Defending Tenessee

[pgr]

So I'm hoping to start a bit of a strategy discussion. I have recently been playing CSA (not my normal preference) in various PBEM games, and I am a bit baffled on coming up with an effective strategy for defending Nashville and Memphis.

On the face of it, holding a line from Island no 10, Ft. Donelson, and Bowling Green seems like the best choice. However, in my experience, the naval bombardment of the forts and guns of troops I station there don't seem to dissuade running by a fleet. (If a fleet is big enough, it just soaks up the damage... perhaps fleets should have a CP penalty as well...)

In addition, Island no 10, and Donelson tend to be death traps. The swamps in the first make retreating difficult, while fleets can easily isolate the other.

I have tried to play soft at Donelson, and concentrate the defenses at Nashville... but once Donelson falls, any force in Nashville tends to be venerable to encirclement.

Of course, one could just write off Nashville, and focus on Corinth-Chattanooga-Memphis, but one looses an important objective (and industrial city).

So what some of you other people doing?

One strategy seems like going to Paducah in force to bombard union fleet activity at the earliest possible point. (But is it really worth it if the fleets can silp by so easily... what do you use for a good bombardment force)

Another might be to concentrate all forces at a central location (say Corinth), and throw everything at federal forces that make landings after the fact....or should forces be moved forward to "meet them at the beach?"

Other ideas and thoughts?

[Mickey3D]

I think Paducah is a must have. A force there (a division or more) can deliver a hard blow to any passing fleet. If you can take Charleston (MO) also it's even better. You can't destroy a big fleet but you can weaken it enough (and above all the troops it might transport) to jeopardize a landing against a defended place (keep a small force in Memphis). You can also entrench small forces (e.g. a militia and a battery) along the Mississippi so an ennemy force will be hit several times (Paducah, Island 10, Fort Pillow, small forces along the river, force in Memphis,...).

One strategy of the Union player is to try a move from Charleston (MO) or New Madrid to Island 10 : if possible try to keep an entrenched force outside of the fort. Because of the swamp and the landing penality your force will have an important advantage.

IMHO, Donelson is important because, as you described it, the Union can flank Nashville once it is in its possession.

The difficulty for the CSA is the lack of 2* generals to create corps : on this theatre there is place to maneuver so you need corps to cover the space and at the same time be able to support each other.

[Mickey3D]

And don't forget that at the beginning the confederate Mississippi fleet can match up to the Union if you gather together all the ironsides given for free by the game (or you can keep them to defend New Orleans).

[ArmChairGeneral]

Obviously my experience is playing against the computer, but I will try to keep it as relevant as I can. Most of my tactical experience in this region this comes from playing in the Shiloh and West scenarios. In the GCs early aggression in Louisville distracts Athena from trying to actually invade TN.

In GCs I gather my river fleet at Memphis and patrol the confluent, resupplying at 10 and keep this going at least through the beginning of 62, weather permitting. I like to put a brig or two into this stack because they have good Patrol value and bring enemy river traffic to battle more effectively. I catch a lot of stray brigades using river-movement with these guys; I never destroy any, but I give them some hits that need to be paid for.

I defend #10 like Mickey3D (a division outside) but I consider Ft. Pillow the west end of my line; it is better suited for Corps sized operations, and has a fortification already. I often put a depot there; it can easily push Memphis supply to Corps operating in the #10-Ft. Henry-Corinth triangle and it gives me a frontline place to recover quickly. Unfortunately it doesn't have a harbor. Aside from the fortification itself , #10's region isn't that useful of an attacking position (without the harbor, it would be totally useless) so I don't always mind when it gets taken; holding it becomes a diversion of resources for my opponent rather than me. Stops my fleet from operating in the confluent area, though.

I defend Donnelson the same way I defend #10, approx. 1 division, entrenched outside the fort. Henry/Donnelson is much more important to me than #10. It is a weak spot along the northern of the two rail routes between Nashville and Memphis, and interdicts a much more useful stretch of river than #10. If I can spare any guns for bombardment this is a prime spot until Paducah is up and running.

I would try to hold Bowling Green as long as I could against a human, it helps the situation in TN and western KY: the best path to Memphis is from Bowling Green to Ft Henry to Memphis, using the railroad to stay supplied and mobile. Controlling/interdicting this railroad for as long as possible is an important forward defense of western TN.

