AGEOD Forums

I notice that my naval units in the blockade boxes are losing cohesion, thus reducing their "power" to zero. Is this supposed to happen even if the optional rules for handling blockade (i.e. 66% and 50%) are enabled?

It would seem that, if these optionals are enabled, given that they are designed to simulate returning to port, the units should not lost cohesion either.

Anyone else seeing the cohesion drop or is no one else using the optional blockade rule and just micromanaging the blockade?

I've seen cohesion drop while using the optional rules, but figured it to be because of engagements wih raiders and blocakde runners.

Rafiki wrote:I've seen cohesion drop while using the optional rules, but figured it to be because of engagements wih raiders and blocakde runners.

My question is, as I believe it is with ammo supply and general supply, when using the optionals, should recovery of cohesion be automatic as well?

Or maybe I mis-understand the optional. If engaged in a battle between raiders/runners, is ammo/supply recovered when using the optionals? Or is it simply not consumed when sitting idle?

Do ships lose supply when in blockade? If not, then I think cohesion loss would be justifiable. If so, then I don't really understand it, other than you can't leave a ship at sea for 4 years....

PBBoeye wrote:Do ships lose supply when in blockade? If not, then I think cohesion loss would be justifiable. If not, then I don't really understand it, other than you can't leave a ship at sea for 4 years....

I thought the idea behind the options was to reduce the effectiveness of the naval units to 66% or 50% to "simulate" them going to/from port. If that is the case, they are not "at sea for 4 years", even though it may look that way.

deleted

Gray_Lensman wrote:I've been cycling my ships back to port when the cohesion factor was below half of the original, is this even necessary?

I also. We wait for the great oracle to speak!

Gray_Lensman wrote:I've been cycling my ships back to port when the cohesion factor was below half of the original, is this even necessary?

If you have to do this, why use the option? Instead, get 100% value from the forces and cycle them.

deleted

Yes, I've been using standard and I also forgot there were percentage options. Will be interesting to find out what is going on.

PBBoeye wrote:Yes, I've been using standard and I also forgot there were percentage options. Will be interesting to find out what is going on.

Me too

Rafiki wrote:I've seen cohesion drop while using the optional rules, but figured it to be because of engagements wih raiders and blocakde runners.

Yes, the optional rule only prevents drop from bad weather and lack of supply, but in case of fight, ships won't be repaired automatically in the box (both in hits and cohesion).

Pocus wrote:Yes, the optional rule only prevents drop from bad weather and lack of supply, but in case of fight, ships won't be repaired automatically in the box (both in hits and cohesion).

Ahh. I thought the idea behind the percentage reduction was to simulate them going to port.

Probably not much reason to use the optionals then since you have to worry about getting them to port anyway. May as well get 100% of their value while they are blockading.

You get less cycling of units, without having "invincible" fleets patrolling your sees.

I very much like the way it works with the options of less efficiency, but no non-combat reductions. It has been the most significant step in reducing tedious micromangement for me since the game came out, and I *hate* tedious micromanagement

Rafiki wrote:You get less cycling of units, without having "invincible" fleets patrolling your sees.

I very much like the way it works with the options of less efficiency, but no non-combat reductions. It has been the most significant step in reducing tedious micromangement for me since the game came out, and I *hate* tedious micromanagement

Is cohesion only lost in combat or do the fleets lose cohesion simply by being at sea. If the former, I agree. If the latter, I don't think it makes sense.

with the optionnal rule, you only lose cohesion during combat.

Pocus wrote:with the optionnal rule, you only lose cohesion during combat.

Then all is good. There must just be a lot more combat taking place in those boxes than I ever realized.

Yeah, I just read last night about DuPont's attack on the Charlestown harbor ('62?). DuPont had a fleet of about 9 Monitors and attacked Ft. Sumter and Ft. Moultrie. Well, the attack did not do too much damage to the forts. The monitors got chewed up. No immediate sinkings however one of them did sink the following day. The evening after the attack DuPont gathered his monitor captains together and asked if they should renew the attack on the morrow. Everyone one of the them voted "no".