newbie question

[tonedog]

im playin as the csa and the biggest problem im havin is tryin to form some kinda front line. what do i do about north mexico? theres a big usa army there, it is just a simple matter of leavin a large army in laredo to stop it invading?

[Jabberwock]

That army won't do anything unless you get foreign intervention (very difficult), which means:
1. You would almost have won the game by that point.
2. You would have control of some French units in the area that could counter anything the Mexicans did.

[Ethy]

That army won't do anything unless you get foreign intervention (very difficult), which means:
1. You would almost have won the game by that point.
2. You would have control of some French units in the area that could counter anything the Mexicans did.

i totally agree...

my plan for the west is keep a division and a few scattered cavalry units such as texas rangers and Possibly Indians to keep any skirmishing union units out. Regarding the state of MO, keep recruiting militia units to keep union fighting for Springfield and Rolla, usually the forces trying to capture them aint strong enough to take it if you have several militia units garrisoned in each... this stops the union over running you.

regarding the east, im sure you realise the importence of holding the union at bay and not letting them capture Richmond.

the centre states, hold on to nashville and win at bowling green and paducha early in the game as you can, then you can take the fight to liousville, St Lious and cincinatti

hope it helps

[tonedog]

im havin lots of probs with union troop movin about in the rear, i guess just havin lots of cavalry and militia units is the answer right?

also, what do i do with gunboats?

[arsan]

im havin lots of probs with union troop movin about in the rear, i guess just havin lots of cavalry and militia units is the answer right?

also, what do i do with gunboats?

Hi!

Gunboats: at the beginning of the campaign as the CSA i usually make a couple of fleet of 4-5 gunboat units (with all the ones you get for free scattered around) and put them on offensive stance one on the mississipi river (near island 10 area) and other at the confluence on tenesse and cumberland rivers.
That way they will fight any union fleet trying to go towards Memphis or Nashville, and help the fort guns of island 10 and Donelson to do their work.
These fleets are very weak and won't stop a big union fleet, but they are more than enougn to scare away union transports with little escorts and land units using riverine movement.
You will have to send them to port from time to time to recover cohesion.
Also, gunboats can escort transports when you move units by river.
Later you will recieve ironclads who can fight very well and bombard if you make an amphibious assault.

About union raiders... yes they are a chore... be sure to be the same to the north with your cavalry and irregulars...
To reduce his attacks garrison with at least 1 militia every town near the front so they can't resupply there. Lone ports are also a a resupply spot, but probably you won't have enough unist to garrison them. leure:
Enemy cavalry will have a very hard time taking a town garrisoned even with one militia unit which can get level 4 entrenchments.
And NEVER leave a depot town without adecuate garrison! They are expensive but easy to blow!
In addition, use groups of your own cavalry to chase and hunt the raiders (they will be weak and unsupplied, but still hard to catch )
And use milita or infantry to repair broken railroads as soon as possible.
Also, gunboats can help to ward off raiders. They can´t cross river areas with your gunboats there, so you can build serveral boats and put one per area to stop raiding on fronts with rivers. But bear in minde they will be easy pray for most union fleets.

Regards!

[samwise]

How many naval units are necessary to stop the enemy from crossing rivers. I know the tooltip will tell how many needed to blockade that river spot, but is that also the number needed to keep enemy units from crossing rivers?

[tonedog]

ok thats great info! with regards to transportin troos via rives/sea what the difference between manually doin it or usin the "move my river" movement order?

also, do units have to be told to entrech or is a defensive posture good enough?

[arsan]

Samwise,
I think just one gunboat per river area is enough to block crossing.
To blocade (which means no supply and also limited production on the blocaded area) you need what the tooltip says.

Tonedog,
Puting land units inside a fleet for moving is safer as you can put combat ships as escorts on the stack. And if they are ironcalds, they could bombard and help on an opposed amphibious landing (gunboats guns have not enough range to bombard).
Also, on riverine movement (the automatic one, without "real" ships) your units have minimun evasion value (1) since the last patch. They will be very vulnerable to any ship, fort or entrenched guns you find on the way.

As a rule of thumb, i use riverine transport to move units on my territory, far form the front lines and transport fleets with some escorts to advance on enemy territory or on dangerous "no mans" land.
In both modes, be very carefull trying to bypass enemy forts. They can hit you pretty hard!

