Historical Political Freedoms

[GraniteStater]

Most people are aware that Lincoln suspended habeas corpus, first in certain counties in southern Indiana, and then later to the entire US. By spring of 1865, about 14,000 people were incarcerated or under other restrictions with no charges or indictments.

Has anyone tried a game with this historical pattern? I think 63 for the initial curtailment of Liberties is about right.

And the South should play with restriced Liberties from the beginning, just about, to be historical.

[Micah Goodman]

I do have a question about this aspect of the game. Does anyone ever change political freedoms? If so when do you start how agresive with the restrictions do you get and when do you remove them?

[Mickey3D]

Does anyone ever change political freedoms?

I never did it. I see no clear advantage with using it.

[Baron von Beer]

I'll sometimes use Suspension in Missouri. Not sure if it is actually "Worth it" or not, I just don't like seeing 0 loyalty. It's heartening to know at least 1 in 10 is pulling for the Blue team.

[CarnageINC]

Once you get loyalty above a certain number, don't you get intel on enemy formations in that area? I don't know the threshold for that number?

[Mickey3D]

Once you get loyalty above a certain number, don't you get intel on enemy formations in that area? I don't know the threshold for that number?

Yes, high loyalty improve intelligence but is it worth the drawbacks ?

[GraniteStater]

The original idea is for historical accuracy. I might start a game myself as US and impose restrictions historically, just to see.

The CSA (all of it), though, should be at least NoHabCorpus. Perhaps states suffering Federal invasions should go to MartLaw as a matter of course.