Just a thought...

[Groove74]

I was sitting here thinking.. seen as how there are the english, french and Mexican cultures in the game. is it at all possable to play as them. or is there a mod to make them playable. would make for a interesting twist,

[Doomwalker]

I don't think that is possible. I know that once you get foreign intervention and the British and French units become controllable by the CSA, all regions that you take with them will have a Confederate flag over them not the British or French flags. I am thinking that there are only two playable sides, one is the US and Mexico, the other is CSA, Great Britian, and France. I know that looking at the regions that the British and French are in before FI, it states that the territory is controlled by the CSA. The same is true for Mexico with the US controlling.

[berto]

This could make for a very interesting fantasy scenario (or scenarios).

Pick a plausible situation(s) and start date(s), involving foreign intervention, from modest to full-blown. Build a mod(s) around it. If good enough, maybe it (them) could even go "official".

It would be fun to, at whim, indulge in these capabilities (playing the French, British, etc.) without hoping that maybe once or twice in the months and years that one plays AACW, with just the right luck, these capabilities are unlocked.

Doable?

[lodilefty]

Every scenario file starts with 'create faction' commands, so I guess you could build anything from there. I'm just not sure what you'd build!

I have no idea if the engine limits you to only 2 playable, but I'm guessing it does.

[berto]

I'm not suggesting a mod that overcomes the two-side, Union-vs-Confederate configuration only. I'm just suggesting a mod (or mods) that, as the very basis for the mod(s), adds these foreign countries to one side or the other (or both!)--without leaving it all to chance.

[lodilefty]

I'm not suggesting a mod that overcomes the two-side, Union-vs-Confederate configuration only. I'm just suggesting a mod (or mods) that, as the very basis for the mod(s), adds these foreign countries to one side or the other (or both!)--without leaving it all to chance.

Doh!

That's 'just' an adjustment to a few events......

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[lodilefty]

Would be kinda cool to have a "Jefferson Davis" Fantasy Scenario, that brings the French and British into play sometime in 1862 or later due to "superb" CSA diplomacy efforts.

All we need is an event that gives huge [200?] foreign intervention points...

[berto]

All we need is an event that gives huge [200?] foreign intervention points...

But we would "want" more than that, for instance, and assuming foreign intervention on the side of the South, for the North:

--Special, cost-free (in terms of NM) draft(s) or volunteer call(s).
--Extra low-interest war bonds.
--Special taxes.
--Maybe increased production of war and general supply.

All of this to reflect the North mobilizing to fight the foreign invader(s).

And there might be other interesting special events that might flow from foreign intervention.

[Korrigan]

The ACW engine can't handle more than two factions.

Only the new code added for Vainglory will allow multifactions.

However, as you have remarked, the AGE engine was designed right from the begining for this evolution. That's why you'll find the "create factions" orders in the scenario file.

Korrigan

[lodilefty]

How about a 'Trent Affair' mod:
Reduce the probability that the Union 'cools' it.
Inrease the entryfactor awarded when/if they don't.

This would add some serious tension for those 2-3 turns....

hmmm. What to add to allow the union player to affect the probabiity......

[Doomwalker]

Having fired the FI for CSA several times, I would say that there needs to be adjustments to the FI itself. For a "All powerfull mod" it should fire no later than the end of 1861. I have gotten FI on normal setting to fire twice before Mid 1862 without too much trouble on my part. I would want the forces augmented also, because what you get in game ain't that much.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Jabberwock]

Another possibility, although somewhat lopsided, would be "Blair's War".

USA and CSA negotiate peace in Jan/Feb '65. This could be written with either a Conferate surrender (2-sided, Jefferson Davis leads the combined armies to attack the French in Mexico.) or with an armistice (3-sided, Grant & either Davis or Lee each get an army).

Smaller 'filibustering' scenarios could also be written.

[Jabberwock]

The "Trent Affair" would be a marvelous trigger. And since the USA doesn't "cool" it, it could justify more BEF and French intervention forces, because of the USA overreaction instead of just tacit support for the CSA which the current reinforcements signify.

Possibilities ...

If the Brits don't "cool" it (tone down their ultimatum) French could be neutral with FI in favor of the US as a possibility.

There are multiple roles for the Confederates here:

1. The ACW continues.
2. Temporary cease fire - delayed entry by CSA.
3. Armistice (CSA neutral - France either side).
4. least likely - armistice (CSA joins in against British - France either side).

These could be written as seperate scenarios, or as FI by the confederates.

P.S. Write FI by the Russians into it (French side) for CSA roles 3 or 4.

[Groove74]

Wow some good stuff here!!!!!! Sounds as if the idea has sparked a bit of intrest, I for one would like to see some kind of MOD where we could play out this Alt history using the forgen powers. I think it would lead to some real fun and different out comes to the civil war. Not to mention the fun to read AAR's that will be found on the fourms.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Le Ricain]

Possibilities ...

If the Brits don't "cool" it (tone down their ultimatum) French could be neutral with FI in favor of the US as a possibility.

There are multiple roles for the Confederates here:

1. The ACW continues.
2. Temporary cease fire - delayed entry by CSA.
3. Armistice (CSA neutral - France either side).
4. least likely - armistice (CSA joins in against British - France either side).

These could be written as seperate scenarios, or as FI by the confederates.