About entrenchment: its automatic. Every unit will try to entrench each turn.
There is a luck roll involved, so the time to get each level of entrenchemnt varies. Engenieers and some leaders make entrenchment faster.
To get more than 4 level entrenchments you need to have guns on the stack.

A litle "trick" for entrenchments: the entrech value is per stack, not per units. So you can have a lone milita unit enternching to level 4 for several turns... then move a big corps stack to the area and, dragging the corps stack on the milita stcak, get the level 4 entrenchment for the whole corps!!
Later, you can detach most of the corps to another area and keep teh high level entrenchment on teh area as long as you let some unit there...

Its a little gamey, but one can see it as the small unit digging or keeping big entrenchments for the main army to use later...

And the last thing... take note that an area with a city is like two separate areas in one. A stack can entrench inside or outside of the city...
And a unit moving in or out from the structure will lose all his entrenchments levels if you dont leave a unit "maning" the trenches.
Regards!

[tonedog]

so am i better to move units out of cities and entrench or have them entrench inside the city/fort?

again, thanks for the tips

[Jabberwock]

If there is only one unit available, it is generally better to entrench outside of a city. That is where you will want the trenches if a significant force moves into the area, so that they can't get besieged. If you have a fort in the area, entrench inside the fort. If you have several units, do both. Use any weak or weakened forces to entrench inside a structure in passive posture, and full strength units to entrench outside. If the enemy attacks in assault posture, they will fight both stacks, and the stack inside the structure will automatically switch to defensive posture. If they attack in offensive posture, they may drive off the outside force, but the inside force will hang on to the structure, and hope to be rescued. In the meantime, the enemy will not be able to get supplies from the structure, or get complete control of the region.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[tonedog]

so a good rule of thimb would be that any unit inside a structure should be set to passive as they will change to defensive anyway if attacked?

i assume units outside the structure on passive would retreat instead of switching to defensive?

also in regards to river crossing, on the map road/rail criss cross over rivers. do these simulater bridges so that in only certain regions rivers can be crossed or is the game more abstract in that rivers can be crossed anywhere?

[soundoff]

I second that comment Gray_Lensman about the Jabberwock post. In fact I'd go further and say there
should be a place in the Wiiki for useful 'hints and tips' in addition to answers to FAQ's

Just my tuppence worth

[Coffee Sergeant]

If there is only one unit available, it is generally better to entrench outside of a city. That is where you will want the trenches if a significant force moves into the area, so that they can't get besieged. If you have a fort in the area, entrench inside the fort. If you have several units, do both. Use any weak or weakened forces to entrench inside a structure in passive posture, and full strength units to entrench outside. If the enemy attacks in assault posture, they will fight both stacks, and the stack inside the structure will automatically switch to defensive posture. If they attack in offensive posture, they may drive off the outside force, but the inside force will hang on to the structure, and hope to be rescued. In the meantime, the enemy will not be able to get supplies from the structure, or get complete control of the region.

Generally true, however in regions with depots you may want to defend inside the structure, because an opposing force can enter the region burn the depot without your unit defending if you are not careful.

[soundoff]

Ouch what are you saying Coffee Sergeant, if I read you correctly is that you can enter a region that contains a defending entrenched force that also contains a structure and providing you enter the region in defensive mode no combat will occur. Then next move you enter a 'destroy depot' order without ever having entered the structure but because the structure itself is undefended and you are 'in the region' the depot will be destroyed?

Or is it simpler still and all you have to do is enter a region in defensive or passive mode but with an enter structure order and you just bypass the defender and enter the structure.

[Jabberwock]

so a good rule of thimb would be that any unit inside a structure should be set to passive as they will change to defensive anyway if attacked?

1. They may or may not switch on the first round of combat. (I don't know)
2. They may or may not receive some other combat penalty.
3. Units inside a structure on passive of defensive posture will not join a fight unless assaulted.

I've always used passive in structures for recovering forces in conjunction with an outside force. I believe Pocus mentioned this somewhere, but now I can't find it.

i assume units outside the structure on passive would retreat instead of switching to defensive?

Correct. They will attempt to retreat.

also in regards to river crossing, on the map road/rail criss cross over rivers. do these simulater bridges so that in only certain regions rivers can be crossed or is the game more abstract in that rivers can be crossed anywhere?

Rivers can be crossed anywhere, but can only use rail move across rivers if there is a railroad bridge. There are movement and combat penalties when crossing rivers.

