Full Campaign - New Player Questions

[Captain_Orso]

I'm talking about blockading a harbor.

[moni kerr]

I'm talking about blockading a harbor.

Ok. You meant economic blockade. I thought you meant trying to prevent ships moving into or out of the harbor.

[Captain_Orso]

In the sense of preventing ships from passing through a region the only thing you can do it try to intercept them with a fleet(s) on offensive, but a brig or two or small fast fleet on avoid combat might still sneak through. It's a fully different mechanism than blockading.

[lodilefty]

Also, a Frigate with it's higher Spotting value will help...

[Chuske]

Thanks guys.

Any tips for my current situation. I'm in a PBEM against a more experienced player. I'm Union and we're playing 1.16rc10 with attrition on.

Now in April 62 and CSA still has Harpers Ferry, Mannassas, Paducah, Bowling Green and Columbus KY.

I have Cairo, Charleston MO, Barren KY and a bridgehead in Muhlenburg KY (NW of Bowling Green). Problem is despite using Full Mobilization and recruiting officers in St Louis, Baltimore etc I seem to have virtually no numerical advantage and struggling to find some counter-play. Assaults on Paducah or Columbus would be over a major river and costly. Attempts to take Harpers and Mannassas have been beaten back.

Trans-Miss is similar with 2 divisions under Lyon duelling around Springfield against a simailr sized reb army.

I don't have much in reserve, just a small division in Ft Monroe and a strong one under Hooker in Ft Macon. My river Ironclads got a heavy mauling in the winter and are being repaired so I have just a medium sized gunboat force in Cairo.

Issue is if I weaken one front to build up strength in another I risk reb counter attacks, plus the heavy attrition rules stop decisive rapid moves meaning Rebs can instead choose to match my movements.


Update: Asked my opponent how he managed to recruit such a large number of troops. Firstly he kept his NM high and so his mobilization is more effective, plus he admitted to a lot of his troops are militia (obviously he is not saying which!)

So I'm looking for general advice on strategy in this game, how to open up a struck fronts. How to stabilise NM (which has been dropping due to my mobilization and defeats)?

The options as i see it are :-

1) Heavily strip most fronts to create an unstoppable force somewhere and hope I can hold off CSA in weakened areas.

2) Amphib to open a new front (has same disadvantage of weakening an existing front). Eg New Orleans or other big port.

3) Peninsular campaign... how to avoid counter against Washington

4) Try and get a force behind his defenders forcing him to hit that force and abandon his entrenchments... but how?

Attack points I have are:

East
a) Mannassas
b) Harpers Ferry
c) Peninsular

West
c) Paducah/Coulmbus
d) Bowling Green

Other
e) Coast / ports
f) Trans-Miss

[moni kerr]

You won't start to see a significant numerical advantage until 1863. If he is matching you in army size then he is likely going to be short of replacements. Many players do this when playing CSA; they build too fast and although they can almost match the Union in size they are woefully short of replacements.

So try attrition; attack wherever you can, but keep the attacks conservative unless you have a definite advantage. If you keep it up and the exchange doesn't get to 2:1 against you his units will become brittle and you will either start destroying elements or he will pull back to conserve his cadres.

[Aphrodite Mae]

An important point that I haven't seen mentioned in this thread is that 4 Cav are required in a stack of 16+ elements. Otherwise, screening and pursuit are adversely affected. Here is the post by Pocus: regarding Cav.

[...] I am going through various threads collating posts like this. For now I am just slotting them into various folders as addenda to the main rules for new people. Later on perhaps I'll drop in specific paragraphs into the rules themselves as appropriate, or reformat what I have into some sort of companion AACW reference guide. [...]

Stauffenberg, thanks for your good work! May I suggest that you consider appending some of your succinct insights to the What's not in the manual thread? It's stickied, and might be a convenient place to compile your wisdom until your project is done.

Captain Orso, it appears that you've become one of our cadre! Thanks for your excellent advices in this and other threads.

[rattler01]

Open up new fronts and force him to spread his limited number of good leaders (provided the past conflicts haven't let him promote a slew of 2 stars)


Strip KY front to the bear bones. Use the river navy to funnel possible enemy river crossing to a defended zone. If you have to cross rivers, then so does he. If you want to press this theater. Take a force with 4 or 5 wagons and flank him at Knoxville. He will have to move to engage. From here he will most likely have engaged you in defesive terrain. Weakening his line somewhere else. If he doesn't move to Chattanooga with your 5 replenished wagons. But from the situation you described, I would write off this area for the time being.


The USA's navy is one of the most under valued thing in this game. In my current PBEM I had 3 invansion forces taking and destroying all the forts along the coast. Making him garrison every key harbor. This allowed me to promote Lyons, Hooker, Gant, Sherman(3 stars) and other generals to set up good commands. Send brings to scout F-burg. In fact send a ship to scout every harbor you can (Frigates are the best for detect value) and see which one you want. All you need is 2 divisions to pose a serious threat in a coastal landing. If you still own Pickens, then Pensaloca is a good target. And stages you for a move at Mobile or to Montgomery threatening Atlanta. The key is to open a front he has to commint at least 1 maybe 2 divsions. When he does this pack up 1 div and assemble another and repeat on the opposite coast. I would stay away from Wilmington unless you can cut the RR first otherwise expect Jackson to charge down with a vengence.

Most CSA players will abandon TX and FL if pressed. There are 6 VP locations in these states that are prime for landings. (VP) covers the amount of money you get when printing or taxing. Have you maxed out your transport fleet and moved any you're not using into Shipping? I have 30 transports in my shipping box giving me an additional $120 a turn and another 10-12 moving divisions and suppling my blockade. This allows me to run $300 bounties and still run out of conscripts before I run out of money. I never use 8% bonds. costs to much VP. And by the end of 62' if I want money I just print it and it give me over 1 million.

Speaking of a blockade, make sure the 2 boxes have equal number of ships. I'd also increase each by a fotilla or 2. Make sure you have a Firgate with the one where he is putting his brigs, as it increases chance of detection.

I've never beaten the CSA with attrition. One of the drawbacks with how it becomes trench warfare and the victories strengthen the CSA and allows more impressive generals. Unlike in history here the CSA can raise a 500,000+ army. The key to the USA is not the numbers, but the mobility. No matter how fast Jackson is, he can't move from Richmond to Savannah in 1 turn.

[colonel hurst]

It sounds like the CSA has a big NM lead and that is the reason for the close to equal amount of men. You will creep back slowly but will need to win a couple of bigger battles.

I would go for Ft Henry & Donelson since you have a force in Muhlenberg, KY. Taking Donleson will allow you to pose a threat on Nashville which would choke off Bowling Green and also threatens Paducah.

Take Springfield as soon as you can. That will free up the pressure on Rolla, Lexington, and Jeff City, pretty much locking down Missouri.

It's OK to build up a big army in Virginia and then pick a spot to make a strike at, either Charlottesville or Fredricksburg. Helpful if you can make a diversionary strike in North Carolina that can attack Petersburg or Norfolk.

A beach head in Elizabeth City, NC will give you a spot to setup a seige of Norfolk from. Take a couple of Siege guns and build a depot immediately. Alternately you could go for Suffolk which will probably be an easy target and cuts off Norfolk and gives you a point to go for Petersburg. You will have to be able to control Elizabeth City to keep the food flowing!

Good Luck!

[Chuske]

Thanks for useful advice. Seems that I have many potential targets:-

Suggested so far:-

South Coast
-Pensacola
-TX or FL

E Coast
- Elizabeth City or Suffolk
- Fredericksburg

KY
- Knoxville
- Ft Henry/Donelson

MO
- Springfield

I've never beaten the CSA with attrition. One of the drawbacks with how it becomes trench warfare and the victories strengthen the CSA and allows more impressive generals. Unlike in history here the CSA can raise a 500,000+ army. The key to the USA is not the numbers, but the mobility. No matter how fast Jackson is, he can't move from Richmond to Savannah in 1 turn.

Tell me about it! I got Grant over the river into Columbus a few turns ago only for winter attrition to give his army an epidemic and bottoming out his cohesion, forcing me to withdraw and after that CSA reinforced and fortified that point so when Grant's army recovered, it was pointless to attack there.

It sounds like the CSA has a big NM lead and that is the reason for the close to equal amount of men. You will creep back slowly but will need to win a couple of bigger battles.

Current situation is:-
NM US(me) 61 CS 116
VP US 681 CS 1203
Casualties US 28885 12498

[moni kerr]

I've never beaten the CSA with attrition. One of the drawbacks with how it becomes trench warfare and the victories strengthen the CSA and allows more impressive generals. Unlike in history here the CSA can raise a 500,000+ army. The key to the USA is not the numbers, but the mobility. No matter how fast Jackson is, he can't move from Richmond to Savannah in 1 turn.

Attrition doesn't mean trench warfare, it means wearing your opponent down. It's a big front and a long war and there are many places to attack. So if a position is well defended, go around it and starve them out. You may not get vp for hits caused by supply shortages, but you will certainly up the pressure on his replacement pool.

[Longshanks]

Attrition doesn't mean trench warfare, it means wearing your opponent down. It's a big front and a long war and there are many places to attack. So if a position is well defended, go around it and starve them out. You may not get vp for hits caused by supply shortages, but you will certainly up the pressure on his replacement pool.

Yup Three approaches for the Union follow. Use these until you have the CSA on its heels.
1. Go where he ain't. (Corollary: when he shows up to outnumber you, leave or dig in heavy.)
2. Go around behind him and cut off his supply. Do I need to add to take engineers and SUs (and a Gatling if you have them)?
3. When he's cut off, entrench and make him attack you, or pull out.
Repeat.
I do like Moni Kerr's attrition approach which seems to be working well for him in the tourney. Attrition works best when in wide open spaces where you can pile 4 artillery within a division to blast him.

[Stauffenberg]

Stauffenberg, thanks for your good work! May I suggest that you consider appending some of your succinct insights to the What's not in the manual thread? It's stickied, and might be a convenient place to compile your wisdom until your project is done.
[B]

Will do and thanks for that Mae. I may title the opening remarks: "The AACW Companion Noob Guide: How to Avoid Becoming Shark Bait in your First PBEM Game."

Seriously, years later and the grognards are still winkling out abstruse game dynamics, and much of it ends up buried in threads like this. It couldn't hurt.

[Chaplain Lovejoy]

1. Go where he ain't. (Corollary: when he shows up to outnumber you, leave or dig in heavy.)
2. Go around behind him and cut off his supply. Do I need to add to take engineers and SUs (and a Gatling if you have them)?

Agree totally, although I express these two a bit differently:
1. Like a good quarterback, take what the defense gives you. Don't try to force the ball into double coverage.
2. Remember that this is a game of logistics as much as anything else. Do everything you can to degrade your opponents logistical infrastructure while protecting and enhancing your own (this observation is in an operational and strategic sense, while Longshanks's is in a tactical sense; both apply).

[lodilefty]

The AGE games all seem to do well simulating an old saying:

"Amateurs study Strategy and Tactics, while Professionals study Logistics"

...just ask Georgie Patton 'bout that

[charlesonmission]

St. Louis and Baltimore aren't good places for the Union recruiting generals do to low loyalty there. Try moving them to Chicago, Philly, or NY and you'll see the recruiting numbers go up. Remember that the general needs to be in command of a "set" in the city, even if the "set" is just the general.

Charles

[Chuske]

Thanks Charles and everyone. Got my recruiting generals moved now.

I've managed to capture Columbus and Gallatin and cut the rails around Donelson, Hooker is attacking Pensacola but Beauregard has appeared to defend that port. Either Pinkerton is in charge of my intelligence or the CSA really has a massive army, opponent has dropped a hint that he recruited a lot of militia but its hard to tell what armies are mainly militia, maybe he has trained them up?

I've also surrounded Springfield MO but struggling to hold on there and at Columbus and Gallatin as he still hold Paduach, Bowling Green etc and he has partisans and bushwhackers everywhere ripping up rails and beseiging depot garrisons, if I move my armies to deal with threat to my rear garrisons I open his supply/reinforcement lines and I lose my position, if I attack which is what I think I'll have to do if those armies aren't all miltia I'm risking heavy casualties.


Recruitment wise I'm short even with full mob. and call vol with 2000 bounty. Money wise, transports in shipping lane now reinforced and money is rolling in so just need occaisional bond, but low NM means I'm short of conscripts.

Should I have recruited more militia instead of line inf? Can militia train up to line quality?

The CSA river force is strong and just sank what was left of my river force outside Columbus. I keep trying to build Ironclads in MO but none ever appear to be building, any idea why?


Overall I like this game but a few issues make it feel not like the real ACW (at least to a newbie who hasn't mastred everything!). I know its not meant to be exactly historical but a few niggles are:-

1) CSA recruitment and industry seems greater than I'd expect, I guess this is so for game balance but does make Union job harder.

2) Full attrition is vicious! Really bogs down war into almost WW1 combined with above and entrenchment.

3) Early war entrenchment seems excessive. In ACW history only in Peninsular campaign do you here about early entrenchment and then only at Yorktown seige.

4) Naval guns can command a lot of river (esp where rivers meet) and ships too easily get sunk rather than take damage and retreat. Hard to do the real combined ops that happened at Island No 10, Donelson/Henry and New Orleans.

5) Marines are silly (EDIT, oops meant marine units in GAME as effectively river crossing units are not realistic) . Real marine force on ether side was tiny (3000 max union) and mostly guards at ports. Nothing like the modern marine corps. Prob should have had pontoon train units instead?

6) Recruiting generals that recruit all war especially major political generals like Banks and McClernand. In reality their political clout got the field commands and they wouldn't have accepted long recruiting assignments.

[Longshanks]

Yes, Militia trains up to conscript and then to line infantry (some leaders can help with that last step).

You can no longer build artillery or ironclads west of Missi. R. unless you get a factory as a result of Econ investments. For ironclads, the factory has to be in a Missouri port. I'm not sure why St. Louis doesn't qualify, but it doesn't.

as for your observations:
1) many people restrict mobilization for both sides, esp in 1861.
2) attrition can be mitigated by keeping supply units with your forces
3) some agree, some don't. Personally, I don't find entrenchments to be much of a factor as long as you can move around them.
4) It is, in fact, quite possible to sail units right up to all those places, invade them, and take them without difficulty provided you do it before your opponent gases them up.
5) I'm never going to tell a Marine that the corps is silly. Good luck with that! In the game Marines have a small effect.
6) Some folks use them, some don't. When you by-pass them in favor of promoting Grant or Lyon, etc., you'll usually pay a VP and NM penalty.

No game is perfect, but this one is among the best, esp. with the latest version improvements. I'd like to see the Moblization issue addressed, but that's for another day. The more you play it, the more subtleties the game shows you, and yet the clearer it becomes.

[rattler01]

St. Louis needs to have 25% loyalty.

And I think loyalty increase by garrison is broken. You'd need to leave a force of 10k plus for a few turns to get. near 25%.

[Chuske]

Yes, Militia trains up to conscript and then to line infantry (some leaders can help with that last step).

You can no longer build artillery or ironclads west of Missi. R. unless you get a factory as a result of Econ investments. For ironclads, the factory has to be in a Missouri port. I'm not sure why St. Louis doesn't qualify, but it doesn't.

as for your observations:
1) many people restrict mobilization for both sides, esp in 1861.
2) attrition can be mitigated by keeping supply units with your forces
3) some agree, some don't. Personally, I don't find entrenchments to be much of a factor as long as you can move around them.
4) It is, in fact, quite possible to sail units right up to all those places, invade them, and take them without difficulty provided you do it before your opponent gases them up.
5) I'm never going to tell a Marine that the corps is silly. Good luck with that! In the game Marines have a small effect.
6) Some folks use them, some don't. When you by-pass them in favor of promoting Grant or Lyon, etc., you'll usually pay a VP and NM penalty.

No game is perfect, but this one is among the best, esp. with the latest version improvements. I'd like to see the Moblization issue addressed, but that's for another day. The more you play it, the more subtleties the game shows you, and yet the clearer it becomes.

Thanks Longshanks. I agree no game will ever be perfect, including this one and yep this is by far the best, although I do like War Between the States for totally different reasons and I know I'm in a minority for that!

I think what is tough with this game for a newbie is all the little rules like the one you mentioned about the no Ironclad builds in MO without industrialisation even though you can click on Ironclad units to build in reinforcements.

Saying that I'd be happy to help with the wiki in light of what I've learnt but before I get too experienced and forget what is important to know when you try and learn the game.

1) Think I'll ask for house rule on this in future PBEMs I play.
2) I'm doing that but supply units cost a lot of conscripts, think I need to work on my early war strategy to pickwhen to mobilise more intelligently
3) True. Not always easy in your first PBEM to know where you can weaken to build a decisive force to open new front to draw him out of trenches. I guess my point is the game bogs down easy unless you have some experience.
4) As with 3, its a lesson I'm learning, move slow and you find entrenched opponent at every key port etc.
5) I've found marines important to contest defended riverlines I can't get around, in reality it would be pontoon unit, real civil war marines were a weak force unlike modern marines. Army did most amphib ops, engineers the pontoons.
6) Good point.

Definitely a game of subtleties!

[Chaplain Lovejoy]

I think what is tough with this game for a newbie is all the little rules like the one you mentioned about the no Ironclad builds in MO without industrialization even though you can click on Ironclad units to build in reinforcements.

Good point! If there is no possibility of building ironclads in MO due to lack of ... whatever, then there should be no clickability to build ironclads there--perhaps the choice is grayed out with a tooltip explanation why. Easy to implement, or hard?

[lodilefty]

Good point! If there is no possibility of building ironclads in MO due to lack of ... whatever, then there should be no clickability to build ironclads there--perhaps the choice is grayed out with a tooltip explanation why. Easy to implement, or hard?

Very hard to redo code for the "grey out", as that is essentially implementation of the "build" system seen in ROP and later games.

Maybe a way to fiddle with the force pool, so that goes on the 'next patch' list.

St. Louis needs to have 25% loyalty.

And I think loyalty increase by garrison is broken. You'd need to leave a force of 10k plus for a few turns to get. near 25%.

Why should a small force in the City influence loyalty in a region of many so square mies of countryside?

[rattler01]

I don't think they should effect loyalty at all, no matter if you had 200k men. The population wouldn't start to like the other side. My 40k troops raised 8% loyalty in one turn providing they stay for 3 more I will have enough loyalty to do builds. If I leave the loyalty stays which doesn't make sense.

Before the "Raise Rule" it really only effected FOW in ungarrisoned areas, which wasn't a big deal. I know it effects supply production also, but it wasn't that major because a majority of your supply come from the northern states (based of my knowledge). With the changes on how loyalty affecting what can be built in regions, there needs to be a way to improve it. I don't think USA has much or any force pool for CSA states, so the only thing it seems to really change from previous versions is the inability to industrialize conquered lands unless you commit tens of thousands of troops. Should we consider this WAD?

In reality I don't think this is a priority because the only place it seems to be an issue is MO. Even though I have taken all of MO, doubled the garrison (which isn't that much), and several victories in the state St. Louis is only 1% Union. Which is way different from history. St. louis was filled with union friendly Germans and Irish only the rest of the state hated them . Causing all my builds to appear in St Joseph . While the inability to build Ironclads there sucks. There are more than enough eslewhere.

Disclaimer: I am not a MO loyalty Civil war historian. Just going off from generic info. Please correct if I'm way off.

[Chuske]

Ahhh so loyalty has an impact on what you can build in St Louis.

Further questions I have:-

1) Is there an optimum financial and conscription/mobilization strategy in 1861? Assuming no house rules is it best to time mobilization to particular situations, NM levels or just go for it and recruit as soon as you have option?

2) Is it better as USA to recruit a proportion of your field armies as militia? In this first PBEM I recruited militia only as depot guards and recruited regulars for field armies. I've found my opponent recruited a lot of militia and trained them up and now has a large army to oppose me.

3) I got confused early on at how best to use troops before divisions and corps. I failed to take and hold Harpers and Paducah and now suffering for it. How best to use early war divisionless stacks? In particular is there any way to make sure stacks from same region attack together and not piecemeal? I assume there is a balance in stack size between command point penalty for large stacks and too many stacks that can't guarantee to fight together?

4) Are armies any use before corps are allowed? ie are there any command benefits to stacks in same region or surrounding areas?

5) Artillery. I'd read initially that 12lbs are best bang for buck, so I've only built them. I gather other types offer better range and assault capability. So should I fill defense forces and forts with 12lbs and for divisions that might attack have a combination of 12lb and Parrots/Rodmans? What are gatlings good for, defense? What about horse art, is that for use with cav only forces or can it be of use with inf in tough terriain?

I'm very keen to become a wiki editor so answers you give me here, I'll start collating info to add there when I know enough. By the way how do I register to contribute to the Wiki I can't find a page to register a username?

[charlesonmission]

Your opinion of St. Louis is correct.

I don't think they should effect loyalty at all, no matter if you had 200k men. The population wouldn't start to like the other side. My 40k troops raised 8% loyalty in one turn providing they stay for 3 more I will have enough loyalty to do builds. If I leave the loyalty stays which doesn't make sense.

Before the "Raise Rule" it really only effected FOW in ungarrisoned areas, which wasn't a big deal. I know it effects supply production also, but it wasn't that major because a majority of your supply come from the northern states (based of my knowledge). With the changes on how loyalty affecting what can be built in regions, there needs to be a way to improve it. I don't think USA has much or any force pool for CSA states, so the only thing it seems to really change from previous versions is the inability to industrialize conquered lands unless you commit tens of thousands of troops. Should we consider this WAD?

In reality I don't think this is a priority because the only place it seems to be an issue is MO. Even though I have taken all of MO, doubled the garrison (which isn't that much), and several victories in the state St. Louis is only 1% Union. Which is way different from history. St. louis was filled with union friendly Germans and Irish only the rest of the state hated them . Causing all my builds to appear in St Joseph . While the inability to build Ironclads there sucks. There are more than enough eslewhere.

Disclaimer: I am not a MO loyalty Civil war historian. Just going off from generic info. Please correct if I'm way off.

[charlesonmission]

1. NM impacts volunteers and moblization. So, depends, but basically try to utilise those when you have a higher NM (easier said than done).

2. Depends on strategy. I personally don't use militia much because I like to really move forward and hit hard. Militia are unsteady.

3. They only way to make sure units defend or attack together is if they are together, even with the penalty. Remember, your opponenet is also likely to have the same penalty.

4. Yes, an army can be useful before corps as it still gives you many CP for that set.

5. Artillery is rather complicated just like it was in the war. Let's just say, you will need a mix, and you never know when you might need to defend, so don't forget that.

Ahhh so loyalty has an impact on what you can build in St Louis.

Further questions I have:-

1) Is there an optimum financial and conscription/mobilization strategy in 1861? Assuming no house rules is it best to time mobilization to particular situations, NM levels or just go for it and recruit as soon as you have option?

2) Is it better as USA to recruit a proportion of your field armies as militia? In this first PBEM I recruited militia only as depot guards and recruited regulars for field armies. I've found my opponent recruited a lot of militia and trained them up and now has a large army to oppose me.

3) I got confused early on at how best to use troops before divisions and corps. I failed to take and hold Harpers and Paducah and now suffering for it. How best to use early war divisionless stacks? In particular is there any way to make sure stacks from same region attack together and not piecemeal? I assume there is a balance in stack size between command point penalty for large stacks and too many stacks that can't guarantee to fight together?

4) Are armies any use before corps are allowed? ie are there any command benefits to stacks in same region or surrounding areas?

5) Artillery. I'd read initially that 12lbs are best bang for buck, so I've only built them. I gather other types offer better range and assault capability. So should I fill defense forces and forts with 12lbs and for divisions that might attack have a combination of 12lb and Parrots/Rodmans? What are gatlings good for, defense? What about horse art, is that for use with cav only forces or can it be of use with inf in tough terriain?

I'm very keen to become a wiki editor so answers you give me here, I'll start collating info to add there when I know enough. By the way how do I register to contribute to the Wiki I can't find a page to register a username?

[colonel hurst]

1. I would use the call for volunteers and mobilization options as soon as you can start building units, the third turn of the game. You need to start advancing as the USA.

2. I usually don't recruit militia as the USA, I don't want to wait for them to become regulars. Using them to hold depots may not be a bad idea though. As the CSA, I have built entire divisions with militia after forming a base of 4 artillery, 2 cavalry, and one sharpshooter. That division was able to stay behind the front lines for a few months and most of the militia trained up to line infantry. I built this division under a leader with the militiaman attribute. This could work for you in the winter months when you may be able to spare some conscript points on militia. If you are using Butler as a recruiting officer, build a division of militia under him in the city he is in as I believe he also has the militiaman trait.

3. You have to go with bigger stacks of units, especially in Virginia. As mentioned earlier, your opponent will have a command penalty as well.

