Learning Curve

[CWNut77]

My 2 cents regarding the learning curve of this game...

Honestly, the game can be quite intimidating, especially if you are completely new to wargames of this type on the strategic level. But, as intimidating as it is, it really isn't as bad as it looks. So long as you take your time to read the rules (I would suggest two readings, one before and one after your first play-through), and check on the forums for unanswered questions, it will all come to you sooner than you think.

Common sense and a historical frame of mind help as well. Such as, the knowledge that it will take longer to get from point A to point B when crossing a river, for example. Knowing how stuff actually happened in the Civil War helps immensely with learning the game from a strategic standpoint -- but generally, these games are made mostly for the history buffs in us so that goes without saying.

Keep with it and don't get discouraged, and evantually you will come to that day when, all of a sudden it all "clicks" for the most part, and that is the most satisfying experience of all. It has "clicked" for me through the PBEM game I am playing currently, in which I have made numerous mistakes but have also learned by them. You'll ALWAYS be learning new stuff about the game, but the general gameplay rules should come to you in no time, with patience and diligence.

Bottom line, keep in mind that this is not the kind of game you can install and jump right on. These games take time to learn, and the payoff is a refreshingly rewarding experience unlike most other genres of video gaming.

[GShock]

Perfect analysis.

[tagwyn]

I know you did Rafe!! I was just trying to support your good advice, and, perhaps he will buy NCP?!!! Have a great day!!! Tag

[tagwyn]

Amen to comments by CWNUT!! apy:

[bigus]

After starting with a small scenario I say try playing the Far West scenario. The resources and troops are limited so you don't feel overwhelmed and you get a good idea of how things work. The only thing I left out of the scenario was the politics. I think a great start. Then you can either move on to one of the theatre scenarios (62) or the full campaign.

Bigus

[CWNut77]

Honestly, I think the best approach is to dive right into the full campaign game right away, after the rules are read...and then re-read the rules afterwards, with consultation of the rules during the game.

Let's face it -- very few of us play the scenarios, and no one plays them PBEM that I have seen. They have their place as a quick fix...but if you want to learn quickly you have to get over the overwhelming nature of the full campaign and dive right in, to see all the game has to offer.

I may be in the minority here, but that is what worked for me

[Banks6060]

Ive been playing the scenarios and i win everytime on normal difficulty now, so I have moved on to the confederate campaign. Ive put the AI on passive. So time for the dumb questions.

1) Industrialization.....why when what where and how much... I put 3 in georgia because it said it had the best potential

2) Trains and river transports? build any of these from the start?

3) Training Troops from the start. It seems like you are having alot of them come on line by themselves. I trained a few divisional HQ's but thats it. should I train some arty maybe?
Anyways thats where I am at now. Putting a few stacks together getting rdy to make a thrust into the Northern Aggressors. O yea I almost forgot
4) how many supply wagons should i have. Say 1 per division or what?

I've been experimenting with a "no industrialization" strategy in one of my PBEM's. It's really worked well. As the south...playing primarily defense across the board. You really don't NEED the added WS. It's certainly worth the investment when it DOES come, but it's not really needed much at all. I'd say you could get just as much or more supplies per turn by placing around 4 or 5 blockade runners in each of the boxes and using the rest to build troops, guns and ships.


Trains and river transport are essential mainly for moving supply as the south. The more the merrier, but you have to make sure to budget it.....troops, guns and ships are most important.


As far as training troops....I train what I can afford and I shoot for somewhat historical marks. If you've got around 10-11 divisions in the east...5 or 6 in the west and a couple in Missouri, you should be pretty well off by 1862. Where you'll probably want to add on is the west...I'd say between 8 and 10 divisions by '63 or 64.


Suppy wagons are very important for large formations....the average I use is about 2 per Corps for normal operations....3 or more for extended offensive operations farther from your depots. Remember....supplies only get pulled by a few things.......depots, forts, ports, and SUPPLY WAGONS. So put them with any smaller commands that you've got protecting an area without a depot, fort or port.

[TheDoctorKing]

Suppy wagons are very important for large formations....the average I use is about 2 per Corps for normal operations....3 or more for extended offensive operations farther from your depots. Remember....supplies only get pulled by a few things.......depots, forts, ports, and SUPPLY WAGONS. So put them with any smaller commands that you've got protecting an area without a depot, fort or port.

But don't they cost oodles of WS? I have tended to buy river transports instead and use them to build depots in ports. Wagons go to the trans-Mississippi and maybe West Virginia if I'm doing a major op there. For the USA it is a little easier since they generally have more WS.

[Banks6060]

But don't they cost oodles of WS? I have tended to buy river transports instead and use them to build depots in ports. Wagons go to the trans-Mississippi and maybe West Virginia if I'm doing a major op there. For the USA it is a little easier since they generally have more WS.

Oh absolutely....transports a deff. first on the list when it comes to building your river supply depot network. What I was referring to though was supplying an army on the move, say down a rail line that's vulnerable to being cut all the time.....it's always good to have plenty of supply wagons just in case you hit a spell where you're having to repair TONS of rails for several turns. It keeps your momentum from stalling...now of course those wagons can only carry so much...eventually you have to open the rails up again...or retreat to the nearest depot, port or fort. That is if you haven't taken your objective.

[bigus]

Let's face it -- very few of us play the scenarios, and no one plays them PBEM that I have seen. They have their place as a quick fix...but if you want to learn quickly you have to get over the overwhelming nature of the full campaign and dive right in, to see all the game has to offer.

I did'nt realize you knew what everyone on the forums was playing....sorry.
I must be the only one who plays the scenarios then.

In all honesty I learnt how to play the game from playing the scenarios.
It was an easier transition to the full campaign for me.

In fact I liked them so much I actually made a few more.
But since I have a limited amount of playing time the scenarios suit me more than the full campaign sometimes.


Minority Scenario Player

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Rafiki]

bigus, was that a Minority Report?

(Sorry couldn't help myself)

IMO, the scenarios are a very nice place to get your feet wet without getting overwhelmed. Limited scope, limited number of units, some let you diregard naval matters, etc. I see the charm in diving head-first into the full campaigns, but I also appreciate that it can be nice to take things one step at a time

[GShock]

Second best, straight after tutorials, i learned the game via scenarios and i refused to tackle the campaign before i was sure everything was in my grasp...It took me 4 months.

...and yet i was hit hard by the complexity of the game at my first campaign. The steep learning curve gives the best results after one year of campaigning in single player and you can really master the system and learn that changing history is possible if you can avoid mistakes. The rewards coming when you learn to make the generals do exactly what you want them to do is immense...


...and it's doubled when playing PBEM against a human opponent.

Everyone lands there sooner or later, and it's the major power of this game.

Yet, each of us has a different attitude and experience behind him and scenarios are designed to learn how to use smaller groups. It's an important part of the learning process i suggest everyone to play with.

I play Gettysburgh scenario very often even now and i lose with CSA 90% times.

[CWNut77]

bigus, was that a Minority Report?

(Sorry couldn't help myself)

IMO, the scenarios are a very nice place to get your feet wet without getting overwhelmed. Limited scope, limited number of units, some let you diregard naval matters, etc. I see the charm in diving head-first into the full campaigns, but I also appreciate that it can be nice to take things one step at a time

I can agree -- and I didn't mean at all to sound offensive (my apologies, bigus, if I came across that way).

I guess I should have said that the scenarios are often overlooked, especially among the more seasoned players (of which I cannot yet claim to be one). So, bad choice of words.

[Rafiki]

...and it's doubled when playing PBEM against a human opponent.

Everyone lands there sooner or later, and it's the major power of this game.

No, it is untrue that "everyone" sooner or later moves to PBEM; this is something discussed and polled and covered long-since. Quite frankly, the lack of respect (as in acknowledgement and understanding) you seem to have for people who play against the AI (for whatever reasons) is disappointing.

[bigus]

I can agree -- and I didn't mean at all to sound offensive (my apologies, bigus, if I came across that way).

I guess I should have said that the scenarios are often overlooked, especially among the more seasoned players (of which I cannot yet claim to be one). So, bad choice of words.

NP ......a sad attempt to be funny on my part.
What I hoped to get across though was that the scenarios were a big stepping stone or prelude to the full campaign for me.

>End of Minority report<


Bigus

[Pocus]

Even if the Campaign is the 'Real Thing', I really enjoy the small scenarios, especially when I tweak the AI. They are focused, you can identify a sound strategy and see if the AI (or you) can reproduce it. It is a bit like the exercises you get in chess, when one ask you to win in 3 turns, or take the tower without losing more than a pawn, etc.

(Disclaimer: I'm utterly crappy and know almost nothing on chess)

[CWNut77]

Even if the Campaign is the 'Real Thing', I really enjoy the small scenarios, especially when I tweak the AI. They are focused, you can identify a sound strategy and see if the AI (or you) can reproduce it. It is a bit like the exercises you get in chess, when one ask you to win in 3 turns, or take the tower without losing more than a pawn, etc.

(Disclaimer: I'm utterly crappy and know almost nothing on chess)

I concede...now you all will have me trying some scenarios out in full

Although...I must confess, as was pointed out above...the limit of 2-week turns kind of dulls down the strategic depth of a lot of these short scenarios. I am sure we can agree on that.

Still, I will give em a shot!

[Pocus]

Modders can make one week per turn scenarios

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[FM WarB]

Modders can make one week per turn scenarios

Aegod can make one week per turn games...see NCP.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[bigus]

What's not so obvious is the changes that may or may not be needed to accomodate the different time frames.

Also, can a particular individual game engine (such as ACW) accomodate different time frames for different scenarios without any serious side effects?

Example:

All the Campaign Scenarios retaining the 2-week turns, and at the same time all the smaller scenarios working on 1-week turns.

I think there might be a host of problems going to a 7 day turn. Movement rates might be a big one. I guess it would depend on the scope of the scenario. FI a small one like Gettysburg might not be a problem. Maybe even a Valley campaign or 7 days scenario would be alright too but a scenario like Kentucky Invasion probably would'nt work to well.

Anyhow sorry for going off topic......

Bigus

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[bigus]

I really don't think movement rates themselves will be a problem at all, since they are in days not turns. Supply distribution phases are what I'm primarily interested in. That and any other (per turn) items that would basically be doubled in a 1 - week turn.

I'll let you know. Checking it out starting today.

Bigus

[Pocus]

I really don't think movement rates themselves will be a problem at all, since they are in days not turns. Supply distribution phases are what I'm primarily interested in. That and any other (per turn) items that would basically be doubled in a 1 - week turn.

The two problems would be:

a) structures produce too much. Just edit the structures file and halve that.

b) supply move too far for one week. I will have to export the variable used to give the number of allowed ticks of move (a tick is an abstract measure, obtained by tweaking and testing, just halve it).

[Jabberwock]

allowed ticks

Greybacks in the hardtack again? ewww. Weevils are bad, ticks are worse.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[bigus]

This is really a cool idea for the smaller scenarios. I'm hoping Bigus' sees this also, though it probably will involve quite a bit of adjustment to these small scenarios. I'll try to give him a hand regarding structure production adjustments and hopefully we'll have 1-week turn versions of these scenarios available about the time you are ready to resume patching ACW. I would imagine we might leave both versions of these scenarios with a notation as to which are 1-week turns and which are 2-week turns to accomodate everyones' particular timeframe desires.

Already testing Gray...Check out the Beta thread.
The 7 day turns look like they will be very good.

I would appreciate some help with production adjustments.
Because the area of OPS of the scenarios are limited, the production adjustments will not be that bad at all IMO.

Bigus

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted