The one time period not done well since Sid Meyer

Guys, I know there are thousands upon thousands of people from other countries that play these games, and at the risk of seeming "Ameri-centric" I'm gonna make this statement:

Not since Sid Meyer made Antietam and Gettysburg has there been a decent American Civil War game, or a game that contained the elements of fighting the American Civil War.

Now, I know that CA has moved backward in time and chosen to revisit medieval Japan, but God help me I think these guys could make one heck of a game for this time period that could contain this war.

I've seen some of the arguments that "it would only have 2 similar factions", that "it's a very short time period", etc.

The Union and Confederacy were nothing alike. The Union was incredibly industrialized, had 5x the amount of rail capacity of the South, had a much larger population.

The South had to deal with creating from scratch an industrial base, had to contend with the fact that the slaves might create a 5th column, especially after Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclaimation.

France, Spain, and Great Britain all had observers in America during this war... most of them with the Confederate forces, deciding whether or not they should enter on the South's side.

England built the Southern navy's best blockade runners and raiding ships (CSS Alabama).

There were also thousands of Native Americans that chose sides during the fighting and fought on each side.

ALL THAT BEING SAID, I know that CA probably will never touch this time period, but I feel it would be great to have in some sort of expansion pack to maybe Napoleon, or have it in a Kingdom's-esque thing containing other nation's Civil Wars... I'm a history major, I focus on military history, I like them all.

Boring battles, Prussians or French would rape american armies in few months. No proper cavalry, cowardly and badly organised infantry. French would just ride them over with cuirasers and Imperial Guard. Prussian would shot them to bits with needle guns and artillery.

Originally Posted by FilipVonZietek

Boring battles, Prussians or French would rape american armies in few months. No proper cavalry, cowardly and badly organised infantry. French would just ride them over with cuirasers and Imperial Guard. Prussian would shot them to bits with needle guns and artillery.

1) None of those things has ever stopped CA from including Westphalia, Oldenburg, Mecklenburg, Wurttemburg, Bavaria as their own nations in Empire or Napoleon... and none of them could stand up to any nation of size.

2) In a Total War game, you can turn anyone into a major military power

3) Your assessments are grossly inaccurate. I am a MILITARY HISTORY MAJOR, 3 months from graduation. I study this stuff daily.

Cowardly - Have you ever read a history book on this war? Check yourself, the assault of the Confederate infantry at the Battle of Murfreesboro, Pickett's Charge at Gettysburg, Jackson's Valley Campaign where he defeated 3 Union armies with 17,000 men, the charge of the 1st Minnesota at Gettysburg where they stopped the advance of an entire brigade at the price of 215 of their 260 men.

Badly Organized Infantry - BOTH armies were organized based upon the model laid down by NAPOLEON and were commanded by men who studied NAPOLEON's Corps Structure at West Point.

No Proper Cavalry - I take it you've never heard of J.E.B. Stuart, Wade Hampton, Philip Sheridan, John Buford? Or of the fact that each nation employed dragoon style cavalry forces because of the invention of the Sharps breechloading carbine? Again, check yourself... the Battle of Brandy Station, the action of Gen. Buford's cavalry at Gettysburg, the Battle of Yellow Tavern etc.

Also, American armies were drilled in forming the SQUARE... and we all know how the French cavalry performed against the SQUARE.

As far as artillery... we shot each other to bits with it... and still kept charging (which fits nicely into the un-cowardlyness of the war).

Originally Posted by austin.weathers

1) Badly Organized Infantry - BOTH armies were organized based upon the model laid down by NAPOLEON and were commanded by men who studied NAPOLEON's Corps Structure at West Point.

Which was exceptionally outdated at this point.

Originally Posted by austin.weathers

1) None of those things has ever stopped CA from including Westphalia, Oldenburg, Mecklenburg, Wurttemburg, Bavaria as their own nations in Empire or Napoleon... and none of them could stand up to any nation of size.

2) In a Total War game, you can turn anyone into a major military power

3) Your assessments are grossly inaccurate. I am a MILITARY HISTORY MAJOR, 3 months from graduation. I study this stuff daily.

Cowardly - Have you ever read a history book on this war? Check yourself, the assault of the Confederate infantry at the Battle of Murfreesboro, Pickett's Charge at Gettysburg, Jackson's Valley Campaign where he defeated 3 Union armies with 17,000 men, the charge of the 1st Minnesota at Gettysburg where they stopped the advance of an entire brigade at the price of 215 of their 260 men.

Badly Organized Infantry - BOTH armies were organized based upon the model laid down by NAPOLEON and were commanded by men who studied NAPOLEON's Corps Structure at West Point.

No Proper Cavalry - I take it you've never heard of J.E.B. Stuart, Wade Hampton, Philip Sheridan, John Buford? Or of the fact that each nation employed dragoon style cavalry forces because of the invention of the Sharps breechloading carbine? Again, check yourself... the Battle of Brandy Station, the action of Gen. Buford's cavalry at Gettysburg, the Battle of Yellow Tavern etc.

Also, American armies were drilled in forming the SQUARE... and we all know how the French cavalry performed against the SQUARE.

As far as artillery... we shot each other to bits with it... and still kept charging (which fits nicely into the un-cowardlyness of the war).

For the lucky guys who still have an Amiga 500/1200, load North & South and enjoy single player or invite a friend and have extra fun .....

Originally Posted by Cozur

Which was exceptionally outdated at this point.

Yet it was used and worked effectively until a newer system arose, around I believe World War I and even then components of it were still taken. The French Corps system, and it's general staff system along with the Prussian general staff system exist today in many armies because it is such an effective system.

Originally Posted by FilipVonZietek

Boring battles, Prussians or French would rape american armies in few months. No proper cavalry, cowardly and badly organised infantry. French would just ride them over with cuirasers and Imperial Guard. Prussian would shot them to bits with needle guns and artillery.

Cowardly? You best check yourself, that is a disrespectful and completely ignorant statement to make about any man who serves in combat. You should ashamed of yourself.

Originally Posted by CK23

Cowardly? You best check yourself, that is a disrespectful and completely ignorant statement to make about any man who serves in combat. You should ashamed of yourself.

Some men who serve in combat are cowards, get over yourself.

Originally Posted by FilipVonZietek

Boring battles, Prussians or French would rape american armies in few months. No proper cavalry, cowardly and badly organised infantry. French would just ride them over with cuirasers and Imperial Guard. Prussian would shot them to bits with needle guns and artillery.

Cowardly,maybe by Early 19th century standards,when we were still barely a new nation,but go ahead to let's say 1860(civil war time) and i would put the union or southern army anytime against a european country.No proper calvary?the south was known for there cavaliers and we have just about as good of generals coming out of Westpoint as the euros. By todays standards the USA would crush any or all combined european army.

NEEDLE GUNS WERE USED BEFORE AMERICAN CIVIL WAR !!! They were invented in 1836 and intriduced into service in 1848 so hoho you made me lol. Thats first/early part of 1800.

Originally Posted by M2TWRocks

And where exactly are you from?

I wonder myself where he is from(obiviously a foreigner)?last time i checked korea and vietnam (technically were not wars but a policing of the countries) and as far as Iraq (my neighbor was shot in the back and killed clearing a town)we liberated the country and Afgan (a problem russia started) we barely started there,we come to the call of democracy when we have to,and if not for the USA, england and all the other european countries would be speaking german right now living under a nazi flag and controlled state.
p.s. Semper FI, USMC "the worlds 911"

I hate to see blatant, arrogant Europeans or Europhiles doubt the massive size and significance of the American Civil War. It was a massive war, not some petty side show to the "big," "great" wars in Europe going on simultaneously.

Fillip, I want you to take a look at the two largest battles of the war, Gettysburg and Antietnam. These were no small skirmishes, with or without your beloved Froggy cavalry and Kaut needle gun soldiers.

Personally I think we should get back to the swords and bows, I still enjoy Rome and Medieval 2 more then Empire and Napoleon. If the swords and bows would be combined with the ingame superiority of Napoleon we would get one heck of a game. Shogun II is a start though..

Nothing personal but did you had to capslock your HISTORY MAJOR, I literally bursted out in laughter. It's like 'back off and be silent because I have this.'

US Civil War would be good as a DLC, though I'm afraid it will quickly be repetive, as with Napoleon, because of the way the battles are fought. As a stand alone game, no thank you. Total War only stands strong without gunpowder, or very limited use of it.

Yes, I am European and I do not want the US Civil War as a stand alone game nor would I immediatly buy it if it was a DLC. So flame me for being a 'blatant, arrogant European.'

Originally Posted by kenniston5

I wonder myself where he is from(obiviously a foreigner)?last time i checked korea and vietnam (technically were not wars but a policing of the countries) and as far as Iraq (my neighbor was shot in the back and killed clearing a town)we liberated the country and Afgan (a problem russia started) we barely started there,we come to the call of democracy when we have to,and if not for the USA, england and all the other european countries would be speaking german right now living under a nazi flag and controlled state.
p.s. Semper FI, USMC "the worlds 911"

Bit patriotic, aren't we buddy?

I'm sorry, i suggested we left this behind but it's been said and the following annoys me SO much...

Originally Posted by kenniston5

last time i checked korea and vietnam (technically were not wars but a policing of the countries)

Well... don't... how many good Americans were lost in these wars? These good American soldiers who's lives were wasted on pathetic wars... and yes, they were wars... over nothing.
Nobody jumped in to your civil war and now you're one of the most powerful countries in the world... don't jump into other peoples wars.

Originally Posted by kenniston5

and as far as Iraq (my neighbor was shot in the back and killed clearing a town)we liberated the country and Afgan (a problem russia started) we barely started there,we come to the call of democracy when we have to

You're losing men, Britain is losing men FOR NOTHING, these are stupid wars!!
Don't give me all that crap about America being the saviours of democracy... Afghanistan isn't your enemy.... a terrorist group in Afghanistan is...
Iraq... it's common knowledge that the war was a farce, you're the only ones who believe you were doing any good.

Originally Posted by kenniston5

and if not for the USA, england and all the other european countries would be speaking german right now living under a nazi flag and controlled state.
p.s. Semper FI, USMC "the worlds 911"

Yes, you helped in WW2... but do you honestly think that Germany could've held onto the WHOLE of Europe? Think about it... Germany was already starting to have problems by the time you joined the war, you just helped speed it up.

And one thing that REALLY pisses me off... no we wouldn't be speaking German, especially not in "England" (i think you mean Great Britain btw) because first of all... people don't just stop speaking a language when a foreign government takes over and secondly, the Battle of Britain saw the end of Hitlers plans to invade Britain and that happened almost a full year before you joined.
And there isn't anyway they could have defeated Russia... who by the way were the first ones into Berlin and basically won the war.



Now PLEASE, i'm very thankful for everything America has done for us, i'm not bashing America... i don't agree with the prick who's bashing America here...

But we live in a new century, a century of information, a century where we can learn anything we want by a few simple clicks on a computer... the times of falling for propaganda crap is over.

And before you all jump on me... DON'T.

fail much dude? needle guns weren't invented till lat 1800s about the 1880s second America was still a new country barely 90 years old also we have the mine ball that could blow a mans arm or head in off and grooved rifleing that made rifles very accurate and we had way better commanders, more advanced tech like phone lines and trains, and Ur grammar fails epically, so you sir fail at history.

Originally Posted by Michel ney.v2

fail much dude? needle guns weren't invented till lat 1800s about the 1880s second America was still a new country barely 90 years old also we have the mine ball that could blow a mans arm or head in off and grooved rifleing that made rifles very accurate and we had way better commanders, more advanced tech like phone lines and trains, and Ur grammar fails epically, so you sir fail at history.

Grooved rifles weren't invented by America. They were invented by Britain. I'm not sure but I think this was the first one. So you Sir, fail at history, and grammar.

Baker wasnt the first one but technology itself was invented by british physician.

Originally Posted by FilipVonZietek

Boring battles, Prussians or French would rape american armies in few months. No proper cavalry, cowardly and badly organised infantry. French would just ride them over with cuirasers and Imperial Guard. Prussian would shot them to bits with needle guns and artillery.

Never in my time here, have I ever read a post that was so absolutely wrong, and made it so abundantly clear that the poster was either an absolute moron, or the bastard of a vegetable.



The colors of the 19th Mass. Tattered by the rain of lead that its men were immersed in.

Well dont compare Pickets charge and other to French cavalry at Worth, Von Bredows death ride or Imperial Guard at Magneta. If you dont know i would like to inform you that many cavalry regiments covering french retreat from Worth suffered around 90% casulties.

American armies suffered high casulties becouse of they were full of fail while European becouse of their elan.

