Want to try out some house rules in AACW

[TheDoctorKing]

I'm looking for a PBEM opponent to try out two house rules in AACW.

The first rule I propose is a limitation on CSA invasions of the north: No CSA unit can enter a free state (New England, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota) unless the CSA has announced an invasion of the north. CSA can make one invasion each calendar year beginning in 1862. If the CSA declares an invasion, it can enter any free state territory on the turn it makes the announcement and the following turn. On the third turn, any CSA units in free state territory must be ordered to move to permitted territory by the shortest route, using passive status or "avoid combat" orders. If they don't make it on that turn for whatever reason, they must again be ordered to move to permitted territory under the same conditions.

The second rule is a limitation on the draft. Neither side may use full or partial mobilization in 1861. The Confederacy may use partial mobilization in 1862 and full mobilization in 1863 and thereafter. The USA may use partial mobilization starting in January 1863 and full mobilization starting in July 1863. Either side may call for volunteers and offer bonuses of any size from the beginning of the game.

I would be willing to play either side under these conditions. I have only played one PBEM game before. I would play about ten turns a week. I would prefer to have players alternate executing turns, though if anybody thinks the house rules place an inordinate burden on the CSA, I would be willing to permit the CSA player to execute all turns. Please send me a message if you are interested in trying out these house rules.

[Redeemer]

I'm looking for a PBEM opponent to try out two house rules in AACW.

The first rule I propose is a limitation on CSA invasions of the north: No CSA unit can enter a free state (New England, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota) unless the CSA has announced an invasion of the north. CSA can make one invasion each calendar year beginning in 1862. If the CSA declares an invasion, it can enter any free state territory on the turn it makes the announcement and the following turn. On the third turn, any CSA units in free state territory must be ordered to move to permitted territory by the shortest route, using passive status or "avoid combat" orders. If they don't make it on that turn for whatever reason, they must again be ordered to move to permitted territory under the same conditions.

The second rule is a limitation on the draft. Neither side may use full or partial mobilization in 1861. The Confederacy may use partial mobilization in 1862 and full mobilization in 1863 and thereafter. The USA may use partial mobilization starting in January 1863 and full mobilization starting in July 1863. Either side may call for volunteers and offer bonuses of any size from the beginning of the game.

I would be willing to play either side under these conditions. I have only played one PBEM game before. I would play about ten turns a week. I would prefer to have players alternate executing turns, though if anybody thinks the house rules place an inordinate burden on the CSA, I would be willing to permit the CSA player to execute all turns. Please send me a message if you are interested in trying out these house rules.

I would give it a shot. A couple of things though. I'm not sure I understand your invasion rules. Why would the south retreat after two turns if they haven't been defeated? If Lee hadn't been defeated at Gettysburg, you think he would simply go back to VA? I would agree to limit any invasions to border states per the above rules, but I think if the north wants them out, they should kick them out. Also, I think if foreign entry triggers, the reason for no invasions disappears, and all restrictions on invasions should be released.

I would want a house rule on raids as well. No raids by either side in 1861. Raids in all other years must be made by partisans or cav.

I don't care what side I play, but regardless, I think the CSA should host all turns.

[TheDoctorKing]

I would give it a shot. A couple of things though. I'm not sure I understand your invasion rules. Why would the south retreat after two turns if they haven't been defeated? If Lee hadn't been defeated at Gettysburg, you think he would simply go back to VA? I would agree to limit any invasions to border states per the above rules, but I think if the north wants them out, they should kick them out. Also, I think if foreign entry triggers, the reason for no invasions disappears, and all restrictions on invasions should be released.

I would want a house rule on raids as well. No raids by either side in 1861. Raids in all other years must be made by partisans or cav.

I don't care what side I play, but regardless, I think the CSA should host all turns.

The reason for the south retreating is that the invasions were just big raids. They didn't intend to capture territory. Lee was in Pennsylvania for about ten days, June 25th to July 4th plus a couple of days to move out. If he had won at Gettysburg, I understand that his plans were to move on Baltimore, i.e., back in the border states. He might have remained for another week.

I would say that if intervention triggers, then French and British troops could enter northern territory at will. Maybe southern troops could also enter if they were stacked with British and French units. But southern public opinion would probably still have resisted the idea of conquering northern territory.

What do you mean by raids? The invasion rule is intended to address the occasional silly cavalry regiment wandering around the northern rear areas. Are you saying there should be further restrictions on entering even border states and conquered territory? The question is definition - what is a raid and what is an attempt to interfere with communications, capture weakly-guarded positions, etc.?

Have you tried the "replay" rule in the new RC5 patch? I think it is intended to address this problem with only one side in a PBEM game getting to watch the execution, but I don't know how it works.

[Redeemer]

The reason for the south retreating is that the invasions were just big raids. They didn't intend to capture territory. Lee was in Pennsylvania for about ten days, June 25th to July 4th plus a couple of days to move out. If he had won at Gettysburg, I understand that his plans were to move on Baltimore, i.e., back in the border states. He might have remained for another week.

I would say that if intervention triggers, then French and British troops could enter northern territory at will. Maybe southern troops could also enter if they were stacked with British and French units. But southern public opinion would probably still have resisted the idea of conquering northern territory.

