Is anybody working on developing new scenarios?
For example, more battle scenarios, west-of-the-Mississippi-only theater scenarios, cavalry raid scenarios, coastal area only theater scenarios, etc. Small-scale scenarios are especially great when you only have an hour or two to play, or you want to focus on learning or practicing just one or two aspects of game play.
It's great to see all the modding activity, but I am left wondering at what appears to be inactivity in the area of new scenario creation. Am I missing something?
New scenarios?
What this town needs is a good Renaissance band!
Early MusiChicago - Early Music in Chicago and Beyond - http://earlymusichicago.org
PIKT - Global-View, Site-at-a-Time System and Network Administration - http://pikt.org
AGElint - an AGE debugging toolkit - http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2978333
Your Mileage May Vary -- Always!
Early MusiChicago - Early Music in Chicago and Beyond - http://earlymusichicago.org
PIKT - Global-View, Site-at-a-Time System and Network Administration - http://pikt.org
AGElint - an AGE debugging toolkit - http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2978333
Your Mileage May Vary -- Always!
If you create a Vicksburg scenario, I will be forever in your debt.
The Vicksburg campaign is a classic, and one of the most fascinating episodes of the war.
More to the point ...
... um, I'm afraid to admit to heresy here ...
... scenarios might save this game (and my soul?) for me.
Every time I begin one of the full-map, 2 theater scenarios I am overwhelmed by all the choices and all the complexity.
It's been asked elsewhere whether this game is unplayable. Clearly the game is playable for many of you. But for me, it's too akin to my work. I am a computer programmer and systems administrator by trade, and I sit on my butt my entire workday dealing with mind numbing mountains of detail and complexity. To face similar mountains of detail and complexity in what is supposed to be a game, an entertainment, is not quite my idea of fun.
It's the reason that, despite my other gaming passion for WWII Pacific Theater, I never seriously considered buying Matrix Games' War in the Pacific, because I knew that I would never have the pep and stamina to climb that Mount Everest of grognardiness (?).
I hasten to add that I see all of this detail and complexity as being necessary to simulate the American Civil War faithfully. I am in the middle of re-reading Shelby Foote's Civil War trilogy, and as I go along I am struck by how well AACW models The Real Civil War (as opposed to the popular conception of the Civil War that it was all about, or just about, the big marquee battles of Gettysburg and Antietam with Sumter and Appomatox as bookends). My hat's off to AGEOD for their achievement.
But every time I sit down at the computer to "play" The Real Civil War in AACW, I am overwhelmed. Honestly, all I can think to do is to run upstairs to bed and read some more Shelby Foote. Or maybe play one of the HPS Civil War battles (or the soon to be re-released Battleground Series of Civil War games by Matrix).
All that said, I have played the AACW Shiloh battle scenario several times and enjoyed myself immensely. Just the right amount of scope and detail. Playable in an hour or so. Lots of fun.
So, I am hoping and praying that new AACW scenarios will come forth. Scenarios like
--Vicksburg
--Peninsular Campaign
--Jackson's Valley Campaign
--Bragg's invasion of Kentucky
--Fort Henry and Fort Donelson
--Pea Ridge
--Chickamauga
--Chatanooga
--Antietam
--Wilderness, Spottsylvania, Cold Harbor
--New Orleans
And so on and so forth.
Maybe one of these months my life will settle down to where I can devote day after day to study and play AACW. Maybe I will finally reach the point where I can't stand it any more, where I just commit to learning the whole darned thing. (Like I really should just bite the bullet and commit to learning Javascript in my professional life.)
But unless and until then, I'm wishing for more AACW battle scenarios.
I await your Vicksburg scenario eagerly.
The Vicksburg campaign is a classic, and one of the most fascinating episodes of the war.
More to the point ...
... um, I'm afraid to admit to heresy here ...
... scenarios might save this game (and my soul?) for me.
Every time I begin one of the full-map, 2 theater scenarios I am overwhelmed by all the choices and all the complexity.
It's been asked elsewhere whether this game is unplayable. Clearly the game is playable for many of you. But for me, it's too akin to my work. I am a computer programmer and systems administrator by trade, and I sit on my butt my entire workday dealing with mind numbing mountains of detail and complexity. To face similar mountains of detail and complexity in what is supposed to be a game, an entertainment, is not quite my idea of fun.