[Le Ricain]

Ouch what are you saying Coffee Sergeant, if I read you correctly is that you can enter a region that contains a defending entrenched force that also contains a structure and providing you enter the region in defensive mode no combat will occur. Then next move you enter a 'destroy depot' order without ever having entered the structure but because the structure itself is undefended and you are 'in the region' the depot will be destroyed?

Or is it simpler still and all you have to do is enter a region in defensive or passive mode but with an enter structure order and you just bypass the defender and enter the structure.

I am sure that this is not correct. If you enter a region that is not under your control, you force automatically assumes an attack (orange) posture. This applies even if your stack is inactive. If the region contains an enemy force entrenched outside of a structure, your force will attack the defenders. Only if this attack is successful, would you be able to enter the structure (assuming that there are no defenders inside).

[soundoff]

Phew, glad about that Le Ricain, Coffee Sergeant had me worried there for an hour or two.

[Jabberwock]

so a good rule of thimb would be that any unit inside a structure should be set to passive as they will change to defensive anyway if attacked?

I second that comment Gray_Lensman about the Jabberwock post. In fact I'd go further and say there
should be a place in the Wiiki for useful 'hints and tips' in addition to answers to FAQ's

Just my tuppence worth

I thought I should revisit these:

Strategy Guide Concept #9: Cities are traps.

Pay attention to what Runyan says. He knows strategy. He knows history. He knows game mechanics.

The advantage to being in cities is in cohesion recovery and replacements, This is something you generally want to do behind the front line. You want to have something protecting forces that are doing it, and protecting the surrounding region, so you don't get trapped.

[Jabberwock]

Generally true, however in regions with depots you may want to defend inside the structure, because an opposing force can enter the region burn the depot without your unit defending if you are not careful.

I have actually seen something like this happen. A stronger enemy force enters the region in assault posture, arriving very late in the turn. The defenders successfully avoid combat, but don't make a complete retreat from the region. So the attackers have bypassed the defenders, own the structure, and can blow up the depot.

I forgot to mention depot cities in my earlier posts. I do try to have an extra militia entrench inside any depot city that is remotely close to the front, or a potential front. (defensive posture)

[arsan]

I have actually seen something like this happen. A stronger enemy force enters the region in assault posture, arriving very late in the turn. The defenders successfully avoid combat, but don't make a complete retreat from the region. So the attackers have bypassed the defenders, own the structure, and can blow up the depot.

I forgot to mention depot cities in my earlier posts. I do try to have an extra militia entrench inside any depot city that is remotely close to the front, or a potential front. (defensive posture)

I'm not sure if this could also happen with an enemy cavalry using evade combat. He can enter the region, evade combat with your unit outside the structure (with success probabilities on th 90's% unless your force is a big one) andon the next turn, with the structure empty, blow the depot or take control of the city... i´m wrong?

I agree with most of Jabber and Runyan ideas, but always like to have some unit inside the structure if i´m interested on holding it.
As Jabber says, a unit entrenched outside can choose on their own to retreat before combat against a much bigger attacking force (usually a sound move), and let complete control of regon and city to them.
But just having an additional militia unit inside will usually keep the enemy out of the structure and unsupplied until they assault next turn.

As a rule of thumb, i always defend outside with sizeable stacks but also have a second small stack (1 or 2 militias, maybe a small brigade on very important locations) inside.
What is not good at all is to let your big armies be trapped inside a city. They will have to attack to get out or risk complete surrender after a siege.

About passive: units attacked on passive have combat penalties... so i always use defensive as my "standard" posture, except when i'm on a hurry to recover cohesison/replacemenst and on a safe place (covered by some other forces or out of the front lines).
Besides, garrison units will rarely benefit from being passive, as they usually stay put and already have full cohesion.

Just my 2 cents
Regards

[Le Ricain]

I'm not sure if this could also happen with an enemy cavalry using evade combat. He can enter the region, evade combat with your unit outside the structure (with success probabilities on th 90's% unless your force is a big one) andon the next turn, with the structure empty, blow the depot or take control of the city... i´m wrong?

I agree with most of Jabber and Runyan ideas, but always like to have some unit inside the structure if i´m interested on holding it.
As Jabber says, a unit entrenched outside can choose on their own to retreat before combat against a much bigger attacking force (usually a sound move), and let complete control of regon and city to them.
But just having an additional militia unit inside will usually keep the enemy out of the structure and unsupplied until they assault next turn.

