Is the game coded so that the CSA will always be eliminated? Playing as Brazil I saw the USA stomp the CSA very fast.
CSA Always Doomed?
- Thread starter bbmike
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
No, in my first game the CSA still exists..though I've started three games and played the demo a couple times, and I have NEVER seen Florida join the CSA.
I doubt the CSA will ALWAYS fail, but probably most of the time.
Really, the only reason the CSA lasted as long as it did in the War of Northern Aggression was because the USA was led by incompetent morons (Mr. Lincoln and a few others aside).
Once they got some half decent people running things they dealt with the Confederates. The Union was too powerful for the CSA, both economically and militarily.
Really, the only reason the CSA lasted as long as it did in the War of Northern Aggression was because the USA was led by incompetent morons (Mr. Lincoln and a few others aside).
Once they got some half decent people running things they dealt with the Confederates. The Union was too powerful for the CSA, both economically and militarily.
That's good. Probably just as it should be. I may have to save a game just as they form and try to play as them. 
In game, they lose because there is a bug that prevents them from taking advantage of the techs they have, which keeps them from building proper troops or factories or anything else they need to win.
At least that's how it was with the demo, I'm not sure if it changed in the release version, but it shouldn't have.
At least that's how it was with the demo, I'm not sure if it changed in the release version, but it shouldn't have.
In my first game, the USA beat the CSA easily, before deciding to accept a white peace only for the CSA to be occupied by pan-American rebels within about 6 months and spend the next few years re-seceding back to the USA. Was quite baffled at this turn of events.
That's good. Probably just as it should be. I may have to save a game just as they form and try to play as them.
If you play as the USA from game start, you are given the option of which side to play as in the civil war when it breaks out. Also, depending on where you hired men (Yankee or Dixe) they will either stay on the side of the union, or flip to the side of the confederacy. So, with pre-planning you can make a majority of your army jump to the side of the Confederacy, giving you the edge in the war.
When I played, I sided with the union and then annexed the south; only to have pan rebels pop up all over the south. I suppressed them, but I was also confused; perhaps this is a bug.
from what ive tried, you cant get a significant number of dixie troops while in control of the US
Florida, Oklahoma and Texas joined the Confederacy in my game, and 10 brigades of infantry and artillery defected to them, but then I was kind of a dick to the slave states, and didn't do all the compromises or the emergency measures.
The tech doesn't properly work for the CSA and most of the time 90% of units are allocated to the USA not CSA. That and a poor economy tends to sink the CSA pretty quickly. I can't help but think a simulated Trent Affair event might be useful to try to bring the UK and/or France into the conflict on the side of the CSA, or even a decision for the UK if being played by a human.
I know the aim of Vic II is not to follow history strictly but if the CSA ever did secede Britain would have some role to play, not just sitting around. If the player isn't playing as Britain then the UK just sits there and lets the nerfed CSA be destroyed in ultra quick time. Maybe even the CSA should be given a large amount of leadership to represent how it's generals were generally the better early on in the war.
The CSA AI could use some tweaking aswell, when I played as the UK I intervened in their second civil war (I'd saved the CSA in the first) and give the USA a good thrashing. I occupied most of the Atlantic states and was well on the way to getting the CSA a status quo peace. This was before the CSA decided to sign away Oklahoma and sign peace with the USA. It then followed this up by allowing the USA to SOI over the next three years (bare in mind they'd just thought two wars in about ten years) and then ultimately rejoined the USA via the union tag. It makes little sense when you consider it.
I know the aim of Vic II is not to follow history strictly but if the CSA ever did secede Britain would have some role to play, not just sitting around. If the player isn't playing as Britain then the UK just sits there and lets the nerfed CSA be destroyed in ultra quick time. Maybe even the CSA should be given a large amount of leadership to represent how it's generals were generally the better early on in the war.
The CSA AI could use some tweaking aswell, when I played as the UK I intervened in their second civil war (I'd saved the CSA in the first) and give the USA a good thrashing. I occupied most of the Atlantic states and was well on the way to getting the CSA a status quo peace. This was before the CSA decided to sign away Oklahoma and sign peace with the USA. It then followed this up by allowing the USA to SOI over the next three years (bare in mind they'd just thought two wars in about ten years) and then ultimately rejoined the USA via the union tag. It makes little sense when you consider it.
It's really a recruitment problem, particularly int he instance of a early civil war.
The north just has a lot more people that want to be soliders. so when the war breaks out--esp if early- they have very few troops.
Even then tho-- I've seen them white peace it out quite a few times.
I think overall the CSA is at least doing better to manage in Vic 2 than in Vic 1 (Vanilla), in most of my hands off games they've averaged to survive 4-5 years which isn't that bad.
It varies, depending on how quickly the war starts. In one demo game, I saw Florida stick with the Union. In another, it seceded, but I got Texas in as a free state and it didn't secede. Another time, I saw the CSA get cores In Missouri and Madagascar (yes, Madagascar... weird stuff happens when you take over other slave holding countries before the war). If the war starts before the Secessionist Sentiments event fires for all the slave states, they don't all secede, basically. Also, if I'm remembering correctly from reading the event files, Maryland, West Virginia, and Washington DC will never secede, though they usually do get CSA cores.
If you're playing as the US and want to make the CSA have better chances, I'd suggest using your national foci to encourage soldiers in the southern states, and focus on building up the infrastructure and industry of the south instead of the north.
Wouldn't that be the best outcome for the Brits, anyway? No "King Cotton" loudmouths attempting to blackmail them by withholding cotton supplies, no blockade to prevent the remainder from getting through, no resentment on the part of the Federal government for toying with supporting the traitor states...I honestly don't see a downside, unless you think that the UK should for some reason be opposed to the existence of an American superpower as if it were automatically a security threat.
this time i decided to wait to buy the game ine month not to suffer hoi syndrome. how is the ai so fare better than hoi 3 at relase date or worse?
Honestly out of the box the AI is decent with the diplomatic game and at war, of course it needs tweeking but I assure you it is not HoI3 release date quality.
When I played the demo there were several factories in the South that got deleted when the CSA formed, giving it an industrial score of 0 when it should have been fairly substantial. Anyone else see that happen?
Wouldn't that be the best outcome for the Brits, anyway? No "King Cotton" loudmouths attempting to blackmail them by withholding cotton supplies, no blockade to prevent the remainder from getting through, no resentment on the part of the Federal government for toying with supporting the traitor states...I honestly don't see a downside, unless you think that the UK should for some reason be opposed to the existence of an American superpower as if it were automatically a security threat.
Theoretically speaking yes. However irl there was much support for the CSA cause in the UK especially from Liberals such as Gladstone. They saw the war as much about state's rights and overbearing government as they did for it's slavery issue. There was also an initial panic over the cotton where it was believed that the CSA had to be propped up to retain supplies, this was before alternative supplies were found in places like Egypt. The USA and UK also still had a rather testy relationship at this time, as shown by the Trent affair and the first 60,000 troops for a possible UK/USA war arriving in North America just after the Trent Affair had been resolved.
All of these things put together explain why the UK would be interested and why it did very nearly join the war. Also irl with the UK would have came France, who's leader Napoleon III was anxious to get involved but wouldn't without UK backing. Of course this is less relevant for Vicky II as Napoleon III probably won't be on the throne in most player's games thanks to it's less historically rigid approach.