It's the reason that, despite my other gaming passion for WWII Pacific Theater, I never seriously considered buying Matrix Games' War in the Pacific, because I knew that I would never have the pep and stamina to climb that Mount Everest of grognardiness (?).
I hasten to add that I see all of this detail and complexity as being necessary to simulate the American Civil War faithfully. I am in the middle of re-reading Shelby Foote's Civil War trilogy, and as I go along I am struck by how well AACW models The Real Civil War (as opposed to the popular conception of the Civil War that it was all about, or just about, the big marquee battles of Gettysburg and Antietam with Sumter and Appomatox as bookends). My hat's off to AGEOD for their achievement.
But every time I sit down at the computer to "play" The Real Civil War in AACW, I am overwhelmed. Honestly, all I can think to do is to run upstairs to bed and read some more Shelby Foote. Or maybe play one of the HPS Civil War battles (or the soon to be re-released Battleground Series of Civil War games by Matrix).
All that said, I have played the AACW Shiloh battle scenario several times and enjoyed myself immensely. Just the right amount of scope and detail. Playable in an hour or so. Lots of fun.
So, I am hoping and praying that new AACW scenarios will come forth. Scenarios like
--Vicksburg
--Peninsular Campaign
--Jackson's Valley Campaign
--Bragg's invasion of Kentucky
--Fort Henry and Fort Donelson
--Pea Ridge
--Chickamauga
--Chatanooga
--Antietam
--Wilderness, Spottsylvania, Cold Harbor
--New Orleans
And so on and so forth.
Maybe one of these months my life will settle down to where I can devote day after day to study and play AACW. Maybe I will finally reach the point where I can't stand it any more, where I just commit to learning the whole darned thing. (Like I really should just bite the bullet and commit to learning Javascript in my professional life.)
But unless and until then, I'm wishing for more AACW battle scenarios.
I await your Vicksburg scenario eagerly.
berto wrote:If you create a Vicksburg scenario, I will be forever in your debt.
PM me with your e-mail addy and I'll send you the Vicksburg scenerio as it is right now.
you can beta test it for me if you like.
One thing I think I'm missing is reinforcements from bragg and I'd like to
check The OOB's too see if I can lock them in meridian for a couple of turns.
other than that the scenerio is 10 turns long and Vicksburg is the only VP city right now but I might make Shrevport or alexandria and/or port hudson
VP sites as well.
bigus
Guru80 wrote:By Dec. I will try and have a handful of scenarios out of various battles, mini-campaigns. Just working on it in my free time right now so we will see how it goes. Maybe they will be good enough to be added to the official product ;-)
It will be a great addon to the product. I myself devoted my time to modding the great campaign but I consider this lack of shorter scenarios to be one the biggest shortcomings of AACW.
Clovis wrote:It will be a great addon to the product. I myself devoted my time to modding the great campaign but I consider this lack of shorter scenarios to be one the biggest shortcomings of AACW.
Yes but at least there are some scenerios included unlike the OTHER CW game I bought at the same time as this one
I'm trying too find a decent file server to post links too the Vicksburg scenerio and the others I will make. starting another web page too host 1 scenerio is kind of silly but who knows?
If I do post it , it will be in a new thread.
bigus
My goal is to make a scenerio out of each of the major battles during the course of the civil war and some small mini-campaigns that will cover more with the historical objectives being the goal of them but leaving the player open to all the possibilities that were open to the US and CSA not just the approach they choose.
That is pretty ambitious considering my schedule but I feel I can get it all done in a reasonable amount of time.
That is pretty ambitious considering my schedule but I feel I can get it all done in a reasonable amount of time.
It's great to see this scenario modding.
All things considered, is scenario creation difficult?
I ask because it is curious that scenario mods haven't been attempted (AFAIK) before this.
It occurred to me that, for players new to the game and wishing to try one of the 2-theater campaigns, it might be best to start with 1864 as the Confederates. It's because by then, the Union has occupied most of the coasts and the major western river systems, thereby taking the South out of the naval game; the Confederates' land forces and area of operations are much reduced; and army, corps, and division formations and leaders are already in place--so, fewer things to consider and much easier to play. In that vein, playing the Confederates in a (yet to be developed) 1865 scenario would be even easier, although depressing to be sure, since the prospect for victory by 1865 is nil. The irony is that most newbies probably attempt the 1861 scenarios, where the scope is widest and the gameplay elements are so numerous and open-ended.
Guru80, your scenario modding plans sound fantastic!
bigus, I'll be sure to try your Vicksburg scenario by this weekend. Thanks!
All things considered, is scenario creation difficult?
I ask because it is curious that scenario mods haven't been attempted (AFAIK) before this.
It occurred to me that, for players new to the game and wishing to try one of the 2-theater campaigns, it might be best to start with 1864 as the Confederates. It's because by then, the Union has occupied most of the coasts and the major western river systems, thereby taking the South out of the naval game; the Confederates' land forces and area of operations are much reduced; and army, corps, and division formations and leaders are already in place--so, fewer things to consider and much easier to play. In that vein, playing the Confederates in a (yet to be developed) 1865 scenario would be even easier, although depressing to be sure, since the prospect for victory by 1865 is nil. The irony is that most newbies probably attempt the 1861 scenarios, where the scope is widest and the gameplay elements are so numerous and open-ended.
Guru80, your scenario modding plans sound fantastic!
bigus, I'll be sure to try your Vicksburg scenario by this weekend. Thanks!
bigus, I downloaded and launched your Vicksburg scenario. Although I won't have time to playtest it until this weekend, so far I am mighty impressed. It looks like you have captured all the important elements of the campaign, at least OOBwise, and the geographical scope appears to be just right. I'm very eager to try this out. 
Looking ahead to the future, we might hope for an extended Vicksburg variant involving Grant's many "experiments" beginning in December 1862 (Grant's overland push from north Mississippi, Sherman's Chickasaw Bayou Expedition, and so on). But first things first...
Looking ahead to the future, we might hope for an extended Vicksburg variant involving Grant's many "experiments" beginning in December 1862 (Grant's overland push from north Mississippi, Sherman's Chickasaw Bayou Expedition, and so on). But first things first...
Yes the OOB is from the game mission designers,(and very well done I might add) I only added Brekenridge's division as reinforcements. So far I've played about 7 games all as the Rebs.
And all have been Confederate victories
but very narrow victories.
I will keep Port Hudson as an objective but I might have too add 1 Union controlled Objectives as well too even out the VP count at the start.
this will make it harder for a Confederate win.
right now the VP count for cities is 10-4 for the confederates at the start.
I'm thinking New Orleans which would make the count 10-7 at the start, then if the Union does'nt capture cities then they deserve to loose.
As for your previous post ,the scenerio took me 3 days to make but I had too figure out how too get it into the game etc... Since the OOB was done for me it was very easy.
bigus
And all have been Confederate victories
but very narrow victories.
I will keep Port Hudson as an objective but I might have too add 1 Union controlled Objectives as well too even out the VP count at the start.
this will make it harder for a Confederate win.
right now the VP count for cities is 10-4 for the confederates at the start.
I'm thinking New Orleans which would make the count 10-7 at the start, then if the Union does'nt capture cities then they deserve to loose.
As for your previous post ,the scenerio took me 3 days to make but I had too figure out how too get it into the game etc... Since the OOB was done for me it was very easy.
bigus
-
Gray_Lensman
- Posts: 497
- Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 4:04 am
- Location: Who is John Galt?
bigus wrote:we'll since the scenerio has'nt totally been tested out.....
here it is.
the file server might be a little crappy but we'll see.
Download Vicksburg.zip
hope to hear some feedback on this 1 and if all goes well
I'll start the Atlanta scenerio.
bigus
Bigus I downloaded your scenario. I have not played it, but ran a turn to see if error popped up (it was stable). I see it in a work in progress, but overall I must say you did a major thing here, I would have not expected a new modder to pull out a new scenario by himself!
So congrat to you!
Hofstadter's Law: "It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's law."
Pocus wrote:Bigus I downloaded your scenario. I have not played it, but ran a turn to see if error popped up (it was stable). I see it in a work in progress, but overall I must say you did a major thing here, I would have not expected a new modder to pull out a new scenario by himself!
So congrat to you!
Thanks but it was really the help from the community and in particular
Primasprit and McNaughton. Plus the fact you folks made the game highly moddable (congrats and thanks).
I think we'll see a lot more scenerios in the future.
here is the new Vicksburg scenerio.
Changes I've made are .....Some union units in the north were taken out or locked. Added port hudson garrison and locked them. I changed the VP count so the rebs will have a slight advantage at the start in city VP.
Other than that I still have to fart around with the localstrings stuff and this thing will be complete.
file deleted.....see below
bigus
bigus wrote:Here is the new Vicksburg scenerio.
Changes I've made are .....Some union units in the north were taken out or locked. Added port hudson garrison and locked them. I changed the VP count so the rebs will have a slight advantage at the start in city VP.
Other than that I still have to fart around with the localstrings stuff and this thing will be complete.
All good changes, especially the creation and locking of a separate Port Hudson garrison.
In my third test game as the Union, in response to aggressive moves toward Vicksburg, the Confederate AI moved the Gardner command north to Natchez, leaving Port Hudson entirely unoccupied. The next turn, I waltzed Banks' corps into Port Hudson unopposed. Instant (then) 45 morale points. Not good.
I am pleased, also, to see that in the latest revision, you have lowered the Port Hudson morale points from 45 to 10. I'm not sure about going so low as 10. But I really can't comment much more on the issue of scenario balance, as I am hardly an expert at good play yet.
FWIW, in my first two test games as the South:
--In game one, I held Vicksburg, lost Port Hudson, and lost the game on the final turn.
--In game two, Grant's command besieged and immediately took Vicksburg on turn two or three. I was surprised to see Pemberton's command quit the siege and just up and leave, immediately losing the scenario for the South. (I believe that Pemberton was positioned inside Vicksburg.) Despite the loss (and the dialog box announcing same), I was pleased to see that I could still play on. Although I didn't take the opportunity, it would have been interesting to see if, despite having "lost" (according to the game AI), I could retake Vicksburg as the South. This is a great game/scenario feature--the ability to continue playing beyond AI-announced victory/defeat (where most games would just end at that point and not allow you to continue).
As the North:
--In game three, it's where the Confederate AI abandoned Port Hudson for the Union's easy, unopposed occupation. I didn't have time to play on after that.
I think we'll see a lot more scenerios in the future.
Wonderful! This will give a big boost to AACW's (playability and) popularity.
berto wrote:All good changes, especially the creation and locking of a separate Port Hudson garrison.
In my third test game as the Union, in response to aggressive moves toward Vicksburg, the Confederate AI moved the Gardner command north to Natchez, leaving Port Hudson entirely unoccupied. The next turn, I waltzed Banks' corps into Port Hudson unopposed. Instant (then) 45 morale points. Not good.
ya same thing happened too me too so the port hudson garrison was made.
Now at least the union has too fight for port hudson.
berto wrote:I am pleased, also, to see that in the latest revision, you have lowered the Port Hudson morale points from 45 to 10. I'm not sure about going so low as 10. But I really can't comment much more on the issue of scenario balance, as I am hardly an expert at good play yet.
I'm still messing around with the values too see what kind of VP's the union get for taking the city. I went from the extreme 45 NM to 10 NM. I'll still have check on this one a bit more.
thanx for the feedback.
bigus
I'd like to repeat how nice it is--with bigus' Vicksburg scenario only? or with all AACW scenarios?--to be able to play on after the AI has announced victory or defeat.
In the Vicksburg campaign, Johnston advised Pemberton to abandon Vicksburg, join up with his forces to the east, then attack Grant's numerically inferior forces. And afterwards presumably also retake Vicksburg.
Although with hindsight it's difficult to see how Johnston's strategy would have succeeded, it's nice to be able to test it--to abandon Vicksburg, thus automatically "lose" the scenario, but play on anyway to see if Grant could be crushed and Vicksburg retaken.
I hope and assume that this sort of flexibility is available in other scenarios.
In the Vicksburg campaign, Johnston advised Pemberton to abandon Vicksburg, join up with his forces to the east, then attack Grant's numerically inferior forces. And afterwards presumably also retake Vicksburg.
Although with hindsight it's difficult to see how Johnston's strategy would have succeeded, it's nice to be able to test it--to abandon Vicksburg, thus automatically "lose" the scenario, but play on anyway to see if Grant could be crushed and Vicksburg retaken.