Austrians had Maurica style army and got defeated by Prussians supperior weaponary. But ofcourse irregular Mauricans were far superrior.

Originally Posted by FilipVonZietek

Boring battles, Prussians or French would rape american armies in few months. No proper cavalry, cowardly and badly organised infantry. French would just ride them over with cuirasers and Imperial Guard. Prussian would shot them to bits with needle guns and artillery.

Originally Posted by FilipVonZietek

Well dont compare Pickets charge and other to French cavalry at Worth, Von Bredows death ride or Imperial Guard at Magneta. If you dont know i would like to inform you that many cavalry regiments covering french retreat from Worth suffered around 90% casulties.

American armies suffered high casulties becouse of they were full of fail while European becouse of their elan.

Austrians had Maurica style army and got defeated by Prussians supperior weaponary. But ofcourse irregular Mauricans were far superrior.

Don't compare apples with bananas please ....

The early US Civil War Armies were of course ill prepared, trained and also equipped. Further most officers had never commanded more than a Regiment, only few a Brigade and more lesser a larger formation as Divisions, Corps or Armies. So the US and CS went to war with no experiences and no professional trained men.
But this situation changed from about 1863 on and most serious hiostorians say that:
Until 1863/ 1864 both, the US and CS would be easy crushing defeated by a single Corps of one of the big European states as Britain, France, Prussia, Austria or Russia. But from mid 1863 on this was not further the case, because the armies of both changed to become professionals, including the commanding Generals, the staffs and the logistics. In parts both armies were superior to the Europeans because they were the first armies fighting a new modern war with trenches and so on. Sure, they lack mostly in discipline and drill in comparsion to the European armies all the time, but their spirit and more important their experience in modern warfare matched these lacks thoroughly!

You think the French cuirassiers will ride them to pieces with an attack? Sorry, the cuirassier would be shoot to pieces before reaching any infantry man of US or CS! This experience they made 1870/1871 against Prussia and latest all the Europeans learned that the time of cavalry charges were over only at 1914 with their dickhead! The US learned that 1861 and this is also the reason why the US and CS cavalry rarely made any charge of old style! US and CS cavalry were only Dragoons which made scouting / reconaissanece, raids and protecting. If they fight they dismounted in 95% of all cases!
Did that the Europeans too? No, they still believe to often in the power of a heavy cavalry charge ... still as you wrote with your French Cuirassier example.

About such a TW game I must say that it will be one which I will buy! Yes, there are only 2 factions given (if not made a silly fantasy with an "if and when Britiain/ France went in") and there is only the USA as map and no world. Also yes, the unit diversity will not much bigger as at Shogun 2 ... even when thoroughly researched and if any "Amazone-Unit as e.g. several Zouaves and many others" will be put in, it will be not more than 60-70 different units at all for both on land.

But so what? Is this a problem?
I will only name some arguments told here in TWC about Shogun 2 with the "only Japan, only 30 units etc." now: Fewer units give a more tactical depth, because the scissor-paper-rock system will work better. The campaign map can be made large even only being the US. The further given features and graphic works are also important and finally, with only 2 factions and not too much different units, the AI has it easier to handle them with scripts and so on.

Further, the Naval-Warfare will be of course other and sure, there was no real naval seafight on the Oceans, only some few exceptions. But whats about making the rivers into a naval warfare place too? Most "maritime actions" were made on the big rivers and why not making rivers inside as battlefied for ships? Think about the now made naval / land action at Shogun 2 in this matter ....

Finally I will say that there are many new features possible to make .... good to make for such a TW game. Telegraph line, railway, are only 2 examples. Think about making a real rais to destroy stations and rails which must be build new. Also you can implement the option to build them really new in matter of that the player decides where to build from A to B and where to build new stations and so on.

The US Civil War is not only liked in the US! It is a theme which is liked around the world and fascinating them in many cases and parts. Of course there are also other voices, no doubts, but it is clear not an "too american theme" as possible TW game. It can make really fun and can give a real deep gameplay and even the time of any turn can be changed to whatever you will, also the campaign map can be made with the TW priciples of "conquering provinces" as large as possible, it will be a good idea!

So a clear yes, it is a fine thought for me to make such a TW game!

Batman this is a topic about Civil War you know?

Those battles hmm not too big meh, masses of almost same looking soldiers in boring uniforms meh