P.S. Write FI by the Russians into it (French side) for CSA roles 3 or 4.

I am unclear on your P.S. Russia would have intervened on the Union side, not the CSA side. The Union did much to cultivate Russian relations as an offset to possible British/French intervention. That is why the US purchased Alaska (Seward's Folly).

[Jabberwock]

I am unclear on your P.S. Russia would have intervened on the Union side, not the CSA side. The Union did much to cultivate Russian relations as an offset to possible British/French intervention. That is why the US purchased Alaska (Seward's Folly).

This is very true. My (very late-night) thinking was:

1. The Russians had been traditionally allied with the Brits. (Completely forgetting the Crimean War)
2. It was a primary goal of Russian policy to not support slavery (even though they still had serfs), and that obstacle to their switching sides would be largely removed in 3 & 4.
3. If France intervened against the US, Russia would have had a harder time "fighting the current".
4. It might be more balanced and/or easier to write for a French faction to control the Russians (since there is only one FI variable).

I know, I know. That last is not a historical argument ... but we are talking about unhistory here. (Pasternakski should chime in anytime about the Plutonian invasion)

I don't think those are very strong arguments, and I'm not emotionally attached to the idea, but I'm glad to see it sparked some commentary.

[Le Ricain]

This is very true. My (very late-night) thinking was:

1. The Russians had been traditionally allied with the Brits. (Completely forgetting the Crimean War)
2. It was a primary goal of Russian policy to not support slavery (even though they still had serfs), and that obstacle to their switching sides would be largely removed in 3 & 4.
3. If France intervened against the US, Russia would have had a harder time "fighting the current".
4. It might be more balanced and/or easier to write for a French faction to control the Russians (since there is only one FI variable).

I know, I know. That last is not a historical argument ... but we are talking about unhistory here. (Pasternakski should chime in anytime about the Plutonian invasion)

I don't think those are very strong arguments, and I'm not emotionally attached to the idea, but I'm glad to see it sparked some commentary.

It would be possible to devise a scenario that would lead to a possible intervention of Russia into the ACW. I should add that this scenario would be extremely implausible, but not impossible.

To address your points:

1) After the Crimean War, Russia was a diplomatic pariah. Russia wished for a reunited and powerful USA as an ally against Britain and France.
2) The serfs were emancipated in 1861. In fact the serfs would have more rights and be better integrated into Russian society than the freed slaves of the US would have been.
3) Before the Emancipation Proclamation, the ACW was presented as a war to restore the Union, ie to defeat a rebellion. There is no way autocratic Tsarist Russia was going to support an insurrection or revolution for fear of igniting a new wave of revolutions in Europe, especially in Russia. After the Emancipation Proclamation and the emancipation of the serfs, Russian intervention in favour of the CSA would have been unthinkable.

At the time of the ACW, Britain and Russia were heading to war over Russia's oppression of Poland. In 1863 the Tsar sent the Russian Atlantic and Pacific fleets to US ports to spend the winter. The reasons for this move were twofold: to show support for the Union cause (and to be seen to have Union support in return) and also to have two fleets not ice bound in case of war with Britain and possibly France.

Basically, Russia and the USA needed each other to keep Britain and France out of their respective affairs. Russia intervening in the war for the Union in case of British intervention could have been an option.

In an attempt to break up this blossoming friendship, Britain made separate offers in 1863 to the US and Russia. To Russia, they offered a chance to join in a European intervention to settle the ACW. At the same time Britain approached the US with the idea of acting with Britain and France against Russia over the Polish suppression. The fact that the British offers were shams was obvious to the two countries. However, if one of the target countries had taken the bait, it is conceivable that Russia could have entered the war against the USA.

[Doomwalker]

Now that is something I would really love to see would be a ACW game that gives you all the possibilities in regards to world affairs. Various events that are affected by factors both in and out of the players control. That would truly be sweet. I could see it now the ACW turns into the first World War!

[Jabberwock]

I think VGN will be something like that.

[Ethy]

This could make for a very interesting fantasy scenario (or scenarios).

Pick a plausible situation(s) and start date(s), involving foreign intervention, from modest to full-blown. Build a mod(s) around it. If good enough, maybe it (them) could even go "official".

It would be fun to, at whim, indulge in these capabilities (playing the French, British, etc.) without hoping that maybe once or twice in the months and years that one plays AACW, with just the right luck, these capabilities are unlocked.

Doable?

i agree that it might make the game interesting if one was to play as the french or the british. however the way i see it and im sure some people will agree that the game is really fine as it is. having the prospect of foriegn intervention is exciting and quite fun when you do (although i have never managed it) it keeps people wanting to play more and experience wat the game has to offer.

secondly i think playing as the british or french would be quite boring! considering the vast amount of time you have to spend employing troops and sending them over to america. so in this respect the concept of playing british or french armies would make it like "birth of america" and in my eyes would play more like the british and french trying to regain the colonies!

yes it might make a nice novelty edition in a scenario if it was ever constructed but really it wouldnt catch on... just my thoughts

[berto]

FWIW, my idea is scenarios where you play as either the South with foreign friends, or as the North with foreign friends. I am not proposing the addition of third or fourth (or more) independently playable sides to the game. VGN (inherently multi-faction) will be the better game for modeling that.