If the Union is able to take Bowling Green, Donnelson and Henry (like in the West Scenario) or invade from the Paducah area, I entrench Corps in the two regions between the Forked Deer and Hatchie Rivers (Ft. Pillow and Madison, TN). They support each other nicely, are easily supplied, block the best routes to Memphis and Corinth from the north and are behind a river. Sometimes a stockade/depot combo goes in Madison if needed to speed replacements and cohesion and to create ZOC.

Paducah is a great spot, and covers the choicest bit of river in the game, but Kentucky has to open first, so you need to be ready to grab it as soon as it is available if you want to get it properly fortified before the storm comes. Also, holding it pushes the line of defense north into KY, which is fine, but is harder to cover with limited forces than a line further south in TN.

Coastal Artillery have one better sea detection than land based artillery, so make it harder to run past a fort; sometimes I take the one from Ft. Sumner and rail it somewhere in TN, but I can rarely afford to build one.

Which attack axes do human Union players tend to invade from most successfully? #10 and the river, through Paducah, Bowling Green->Donnelson->Ft. Henry, or Bowling Green->Nashville are the four routes I plan my defenses against.

[pgr]

Paducah....is it worth it enough to open Kentucky to get it? (Polk sure felt so in 61...)

Which attack axes do human Union players tend to invade from most successfully? #10 and the river, through Paducah, Bowling Green->Donnelson->Ft. Henry, or Bowling Green->Nashville are the four routes I plan my defenses against.

ArmChair.... I would say the most typical involves moving down through Bowling Green, or via Ft-Donelson. The most galling though is running past Ft Donelson with a huge fleet and attacking Nashville directly with marine divisions. (Which tends to be lightly defended if you have forces forward deployed to Bowling Green and elsewhere). I for one have decreasing faith in the power of forts to stop ships. One really needs a fleet waiting for the river force behind the fort to secure the river approach... but that costs significant WS.

[Durk]

My take is a bit different. The CSA has some really nice offensive leaders. I tend to join them with a decent army commander and move to take Louisville and point beyond.
The Union is very challenge to hold against a determined CSA offensive.
So I do not hold at all.

[ArmChairGeneral]

Durk,
That is definitely my philosophy as well, and it works great against Athena. I go straight for Louisville on the turns immediately after Kentucky lights up with 2+ divisions that I have either built or spawned in Nashville. It takes a turn to repair some rail, but I can usually take Louisville within three turns of Kentucky declaring and Lexington shortly thereafter. These two strategic cities, combined with the threat against Cincinnati and Indianapolis/Columbus cause Athena to focus on the Ohio River Valley and not on western TN/KY. Further, Louisville is a very large build point, able to access the deep KY force pool right in the heart of the Union's soft mid-western underbelly, so it grants real attacking opportunities against strategic and objective cities. It also greatly distracts Athena from properly defending St. Louis. A human player might ignore the implicit threat against Indy/Columbus IN/Cinci, and instead counterattack in Paducahland, Isl #10 or Donnelson via river, (or most troubling, Nashville the way pgr described) but Athena never does. I am curious how a more attacking strategy designed to at least pressure Louisville and control the rail line through Bowling Green would fare against a human opponent.

pgr,
Attacking along the rail line from BG to Donnelson (Dover on the map) to Ft Henry seems like it would be the most effective route for the Union. South through Nashville is a tough nut, especially in the first half of the war, and riverine landings at the forts or in Paducahland are risky and prone to supply problems with Corps sized stacks. The flanking move to Nashville sounds like pretty clever counter-play against KY aggression by the CSA; you certainly won't see Athena doing this.

I always wait until Paducah opens naturally, but I have a brigade, a pair of cannons and a supply wagon ready to race on up there and fortify it as soon as KY opens. It is worth using one of the Redoubts for sure.

Mickey3D,
You are definitely right about the initial naval advantage for the CSA. The Union is unable to match the Confederate Mississippi fleet until at least 1862, and even that takes a major commitment. The Mississippi fleet is WAY better at intercepting river traffic when it has a couple of brigs from the Gulf in the stack.

