Baste
Private
Posts: 27
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 4:44 pm

Industrialization or blockade runners?

Tue Nov 19, 2013 9:07 pm

What is more profitable for the CSA? Industrialization or blockade runners? I did not count, but it seems to me that or blockade runners bring more income. Perhaps playing against a player (Now I'm playing against the AI) blockade runners is not as effective, because player can expose more ships.
I want to hear your opinion.

And another question. At CSA can reduce the level of blockade?

User avatar
Ace
Posts: 3498
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:33 pm
Location: Croatia

Tue Nov 19, 2013 9:24 pm

Industrialization.
Brigs cost 40 $ and WS. It takes a lot for ROI. And that is without your ships getting sunk which can always happen.

You cannot reduce blockade unless Brits come in and chase Union ships away. You could send more brigs though.

User avatar
Ol' Choctaw
Posts: 1642
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2011 7:13 pm

Tue Nov 19, 2013 9:38 pm

Industrialization. The runners seem far more likely to sink thus far. Industrialize first and then bring in your ships in groups to spread the damage done by the Union fleets.

User avatar
Gen.DixonS.Miles
Captain
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed Jul 03, 2013 4:16 pm
Location: Neffs-Laury's Station, Pennsylvania

Wed Nov 20, 2013 12:03 am

Go for Industrializtion. (No I'm not just jumping on the band wagon)
“In my opinion, Colonel Miles was a drunkard, a coward and a traitor, and if I had the power I would have had the United States buttons taken from his coat.”

Elble, Sigmund-Soldier with the 3rd U.S. Infantry


Elble, an officer on the frontier who knew Miles well

Baste
Private
Posts: 27
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 4:44 pm

Wed Nov 20, 2013 9:12 am

Thanks for the answers.

Does it make sense for CSA, to build warships that would fight for the window of the blockade?

Does it matter how the blockade runners are located inside the window of the blockade. All one stack or each separately?

User avatar
Ace
Posts: 3498
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:33 pm
Location: Croatia

Wed Nov 20, 2013 9:24 am

CSA cannot break the blockade, they cannot build large enough fleet, unless half of North is already taken.
Single units stacks are more difficult to catch but I would keep them together because damage is then spread on multiple ships, not concentrated on single one.

ancient seaman
Corporal
Posts: 49
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2008 6:01 pm

Wed Nov 20, 2013 10:31 am

Early on runners are fine since the blockade isn't strong enough,eventually you will have to industrialise somewhat,truth to be told the CSA has to make a mix between setting industrial base/importing things/strengthening the army and you shouldn't be able to do all of them easily.

User avatar
Ol' Choctaw
Posts: 1642
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2011 7:13 pm

Wed Nov 20, 2013 11:46 am

I would be a little leery of that. Even with only the 35% starting blockade I keep losing ships in the early turns. I don’t mean just individual elements either. Whole squadrons or even two in a single turn.

The blockade is much more effective than in the last game, or even historically. For the first 6 months the blockade existed in name only.

User avatar
Jim-NC
Posts: 2981
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 4:21 pm
Location: Near Region 209, North Carolina

Wed Nov 20, 2013 6:32 pm

As to reducing the blockade percentage as the CSA, there may be a way. In AACW I, certain ports added to the blockade percentage if they were blockaded or taken by the union. I suspect that there is the same mechanism in 2. If that is the case, you can slightly lower the percentage by taking those ports back (if union controlled). I don't have a list of the ports for 2, but I did (still do I think) have the list from AACW I.

If this is still the case, then the union can gain blockade % by taking those ports, and the CSA can lower by taking them back. It's not a large swing, but it could be a few % points.
Remember - The beatings will continue until morale improves.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

User avatar
Ol' Choctaw
Posts: 1642
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2011 7:13 pm

Wed Nov 20, 2013 7:02 pm

Jim-NC wrote:As to reducing the blockade percentage as the CSA, there may be a way. In AACW I, certain ports added to the blockade percentage if they were blockaded or taken by the union. I suspect that there is the same mechanism in 2. If that is the case, you can slightly lower the percentage by taking those ports back (if union controlled). I don't have a list of the ports for 2, but I did (still do I think) have the list from AACW I.

If this is still the case, then the union can gain blockade % by taking those ports, and the CSA can lower by taking them back. It's not a large swing, but it could be a few % points.


I am pretty sure that Norfolk counts for 10% of the current starting level (35%).

User avatar
StoneWall Jackson
Corporal
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Oct 22, 2013 10:20 pm
Location: Winchester, TN.

Thu Nov 21, 2013 4:47 am

Industrialization is best.

To make the blockade runners you do have last longer, I advise that you set them to defend/retreat upon contact, and also the avoid setting. Since I have started doing that I rarely loose any whole ships or elements.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

MarkCSA
Posts: 403
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 3:35 pm
Location: In a safe place, they couldn't hit an elephant at this distance

Thu Nov 21, 2013 1:08 pm

Ok, I am going to be the lone dissenter here and advise Runners, as they can also generate cold hard (well, CSA dollars, so not that hard) cash. If Industrialization now generates cash (of which I am not aware at this point) please let me know!

Cash, not WS is usually my restraining factor when building up my troops, but apparantly I am weird as I use very small (but highly motivated) forces, mainly defensively (I do not see the point of attacking large entrenched stacks).

As for CSA Navy, build a nice mix of Steam Frigates and Frigates, get Semmes to lead em and raid Union shipping.
Murphy's Law of Combat: 'The most dangerous thing on a battlefield? An officer with a map'

User avatar
Ebbingford
Posts: 6124
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 5:22 pm
Location: England

Thu Nov 21, 2013 1:44 pm

Most of the industrial structures generate cash each turn in various amounts.
"Umbrellas will not be opened in the presence of the enemy." Duke of Wellington before the Battle of Waterloo, 1815.

"Top hats will not be worn in the Eighth Army" Field-Marshal Viscount Montgomery of Alamein K.G.


Image

User avatar
Ol' Choctaw
Posts: 1642
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2011 7:13 pm

Thu Nov 21, 2013 2:04 pm

MarkCSA wrote:Ok, I am going to be the lone dissenter here and advise Runners, as they can also generate cold hard (well, CSA dollars, so not that hard) cash. If Industrialization now generates cash (of which I am not aware at this point) please let me know!

Cash, not WS is usually my restraining factor when building up my troops, but apparantly I am weird as I use very small (but highly motivated) forces, mainly defensively (I do not see the point of attacking large entrenched stacks).

As for CSA Navy, build a nice mix of Steam Frigates and Frigates, get Semmes to lead em and raid Union shipping.


Most Industrial structures generate 1 or 2 money per turn in addition to their WS, general supply, and or ammo production.

There is nothing wrong with runners, so long as they are not being sunk at a quick rate. Unfortunately they do seem prone to that. Industrialization is more stable so long as you can keep the Union out of the cities.

Semmes is also locked from the time CSS Alabama enters the game and never unlocked again.

MarkCSA
Posts: 403
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 3:35 pm
Location: In a safe place, they couldn't hit an elephant at this distance

Thu Nov 21, 2013 2:20 pm

Ol' Choctaw wrote:Most Industrial structures generate 1 or 2 money per turn in addition to their WS, general supply, and or ammo production.

There is nothing wrong with runners, so long as they are not being sunk at a quick rate. Unfortunately they do seem prone to that. Industrialization is more stable so long as you can keep the Union out of the cities.

Semmes is also locked from the time CSS Alabama enters the game and never unlocked again.


I merge my runners into single fleets, as soon as you have about 4-5 in a fleet, you should be safe from (most) Union ships. Semmes locked is being looked into by AGEOD as far as I know. Even without a leader the SF + F fleets seem to do ok on sinking the Union shipping and economy.
Murphy's Law of Combat: 'The most dangerous thing on a battlefield? An officer with a map'

Baste
Private
Posts: 27
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 4:44 pm

Fri Nov 22, 2013 4:35 pm

Yes, Industrial structures generate money. For example, Arsenal generates + 2 money, Powder Mill +1 money. This can be seen by hovering on the structures in the city (Click + Ctrl on the city).

What it means - Land Constr. Capa.:?

User avatar
willgamer
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 275
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 12:41 am
Location: Mount Juliet, TN

Fri Nov 22, 2013 6:12 pm

Be sure to examine what you are receiving per dollar invested with industry.

For example (Union), best return for money invested: profit/turn are Armory and Arsenal- 25:1, then Powder Mill- 50:1, lastly Iron Works- 100:1.

User avatar
Ol' Choctaw
Posts: 1642
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2011 7:13 pm

Fri Nov 22, 2013 6:21 pm

For the Union it is just some place to spend money and WS. The CSA actually need money, WS, and Ammo.

sorta
Captain
Posts: 176
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2011 3:25 pm

Sat Nov 23, 2013 2:46 am

For the Union is their a trade-off between putting transports into the merchant fleet vs building an armoury?

User avatar
Captain_Orso
Posts: 5766
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 5:02 pm
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Mon Nov 25, 2013 8:16 am

I haven't collected any statistics for ROI (Return on Investment) for the Union in CW2, but I suspect it is not so very different from AACW relative to the income levels.

Putting transports in the Shipping Box will generally bring a lot of cash. Looking back to a game in AACW, in Early Feb. '62 with 97NM I have 37 transport squadrons in the shipping box and took in $134 and 4WSU. At that time my income from cities etc as about $137. So it was practically doubled.

Just over a year later at 63NM Image with 39 transport squadrons in the Shipping Box I was still getting $122 from shipping and $107 from cities. How much you get depends on your NM.

In a CW2 game in Late Nov '62 with only 9 transport/merchantman squadrons in the Shipping box and at 108NM I see $60 and 14WSU from shipping with $476 from cities (yes, far more income, but everything is also more expensive). Judging from that, shipping income may be a bit lower, but if you just want cash, it's probably the way to go, to some extent at least.

But the ROI will at some point start to level off. You don't gain the same for each additional squadron in the Shipping Box. Count on about only 95% for each additional squadron, although it's a curve and not a straight line.

Also remember, the more raiders the South puts into the Shipping Box, the less the Union will get from shipping.

User avatar
Pat "Stonewall" Cleburne
General of the Army
Posts: 639
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 7:46 pm
Location: Kentucky

Tue Nov 26, 2013 6:07 am

Shouldn't it cost the CSA money to operate these industrial structures once they are built? Someone has to pay for what gets produced.

User avatar
Captain_Orso
Posts: 5766
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 5:02 pm
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Tue Nov 26, 2013 9:49 am

Yes, you do every time you purchase a unit.

Return to “Civil War II”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests