Slitherine

Only played 3 games so far, but I love it. The system is familiar, but different enough to make it really fun, but not "gamey." Great map, and the chit system (I thought I wouldn't like it, but was proven WRONG) adds variability which, IMO, increases replay value.

One question to gamers who have owned this longer than me (about 6 hours)...after one game at the lowest difficulty setting, and 2 at medium (all as Confederates), I find I have no difficulty winning a crushing victory. I am movung up to 3 stars, but have had the game for less than a day, so I just wondered abut other gamer's experience.

This is not a complaint...I have yet to play the Union, or use the (3 star) diffuilt setting. I mention it because the Confederate victories seem due, in part, to the game mechanics. Specifically, the chit system, and movement. Maybe I am missing something, but it seems that it is too easy to move Confederate infantry from flank to flank (unsing roads), rather like panzer brigades. I was able to attack the extreme left, switch to the extreme right with minimal difficulty. Additionally, I did not appear to be penalized for splitting divisions (one brigade here, another there...perhaps I am missing a command control feature? The other "gimmie" is that, if a chit (Combat) is played, you have a good chance of moving without fear of being counter-attacked until the next turn (and maybe after you have had a chanc to move. (OK, it can happen, but if the Union draws an early combat chit (particularly if the Rebels have initative), you can move into exposed positions, and then attack).

Sounds like I'm griping...but I really like the game...haven't had much time to explore it, so I though a post might draw feedback. I'm not sure if the game is even playable head-to head, but if so, most of my observations would evaporate. Being the AI is always a tough job...humans are so much more devious.

OK...I admit I am a noobie at this game (purchased it today). See above post. What the heck am I dooing wrong? I just went through 2 more games, as Confederates, at maximum difficulty. (Campaign) & won a crushing victory for the rebels on turn 11.

There are some caveats....my play was extremely ahistorical; casualties on both sides were massive (50% + losses on both sides...like Pickett's charges several times a day). By the time I "won, " both armies were so decimated that the war would have ended, due to lack of combatants. Multiple corps were wiped out. An that was just day 1 (win on turn 11).

A coupla' guilty admissions...My play was probably "gamey," first shot at a new game Itend to go balls-to-the-wall: My infantry brigades would routinely charge to double flank Union troops (minimum of 2 brigades @180 degrees frequently 3 or 4 surrounding 1 unit.). This was possible due to gaps in the Union line, and awesome marching disciple by the CSA's.

As I said before, it felt like I was commanding Panzer Troops. My best guess is that I am exploiting the chit system (which I find quite interesting, and a refreshing change from most Igo-Yougo mechanics), but it allows you to know for certain who can't move or attack for the remainder of the turn. Coupled with the Confederate's early initiave, I think Hans Guderian would say, "This is too easy."

I have not yet studied the nuts and bolts of the mechanics, but I found it unrealistically easy to slip brigades around defenders (often @180 deg,), and rout them. Dunno if it is the AI, or the game system, but some adjustment is needed, or we will be dealing with The CSA in 2017.

Enough...I love the game, it is a hell of a lot of fun. Perhaps I should try the Union, and/or PBEM. I think a human opponent would give me a lot more competition. That is the case for almost all programmed opponents...just the way it is. Tough to predict what ahuman will do. We are a lot more devious (read: able to adjust to circumstances) than a programmed opponent. (Ask anyone who has dealt w/"Elmer" in TAOW3.

PLEASE understand, I really like the game; it's a classic battle, and the game's mechanics give a novel spin to the confrontation. I just want to put in a word about my (very early...<24 hours) experience.

It is also possible that, having no life (I have logged over 3700 hours on 2 recent (< 1 year) strategy games), that I am missing the point by going all out to "win," regardless of the consequences. I've certainly decimated the Confederacy, as well as the Union. I don;t think Grant (or Meade) or Lee would isue orders that generated the level of carnage I have precipated. (Maybe I should have moved to the WW2 Easter Front...Hitler & Stalin would have loved the bloodletting.

Well...I can't seem to let it go.

1) This game is a lot of fun, and well worth the price of admission.

2) That said, I have spent the last 8 or 10 hours stomping the Union forces...on the highest difficulty setting. I am not sure if I am simply exploiting the game mechanics, or just dealing with the AI vs human factor. Is it just me, or is it to easy for the CSA to win?

It seems that it is too easy...the AI lets me split my army and attack (with vastly out numbered forces) on both wings. The combat is VERY fluid, and the ability to switch forces around, plus the apparent lack of any CC penalty for splitting up divisions produces an easy win. The lats game, I was 1) moving rapidly (click, click, click...not stopping to plan anything, just quick action (less than 1 min/turn). and 2) By this time I was rather intoxicated...it seemed to make no difference. The AI is incapable of dealing with a severely wasted Robert E. Lee.

I'm not trying to gloat. I concede a possible OCD issue, but the game is so much fun I don't want to put it down. Before purchasing, I watched a bunch of You Tube videos, and the play seemed to be (more) competitive. My approach may be "outside the box," in that the AI does not expect an opponent to embrace atrocious casualties (matched by similar Union losses...a feature common to warfare of this period). Also, the AI doesn't seem to cope well with attacks on both flanks....with a big hole in the middle.

I think this situation would be very different n head-to-head play? After a few trials as General Meade, I may be looking for a human opponent.

Is my experience atypical? I like the game, but a quick (1 day) marathon leaves me feeling that the mechanics (or AI) are very exploit-prone. While most AI opponents are not up to beating a human player, this is my first experience with a PO that loses to me after a quart of Wild Turkey. (Not my usual level of consumption, but I got hooked on playing, and kept on sippin as I fought those damn yankees.....

Kudos for a game that can keep me up all night...we will see how the union fares.

I also saw that it is too easy to win with the Confederates even at the level of 3 star difficulty.
Too bad it would be a nice game but so is not a challenge. Can you increase the level of difficulty? Or Improve AI?

The AI often makes suicidal advances into hexes surrounded by enemy units. Programming some parameters for the AI to consider before moving would be great - but I'm no programmer.

This does seem the perfect game to introduce ACW buffs into the fold though. Scourge of War and the HPS series would overwhelm newcomers. I have done this with GTT and will see what my brother in law from Richmond thinks. First thing he will do is try to whip the Union I am sure