In general, the game does a good job of recreating the strategic war of movement in the West, and the strategic stalemate in the East.
The end result is that gamers who can't handle SC:ACW's level of abstraction (or a view from 20,000 feet up) can try another ACW game on Steam: the Ultimate General: Civil War real-time strategy and tactics game, or the ambitious GT in its current, less-than-perfect state.
Another important issue is that the artillery guns represented in SC:ACW are "integrated" within each formation. Field artillery and siege guns can be created as stand-alone units, but only when using the Game Editor.
This does not mean that SC:ACW is devoid of tactics. In fact, the game is overflowing with tactical-level unit data everywhere one looks, and we will expand on the game's generous use of the nitty-gritty, grognard-style level of unit detail a bit later on. Let's just say that by the end of 1862 in most campaigns, the Union is pushing around more than 110 land units alone, so micro-management is certainly a thing here.
The Production Screen shows future unit deployments.
Another minor quibble is that, like the other games in the SC series, various Military Events are displayed at the start of the players' turns - such as the destruction of enemy units and capture of various objectives - but, clicking on the Event being displayed does not localize the Event on the map. So, one must use one's good memory and imagination when interpreting these start-of-turn updates.
The Reports tab gives a quick overview regarding active formations and unit losses.
The Main 'Events'
Much like Fury Software's most recent WW2 titles (World at War and War in Europe), as well as the latest Strategic Command - World War I game, players will be asked to make strategic decisions, called Decision Events - usually with a simple "yes" or "no."
Stephen Mallory, secretary of the navy for the Confederate States, queries the player regarding one of more than 160 rich, historical and what-if Events programmed into the game.
More information on the events themselves are contained in the Strategy Guides for each campaign scenario, and these excellent documents are conveniently accessed by push a command button at the top right-hand-corner of the game screen. One can also study the game map and return to the decision screen at one's leisure.
There are also specific Notes that come with each decision (available by selecting the "Notes" button). These Notes give players detailed descriptions of the background and the current consequences of every "yes" or "no" choice.
For this game, there are more than 160 specific Decision Events, not including several hundred - perhaps more than 1,000? - general event scripts included with SC:ACW. The latter non-decision events announce themselves at the start of a new turn, but do not require a decision to be made on the part of the active player.
The marriage of George Armstrong Custer is duly celebrated in this in-game "flavor" Event.
The fact that all of these events and AI scripts can be easily edited inside the Game Editor using the player's default text editor, which automatically pops up when a script is opened, offers levels of customization which are quite staggering. And if English isn't one's native tongue, the game actually supports more than 650 different languages for modding purposes.
Each of the scripts are generously "commented" within the files themselves, which offer would-be programmers a chance to get in some practice. The effort required by the developers to make all this available to the player is somewhere North of extraordinary. But that's just how the latest SC game releases are built.
Multiplayer Gaming
The topic that's taken up the most bandwidth on the games' forums thus far is multiplayer balance. In that regard, the developers have already pushed out a couple of patches addressing play balance between two human opponents. Our view is that's what the game editor is for: simply make some adjustments between two consenting adults and have at it! Meanwhile, here's the latest on multiplayer game balance based on two informative forum posts:
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=11908&t=386205
and
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=11908&t=385748
We also have a detailed quote on game balance from SC Assistant Programmer Bill Macon:
"There may be some confusion as to 'being
able to simulate historical events' with wanting to replicate exact
historical results. But this shouldn't be the case at all. Good wargames should demonstrate that if you
follow historical strategies, then you should achieve relatively similar
results. But that's not the point. If you have some confidence in the wargame
being realistic and historically accurate, then you should have some confidence
that following ahistorical strategies should produce believable results.
"The
Strategic Command series does a pretty good job of doing that, improving and
expanding as it has over the years," continues Macon. "If you play ahistorical to win, your
victory or loss should be believable. In that sense, we should be on the same
spectrum. And there should be an addictive replayability effect to try again
with different ahistorical strategies."
The fact is that the Civil War in the East did not consist of a continuous line of units, but the battles played out that way. So, one point for Macon. Also, this was a period in warfare when the defender was favored, and wave attacks against the weapons of the time were suicidal. Even Lee, when he marched North and encountered the Union at Gettysburg, found that attacking on terrain favorable to the enemy was sheer madness.
So, the War in the East eventually did take on a WWI-style of attrition warfare, with the North having to accept high losses in order to destroy the Army of Northern Virginia.
According to another knowledgeable poster, "...the map only offers a limited number of hexes depicting Maryland and Pennsylvania. And as a result, there is no representation of mountain areas, such as South Mountain. So, the Cumberland Valley doesn't exist in the game, and that alone cancels out some crucial operational decisions." (Italics ours)
And so, we remind ourselves once again that this is not an operational-level game to begin with. We only belabor the point here because it may be a deal-breaker for certain gamers.
Our other observation related to multiplayer thus far is that, while Matrix/Slitherine's PBEM++ system is quite functional, gamers should expect only a limited amount of activity on the servers. This means that almost all multiplayer games available are locked-out as "private," and those searching for opponents are best directed to the Matrix/Slitherine forums to get connected.
The 'Intelligence' of the Artificial Opponent
It's high time to give some credit where it's due. Whether it's O'Shea, Cater, Macon or Runacre, or most likely a team programming effort, the AI in this game is imminently credible. It's likely that only veteran-to-expert SC players (and those familiar with the most detailed levels of ACW grand strategy) will find any glaring faults here.
And here's some proof: When playing a custom 1861 game-start as the Confederates against a "veteran" Union AI opponent - with the French controlled by the AI but immediately active on the Rebel side with a generous portion of MMPs - the artificial opponent conducted itself quite admirably.
Specifically, our French allies under AI control both purchased units and conducted its land and naval operations better than this intermediate player could hope to do. (Of course, this isn't saying much.) On the Union side, the AI was bull-dog efficient in identifying, surrounding, and eliminating vulnerable Rebel forces, while credibly reinforcing its own formations.
Coming off some play-time with the ever-popular, strategic-level Unity of Command II game series on Steam, this writer was struck by the manifold internal AI decisions required of SC:ACW compared with the aforementioned game. Let's just say that the perceived effort required to program an excellent single-player game like Unity of Command II cannot be compared with the challenges presented - and mostly overcome - by the SC:ACW artificial opponent.
And, the AI isn't programmed to cheat, either. It uses the same supply, combat, spotting, income, research and other rules and formulas as the human player. However, by increasing the difficulty level in the Options menu (from Green, to Intermediate, to Veteran and onto Expert), the AI can be assigned spotting, experience, and/or MPP bonuses. The Experience bonus may give the AI an edge in certain combat situations, while the MMP bonus allows the AI to reinforce, upgrade and purchase more units over time than the human player.
Players can further customize the difficulty level versus the AI by disabling a number of AI bonus unit events in the Options/Advanced/Scripts screen during game set-up. These AI unit bonuses are typically found on the last few pages of the Unit Events menu and specifically labeled "for AI use only."
Hundreds of AI and Event scripts can be activated or de-activated at the start of the game.
One example is "AI Union: Division - Boston 3/63 Lv2," which translates into a Union AI-only event at the intermediate difficulty level or higher, whereby the AI will received a Division unit in Boston in March 1863.
The designers admit that the AI plays pretty well tactically, but "has difficulty matching the big-picture awareness of a human player." So, giving the artificial opponent a few more units helps it with grand strategy.
In addition, the AI bonus unit events are said to "smooth out" game play in general and avoid a snowball effect, where the AI begins to lose badly, resulting in an abrupt and unsatisfying finish to the game for the human player.
A number of advanced AI scripts are also present, which actually force the programmed opponent to conduct various research and diplomacy investments, whether it has the income to do so or not. These events were included to optimize the game experience for the player, but like most scripts, they can be turned off if desired.
Finally, when playing against the AI, the turn resolution phase in the SC:ACW game reviewed here is relatively lightning-quick, thanks in large part to a system that has been proven over more than 20 years of designer effort. And that's when testing the game on a sub-par, i7 3.6 ghz machine with a lowly GeForce GTX 745 video card at a screen resolution of 1900x1200.
A Rousing Welcome for the 'Old War Dog'
It may be the right time in this narrative to welcome a special guest: the Old War Dog. With 30 years of professional military experience as a U.S Army/USMC officer - and an astounding 1,500 hours playing GT (you remember that GT is short for Steam's Grand Tactics: The American Civil War, don't you?), the Old War Dog oozes the kind of real-world credibility that this writer sorely lacks.
Major General William Tecumseh Sherman
Let's quote General William T. Sherman here: "War is cruelty, and there is no point in reforming it..."
And the Old War Dog responds: "Well, war has gotten 'reformed' very dramatically, and it is still being made the more terrible."
Like many military veterans who play wargames, the Old War Dog revels in designs that feature in-depth historical immersion, including a detailed treatment of unit headquarters, their personalities, and their functions. The Old War Dog notes that the shorter command ranges of HQ units in this version of SC makes their strategic placement "pure gold," but he mourns the limited number of historical leaders available to both sides during the game.
Now, we'll go into a bit more detail on the available HQ units and the strategies behind their optimal use in this SC game offering:
Like Fury's previous games, HQs can be set in one of three modes: Auto, Auto-Assist and Manual. The full-on Auto function allows the friendly AI to fill all the command slots, while Auto-Assist lets players intervene and manually assign formations to HQs as an option. Manual mode requires that gamers manually assign each unit to a HQ.
The Old War Dog notes that the AI doesn't always select the optimal HQ for each unit when on full Auto. On the other hand, Manual requires a good deal of micro-management to avoid leaving a command slot wide open. In this regard, Auto-Assist appears to be the best setting for HQs.
When using Auto-Assist mode, formations within command range are color coded on the map: A "blue" tint indicates a unit is not in command, and said formation will likely perform poorly in battle. A "green" tint indicates the unit is commanded by the selected HQ, while "red" shows that the selected formation is part of a different HQ than the one chosen. While all of this sounds complicated when being spelled out, it's relatively straight-forward in practice.
Van Dorn's Confederate HQ is responsible for several brigades (highlighted in 'green') when accessing the game's HQ mode. Also in use here is the "1861: The Blue and the Grey Mod" (alternate turns), which features custom unit graphics and a number of other features (link below).
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=11920&t=387378
When accessing the game's HQ mode, one strategy is to focus on the "blue" highlighted units and determine if each one really needs to be commanded by a HQ during that game turn - for example, if that particular formation is going to be involved in a key battle or is likely to be attacked during the next enemy turn. If a critical battle is coming up, it's wise to assign the units in question to the highest-rated and most experienced HQs.
If that is the case, the player can right-click on that important unit and attach it to the selected HQ. If the "attach" function appears faded-out, that means the current HQ is devoid of command slots, and another unit must be detached to make room for the key formation.
The various HQ functions cannot be used if a unit has been moved, has attacked, or has been upgraded. Therefore, it's important to finish all the HQ assignments before one starts shuffling units around. When one deploys a new HQ unit - and there won't be many of them in a vanilla campaign - that HQ cannot move but can be assigned subordinate units within its command range.
The Naval Game
There's quite a bit that's new when it comes to naval warfare in the game, and even the most experienced SC players have come up against a moderate learning curve when exploring the nuances of riverine warfare in SC:ACW. There are no less than 15 individual naval vessels modeled in this game.
Ironclad ships (including river ironclad and monitor-type vessels) are most useful in destroying wooden ships (mainly gunboats). And there is a meaningful distinction between all types of naval units, from battleships to amphibious transports.
Monitors are less effective than ironclads when battling the latter ships, but they are potent weapons when faced with wooden ships and also cost a bit less in MMPs and can be built quicker than ironclads.
The Confederate player is advised to build at least a few river ironclads and monitors to challenge the Union and avoid having the enemy destroy Rebel convoys and drain its economy. On "normal" difficulty level, one can do significant damage with ironclads in order to open up Confederate trade lanes and gimp the Union's ability to amphibious assault. And new players should be warned that the Union player seems to be able to conduct landing operations anywhere and everywhere it so chooses.
The latest build of the game gives gunboats the "special" ability to kill land units on an all-to-frequent basis. "They make field and railroad guns look like peashooters in comparison," says the Old War Dog, although certain land features appear to mitigate their effectiveness. The use of several gunboats can be used by human players like a surgical tool to inflict "1" or "2" strength points of damage to land units per attack. While Union General U.S. Grant used these weapons to great effect when sailing down the Ole Mississippi, at press time gunboats appear to be overpowered when attacking land formations. As such, the building and deploying of large groups of gunboats are currently a known "exploit" for Union players.
In any event, researching naval weapons is a good idea in order to improve the offensive capability of one's ships when playing as the Confederates. The Union player is graced with a preponderance of ships active in coastal areas of the game map. However, players will still need to prioritize three key techs - infantry equipment, corps organization and infantry tactics - over and above naval considerations.
SC:ACW's research screen allows player to follow their own strategies when allocating precious Military Production Points to the various technologies that may be unlocked during the game. This particular screen belongs to a "modified" campaign featuring extra research points.
The Old War Dog strongly suggests that players consult the individual Strategy Guides written for each scenario for further hints on research and general game tactics. However, the research paths chosen are typically dependent on the player's overall strategy, so there is no perfect formula for devoting MMPs to various technologies within the game. Besides the infantry techs, bonuses to field telegraph, leadership, spying-and-intelligence, and fort modernization should all be considered right up-front.
Directly below is an informative thread on Union naval strategy regarding the blocking of Confederate ports, which is what the AI will certainly use against the player:
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=11921&t=385745
And here's another helpful thread on the use of amphibious landings in the game:
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=11908&t=386389
Finally, we offer one more tip on SC:ACW naval strategy:
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=11908&t=386877
More On Strategy
With
more than 1,500 hours playing GT, the Old War Dog rates the complexity level of
SC:ACW as a "3," with GT's challenge rated at an "8 and rising," with
the latest updates. That steep of a learning curve, as well as a
fleshed-out "civilian" component, makes the strategic, operational and
tactical aspects of GT time consuming and demanding compared with the
high-level and relatively streamlined personality of our latest SC game.
A quick study of this game screen pulled from Grand Tactician: The Civil War (1861-1865) shows the depth of detail inherent in this breakthrough game design.
"SC
may be a great game for 19th and 20th Century large-scale wargaming,"
says the Old War Dog. "I have noticed with Fury's latest iteration a
unique AI compared to the previous games that teaches history while
guiding the player through the scenarios. At the tactical level, the AI
component is competent but relies more on the player making the
decisions than in GT's tactical game module.
Grand Tactician: The Civil War (1861-1865) features strategic, operational, and tactical game play that can challenge the most experienced AWNT wargamers.
"The GT AI is continually evaluating and becoming stronger at holding the lines and less resistant to flanking attacks," the Old War Dog continues. "Of course, the competency of the AI has varied quite a bit from patch to patch with GT. The SC AI seems to adjust well to the player's decisions: going back to the War in Europe game, it you decide not to execute Operation Sealion, the SC's AI does a good job of re-adjusting Britain's home defense priorities."
Also, please find a link below on the strategic uses of regiments, brigades, cavalry divisions and other units from some expert SC game players:
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=11908&t=386837
The International Scene
The inclusion of Britain, France, Spain and Mexico in the stock campaigns is intriguing indeed. But, as was historically the case, wargamers should generally not expect the major nations to play a key role in the vanilla scenarios.
In this campaign, the British Empire enters the fray in the American Civil War on the Confederate side of the conflict, attacking from the Canadian territories.
O'Shea admits that France's intervention in Mexico is not included in the game as a separate scenario. Instead, the designer has built this interaction into the main campaigns. When the French seize control of the Veracruz Customs House in Dec. 1861 (you remember that from North American History 101, right?), a new faction will appear in that city - the Mexican Empire (not Mexico proper) - and every so often after that an event will pop up telling the player about recent events in Mexico.
Of course, all of this changes if and when France enters the war...
In this modified campaign scenario, The French Republic has gone over to the Confederate side. Several French units can be seen in the Southwest corner of the game's strategic map.
When Napoleon III jumps into the fray, both Mexico (on the Union side) and the Mexican Empire (on the Confederate side) will both activate, with their forces positioned in accordance with their historical deployments at that time.
For example, if France joins the ACW in the Summer of 1862, one will find General Lorencez licking his wounds after the Cinco de Mayo. And if France appears a year later, Marshal Forey will be victorious in Mexico City.
The French send 163 Military Production Points to the Rebels via the Convoy system.
At this point, both the Union and Confederacy will also be able to send forces to Mexico; and, in the Union's case, MMPs via a convoy, provided that the Yankees control both El Paso and New Mexico. As such, it's important that players balance out their military commitments between the battles in Mexico and the U.S. if they are to have a chance of winning the much wider war.
Editing Power in the Player's Hands
We are happy to report that the developers did not "wimp out" and promise the editor in a future patch: The standard SC game editor, which is extremely powerful and very easy to operate, is included and entirely functional in the release-version of the game.
Previous owners of one of the SC series of games know exactly what they are getting here. For newcomers, expect to be pleasantly surprised by the scope of editing possibilities offered by this utility - without ever reading the editor's documentation. The editor both reveals all the detailed data behind the game's design and hands it all to the player on a silver platter. In fact, we recommend that players boot up the game's editor just to see the wealth of statistics that back up the vanilla campaigns' designs.
And this is where all the "unused" space on the generous game map of the Northern Hemisphere in the vanilla scenarios can be leveraged to create entirely new global wars. Even for first-time users, one of the beauties of this editor is the ability to profoundly change the character of any of the stock campaigns with just a few keystrokes - and no error messages!
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
_(cropped).jpg)
.png)
.png)
Follow Us