I hope and assume that this sort of flexibility is available in other scenarios.
berto wrote:I hope and assume that this sort of flexibility is available in other scenarios.
Yes I believe it is and I hope it stays this way.
BTW you interested in testing another scenerio?
I'll have Atlanta ready in maybe a day or two.
@Rafiki... Thanks I'll look at posting in the Wiki
UPDATE:vicksburg scenerio added forts "morgan" and "gaines" garrison.
[url=[URL=http://www.filecrunch.com/file/~3qxuyw]Download Vicksburgv1.3.zip[/url]]Download Vicksburgv1.3.zip[/URL]
bigus
berto wrote:Sure, keep 'em coming. I'll be happy to playtest. And it's good to see you polishing the Vicksburg scenario, too.
Yes the scenerio keeps drawing me back
I keep thinking of things that I can change so I don't think this will be the final version.
I'll send the Atlanta scenerio when its ready or partly ready.
bigus
Here is the Atlanta scenerio.......
[url=[URL=http://www.filecrunch.com/file/~h2edea]Download Atlanta.zip[/url]]Download Atlanta.zip[/URL]
Next version of Vicksburg should include...
1 DIV locked in Vicksburg.
new supply depots for union.
Baton Rouge now a depot with Garrison.
bigus
[url=[URL=http://www.filecrunch.com/file/~h2edea]Download Atlanta.zip[/url]]Download Atlanta.zip[/URL]
Next version of Vicksburg should include...
1 DIV locked in Vicksburg.
new supply depots for union.
Baton Rouge now a depot with Garrison.
bigus
Good work again there Bigus.....My Bentonville scenario is complete as well, just have to upload it. Spent some time play testing it because I was having a problem with an event that wasn't doing what i thought it should, got it all figured out now though ;-) Not being very knowledgeable about anything Civil War related other than general information I have had to do a lot of research on the scenarios I am putting together which has been a pain. I really need to invest in the books Jagger and Primepsprit (I believe) suggested since I am just completely consumed with wanting to learn more about the actual battles and the men involved.
As for your Atlanta Scenario........Shouldn't the divisions with Polk be in his Corps instead of the independant divisions they are now? If not never mind and if they are it is easy for the player to just add them but thought I would point it out. Haven't had a chance to play it much yet but very well done again.
As for your Atlanta Scenario........Shouldn't the divisions with Polk be in his Corps instead of the independant divisions they are now? If not never mind and if they are it is easy for the player to just add them but thought I would point it out. Haven't had a chance to play it much yet but very well done again.
I should mention as well that my scenario of the Battle of Bentonville has morphed into the period from when Sherman's Army left Savannah until Bentonville. I did a lot of digging for historical facts about that couple month time period and feel I have a solid representation of what happened. Of course the player is free to make their own moves but it is most benefitial if you divide into a Left and Right wing as Sherman marched. If not you might run out of time and not get all the objectives. For those worried about it, it will be extremely tough (as it should) but it is very possible for the CSA to pull out a win.
bigus wrote:Here is the Atlanta scenerio.......
Great! Just in time for the weekend.
Next version of Vicksburg should include...
1 DIV locked in Vicksburg.
new supply depots for union.
Baton Rouge now a depot with Garrison.
Double great! Yes, from my playtesting experience, you need to take steps to force the Confederate AI to commit more fully to defending Vicksburg (also Port Hudson, as you did previously). Good to see you continuing to tweak other game aspects also.
Although this may or may not be one of your objectives, I am finding these mid-size campaign scenarios to be just the right size and scope for learning the game and deepening my understanding of its mechanics. They have indeed helped make the game playable for me. With enough experience playing these smaller sized scenarios under my belt, one of these weeks I'll feel more comfortable taking on the full-war scenarios. But I suspect that over the long run, it's the user-modded battle/campaign scenarios (eventually merged with the official release?) that will engage me the most.
Keep up the good work!
Guru80 wrote:I really need to invest in the books Jagger and Primepsprit (I believe) suggested since I am just completely consumed with wanting to learn more about the actual battles and the men involved.
Shelby Foote's Civil War trilogy is indispensible for understanding the war as a whole. A very good background read.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests