only settings that matter are the ones the hosting player sets. The non-hosting player has to trust the hosting player. For that matter, the hosting player could in theory load up their opponent's moves, watch what they do, and then make their own moves with that knowledge. I doubt anyone does that, its just silly. If you really care, use a third party as the host.

3. No way of preventing endless reloads - sorry, but it has to be said.

Again, you mean by the hosting player? I suppose it is a philosophical question: why would anybody cheat on a game unless some external reason, like money is on the line.

4. No way of preventing one's opponent from using the slider to allow unlimited recruitment of new units as opposed to the historical setting.

That would affect both players, I believe.

5. No way of preventing an all East approach; and no house rule can really stop this because players can always haggle over what is too much and what is too little.

What prevents an all-anything approach at the strategic level is the advantage of the defense. If one side sends everything East, the other side sends 3/4 of their force East where it will stalemate or lose slowly and then with the remaining 1/4 of force cleans up the rest of the map against no opposition.

It is true that if you are going to try to overwhelm your opponent in one theatre, you want to do it by surprise if possible, so for a brief while one side could arrange to have crushing superiority. Arguably this is exactly what happened historically at Shiloh, or the transfer of Longstreet's corps to the Army of Tenessee before Chickamauga. To some extent you have to play conservatively, and never put yourself in a position where a sudden accession to the enemy's force in a theatre will be fatal.

... fielding Virginia's entire contribution to the war in the first year...

I'm not sure what problem you are trying to address. Even if there was a requirement that you had to recruit all over, nothing prevents a player from moving all their force to one spot. The difference between recruiting in VA and recruiting in AL and railing to VA is a couple turns of transport. Even on the South's crappy rail net, that is not much of a restriction.

1. The manual is in desperate need of updating or the WIKI needs work; either will do. I am amazed at the pearls that experienced players like Ace always seem to know which are otherwise not documented.

Amen to that. I do worry sometimes that CW2 has a whiff of gameplay theatre: stuff that you spend a lot of effort on that you think matters, and then when things happen you selectively perceive support for your hypothesis that they matter, but perhaps actually we are deluding ourselves. More transparency on exactly how the game mechanics work would be very helpful to combat that suspicion.

Oh Marquo, find a live player. You will love pbem.

marquo

as others have said, for #1/2 it doesn't matter as the only set up that determines the outcome are those on the host computer. #3 can be done, but why? The fun of a PBEM turn resolution is to watch your clever plan lie in ruins, or watch it work as you hoped. Take your lumps and learn.

If hosting, and this isn't always doable (real life and all that) but I try to get my turn ready before my opponent(s) return theirs. That provides a bit of reasurance I guess. Or ask a kind third party to do the resolutions for you and, of course, be prepared to offer the same for others. The other trick is the old 2 move tango, that way you swap hosting as the game unfolds [1].

In truth I'd suggest don't play with opponents who prioritise winning at all costs, to the detriment of both fun game play and the game design. You've been playing someone well known for both attitudes.

edit [1] - just to explain this also slightly speeds up the game. When you send the turn resolution send your orders. Your opponent then constructs their own orders, runs the turn and sends both the turn and their order file to you. So hosting alternates, it also cuts out one step at each turn iteration.

In others news, it will be possible to get a replay in upcoming 1.03 patch. There won't be a replay VCR but the feature will be handy enough to ease PBEM greatly though.

I have been playing the "2 move Tango" with MT and TD. I think MT got bored with the system because once he figured out the supply system, there was absolutely no stopping him. He created an "All in in the East" gambit which was unstoppable. I I attribute this to his skill and my novice status, but I bet that even an veteran player would have problems with MT.

The ability to shuttle troops around not withstanding, I still believe that a state should not be allowed to recruit it's full 4 year historical contingent of troops in one year; it's plain silly. Whatever the rules for drafting were, a 12 year old boy in 1861 perhaps could not serve until 1864/5 at the old age of 16/17.

Loki100 or Durk: either of you care to command CSA against me, and perhaps do a bit of tutoring as we play?

Thanks

Marquo

Don't feel bad getting wiped off the field in your first PBEM game, it's happened to all of us

marquo wrote:I have been playing the "2 move Tango" with MT and TD. I think MT got bored with the system because once he figured out the supply system, there was absolutely no stopping him. He created an "All in in the East" gambit which was unstoppable. I I attribute this to his skill and my novice status, but I bet that even an veteran player would have problems with MT.

The ability to shuttle troops around not withstanding, I still believe that a state should not be allowed to recruit it's full 4 year historical contingent of troops in one year; it's plain silly. Whatever the rules for drafting were, a 12 year old boy in 1861 perhaps could not serve until 1864/5 at the old age of 16/17.

Loki100 or Durk: either of you care to command CSA against me, and perhaps do a bit of tutoring as we play?

Thanks

Marquo

Agreed and this is really easy to solve by the way.. just unlock slowly every say 3/4 months a bit more troops per state : One cannot after a big call on volunteers plus draft raise 15 brigades in Virginia and 10 in NC.. because there has only been 4 added in Virginia, 2 in NC, 2 in SC, 3 in Georgia, 3 in Tennesse, etc... This would make the all east gambit harder by virtue of requiring significantly bigger investment in rail infrastructure, that cannot be invested in troops, etc..

I also thing their should be theater troop level checks leading to NM loss or even loss of recruits, or locking of stacks or so : if the Union has less than so and so soldiers in Missouri/kansas, or the Union has less than so and so in the Western theater, they lose NM because the local governors a pissed, some recruits are automatically recruited in those states (ie brigades or Militia) and locked in place, leading to a loss in conscripts and recruitment capacity... Basically if you only recruit in the east and leave Tennessee empty, well the game would automatically recruit forces in Memphis, Nashville and so and have them take precedence on your planned recruitments, Not only that but they would be locked there (or just militia). This would force the player to somewhat follow history.