As a rule of thumb, i always defend outside with sizeable stacks but also have a second small stack (1 or 2 militias, maybe a small brigade on very important locations) inside.
What is not good at all is to let your big armies be trapped inside a city. They will have to attack to get out or risk complete surrender after a siege.

About passive: units attacked on passive have combat penalties... so i always use defensive as my "standard" posture, except when i'm on a hurry to recover cohesison/replacemenst and on a safe place (covered by some other forces or out of the front lines).
Besides, garrison units will rarely benefit from being passive, as they usually stay put and already have full cohesion.

Just my 2 cents
Regards

Yes, I guess that it is possible to capture a city as you described. However, the process is one of two turns. After the cavalry arrives and avoids combat, there is nothing to stop the player from moving a unit back into the the structure.

The best solution is as you mention, leave a unit inside the structure.

[Jabberwock]

Before the destroy depot special order was implemented, it was a one turn process. Raiding cavalry could cruise through a region with a depot and passive defenders using assault/evade, blow up the depot, and keep going (that was fun). That may be one cause of confusion.

[arsan]

I think indians and irregular raiders can also blow a enemy depot just by passing by... in one turn. They can't capture cities but blow things automatically.
Regards

[tonedog]

ok ive got another question so i may as well use this thread. playin as the confeds its aug 61 and ive been allocated more army hq's to my force pool. when i click the message the map moves to richmond but i dont see any army hq's. what do they look like?

also, i have a level 1 city with a depot that is at 110/41 supply. i have a level 2 city (no depot) next to it at 0/7 supply. there are only a couple of brigades in each town so why is the supply so low at the level 2 city?

im guessin its because my rail/river transport is limited, is this the reason even though the two cities are in adjacent regions/

[Rafiki]

When your force pool increases, you can build the new units just like you can any other reinforcements, provided that your on-map count of those units is lower than your force pool limit.

Note that in some cases, even if you receive a message that your forcepool limit has been increased, it might not be enough to be able to build new units. E.g. if your forcepool limit is 1 and you have 2 units of that type on-map, getting 1 added to your forcepool won't be of much help in being able to build new units, since your on-map count will match the force pool limit. However, should you then loose 1 of the units on the map, you'll be able to build a new one.

[soundoff]

Look in the ledger...reinforcements...support units...tonedog and you should find that there is a new unit to purchase....new HQ's which will give you the potential for new armies. If you are playing as the CSA there should be two of them to purchase.

As you are saying you are only in August 61....I think this may be the answer.

Mind you additional HQ's dont come cheap.

[arsan]

ok ive got another question so i may as well use this thread. playin as the confeds its aug 61 and ive been allocated more army hq's to my force pool. when i click the message the map moves to richmond but i dont see any army hq's. what do they look like?

also, i have a level 1 city with a depot that is at 110/41 supply. i have a level 2 city (no depot) next to it at 0/7 supply. there are only a couple of brigades in each town so why is the supply so low at the level 2 city?

im guessin its because my rail/river transport is limited, is this the reason even though the two cities are in adjacent regions/

About depots
Depots function is just that: accumulate supplies (food/ammo) pulling them from other structures and pushing them to other depots or to near units that need them.
A level 2 city porduce some supplies but not that much and it does not accumulate supplies form other places. The brigade on that citie is consuming all the food produced there (thats why you have 0 food/ 7 ammo there) and probably is also receiving the rest of the food it needs form a depot nearby.
Fortunately, all this complex pushing and pulling of supply is done automatically by the game.
Still, the supplies distribution has its limits (depending on railroads/rivers, your transport capacity and nearby depots) so if you put a lot of units on an area with little supply capacity (like on the mountains, wilderness or far away form cities/depots you will have problems feeding them.
The solution: get them out of there, use wagons as "manual" supply or build a depot near.

Regards!

[Rafiki]

also, i have a level 1 city with a depot that is at 110/41 supply. i have a level 2 city (no depot) next to it at 0/7 supply. there are only a couple of brigades in each town so why is the supply so low at the level 2 city?

im guessin its because my rail/river transport is limited, is this the reason even though the two cities are in adjacent regions/

Didn't see this last part before I replied, but you can find more information about how supply is distributed at http://ageod.nsen.ch/aacwwiki/Supply#Supply_distribution

[tonedog]

yeah i now see the hq unit in reinforcement screen, i was thinkin it would be a free unit on the map!

and about my supply question, that answer pretty much clears it up. reckon in a few more weeks il might be ready to get some pbem action goin