[ArmChairGeneral]

pgr,
I don't have ANY faith in the power of forts and/or the navy to stop enemy troop movements. Forts only lay so many hits, and we are constrained by how many cannons we can afford to stuff into them. Further, even with brigs, river traffic evades fleets half the time. I just assume that a determined force can make a landing anywhere on the rivers, and hope my forts and fleets have eroded them some along the way.

Once they are landed, though, river borne invaders can have problems getting supply. Ships and troops can run the forts, but supplies can't! (Which, again speaks to the Bowling Green->Donnelson route as most promising for the Union: rail supply is easier to maintain than river.)

[Mickey3D]

@ArmChairGeneral : I agree with you, Bowling Green must be defended and normally I try not to invade Kentucky but I keep a force ready to seize the important objectives once this State becomes open to play.

@Durk : If your opponent give you the opportunity to attack Louisville, do not hesitate...

@ArmChairGeneral and @pgr : yes, forts can't stop a fleet but the Union player must be concerned by the hits his invasion force will suffer if he moves too far down the Mississippi (and as pointed by ArmChairGeneral the supply will not bypass forts).

[minipol]

It helps a lot to split artillery in the forts into different stacks.
If you keep them in 1 stack, I believe there is a limit of 50 hits per stack.
However, you can put several stacks in and greatly enchance the number of possible hits.
This really increases the stoppage power of a fort in regards to river fleets.

[pgr]

My take is a bit different. The CSA has some really nice offensive leaders. I tend to join them with a decent army commander and move to take Louisville and point beyond.
The Union is very challenge to hold against a determined CSA offensive.
So I do not hold at all.

My main attempt at this strategy against a human player ended in disaster. The main advantage of the Kentucky thrust is psychological. If the Union player is thrown off by it, you can draw a large number of forces away from Tennessee and make him crazy trying to stop you. If he stays calm though, fleets are pretty effective at blocking your path across the Ohio, forces rapidly start pouring into Ohio, and you only have one rail line back that can be interdicted by a landing at Bowling Green.

It was pretty terrible to get contained, have Grant take Bowling Green, and then watch all of Western Tennessee fall while I tried to extract myself from Kentucky.

Of course, I suppose one could argue that holding on to Kentucky and Eastern Tennessee is better that Western Tennessee anyway... but that seems a bit off topic. Perhaps I should start a debate thread about the value of invading Kentucky

@ ArmChair. I agree that forts and fleets by themselves won't stop fleets (although breaking arty into multiple separate stacks does help), but I bet there is value in placing fleets just down stream from a fort, so that an attacking fleet is bombarded, fights a fresh CSA fleet after taking hits, and risks being bombarded again if it retreats back up stream. As for CSA naval domination of the confluent....I tend to build a good amount of cotton-clads from the get go with foot in St-Louis, which tends to tip the scales, even before Ironclads become present.

[Jim-NC]

I tried a forward division at Island # 10, and didn't have enough forces at Memphis for the union landing there. The union sailed past Island # 10, and took Memphis, isolating that force. I feel that a division or more is needed at Nashville and Memphis (1 division in each).

I agree that you can't defend everywhere, and the union can just land anywhere they want, and build a depot to get supply. I believe that you have to hit them after they land, and hope to push them back into the reiver.

[Captain_Orso]

But as long as Island Number Ten and Fort Pillow are controlling the Mississippi, if you land in Memphis --or even somewhere else-- and build a depot, you will be getting no supplies coming down the Mississippi.

This is why Grant spent MONTHS trying to build canals and finally building a road down the western side of the Mississippi to get supplies around Vicksburg before starting his campaign.

[pgr]

But as long as Island Number Ten and Fort Pillow are controlling the Mississippi, if you land in Memphis --or even somewhere else-- and build a depot, you will be getting no supplies coming down the Mississippi.

This is why Grant spent MONTHS trying to build canals and finally building a road down the western side of the Mississippi to get supplies around Vicksburg before starting his campaign.

The situation of defending Vicksburg, is in my mind, completely different. As the CSA, you have a lot of strategic depth, only a narrow front to cover coming south along the rail line to Jackson, and and the ability to concentrate forces at Vicksburg.