What do you mean by raids? The invasion rule is intended to address the occasional silly cavalry regiment wandering around the northern rear areas. Are you saying there should be further restrictions on entering even border states and conquered territory? The question is definition - what is a raid and what is an attempt to interfere with communications, capture weakly-guarded positions, etc.?

Have you tried the "replay" rule in the new RC5 patch? I think it is intended to address this problem with only one side in a PBEM game getting to watch the execution, but I don't know how it works.

I haven't tried the replay rule, but from what I read, the RC patches aren't stable yet.

I don't mind the invasion rule, just not sure that it is historical. I know the south had eyes on Cairo and Cinncinatti if they could have, just to halt the use of the rivers. My understanding of Lee's intent was to defeat the AoP and/or take/threaten Washington, so that still is an option with your rules. I would say though that any region with a state border line in it is still game, ie the south can move into a region with a state border line in it and it not be considered a invasion, like Allegany, MD and Somerset, PA could both be entered by the south.

As far as raids go, I was only trying to limit militia rushes. I would define a raid as destroying rail, depots, and taking of smaller garrisons. It wasn't conquest, so any cities/towns taken by cav/partisans shouldn't be held (unless they fall outside your invasion rules, like in MD, WV, or IA.)

[Rafiki]

I haven't tried the replay rule, but from what I read, the RC patches aren't stable yet.

Then you have some unread posts; All problems discovered in the beta patches have been fixed.

[Redeemer]

Then you have some unread posts; All problems discovered in the beta patches have been fixed.

Thanks!

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Redeemer]

Got it, thanks.

[TheDoctorKing]

What do you mean by "militia rush"? Both sides did quite a bit of cavalry raiding in the sense of sending cavalry stacks (in game terms, probably several regiments) roaming around the enemy's rear to disrupt supplies and communications. But these were rarely long-range raids, where the cavalry got more than one or two areas, in game terms, away from the main army. The famous Union raid in 1863 that went half-way through Mississippi from Grant's army to southern Louisiana and a couple of long-range raids by Morgan and Forrest in Kentucky/Tennessee are exceptions. Morgan's men went into Indiana and Ohio once, at more or less the same time as Lee's invasion of Pennsylvania. Do you want to have a house rule that says that no all-cavalry (and horse artillery) force can be more than two areas from its Army HQ or other large (> 10 units) infantry stack unless it is a) west of the Mississippi, b) in areas controlled > 50% by its own side, c) in a town it controls, d) in territory with > 50% loyalty to its side (so northerners can support southern Unionists and CSA can support their sympathizers in northern Missouri, KY, etc.) or e) during an announced CSA invasion.

I don't know about any Confederate plans to capture Cinncinnati or Cairo. Do you have a source on that? I know they wanted Paducah, KY in order to interfere with navigation on the Ohio, but Grant stopped them. I don't think large CSA forces ever got close to Cinncinnati - that part of KY was Unionist anyway. There were southern sympathizers in southern Illinois and Ohio who wanted to encourage Confederate invasions. But I don't think that any southern commander ever seriously considered following up. The CSA secret service sent an agent to Chicago in 1863 trying to encourage local southern sympathizers to help prisoners escape from a large prison camp near the city. There was some talk of smuggling arms in from Canada to give to the prisoners so they could seize the city, but the locals backed out, perhaps because they thought the southerners weren't serious. The CSA also tried a guerilla-style invasion of the northeast, Vermont I think, again with overtones of opera-bouffe. But I don't think the Confederacy was ever seriously intending to conquer any free-state territory.

On the other hand, they invaded slave states that joined the Union freely and repeatedly. Missouri, Kentucky, and West Virginia were fair game, and the invasion of Maryland in 1862 was relatively non-controversial (the big controversial element was when some raiders wandered over to Pennsylvania and trashed Stanton's business, I think it was). If they could have taken Washington, I'm sure they wouldn't have been constrained by any scruples about invasions. The CSA flag had stars for the three border states. And they were equally ready to invade the territories, perhaps because under the Dred Scott decision, they were open to slavery as well. And the CSA did not, of course, recognize the admission of Kansas and West Virginia to the union, so they would remain fair game.

Oh, and I bet they would have been willing to invade California if they could have gotten that far - gold will overcome plenty of scruples.

I would certainly be willing to consider any area split between two states as belonging to the state most favorable to the CSA for the purpose of this rule - I always wondered why the designers didn't split regions along state lines. The split territories along the KY/TN border appear to belong to TN for purposes of invasion of KY in 1861.

Have you looked at the SVF mod? It appears to address my concerns about the draft, not exactly as I did it but similar logic: both sides can draft starting in 1862 but the penalties in terms of NM and VP's are rather high.

So, you want to do this? You can pick either side.

Stewart

[Redeemer]

I don't have a preference on sides, so go ahead and pick. You have my email, so send when ready. I upgraded to 1.12aRC7 so I would have to replay feature.

"militia rush" is the annoying practice of some players to send suicide militia units either way to destroy depots, rails, etc. before armies and garrisions can be built. Which is why I said no raids in 1861 and only cav and partisans after that.

Edit.

I will look for my reference on the invasion plans. I think it was Braggs, but can't remember atm.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted