Civil war 2 by Ageod

Simply the best grand strategy civil war game ever made, cant recommend any civil war game more than this one.

Civil War II
www.matrixgames.com/store/500/Civil.War.II

anyone played it?

Yea, I've played it.

For 23 hours according to Steam. And so far I've mostly managed to not win at Shiloh, get my supply lines messed up and making a general mess of things.

It's a great game but heavens above, I'm absolutely useless at it.

lol, was hard for me at first as well. I will suggest to you putting the supply system at easy supply. That will make game 100% easier and let you get use to game. You must play the entire civil war the scenarios like shiloh just are not even the game [ not fun either], so play entire civil war that will also give you many chances to mess up and recover.

jebstuart wrote: lol, was hard for me at first as well. I will suggest to you putting the supply system at easy supply. That will make game 100% easier and let you get use to game. You must play the entire civil war the scenarios like shiloh just are not even the game [ not fun either], so play entire civil war that will also give you many chances to mess up and recover.

I mainly did Shiloh just to get a hang of command structures and movement and what not.

I've started a number of grand campaigns but they quickly flounder. I may change tack and try a one theater scenario instead of the whole thing. Maybe see if I can do as well as Grant and Sherman.

so by " quickly flounder" do you mean you got whipped?. If so what difficulty level do you play as and what side north or south?. How are you getting whipped as well? I would love to give some basic help to get you started because i would hate to see you give up on such a great game that has brought me more fun than any game in many years. If you are playing as north especially easy supply can help so much when trying to invade, than protecting supply lines and depots are easier and less important making invasion easier.

con20or wrote: Sounds cool!

I cant recommend it more, as great as scourge of war is tactical, i must say i think civ 2 is as good or better strategically.I have never had a game were things like weather,supply,terrain are so important and matter so great. The game goes deep into diplomacy,military decisions, industrial and were/what to build and were. How to use train/boats and were. Do you use to send much needed troops across state? or use to distribute supplies around country etc, and so much more just a great game. Perfect to go along with scourge of was, than best tactical and strategy civil war games ever.

I've tried sevral ageod games, the first one, then civil war, then the remake of the first one, i dont think I've tried civil war 2.

My problem ( other then sucking at them) i don't feel like I'm in control when battles start, its the same problem i have with all those grand strategy games, like Europa universales. Ageod games, lots of the matrix games.

If i can't control the battles, i don't feel in control. Just seeing the pc number crunch then showing then results isn't good enough.

Gunfreak wrote: I've tried sevral ageod games, the first one, then civil war, then the remake of the first one, i dont think I've tried civil war 2.

My problem ( other then sucking at them) i don't feel like I'm in control when battles start, its the same problem i have with all those grand strategy games, like Europa universales. Ageod games, lots of the matrix games.

If i can't control the battles, i don't feel in control. Just seeing the pc number crunch then showing then results isn't good enough.

That's something I sometimes feel as well, but in Civil War 2 I've actually found a way to make it work in favour of the game.

I'm playing the game as a first person Lincoln simulator. When Little Mac fails his actication check and stays put in Alexandria I just reckon that that's how it feels to be the C-I-C and having your general sit on their backsides doing nothing while the Rebs are loading the Shenandoah shotgun.

Same for the battles. I'm Lincoln. I give the general orders and so forth but when it comes to the battle I'm still stuck in DC waiting for the telegrams to tell me how the battle went.

Played like that, the game feels very intense indeed. You know why he probably wanted to shout at generals at times and you start appreciating those who actually move out and do their job.

Gunfreak wrote: I've tried sevral ageod games, the first one, then civil war, then the remake of the first one, i dont think I've tried civil war 2.

My problem ( other then sucking at them) i don't feel like I'm in control when battles start, its the same problem i have with all those grand strategy games, like Europa universales. Ageod games, lots of the matrix games.

