[SUBMOD] MM's ZoR - Final 4.0 Released

[Minas Moth]

@denizjoon

thnx for the rep... regarding the kepi, I do agree... however, there is no indication that all of the men of the 14th Brooklyn used the same exact kepi for the War. the equipment (especially when it comes to zouave style units) was far from standardised. so I went for a look that will be different enough to help differ between the units... however, I note your statement, and maybe I will change the kepi... maybe not...

[Minas Moth]

Dear community members... I know I have passed my delivery date for a week now. this has come to be due to the most fortunate develpment of events. With help of my friends and coworkers Trig and Chieftain John K, new version of ZoR grows ever larger and hopefully better. here follows a little sneak peak of a unit that will be available in new ZoR version:



Enjoy,

MM

[_vanity]

Amazing submod Minas Sir! It is awesome that someone continues work with ACW project and the effects are so good. Maybe U will add some more elite units (perhaps 1 per state - like ex. Cockrell Misourian's brigade or NC Cox brigade under gen. S. Ramseur; Mississippian Barksdale Brigade etc etc. Almost every state had some famous units so it would be great to see them in ZoR.
(Also in my opinion) - maybe U should reconsider the choice of generals of both sides. I think if they are to command whole armies - then G.Pickett, J. Mosby (CSA) Buford, Chamberlain, Custer (Union) should be replaced by someone who actually commands at least a corp (f.e. A.S. Johnston, B.Bragg or J.Reynolds, A. Burnside) I think this could be more historical accurate. Well at least i think so One more time great job and don't leave this project for love of God
p.s. Is there a chance U can add steamships submod to ZoR or any navy at all?

[ss97slp]

added three new units with new textures, there are great small details in them like the X Corp badge on the 203rd.

203rd Penn Vols
early 6th Mass Vols
US Heavey Artillery Regiment






THere is much more to come!

[nonopo]

Thanks for pursuing the work on the great mod.

I was thinking for possible new units :

Confederates

Volunteers from Maryland
26th of North Carolina - Army of Virginia , which lost 90% of troops in Gettysburg, i think...
15th Alabama - Oates Brigade

Union

New York, Corcoran Legion (4 regiments)
Volunteers from West Virginia
1st Delaware
1st Minnesota

thanks

[Trig]

Thanks for pursuing the work on the great mod.

I was thinking for possible new units :

Confederates

Volunteers from Maryland
26th of North Carolina - Army of Virginia , which lost 90% of troops in Gettysburg, i think...
15th Alabama - Oates Brigade

Union

New York, Corcoran Legion (4 regiments)
Volunteers from West Virginia
1st Delaware
1st Minnesota

thanks

Spent the last couple of nights making volunteers from all confederate states and confederate volunteers from border states, including Maryland. Hopefully Mr.Moth puts them in.

[nonopo]

Yay !!!

[Minas Moth]

Mr. Moth had been really bussy... implemented over 40 units this past days... but I am not yet satisfied with the condition of the ZoR. the units alone don't make it a good submod... there is a great deal more to be done.

[nonopo]

Totally agree, the total immersion in the game goes through more than just units. But it's already wonderful ! If I may offer my thoughts.

What's lacking is the political aspects of the game. In my dreams, the technologies would be replaced with political reforms, such as emancipation, colored regiments, conscription and so forth which would give one influence the regions loyalty, rebellion ? or allow you to recruit more, cheaper, or specific units.

You were talking about putting the agents back in the game and creating a slavery / abolition influence meter ( seems complicated...) , what if the confederacy started with 1 region ( I believe a necessity to have the faction in play, ideally it would be 0) and 10 pro slavery agents and in the first turns one would have to revolt the regions.

The buildings' build times need to be longer.

Is there a way to have the prestige meter of the nation influence the happiness of the people. And if such, victories and defeats would impact much more on'es population's.

Finally, is it possible to script short term objectives ? Take a specific city, or defeat a specific army ?

Voila, hope it's not too much of a bore !

[Minas Moth]

What's lacking is the political aspects of the game. In my dreams, the technologies would be replaced with political reforms, such as emancipation, colored regiments, conscription and so forth which would give one influence the regions loyalty, rebellion ? or allow you to recruit more, cheaper, or specific units.

I think you can't use tech to increase number of units. it is specified in a table and can't be changed I think. you could make another unit (exactly the same) but with higher recruitment availability. but tht is to much work for little result and it puts stress on the engine.

