Athena's unrealistic mobilization

[Coregonas]

For sure Clovis mod solves most of the question. Just readed his mod threads and seems heroic work for me. Do you work and MOD for hobby?

Also, if drafts dissappear, tons of money & WS are available.
So again, all the economic system is to be reworked, as Clovis propose.



I am not looking into the real history problems, you know them well for sure, just the math problems getting a final Huge army in the mid 63... I believe this is MORALE.

As designed, it is more MORALE costly to VOLUNTEER a lot than to DRAFT a lot. As everybody says in all your history explanations, it should be the other way.

As designed, we are capable of doing FULL Mobilization (compensating this morale hit- just a -1 difference- with the proper Embargo option) + 1000$ volunteering with only a SINGLE POINT MORALE LOST. Total cost can be 400.000 $, perhaps losing an extra morale for proper economic option

So... hold at 100-105 morale (thanks to other little boost events) and so an extra monthly boost +30 roughly to the pool.

So Year after YEAR we can add all this people without lowering our morale.

If Mobilization could cost 5 NM penalty extra -> Oh for sure we must think seriously on doing it every year.

Perhaps Total Drafted men should be decreased + morale penalized, while volunteers upped?

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Clovis]

My mod is on this point based on 2 ideas:

1) Union must get more volunteers than CSA ( demographics, higher difficulties for CSA to enroll volunteers)

2) the Union advantage has a cost, as more volunteers make much more costly this kind of recruitment. 650 * 3,000 is almost impossible to finance unless by accepting a high inflation level.

But financial options are more limited: printing money is possible only 6 times a year and the hightest tax level is giving a huge NM loss ( 10).

On the contrary, draft is easier for CSA but costs high in NM. USA will get much less proportionally to the same NM cost.

I don't pretend current levels are the best. They 're working ( to the condition to give the AI some free troops here and thereas Athena's use of option isn't always optimal) but new tweakings could be needed for challenge. On the contrary, the philosophy to induce players to follow the historical path without totally forcing them to do so is really IMHO working.

[Coregonas]

My conclusion (even with all those questions about huge armies) is... seems the game can be hardly won by the south if both sides are "gamey tricky" to the max effect. USA is very hard to master, needs more micro-management but if used... has more potential to beat south of course....

CSA has mainly the option to optimize options and build up a big army & navy to allow for enough $ & WS to build a perhaps 36 division size army by 1863, although not really enough corp leaders to use them. Perhaps the new changes fastening seniority upgrade aids a bit.

But, this can only achieved if USA is really "passive" for a couple years., both land and naval.

If USA gets tricky -> his army can be that 30% bigger, better, and the most important -> can reduce that CSA cap. It has a lot of 2* leaders to lead corps all around the map.

The problem arises when a veteran USA player BUT non gamey tricky lover finds a CSA counterpart somewhat gamey tricky-> They dont understand how it is posible a so big army.

About USA fleets doing overflow results, I ve questioned myself why there is no CP cost on them, sure there are good reasons. This allows even more easily for BIG BIG fleets than can ignore a few "50 hits max".. and go all around ignoring forts if needed.

[Coregonas]

I did calculate -> Aproximate RATIO MORALE / CONSCRIPTIONS obtained
Vanilla

Cons T1 Option Recruits obtained vs NM Cost Recruits obtained
245...... 1000$. Free...................... 1,5 *NMC * base
154...... 0$..... Free...................... 2,5 ***This ratio changed in your mod to 2***
429...... FM..... 1,5 times base / NM... 6
656...... PM..... 1,5 base / NM......... 4,5
321...... 2000$. 0,75 base / NM....... 3,2
384...... 3000$. 0,7 base / NM......... 3,8

Surely a big part of the solution is trying to adjust all these figures as you have done.

[denisonh]

It couldn't have been different. Period. It was as possible than an alien invasion in late december 61.

First because the American tradition was to have a small professionnal armyfor peace periodand militia/volunteers units for bigger conflicts than chasing Indians. Draft was highly despised and remained so during the whole Civil War. IF CSA implemented quickly a draft system, it was under the direst necessities and this decision was highly controversial ( and the initial list of exemptions very large). Most studies shows a large part of draftees deserted in the South. For the North, the situation was yet more accentued, as the existence of the North was never menaced. On the whole, 6% of the Noorthern troops resulted from draft.

Secondly, the problem in 1861 wasn't having troops but equippoing it. Volunteers were much higher than the possibility to arm them adequatly. So in any case, draft wasn't needed in 1861.

So to represent adequatly draft possibility in 1861 with historical flavour, we would need to give it malus like -50 NM because it's the only way to represent how much such a measure would have been politically suicidal. And with such a penalty, no player would seriously considering using it.

+1

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Banks6060]

I have to say I disagree with eliminating the Draft choice altogether despite the fact it was historically impossible in 1861.

I believe a significant, but not drastic NM hit...and a slightly increased # of volunteers for both sides could solve the problem.

Say if you want to be the first to draft prior to January 1862...

You must pay 12NM? That's a rather intermediate number....it digs you into a nastly little hole...but it doesn't break your back. You can climb back out again. I agree with Coregonas on this one I think.

I believe the balance between history and playability is with adjusting the morale hit.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Franciscus]

I have to say I disagree with eliminating the Draft choice altogether despite the fact it was historically impossible in 1861.

I believe a significant, but not drastic NM hit...and a slightly increased # of volunteers for both sides could solve the problem.

Say if you want to be the first to draft prior to January 1862...

You must pay 12NM? That's a rather intermediate number....it digs you into a nastly little hole...but it doesn't break your back. You can climb back out again. I agree with Coregonas on this one I think.

I believe the balance between history and playability is with adjusting the morale hit.

+1