If Nashville falls to a big force, with lots of transports and supply wagons, it can hold on for a long time. Plus the CSA looses it's supply to Bowling Green and Ft. Donelson. With all those fleets, it is child's play to trap any CSA force that is north of the Cumberland. Heck, Donelson doesn't need to fall, if Bowling Green does, because the union can forward supplies via that point if it sets up a depot.

Memphis is less of an issue...except if Nashville falls. At that point the Union isn't dependent on the Mississippi for supply routes.

ASJ tends to get ragged on in the history forum, but I think there was a good reason he evacuated all to Corinth after the fall of Donelson and Island No. 10.

The problem is that the game has, in my mind, an over concentration of VP in Western Tennessee. Nashville and Memphis make sense, but why Island No. 10. and Corinth? As a number have noted, this lets the Union gain a pretty durable VP advantage if they take all...and they aren't really forced to invade and further south. So I feel obligated to defend the area the best I can.

@ Jim, I tend to agree that one needs at least a division in Memphis and Nashville to guard against a direct landing. Island 10 seems like a death trap. You can't really overland evacuate or re-enforce, plus it's harbor is on the north side, so troops going in or out have to deal with a union fleet going in or out if the place is attacked.

[Captain_Orso]

The situation of defending Vicksburg, is in my mind, completely different. As the CSA, you have a lot of strategic depth, only a narrow front to cover coming south along the rail line to Jackson, and and the ability to concentrate forces at Vicksburg.

I'm only talking about the supply situation when bypassing #10 and Pillow. I've tried this a couple of times and even if I took Memphis quickly you cannot supply your forces there by transports alone. Even if you have Nashville, no supplies will move to there. It's a death trap.

If Nashville falls to a big force, with lots of transports and supply wagons, it can hold on for a long time. Plus the CSA looses it's supply to Bowling Green and Ft. Donelson. With all those fleets, it is child's play to trap any CSA force that is north of the Cumberland. Heck, Donelson doesn't need to fall, if Bowling Green does, because the union can forward supplies via that point if it sets up a depot.

Memphis is less of an issue...except if Nashville falls. At that point the Union isn't dependent on the Mississippi for supply routes.

If the Union holds Bowling Green with a depot that is enough to support a push on Nashville and Donelson. Once at least Donelson is taken Nashville is fairly easy to take.

I've often taken Paducah early just to deny it to the South, and then BG. BG looks like it's going to be difficult to hold, but I've rarely seen the South put so much effort into holding or retaking it. If they do, I'll take #10 instead and push on Memphis leaving enough force in eastern Kentucky to defend against a push toward Louisville. #10 CAN be taken by brute force rather quickly unless it is massively garrisoned, which then means that BG is not or the South has spread himself out very thinly. In any case I get to pick where to attack and generally where the South is weak and I can create a supply base.

ASJ tends to get ragged on in the history forum, but I think there was a good reason he evacuated all to Corinth after the fall of Donelson and Island No. 10.

The problem is that the game has, in my mind, an over concentration of VP in Western Tennessee. Nashville and Memphis make sense, but why Island No. 10. and Corinth? As a number have noted, this lets the Union gain a pretty durable VP advantage if they take all...and they aren't really forced to invade and further south. So I feel obligated to defend the area the best I can.

Nashville and Memphis are important for their industries and political values. Corinth, however has far greater strategic values. It's the cross roads of the South west of the Atlanta-Louisville axis. If the Union hold Corinth, Memphis must fall, and with her everything not already taken between Corinth and the Mississippi.

@ Jim, I tend to agree that one needs at least a division in Memphis and Nashville to guard against a direct landing. Island 10 seems like a death trap. You can't really overland evacuate or re-enforce, plus it's harbor is on the north side, so troops going in or out have to deal with a union fleet going in or out if the place is attacked.

Moving out of swamp is no a hindrance, only moving into it. As long as #10 is not blockaded, supplies and replacements will arrive, but reinforcements will have to come by river and that can be dangerous.

The South needs to garrison strongly anywhere she wants to maintain, and have a mobile force ready to strike back at an invading force. If the South has some luck the Union will get a bloody nose in the first turn of battle and then get hit by the South's Army of the Tennessee or some portion of it. Even if #10 is in Union hands, if the Union doesn't take Memphis rather quickly he'll have no supply base and must break off to build one; and thus his campaign has failed.