@cernel No one was buying Confederate debt internationally. The debt was defaulted on (and the debt of secessionist states was declared void by the US Supreme Court). Only the Union had access to international financial markets. But that was not a significant factor, as the Northern economy could easily produce weapons. The South was able to get weapons in past the blockade, paying for it with cotton. Insanely, Jefferson Davis initially embargoed the sale of cotton, hoping to pressure the British into recognizing the Confederacy.
The whole loan mechanism in the scenario has little historical relevance.
Read the Wikipedia article on the American Civil War. The North had a tremendous economic advantage (4-1 in GDP) but the size of the Confederacy, greater military readiness and the way the technology of the time favored the defense, gave South a reasonable prospect of defensive victory.
@cernel I think adding that clarification to the notes is fine and leaving the trigger as is.
@mattbarnes I believe queries should be rather moved to the linked official thread.
You can also open new specific topics (like Bug Reports), about the same map.
Locking this as duplicate.
There is another item to address, regarding War Financing.
When you default, there are triggers removing all the following units for the player:
Meaning all units are removed except:
any resource producer
However, this how the rule is given in notes:
All non-infrastructure units except militia are disbanded and removed from the map.
This is contradicting the trigger coding as train, pontoon_bridge and transport are not infrastructures, while they are not removed. Moreover, it may be argued that torpedo is not identified as infrastructure in notes, either, just in the xml definitions.
So, if we would be using the xml definitions, the info in notes should be changed to:
All non-infrastructure and non-transport units except militia are disbanded and removed from the map.
However, this is as much a bad definition as it is correct. Infrastructure is a code definition that it is to some extent unintuitive (I doubt most regular user think you are also talking about torpedo, when saying infrastructure), and it is not actually referenced in the notes or in the units descriptions. Saing "capturable", instead of "infrastructure" would be some better, but still not really good.
On top of this, torpedo is an infrastructure, code wise, while it is not an infrastructure according to the notes (and the common sense); so better just not using the term infrastructure at all.
An acceptable definition, making use of the classifications in notes, may, thus, be:
All combat and command/logistic units except militia and torpedo are removed from the map.
And, in notifications, we can say it this way:
combat, command and logistic units except militia and torpedo are disbanded.
I've updated the pull request at my previous post accordingly.