Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

"Multi-player Madness" or "The HORROR that is Scenario 1"


blood-phoenix

Recommended Posts

Well, its happened.

I've played Scenario 1 as the Confederates...for the last time.

 

Is it just sour grapes?  Am I just a poor loser?  A person might conclude that, but its really not the case.  As someone whose been wargaming for over a quarter of a century, I am highly experienced in the fine art of losing with grace, and while I certainly prefer victory, I am playing in part just for the fun of the game.  But I have my limits.

 

My long-time Grognard buddy "ddschirle" can verify that we have had many discussions about "game balance" in wargame scenarios.  I don't mind scenarios with unequal forces...provided that the smaller or inferior force has adjusted victory conditions.  If I play a game where I'm controlling the defenders of the Alamo, I don't mind knowing from turn 1 that my destruction is inevitable...if I have some kind of objective to shoot for that serves as a measure of success.  Clearly, if I'm the defenders, my Victory Condition can't be "Rout the Mexican Army".  You could, as an example, set the scenario up so that the defender would be considered to "win" the scenario if they held out for at least "X" number of turns, or inflicted over "X" casualties.  But if you set up the game and say that both sides have the exact same objective: to wipe out the enemy army...then there's really no point in playing!  Its a foregone conclusion, and the Mexican player can't help but win.

 

Its especially onerous (and odious) to me when the inequality is based on historical inaccuracy.

 

At first, I just thought Scenario 1 was unbalanced in favor of the Union, and persisted in the delusion that the Confederate might somehow be able to win.  I no longer believe that.  Unless the Yankee General is asleep at the controls, besotted on "Oh Be Joyful" or maybe 9 years old, the Rebs cannot possibly win. (General, there are no 15,000 men alive who can take that ridge.)

 

And the really bad thing is the WHY of it.  It comes down to the fact that the units in Buford's Cavalry are preposterously inaccurate in their capabilities.  No unit in the game that is marked "Skirmishers" should be able to CHARGE the enemy (with the possible allowance that they might charge an enemy skirmish line) nor should they be able to seize and hold a Victory Point Objective.  But if infantry skirmishers are bad in this sense, it is the mounted Skirmishers, the VIDETTTES that take the cake...in fact they ride their horses into your command tent, take YOUR cake...and eat it right in front of you!  And you can do nothing to stop them!  They are like Cataphracts on an ancient battlefield, with the addition of some new Yankee carbine called an AK-47... How I have grown to LOATHE the very word Vidette, when once upon a time to me it meant only the mounted pickets that screened an army or camp.

Little did I suspect that I would come to associate the term with Equestrian Commandoes who haunt the nightmares of every artilleryman in the Army of Northern Virginia.

 

The 1st Scenario is BROKEN.  Because the Videttes are Broken.  Please fix them so we can all move on.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all, I must say that while i really enjoy playing this game and I'm really interested in the civil war I'm not aware of most of the units background. Neither I'm a civil war veteran or civil war games grognard. 

 

Still, I do understand the "negative" (historical?/unhistorical?) implications of how the videttes are working at the moment but I don't think they are actually giving the union players any kind of advantage on the confederate counterparts. 

 

Let's look at the battle (day one, of course)...while, in the overall, the union will be able to field a major force they actually start with a smaller force and have their reinforcements join slowly from far south of the map and just little by little, so actually they usually are never (as the confederates also have their reinforcements) outnumbering the rebs.

 

Also, the brigades of the confederation are sensibly composed of way more men (wich, added to their superior melee capabilities... in overall they can rely on better morale, better charge/melee and if in a firing duel they have the numbers to sustain more casualities, and inflict more if needed). It's clear to see that the union player have to rely on mobility and firepower, if he can. Here comes the skirmishers and videttes. They're not stronger in numbers (on the countrary) and they have not any "aim/reload" buffs (at least for what I've seen). They are mobile. And that's the key. The confederates generals field mountains, the skirmishers have to climb and dance around them. 

 

All said and gone, I need to ask you that will surely know better than me (as see before, I really don't know much about the civil war troops)...those videttes...what were they? Regular troops or irregulars? Because this could change radically my ideas about them.

 

If they are regulars, than I just like them as they are. I would not care about civil war tactics as I'm the general tis time, I'm the one moving the troops... and if I think that the sabres and revolvers of 300 cavalrymen charging by two sides can obliterate one unguarded arty...well that's it. 

 

On the other side, if they were volunteer...they would probably have significative differences in armament from one another, probably no ability to charge at all -lacking the skills of charging in formations, lacking even the sabres probably- and most of all, fearing to lose their own horses...so what do you think?

 

Ceers 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe the main multi-player issue is game going out of sync, but then not correcting itself. Then when you see something its not what is actually happening. Then what is actually happening you cant see and before you know it you have for example Iron Brigade with 90% morale drop to 0% in seconds and running for no reason from your perspective, but from other guy he has you flanked and is charging you from 3 sides. Second issue is Skirmishers and Videttes acting like elite commando's operating behind lines with full morale (maybe deny the Skirmishers the ability to Hold and keep their unbreakable morale?) and Third issue is Routing units charging and running in circles with no rhyme or reason. But I think the third issue may have something to do with the first issue of the game going out of sync. I think a dedicated server could fix the sync issues....

 

-my two cents

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there needs to be a Cause and affect Implemented, If a player uses his forces in an

Unhistoric manner wich is what is happening then that should trigger unhistoric events like the early arrival

of Confederate cavelry, Multiplayer games will always show exploitable weeknesses and with such there should

be triggers to counter those moves to make the game far more enjoyable for both sides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...