Questions on Nemo's Civil War

[Steve Clark]

I'm starting to play Nemo's great American Civil War scenario and have these initial questions:
1) It is stated that you need to play Union at King and Confederate at Deity, otherwise it's too easy. Is the Union playable at Emperor or Deity?
2) I noticed that Darwin, with its two free advances, is available to build. Would it be cheating to build this?
3) When I play a scenario like this, I keep a detailed log of casualties by type, for all sides. The only way it can be shown is to have an embassy with the enemy. I did this for that purpose only. Will this cause any problems with the scenario?
4) I noticed that the sceanrio is set up to allow Union cities to grow agressively. Will reassigning workers away from food, thus reducing (or stopping) the cities' growth rate, cause any problems with the scenario?

[klesh]

Hi Steve,
I'm afraid I don't have the answers to those questions, but I can tell you this. DO NOT finish the research/tech tree. The game'll crash up on ya. There is a way to prevent that by opening up the possibility of the "future techs" but I don't think Nemo did that for this one. I'm pretty sure I can remember being just about ready to deliver the deathblow to those rebels when the whole game went bye-bye...not a good thing. Keep on the lookout for that.

------------------
I am the Ukrainian Anti-Pope!
Automatic Kleshnikov 2001
[This message has been edited by Field Marshal Klesh (edited January 22, 2001).]

[Paul Hanson]

As the Union, just build loads of engineers, build railroads into Confederate territory and whoop them. Piece of piss.

[Steve Clark]

I believe you are thinking of the original Civil War scenario that came with FW/MGE, where it was too easy to win. In Nemo's scenario, it appears you cannot get Engineers anywhere close to the Southern cities without getting killed. Perhaps later in the game, yes, but I can prevent myself from building railroads in the Southern states.

[Paul Hanson]

No, I`m definitely refering to the Nemo version. I built one from Lexington to Knoxville, and it just all fell into place from there.

[Steve Clark]

What if I handicap myself by not building railroads at all?

Or perhaps I can change somethings in the rules.txt to make it more balanced? Can one change the rules.txt after the scenario has been started and have it automatically go into effect?

[Paul Hanson]

quote: Originally posted by Captain Nemo on 01-24-2001 12:27 PM Piece of Piss? I hope you mean "Piece of Cake" (Easy)? Or are you really saying the scenario is a "piece of ****" (Bad Scenario)?

Don`t worry. I mean that it was quite easy. Which made a welcome change after Red Front and Second Front.

[Captain Nemo]

Piece of Piss? I hope you mean "Piece of Cake" (Easy)?
Or are you really saying the scenario is a "piece of ****" (Bad Scenario)?

I agree that it is too easy. It was really designed for CiC and had minimal events. At the time nobody thought of making Scenarios where the AI gets help to make the play difficult for the Human player. So I made it playable from both sides but that makes it really easy compared with all the newer scenarios.
The only Challenge is actually to get all the way down the Mississipi and capture all the cities within the 5 years of the War (Like Allard's River War) but the building of Railroads doesn't really require this. The inept AI doesn't trade with Europe and doesn't know how to defend his cities.
My technique has always been the railroad-engineers-Siege-mortar combo, where a large group of Engineers advances, building railroads and fortifications as they go until they reach a Confederate city which is then "depopulated" with the siege mortars that follow along. A bunch of entrenched infantry and field artillery is also helpful to protect the advancing army. Once you get balloons you can even protect the entire stack using them.
Sorry to say the game is easy, but still fun if you like to whomp on a helpless AI. Also those who find SF and RF too difficult can get to play one of my scenarios and WIN!