AGEOD Forums

Yeah, so maybe that is what is happening. You have to fully blockade the space to get the 90% likelihood of blocking? Also, Kentuckian thinks that you have to be on offensive to stop riverine movement.

havi wrote:and check on the river region how many riverboats/ships u need to block that place!

Yes, your ships need to be in offensive posture to be able to stop river crossings. They also can not be using the evade special order. A minimum of 4 ship elements are needed. Each provides a cumulative 23% chance to a maximum of 90%.

Grant was not able to receive supplies because the CSA had 95% military control in the region. You need at least 25% MC for supplies to flow.

Very nice version of your own Gettysburg you had there. You cut the difference of NM in half. It took massive causalities, but the Confederacy seems to be worse off than you from it. Looked like they had two full divisions wiped out. And maybe some good generals lost their lives too?

I try to refrain from giving advise in on going games, but now that the threat has passed: When D.C. was threatened I would have tried to maximize the chances of your adjacent forces to MTSG by putting them in an offensive posture with rail movement active.

Good thing the depot in Mobile was not blown. He almost had your supplies stretched to collapse in the area.

Also, I feel like the California militia burning towns in Florida would be one of those sensationalized and infamous war stories that ignites an undying rivalry between the states. Sadly, they won't be able to celebrate their victory in Disney World.

Looks to be a very fun game you guys are having. Thanks for sharing.

Thanks for the update on the game mechanics. I had no idea ships had to be in offensive to stop river crossing (did they change that rule).

The CSA started burning towns first in KY (they gave me the idea). Desperate times basically....

Cardinal Ape wrote:Yes, your ships need to be in offensive posture to be able to stop river crossings. They also can not be using the evade special order. A minimum of 4 ship elements are needed. Each provides a cumulative 23% chance to a maximum of 90%.

Grant was not able to receive supplies because the CSA had 95% military control in the region. You need at least 25% MC for supplies to flow.

Very nice version of your own Gettysburg you had there. You cut the difference of NM in half. It took massive causalities, but the Confederacy seems to be worse off than you from it. Looked like they had two full divisions wiped out. And maybe some good generals lost their lives too?

I try to refrain from giving advise in on going games, but now that the threat has passed: When D.C. was threatened I would have tried to maximize the chances of your adjacent forces to MTSG by putting them in an offensive posture with rail movement active.

Good thing the depot in Mobile was not blown. He almost had your supplies stretched to collapse in the area.

Also, I feel like the California militia burning towns in Florida would be one of those sensationalized and infamous war stories that ignites an undying rivalry between the states. Sadly, they won't be able to celebrate their victory in Disney World.

Looks to be a very fun game you guys are having. Thanks for sharing.

FYI, I have been experimenting with one Union brig unit with two elements (just two ships) in the Potomac river area. When I switch to the CSA player, I cannot plot a move over the Potomac into MD with Confederate units no matter what. I realize that I should be able to plot such a move at least some of the time, but no such move happens.

http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?40180-On-the-defense-of-D-C

Also, the brig unit was only set to Blue/Green.

Are there any negative game results that occur from the burning of towns?

Are the positives less WS and a lower recruitment pool for the enemy?

I did a test and no change in WS or recruitment or cash happens when a town is razed.

Gray Fox wrote:I did a test and no change in WS or recruitment or cash happens when a town is razed.

You make use of the "plunder" RGD and you lose 5 VP and 5 development points. You burn a town to the ground and you have no penalty : seems someting is not proportional...

Good point. But, I can't change that.

Mickey3D wrote:You make use of the "plunder" RGD and you lose 5 VP and 5 development points. You burn a town to the ground and you have no penalty : seems someting is not proportional...

Since they are level 1 towns, I think the biggest impact is reducing general supply. Plus, I can't really defend them with the forces I have, so I'm trying to hold level 2 town and above only.

pob303 wrote:Are there any negative game results that occur from the burning of towns?

Are the positives less WS and a lower recruitment pool for the enemy?

It's now late February 64 and we are moving along. Some big moves have already happened before Spring has started.

I just faced a CSA army of 170,000. Has anyone ever seen one that large?

charlesonmission wrote:I just faced a CSA army of 170,000. Has anyone ever seen one that large?

Just check McClellan's imagination. You'll find confed forces that big and larger!

charlesonmission wrote:I just faced a CSA army of 170,000. Has anyone ever seen one that large?

In this game the operational field can get quite cramped late in the war as the Union pushes forward and the CSA contracts while still maintaining a very strong army. IRL the CSA contraction came hand in hand with a decrease of its army size and operational capacity. So you can get those big mega battles late in game that wouldn't have happened IRL. I don't remember with which attrition options you play, but lack of "frictional" attrition is an ingame issue.

So what happens if D.C falls? You take a huge NM hit and lose the 50 VPs every turn (and the confeds gain them?)? I feel like D.C has breathed its last breath. Also, when you saw that huge mega army a few turns ago, why didn't you start pulling men from other theaters of war? I feel like the only meaningful resistance was in middle/upper TN. So you can spare troops from the deep self and still use small units to capture, burn, rape, pillage and gain MC. Even if they didn't arrive in time to defend D.C they could be used at Baltimore, Philly, NYC, Harrisberg, Atlantic city, Scranton etc. etc. I can't imagine Lee stops at D.C once he crushes it.

Agreed, I waited 1 turn too late. Once I saw Forest come in, I should have brought more forces. By the next turn, it was too late.

I'm hesitant to give up DC - it just seems to unrealistic. I think DC can hold with the 2 corps that are there.

B0rn_C0nfused wrote:So what happens if D.C falls? You take a huge NM hit and lose the 50 VPs every turn (and the confeds gain them?)? I feel like D.C has breathed its last breath. Also, when you saw that huge mega army a few turns ago, why didn't you start pulling men from other theaters of war? I feel like the only meaningful resistance was in middle/upper TN. So you can spare troops from the deep self and still use small units to capture, burn, rape, pillage and gain MC. Even if they didn't arrive in time to defend D.C they could be used at Baltimore, Philly, NYC, Harrisberg, Atlantic city, Scranton etc. etc. I can't imagine Lee stops at D.C once he crushes it.

Your prediction may be coming true..... DC is no besieged.

B0rn_C0nfused wrote:So what happens if D.C falls? You take a huge NM hit and lose the 50 VPs every turn (and the confeds gain them?)? I feel like D.C has breathed its last breath. Also, when you saw that huge mega army a few turns ago, why didn't you start pulling men from other theaters of war? I feel like the only meaningful resistance was in middle/upper TN. So you can spare troops from the deep self and still use small units to capture, burn, rape, pillage and gain MC. Even if they didn't arrive in time to defend D.C they could be used at Baltimore, Philly, NYC, Harrisberg, Atlantic city, Scranton etc. etc. I can't imagine Lee stops at D.C once he crushes it.

charlesonmission wrote:Agreed, I waited 1 turn too late. Once I saw Forest come in, I should have brought more forces. By the next turn, it was too late.

I'm hesitant to give up DC - it just seems to unrealistic. I think DC can hold with the 2 corps that are there.

I didn't want to influence the game, so I held my tongue for a couple turns. However, that was the tipping point for me, when you mentioned you saw Forresst on day 12 of that one turn I knew the attack was coming. I was also afraid (and rightfully so) (I think it was Hamilton's corp) was going to get cut off from reinforcing DC. Once your opponent cut the RR he had to take quit a long and circuitous route to get there. If he had made it to DC you might have been able to hold. Anyway it is easy when you are watching, it is much harder when you have to make the decisions. I am not trying to toot my own horn or anything. I am sure you would beat me soundly in a PBEM game.

PS: I think if you had taken several of your units already entrenched in DC and split them into different stacks, then targeted those stacks with incoming divisions, corps armies etc. Then they would of received the entrenchment level of the original unit. IE your most powerful fighting units would have been entrenched like 6, 7, or 8 or somewhere in there. I could be wrong, but one of the turns I think i saw some units in DC with 0-1 entrenchment. I could be wrong though.

Both corps had level 7 entrenchments. The 2 divisions without entrenchments came in with the navy. I'm not aware of a way to get them to join an existing stack.

B0rn_C0nfused wrote:PS: I think if you had taken several of your units already entrenched in DC and split them into different stacks, then targeted those stacks with incoming divisions, corps armies etc. Then they would of received the entrenchment level of the original unit. IE your most powerful fighting units would have been entrenched like 6, 7, or 8 or somewhere in there. I could be wrong, but one of the turns I think i saw some units in DC with 0-1 entrenchment. I could be wrong though.

charlesonmission wrote:Both corps had level 7 entrenchments. The 2 divisions without entrenchments came in with the navy. I'm not aware of a way to get them to join an existing stack.

I assume by the navy you mean on ship units in the game and not by "riverine" movement. Is that correct?

Once you move the stack to the region for the sea insertion, a round marker icon will be in that region representing the move. You can then move the round icon to another stack and it should then land in the region and merge with that stack.

You also have an option to move your capital. (Nudge, nudge...wink, wink)

Is this true for coming in via ship as well?

Gray Fox wrote:Once you move the stack to the region for the sea insertion, a round marker icon will be in that region representing the move. You can then move the round icon to another stack and it should then land in the region and merge with that stack.

You also have an option to move your capital. (Nudge, nudge...wink, wink)

Yes, via ships.

B0rn_C0nfused wrote:I assume by the navy you mean on ship units in the game and not by "riverine" movement. Is that correct?

I should think so.

My aplologies. If you use the above procedure, the shipbourne unit will produce the merging animation and show the destination region with an additional message of the merge in parenthesis. However, it doesn't follow its own instructions and no merger happens when it lands.

I'll be pausing the game from Sept 12th through the 18th while I'm away for work. Good time to catch up if you are behind. We've been going at a breakneck speed. It is now March 65 and Lincoln has been inaugurated.

charlesonmission wrote:I'll be pausing the game from Sept 12th through the 18th while I'm away for work. Good time to catch up if you are behind. We've been going at a breakneck speed. It is now March 65 and Lincoln has been inaugurated.

Atlanta look like a tough nut to crack.

...late, but following.

Sherman is now in command in SC with at large force. And Grant has a large force between Chattanooga and Atlanta. However, since the game ends in 4 turns - it's probably too late to defeat the CSA in the field. It's been a good run though!

71 National Morale? You are going the wrong way.

Only 1 more turn left to run - and then the game is over.