If i can't control the battles, i don't feel in control. Just seeing the pc number crunch then showing then results isn't good enough.

agreed that is a downfall, but to me when i got use to it i felt just as in control because i put the general there in control of those troops, in that terrain, supplies and defensive/attack that well rested [or not] the overall situation. You can in this game chose the overall strategy based on your commanders ability in defence or atack.

That's something I sometimes feel as well, but in Civil War 2 I've actually found a way to make it work in favour of the game.

I'm playing the game as a first person Lincoln simulator. When Little Mac fails his actication check and stays put in Alexandria I just reckon that that's how it feels to be the C-I-C and having your general sit on their backsides doing nothing while the Rebs are loading the Shenandoah shotgun.

Same for the battles. I'm Lincoln. I give the general orders and so forth but when it comes to the battle I'm still stuck in DC waiting for the telegrams to tell me how the battle went.

Played like that, the game feels very intense indeed. You know why he probably wanted to shout at generals at times and you start appreciating those who actually move out and do their job.

perfectly said.

So, I watched a bunch of tutorial videos. Got a new campaign going starting in July 1861 as the Union.

It's not late November and things are... not where I'd expect them to be.

Due to political pressure I made an early grab for Manassas. I wasn't expecting much but I had to make the move. To my bafflement Beauregard evacuated it and I then occupied it. I've since been reorganising McDowels army and it's now in splendid shape and I've brought in Lil Mac to train up the new troops. They're currently in Falmouth, moving towards Fredericksburg to kick out a small CSA force while a couple of divisions are occupying Mansassas.

In the Valley Hooker and Burnside has taken Harper's Ferry and was joined by Banks who's now in overall control of that area. JE Jonhston tried to oust us but took a sound beating and has retreated north west to the mountains. Which means he's out of supply lines. In harsh winter weather. I suspect come spring I will be able to deal with him easily. Meanwhile in the Valley Jackson and Beauregard are concentrating to retry, I think, but I'm well entrenched to just spend winter there and reinforce.

In the west Hurlbut is the star of the show. Kentucky left the Union, much to my consternation and I sent a force under Hurlbut south from Louisville. He's now managed to get as far as Bowling Green. He'll winter there as supply is good and I can reinforce him there and see where I want to go in the spring. McClernand is currently trying to use his division to smash a CSA force that managed to cross the river north into...Ohio, I think.

Grant is currently taking a couple of divisions to Paducah and in the spring I'll take Columbus and then Henry and Donnelson I think. Meanwhile I'm concentrating in Cairo where Halleck is training up troops and organising divisions and sending them on to Grant and Wallace.

Lyons and Fremont are not doing much. Fremont is training troops in MO somewhere and Lyons is sitting out the winter in Rolla.

In short, this game is really, really good and it makes for some good story telling at times. This is probably my most successful attempt at it yet.

Stellar Duck wrote: So, I watched a bunch of tutorial videos. Got a new campaign going starting in July 1861 as the Union.

It's not late November and things are... not where I'd expect them to be.

Due to political pressure I made an early grab for Manassas. I wasn't expecting much but I had to make the move. To my bafflement Beauregard evacuated it and I then occupied it. I've since been reorganising McDowels army and it's now in splendid shape and I've brought in Lil Mac to train up the new troops. They're currently in Falmouth, moving towards Fredericksburg to kick out a small CSA force while a couple of divisions are occupying Mansassas.

In the Valley Hooker and Burnside has taken Harper's Ferry and was joined by Banks who's now in overall control of that area. JE Jonhston tried to oust us but took a sound beating and has retreated north west to the mountains. Which means he's out of supply lines. In harsh winter weather. I suspect come spring I will be able to deal with him easily. Meanwhile in the Valley Jackson and Beauregard are concentrating to retry, I think, but I'm well entrenched to just spend winter there and reinforce.

In the west Hurlbut is the star of the show. Kentucky left the Union, much to my consternation and I sent a force under Hurlbut south from Louisville. He's now managed to get as far as Bowling Green. He'll winter there as supply is good and I can reinforce him there and see where I want to go in the spring. McClernand is currently trying to use his division to smash a CSA force that managed to cross the river north into...Ohio, I think.

Grant is currently taking a couple of divisions to Paducah and in the spring I'll take Columbus and then Henry and Donnelson I think. Meanwhile I'm concentrating in Cairo where Halleck is training up troops and organising divisions and sending them on to Grant and Wallace.

Lyons and Fremont are not doing much. Fremont is training troops in MO somewhere and Lyons is sitting out the winter in Rolla.

In short, this game is really, really good and it makes for some good story telling at times. This is probably my most successful attempt at it yet.

That is great news, I love hearing after action reports. I will keep you updated on mine as well if you wish I am playing as south. Glad to hear your doing well and have the game down, once you get the game the more you play the funner it gets.


When i played as north Nashville was my downfall, they sent jubal early over and defended against 4 assaults and turned the tide in Tennessee and Kentucky, it killed me. If the csa moves to the mountains of w Virginia and you are playing on historical supply or attrition, that is great news. When i pushed them out of the Shenandoah valley the generally just retreat to Richmond, than you have them. Keep me updated.

So, an update on the situation.

In the East I'm doing pretty well I think. The Army of the Potomac under Banks is pushing down the Valley towards Lee. I should note that Lee is there after he slipped passed me and started sieging Leesburg. I took two corps from McDowels army and gave him a sound thrashing and now he's fallen back and I got my lines in order.

At the same time Milroy and Butterfield have done stellar work moving towards the Valley from the west. I've no idea if that's a good idea to do but I figured I'd try. So far so good.

Still though, I need to have more force in the back. So that's what I'm working on right now.




In the west things are a bit more silly. Thomas had taken Nashville when I moved his corps of the Army of the Tennessee under Buel there but I accidentally set him to all out attack. So he did just that and completely busted up his corps. AS Johnston took advantage of that so I needed to pull Grant from Ft Henry to sort it out.

Now Grant is in Nashville and I haven't the faintest idea where Johnston is. And I only have a couple of divisions in Humbolt. At the same time I need to shuffle Thomas north into KY to sort out a force that slipped by in the confusion. All very vexing!

Stellar Duck wrote: So, an update on the situation.

In the East I'm doing pretty well I think. The Army of the Potomac under Banks is pushing down the Valley towards Lee. I should note that Lee is there after he slipped passed me and started sieging Leesburg. I took two corps from McDowels army and gave him a sound thrashing and now he's fallen back and I got my lines in order.

At the same time Milroy and Butterfield have done stellar work moving towards the Valley from the west. I've no idea if that's a good idea to do but I figured I'd try. So far so good.

Still though, I need to have more force in the back. So that's what I'm working on right now.

In the west things are a bit more silly. Thomas had taken Nashville when I moved his corps of the Army of the Tennessee under Buel there but I accidentally set him to all out attack. So he did just that and completely busted up his corps. AS Johnston took advantage of that so I needed to pull Grant from Ft Henry to sort it out.

Now Grant is in Nashville and I haven't the faintest idea where Johnston is. And I only have a couple of divisions in Humbolt. At the same time I need to shuffle Thomas north into KY to sort out a force that slipped by in the confusion. All very vexing!

awesome thanks. Looks to me you are dominating Virginia. I am interested to see if you end up doing what my plan when i played as north in the east was. Looks like you sure cleared out the valley and have a great number of good armies in great spots for a 63 spring offensive to capture Richmond or all of Virginia.


questions

Does that say early sep 62? how much does lee have under his command? were are the csa armies of virginia? destroyed or at Richmond?


west

Funny the cpu had watie over in Tennessee, i am reading book on him know. Already way better than i did in west, never captured Nashville [Grant is great in game isent he?]. I found those confederate forces kept slipping past in Tennessee/Kentucky I always thought if i could capture Nashville it would keep them on the other side of river, but never could. Assuming you get Tennessee and Kentucky under control, what is your plan or do you have one yet? is Memphis in reach and doable? that would be big blow to their supply and likely stop any expedition north of the Tennessee river that is not a Calvary raid. yet east Tennessee has many important spots as well and brings you closer to Atlanta. I will be interested to see what you do with grant, east Tennessee Chattanooga/Atlanta direction, or west with Memphis Vicksburg,Jackson etc.


Thanks for update my new war is still early but will post in time. Any attacks along coat? if you do go to new Orleans let me know how you do it or a good way to do so, thanks.


sorry another question, do you like McDowell? i did allot in game.

As near as I can tell Lee has around 2000 pwr currently but I know that there is one more stack around at least, since I smacked that one around with McDowel in the Wilderness. Its current location is a bit of a mystery though.

Lees stack is basically a text book ANV with Jackson, Longstreet et al. And yes, it's September 1862. So I'm thinking I'll start preparing for winter soon as my current manpower is suffering a bit. I want more troops to Butler in Fort Monroe. They keep trying to kick him away. The AI gets really mad when you sneeze in the direction of Richmond.

So, my plan for the East for now is probably to see if I can give Lee a good kicking and then close up shop for the winter and go for Richmont as soon as spring comes.

In the West I'm more unsure. I need to take Dover for sure and Fort Pillow as well. Want the river sealed off. Problem is manpower at the moment. If I can hold what I got before winter I'll be happy I think and then beef up grant over winter. I need to sort out Fremont in MO as well. It's decent for now but if they apply a bit of push I need to retake it.

I'm still not sure if I'm going for Vicksburg or east Tennessee. As you say, both have good reasons to do. If I can muster the manpower and pin down Johnston so I don't have to worry about him I think I'll have a crack at Vicksburg. I'm also keen on building up some force and get a naval invasion going. I need to do something about their ports. But my navy game is suffering generally. :/

Oh, and yes, Grant is good. I'm playing with slightly randomized generals though so I don't know how he stacks up to the unmodified one. Thomas is great as well.

In the East I'm suffering a bit, command wise. It's hard to get people to move and attack. McDowell I like. He's not spectacular in anyway but he is so far dependable and solid. He's yet to lose a battle and only once has he failed to move.

I should add that I play with hidden activation so I don't know if a general activates until the next round. I give the order and cross my fingers, basically. I find that a lot more fun.

I really think I was lucky that the CSA evacuation Mannassas so early on. It made everything easier that I could take that and not lose manpower.

You have convinced me to start over and play with activation hidden, I was 50/50 on it, plus it should make game harder. So I will be starting over and will post every end of year maybe. Question, I have windows 7, how do a save a screen while in game as you have done to than re-post to show how the game is going?


thanks.

I took my screenshots in Steam as that's where I drunkenly purchased the game. I normally buy from anywhere but Steam if possible but I just squeed and pressed purchase when I saw it on the store after an evening in the pub.

Anyhow, I took the screenies with Steam and then uploaded them to Imgur and just linked them from there. In case you don't use Steam for this game you can either just add the game the over lay or use the trial version of Fraps or some other program and then upload it to Imgur. Steam does have upload options but the linking doesn't work half the time for me. Or I'm just inept. In any event, Imgur is super easy to use.

Looking forward to reading your updates!

Stellar Duck wrote: I took my screenshots in Steam as that's where I drunkenly purchased the game. I normally buy from anywhere but Steam if possible but I just squeed and pressed purchase when I saw it on the store after an evening in the pub.

Anyhow, I took the screenies with Steam and then uploaded them to Imgur and just linked them from there. In case you don't use Steam for this game you can either just add the game the over lay or use the trial version of Fraps or some other program and then upload it to Imgur. Steam does have upload options but the linking doesn't work half the time for me. Or I'm just inept. In any event, Imgur is super easy to use.

Looking forward to reading your updates!

I was thinking if you think you could figure it out, and we could agree on options, would you like to do a play by email? you north me south?. Seems were both pretty new and only played ai before could be a good one.



btw i will update this weekend hopefully with screens

I do apologize for not getting back to you!

I suddenly had to move and leave my borrowed PC behind and I've just gotten a new one built.

If the offer still stands I'd be happy to do some PBEM with Civil War 2 as soon as I get everything running on this PC.

Hi stellar no problem, this is jebstuart by the way. I would love to play as well, but cannot for few weeks finishing something up at moment.

Just in case anyone was curious, stonewalljackson and I had a splendid war.

Three months of back and forth!

If anyone is on the fence I can heartily recommend this game for a bit of adversarial play.

Spoilers: the Union won a magnificent victory and Sherman sieged Richmond while Grant and Thomas out flanked Johnston all through TN and GA.

I'm sure my opponent will agree that it was touch and go and the fortunes of war seemed to shift. Ultimately, I think I proved that manoeuvre warfare can win the day. Knoxville, Memphis and Atlanta all fell to Grant and Thomas cutting the supply and forcing the defenders to move out and face me on my terms instead of behind their defences in the cities. Never let go of initiative!

Looks good. So is a play by email game?

I get horrible freezes on it, panning and zooming. Is this the same as Wars of Napoleon just released today?

montecristo1981 wrote: Looks good. So is a play by email game?

I get horrible freezes on it, panning and zooming. Is this the same as Wars of Napoleon just released today?

Yea, it's play by e-mail. Which is now my favourite mode of multiplayer. It just feels so relaxed.

I haven't bought Wars of Napoleon yet as I'm brassic but yea, I think the core of the game it much the same.

born2see wrote: Maybe this is a question for the Ageod forum but where is the MP documented? There's nothing in the manual and I don't see any other docs in my Steam version.

Thanks,

B

Honestly, I haven't the faintest clue if there is proper documentation for the MP stuff.

What we did was a bit of trial and error but the general gist of it is:

One player is the "host" and resolves the turn. He then sends the turn file to the other guy who loads it up and then makes all his orders and saves them in an order file and send them back. The host then takes that order file as well as his own and resolves the turn and repeats the process.

To be honest, I suspect an easier solution would be to set up a shared folder in Dropbox or Gdrive and then just use that one instead of sending files back and forth.

The thing about MP is: it's the precise same thing as single player, only the AI is disabled and a human generates both set of orders. There is no systemic difference in the game.

I don't know if that was any help at all.

Edit: regarding the freezing on panning and zooming, yea, that's a PC issue generally. There are some options to reduce the footprint of the game that might help in a situation like that regarding the textures on the map and so forth.

There is also a tendency to crash if memory is low or if you view the command range while zoomed out.

born2see wrote: Stellar Duck wrote:

One player is the "host" and resolves the turn. He then sends the turn file to the other guy who loads it up and then makes all his orders and saves them in an order file and send them back. The host then takes that order file as well as his own and resolves the turn and repeats the process.

Thanks for this. What files are those?

B

The turn file is names [savegamename].hst and the order files are [savegamename]~USA.ord and [savegamename]~CSA.ord.

Be aware though! We ran into a weird issue where my opponents game named the order files [savegamename]-USA.ord with a hyphen instead of ~. That may be a difference between the Steam version and the non Steam version. It works fine but I had to rename the .ord file when sent it and change it to the hyphen so they could be interpreted by my opponents game.

So, basically, this is how it works: my opponent sent me [savegamename].hst. That's the turn that was just process and I went over the results and generally swore liberally at useless commanders in VA and fawned over Grant and Sherman. Then I made my orders for the next turn and saved them as [savegamename]~USA.ord and sent it back. He would have made his own orders in the mean time or whenever he had the time. When both sets of orders were ready they should both be in the save folder and then he resolves the turn, generating a new .hst file and he sent to men and the we would repeat the process.

A good idea is to set the option for the game to make backups of 5 turns back, just in case something happens, so you can revert to the previous turn.

And obviously replace [savegamename] with whatever you want to call the game.