You were talking about putting the agents back in the game and creating a slavery / abolition influence meter ( seems complicated...)

nit at all, you simply rename the existing religions to whatever you want, add some effects to it and voila, you are done.

regarding the resurections. husserlTW's The Civil War mod features a script that made southern states go "rebel" in successive order on first few turns. but for that I would have to add new factions (as each state should be a separate fation). also, it is not my area of interest

The buildings' build times need to be longer.

agreed

Is there a way to have the prestige meter of the nation influence the happiness of the people. And if such, victories and defeats would impact much more on'es population's.

not sure about this one, but I think not.

Finally, is it possible to script short term objectives ? Take a specific city, or defeat a specific army ?

well vanilla etw featured a missions tht had to be completed if you wanted thirteen colonies or louisiana to join britain or france. so, capturing tthe regions is there. but I would have to ask arround what "rewards" can be used.

[Chieftain John K.]

...the units alone don't make it a good submod... there is a great deal more to be done.

That's right. Also very small however important things can improve submod. I have already improved the portrait of general Lee and today also for general Grant. I find just these characters if everybody liked to be able to "see" with pleasure. Otherwise I further work on the descriptions for the units (also small however important things)...

LEE

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

GRANT

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[nonopo]

Thanks for the explanations

I've noticed that all the songs are from the gettysburg soundtrack, and Ken Burns' Civil War. There are a couple of other songs that could add a little more musical content to the campaign.

Below the titles of songs I think fitting (most of them I only like in these versions) , and the links to the sample playlist if anyone is interested :

http://www.allmusic.com/album/the-ci...k-mw0000690934

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00.../ref=dm_sp_alb

Titles :

Johnny Has Gone for a Soldier - Jesse Carr / Jacqueline Schwab

Battle Cry of Freedom - Jacqueline Schwab

Cheer Boys Cheer - New American Brass Band

Battle Hymn of the Republic - Matt Glaser / Jacqueline Schwab

Weeping, Sad and Lonely - Jesse Carr / Peggy James / Jacqueline Schwab

Marching Through Georgia (Lament) - Jacqueline Schwab

Angel Band - Russ Barenberg / Molly Mason

The Fall of Paris ( Gettysburg)

Welcome Here Again / Old 1812


There are a couple already in the game but I'm not quite sure which

[nonopo]

my last thoughts for tonight, some of it might already be in game, stated earlier and/or impossible, sorry in advance.

- If you are going to switch religion for abolition :
* Union : agent = abolitionist, building = Newspaper The Liberator
* South : slave trader, slave auction house
* Slavery shouldn't technically be able to increase in non slave states, but abolitionism on the other hand could in slave states but very slow if South in control.

* Or slavery can't increase in Union states, but the division in Union states could be between Democrats ( Anti war pro status quo) and republicans ( Pro War abolitionist ) which would impact the elections.

- Sieges should take way longer until surrender (6-8 turns). That would immobilize the attacker for a couple months (which happened often)

The next is based on pure speculation on the extent of modding available.

- The basic objectives :
* South victory : don't be defeated until end of presidential term ? or 8 year term ? or random period if republican win election ? No regions to seize
* Union victory : Restore the Union / Abolish Slavery ( by seizing all regions ) before end of term?

- Man Pool :
* South : # should be capped at a limit < Union to reflect the population inferiority. But no capping of recruitment per turn or per city. + South Armies should appear miraculously throughout the game.
* Union : total cap > South. But #/turn regulated by government popularity ? Or by province allegiance ?

- Controlling a region
* South shouldn't technically be able to take and control a Union region, except Border states. But they could win money or rewards from being in a Union province.
* Union : should take very long to pacify and prevent rebellion / garrison mandatory to keep order

-Gentleman agent : state representative, decreases city unrest ? Army Instructor ?

- Rake = Rake, sabotage, spying

- Desertion, Disease
* Armies should lose troops to those

- Officers & Generals
* Additional movement penalty in battles for armies with no general. Slower response time to orders, canons less accurate or pick non optimal targets in automatic.
* Different ranks of officers; general highest bonuses, colonel high bonus

- Trade :
* create an artificial trade embargo on the south
* Increase price of cotton
* Negative effects of war on international trade partners : foreign pressure = trade tariffs.

[ss97slp]

i do not like the idea of worse units without generals. in many battles the outcome was not dictated by the commanding generals but by the lower officers. Lee wasnt on the field dictating orders during Pickets charge for instance, it was up to his suboordinate commanders, same with the union side. i recieved a question about what units i am creating for my units pack/historically accurate regimental names mod that i have been making for some time. Minas and myself have agreed to combine our efforts into a major submod and i think people will be happy. so here is a tentative list of the other units i will be creating, other units are already made and listed on the forum. the units are:

basic list will include (and subject to change will be)

6th Mass vols (early)
7th New York State Militia (early)
Clinch Rifles, Georgia Militia (early)
1st Rhode Island Detached Militia (early)
11th Virginia Infantry (early)
Charleston Zouave Cadets
1st Minnesota (early)
62nd Penn Infantry (33rd Independent Regiment)
Sumpter Light Guard (4th Georgia infantry)
17th Mississippi (early)
Irish Jasper Greens (early confederate, savanah militia)
79th New York Highlanders (looking forward to this one)
12th illinios (1st Scottish)
41st New York Vols (2nd Yaegar Reg)
39th New York (Garibaldi Guard)
Garibaldi Legion
New York Independant Battalion, Les Enfants Perdus
65th New york, 1st US Chasseurs
109th Penn Infantry
12th Tenn Reg
5th New Jersey
1st South Carolina (retexture of unit I already made)
12th Indiana Vols
203rd Penn
Heavy Artillery Regiment
Confederate Marines (almost completed)
US Marines (almost completed)

the list changes from time to time but these are the ones i want to put in.

[Chieftain John K.]

I have tried to change icon of the general staff. Before these were icon with stars and crossed saber. Not quite nicely. There it is uniformly I have integrated this icon to represent both nations. It is not perfect but ok.

GENERAL STAFF

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[Trig]

my last thoughts for tonight, some of it might already be in game, stated earlier and/or impossible, sorry in advance.

- If you are going to switch religion for abolition :
* Union : agent = abolitionist, building = Newspaper The Liberator
* South : slave trader, slave auction house
* Slavery shouldn't technically be able to increase in non slave states, but abolitionism on the other hand could in slave states but very slow if South in control.

* Or slavery can't increase in Union states, but the division in Union states could be between Democrats ( Anti war pro status quo) and republicans ( Pro War abolitionist ) which would impact the elections.

- Sieges should take way longer until surrender (6-8 turns). That would immobilize the attacker for a couple months (which happened often)

The next is based on pure speculation on the extent of modding available.

- The basic objectives :
* South victory : don't be defeated until end of presidential term ? or 8 year term ? or random period if republican win election ? No regions to seize
* Union victory : Restore the Union / Abolish Slavery ( by seizing all regions ) before end of term?

- Man Pool :
* South : # should be capped at a limit < Union to reflect the population inferiority. But no capping of recruitment per turn or per city. + South Armies should appear miraculously throughout the game.
* Union : total cap > South. But #/turn regulated by government popularity ? Or by province allegiance ?

- Controlling a region
* South shouldn't technically be able to take and control a Union region, except Border states. But they could win money or rewards from being in a Union province.
* Union : should take very long to pacify and prevent rebellion / garrison mandatory to keep order

-Gentleman agent : state representative, decreases city unrest ? Army Instructor ?

- Rake = Rake, sabotage, spying

- Desertion, Disease
* Armies should lose troops to those

- Officers & Generals
* Additional movement penalty in battles for armies with no general. Slower response time to orders, canons less accurate or pick non optimal targets in automatic.
* Different ranks of officers; general highest bonuses, colonel high bonus

- Trade :
* create an artificial trade embargo on the south
* Increase price of cotton
* Negative effects of war on international trade partners : foreign pressure = trade tariffs.

I like these ideas. Particularly the man pool.

[nonopo]

You guys should turn the Rake into Django ! and the Gentleman into Chris Waltz

[ss97slp]

Update, I think I finished the Historic Regimental names, will spend the rest of the week testing it before I turn it over to minas. along with the first half of the units in my pack unless something changes. so far everything is working great.

[ss97slp]

Update: the regimental names system is working perfectly with no issues. should be ready for imlimentation.

Also, as mentioned above, i do not like the man pool ideas. the north had far more population to draw from, also, southern armies appearing meraculously? that is obsurd. armies do not just materialize out of no where. and that takes away from the historical parts of the game. it is up to the computer/human to control their sides with the most skill in order to create armies and keep them in the field just like it would be in real life. god does not just hand out armies to people.

also, the no general points..... it wasnt up to the commanding generals that won battles. in most aspects it was up to the subordinate commanders to fight battles. over-all strategy was developed by the generals but the execution was left up to the subordiantes. example, lee ordered the attack that came to be know as Pickett's charge, but he wasnt on the field giving the orders to ensure its success or demise. also the attack at Fort Wagner was conducted by 1 brigade under the command of a colornels so led and decided the batttle. And the last point is that troops are not made or broken based on the generals alone and the skill of the men is not dictated by the commanding general, but its based on how their regimental commanders lead the men, how they were trained, and their own courage. cannons do not have less accuracy based on if their is a general present, its up to the skill of the individual unit.

one last thing, the south did want to gain territory. they tried to hold and regain Missouri, Tennessee, and others and tried to gain Maryland away from the Union as well as incursions into the west into the New Mexico territories and present day arizona. Southern California was also on the short list to try and capture.

One last note, it seems to be that most people seem to have romanticized the south as some kind of hero who gives their lives for the greater good, and that southern soldiers were better than northern ones. this is factually untrue. the northern and southern soldiers were mostly equal, it was the quality of leadership at the outset, weopons that were available to both sides, and the principals that both sides had in fighting the war. if the south was truly better it would have won. in fact in msot battles the south outnumbered the north and yet it was the north that would win most of the time. everyone wants to look at the fighting in the far east with Lee and Grant or Meade, or whom ever was in charge at the time as dictating the whole war. in fact the west showed just how badly the south waged war. case in point, the battle of schofield, the union has 30,000 men, the confederates had 38,000 men, with the confederates charging and eventually lost the battle with more than 8000 men and Hood wrecked his army. the union lost less than 200 killed and 1700 wounded.

i am not saying that the union was the greatest thing ever, i am just saying that there seems to be a romanitcized view of the south and its abililities to wage a war. both sides had their ups and downs. both sides had their views and thier abilities. but soldier to soldier, they were equal.

[nonopo]

@ss97slp

Those are very solid points.

The man pool idea was an attempt to add political pressure on the player, it would reflect the populations' view on the war. The appearing armies would appear only if a state is "invaded". To a certain degree some armies do appear miraculously, I mean a revolution/ rebel army is not recruited by the government and formed by the institutions in place, it is born from a mass of volunteers. And the Rebel south did view this as a revolution to safeguard states' rights.

Which brings me to the point of the South invading the Union. Before the war the slave states wanted to preserve the Status Quo by having an equal number of slave and free states. Much to their dismay, Kansas, and I forget which others voted to be free states, which tipped the previous balance in favor of abolitionism. In that sense the border states and the newly ratified states would have been political targets for the South. A return to the Union with a superior number of slave states would allow them to retain control in Congress, and not be voted out. However, we got to remember that the confederacy was against an overseeing body above state's law; it would have been illogical for the increasingly unpopular Confederate government to dictate law to another state. There had been tensions from the start between the rebel states and their central government because of the necessary war measures taken.
The few invasions of the South were aimed at Washington DC, to pressure the Federal Government into ceasing the war. And if hypothetically the South did want to invade, they would not have the means to control a state.

I believe you are correct about the quality of the men; Union units would proved at many battles that they were as bold and brave as the southern ones. The only difference between the two is one was an invading force and the other was fighting in their home states.

I'm confused however about your position on the officers ? You say :

"also, the no general points..... it wasnt up to the commanding generals that won battles"

and then

"the northern and southern soldiers were mostly equal, it was the quality of leadership at the outset"

I think a battle is won by strategy, morale and a bit of luck. Lee's numerous victories over, in most cases, superior forces, led him to believe that his armies were invincible leading to overestimating his chances at Gettysburg. Lee was an excellent general that knew his enemies and would anticipate all their actions. Also, generals like stonewall, pushed their men to their limits, basically, his greatest qualities were his knowledge of logistics, recon and topography. His greatest victories were in the Shenandoah valley where he held and pushed back three different armies, hitting them one after the other, always in surprise.

I think you're simplifying the whole conflict when you say "if the south was truly better it would have won."
If you look at numbers, there is no way in the world the South could have ever won, besides politically (Vietnam style). The Union outnumbered the South at every level. I think, as you say, the quality of leadership at the outset was the only thing that actually kept the South rolling. The Union and the South were not the same type of entity, it wasn't two countries fighting each other over land.

Also, you stated :
"in fact in msot battles the south outnumbered the north and yet it was the north that would win most of the time."
I must disagree with you on this one. On the East, there were very rare occasions when the South had superior numbers, maybe 10% of the battles, not even. In the West, however, you are right, it was much more equal.

cool interactive map of the battles http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...teractive-map/

By the end of the war, Grant was simply grinding Lee's force down, while continuously replenishing his army regardless of the casualties sustained.