4. One thing to remember about army units is that it takes them two turns to train up and will take a turn or two to get them where you want them if you are not using the re-location option. You should start building them in early or late Jan. '62 so you will be able to form corps as soon as possible.

5. You are getting the idea on artillery. If you have a fort along a river, it helps to put a Rodman in it to bombard ships trying to pass by. I usually only use horse artillery with cavalry divisions because you only get a limited amount of them.

Hope this helps a bit.

[rattler01]

1. I go by the sooner the better. I'm doing some testing right now on what 1NM effects on recruiting in draft and volunteers. But it seems the ratio would be so low that the delay isn't worth it unless you plan on capturing a capital soon.

2. Militia take a sizable max org hit when outside their state, even if its another friendly one. Militia are barely cost effective considering they sap replacment pool when they upgrade. Pros; nearly immetiate build, can be recruited with out other types of elements (alot of CSA formations have art and cav attached), cheap on $$ and WS until you can industrilize the south, and numbers allow you to start entrenching everywhere. Cons; bad fighters in general, even worse when not in state, can take many months to upgrade. You might use them for a cheap reserve division and use them to garrison until they upgrade and rotate out damaged units maybe, but I tend not to bother with them when the USA has alot of 1 INF elements in NY and PA.

3.
a. I make dedicated command penaltiless stacks for operations and put everything else in the same stack
b. Besides planning on the same arrival day the answer is nope. But alot of the time when I attck with several stacks 1 engages and if it loses than all the others retire without battle. This is why players will mingle two armies in 1 area with corps so they know two waves will hit the region. And sense a opponent can't see which corps belong to which army, they assume all corps in a area will MTSG.

4. Nope, but they have a larger command point limit in their stack. Only 2 I think because 4 is used for the army HQ.

5.
a. 12lbs are best for defensive formations. But if you buy 6lbs they upgrade to 12lbs. I think it happens alot faster than the militia thing and I beleive it doesn't eat at replacement pool.

b. Horse art with cav division to give them some bang and keep speed. There about equal to 10 lbs, but a bit cheaper.

c. As the union you don't need to worry about bang for your buck. They all cost the same Conscript points which is what limits you. I always build Rodmans and 20 lbs cannons. I will build 12lbs when I want a fort or having a division dedicated to a garrison of a city. I try to always have at least 1 seige gun in a corp stack cause they have the max range. Not sure how much that effects battle.

d. Gatling are awesome for defense.

[lodilefty]

I'm very keen to become a wiki editor so answers you give me here, I'll start collating info to add there when I know enough. By the way how do I register to contribute to the Wiki I can't find a page to register a username?

New users are turned off, as we had an unmanageable Spam-a-thon and had to shut it down.

Send me a PM to discuss your desire to contribute

[Chuske]

Thanks yet again Charles, Rattler, lodilefty and colonel hurst

3.
a. I make dedicated command penaltiless stacks for operations and put everything else in the same stack
b. Besides planning on the same arrival day the answer is nope. But alot of the time when I attck with several stacks 1 engages and if it loses than all the others retire without battle. This is why players will mingle two armies in 1 area with corps so they know two waves will hit the region. And sense a opponent can't see which corps belong to which army, they assume all corps in a area will MTSG.

Sorry Rattler didn't quite follow you. For a) do you mean make small stacks that don't have a penalty? What operations do you refer to and what is the role you assign to the larger stacks you mention?

For b) are you saying that 2 waves are 1 wave from corps of each army? Main use is to confuse opponent yes?

5.
b. Horse art with cav division to give them some bang and keep speed. There about equal to 10 lbs, but a bit cheaper.

If I have inf units operating in tough or mountain terrain, what art is best to go with them? 6lb, 12lb, horse or gatling? I'm assuming here long range guns lose their advantage in hills and mourtains etc

5c. As the union you don't need to worry about bang for your buck. They all cost the same Conscript points which is what limits you. I always build Rodmans and 20 lbs cannons. I will build 12lbs when I want a fort or having a division dedicated to a garrison of a city. I try to always have at least 1 seige gun in a corp stack cause they have the max range. Not sure how much that effects battle.

d. Gatling are awesome for defense.

Won't seige guns slow down your corps?
Are gatlings good for any defence point or best saved for defending divisions that might go out of supply? eg Flanking or units attempting to cut off enemy supply.