Some more Observations from a Union PbeM

[GraniteStater]

havi and I have reached March of 1864 in our PbeM (I'm the Union; havi, CSA). I don't know if anyone else has reached this point in PbeMs in CW2. Here are some more observations (and maybe a gripe) on my part, particularly from the Union standpoint.

* First, the general situation. havi has played well and skilfully. he has taken advantage of terrain, river crossings and has built fortifications where desirable. Recently, he told me he had plenty of conscripts. From what I have seen in the messages, he may be hurting for $$, but that is not surprising.

*Per above, on the map, we are having quite a tussle in central VA. Richmond is the issue. We have manuevered, abandoned Regions and regained them. It truly has been a chess match as both sides employ their advantages. I have made concerted assaults at chosen places and have suffered many casualties. havi is usually entrenched well, and has bled, but not as much. I have stuck with McDowell as the NEVA Cdr and have five Corps under him. havi has been using PGT and Lee in central VA as Army Cdrs. Nashville is held by JJ in 4000 Pwr strength. Grant took Pope and Lew Wallace with him to take Memphis; Nashville is cordoned, just enough, with the remaining AotCumb Corps. Rail cutting and repairing has been going on; Nashville has only one trunk line it can use, one of my Corps blocks the other. Buell landed in Beaufort, SC with Schenk as a Corps Cdr under his AotOhio, right now, trying for Savannah. Rosecrans is in Rolla, MO, very loosely commanding the western Army, which is down to Fort Smith on the Arkansas, but was repulsed in a river landing at Little Rock. I have El Paso. Mitchell, a Cav Ldr, zipped down, took Atlanta for a few Turns, but I foolishly got greedy and hung around one Turn too many for the counter - I should've have left instead of contesting it. The repaired RR and Forrest caught up with Mitchell and he was destroyed last Turn. That was foolish of me, I should've have left earlier and pushed on to other climes.

* Bear in mind, havi caught the 10% "KY secedes' roll in August, 1861. That doesn't exactly help the Union. I was able to regain most of KY fairly quickly, but he has been actively counterplaying with raiders and annoyances throughout the game.

* I took Norfolk, Louisville and El Paso, for Objectives, so far - and it's almost spring of 1864! havi is very stout. His NM is at 150 right now; I was actually leading briefly in the low 130s for a Turn, but several reverses in the field have dropped me down to 98, right now.

* From this experience:

>> I almost starting to think the Union might want to Super Turtle. havi's FI has been no more than 43 or so, but he seems to keep his economy together. The taking of Norfolk raised the Blockade to 55% and that's about it. I dunno, this would be disappointing to me. I'm all for facing reality as the Union and knowing you have to take the time to prepare, but I'm starting to go nuts. Whaddaya gotta do, get everything together just so, build every blessed thing and then win a string of uninterrupted victories? I don't think that's what the designers had in mind.

>> Some of this comes from the combat experience. I have played AACW enough to know that a defense, especially at level 3 trenches or above, has to be overwhelmed by numbers, basically. Yes, one can try to cut Supply, and there is maneuvering, but it still boils down to the need to overwhelm the D. Terrain and weather can be huge, huge, huge here. Still, there seems to have been more than a few instances of "C'mon, man!". You're prepped, you're fresh, you have the numbers, you have the right mix, the weather is OK, etc., - and Defeat, defeat, defeat. Granted, some of these were close and NM makes an immense difference - but fair warning to AACW Union players - your feelings and hunches may not be justified in CW2. This almost endless string of setbacks is a direct cause of his stratospheric NM.

>> Of particular note is MTSG, or the lack thereof. In too many instances, big battles have been resolved as a result of un-coordinated attacks. For instance, my experience in AACW was that if brother Corps, same, or adjacent regions, were arriving at the target within two days of each other, even three days, there was a reasonable chance that support would show, depending on Posture, rivers, RRs, etc. Reasonable. Not in this game so far. Granted, I haven't used Synchronize at all, but that applies only to stacks originating in the same Region. In AACW, one didn't need to use it that much, a reasonable and prudent attack schedule would give you a reasonable expectation of MTSG, especially when both, or all, parties start from the same Region. So far, what I'm seeing is a very strict conductor on this railroad - Days to arrive are Days to Arrive and woe to he who doesn't get there right on time. No 'hurry-up' that I can see.

>> This really affects the Union adversely, because the Union must attack. Look, it's common knowledge that the best way to attack an entrenched string of Corps is to 'hit 'em at the end,' by ganging up on one flank or another so that the defensive MTSG is limited to one Corps, max. But if one does this, one often has to group in neighboring regions - seldom can you put all your chips down in one Region for the assault, for reasons that should be obvious. Well, the Days to Arrive almost never default to Everybody at the Same Time. So...starting to see the picture? It just gets really annoying when 5-4-4 Corps Commanders with good Div Cdrs under them, with Pontoons, Sig, Eng, etc., etc., etc., just can't seem to hear what's going on and get a move on to help out their buddies. Repeatedly.

>> OTOH, defensive MTSG, especially with good Southern Leaders, is the Ueber-Maneuver from Hades. Just last Turn, I have Lew Wallace in the region, Pope and Grant coming into it, against AS Johnston, who has a Corps in Memphis available for support. I've got the numbers For Sure, as far as my G2 can tell. I can see it on the screen, I can feel it, he's breaking, he's breaking - then the support shows up in the third act, crossing a river, mind you, and although ASJ has been essentially reduced mightily by much superior numbers, the late arrivals sweep all from the field - even though, they, by themselves are definitely inferior to what is on the field. Oh yes, fresh, rested troops, don'cha know. It's always AP Hill at Sharpsburg - always. The Hollywood rescues never cease.

>> Now, I have had some successes, a few notable. But take the river war. I know just about for sure that havi has stuck with his out of the box ironclads. I built about a dozen, or even 16, in three, and then, four fleets, under good stat Admirals. Enough gunboats, too, and TPs. I go and order Crush Hollins, Crush Buchanan/Hollins - never happens. He hasn't lost one 'clad, not one. To be fair, he harbored a lot and comes out only when ready, but you would think I would catch some occasion when I'm putting 2:1 or 3:1 against him - hasn't happened yet.

* Panning back to a bigger frame, I really started the Big Push in spring '63. After some significant bloodletting, it becomes clear that your resources are going to Replacements and very few Reinforcements are going to be built. This leads to my first bewailment - you have to avoid major losses if you want to put the Union's numbers on the field? Wait until you're assured success on the field? Doesn't seem right.

**********

Some concluding remarks:

* A Union player might want to build a bigger navy, much bigger, to get your hands dirty with a Brown Blockade. The Boxes cap at 40%, which, in reality, means 20% Hurt to CSA Ports. It looks like single Blockade Squadrons with some other support and a TP might be a good stack to use.

* I didn't bother with New Orleans, I had too much else to do, figuring he'd be reinforcing and building a fort there. An early strike by the Union, if one can get it together in time, could be the ticket here.

* Watch your maneuvering and entrance into battle like a hawk. The least mistake in Posture or timing seems to be punishing. Terrain and weather are very, very important.

* Building Extra Industry early might be a good idea, even though the $$ return might not be awesome. I built 'just enough', per my AI experience, and now I'm starting to think otherwise. Some of the builds aren't that expensive and it could pay some dividends in '63.

* I'm not sure if integrated Cav in Divs is really doing its job. I have several Corps with four or more Cav reg'mts in them, in Divs, and the G2 is abysmal. Too many instances of ?? on the CSA stack icon, IMO. BTW, I've built out my independent Cav, all of them. You just might have to put loose Cav in a Corps for better G2.

Well, I just got a file back - tally ho!

[GraniteStater]

And this, from the Replacements/Hits thread, just chimes right in.

So we have Replacements - yes, those guys whose arrivals are displayed in the Messages, and we have Hits - red stuff, from any source. Replacements arrive because the brigade in question wants to flesh out its TOE, what it should be. Once you're along in the game some, these happen, pretty much, only when an entire element gets whacked and is gone entirely. Hits can be alleviated or obviated anytime, anywhere (wait a minute - gotta be in Port for ships, and I think one needs size 3; unsure), but location, structures, circumstances in general, can keep these to a crawl or speed them up.

And the South gets a 2:1 advantage in this - why? Some Big Historical Reason of which I know not? Or is it more 'balance'?

This veers off topic, but see my latest thread on the experience I'm having with havi. No wonder I can't get past entrenched 4000 PWR posts - he can take the beatings all day long and recover twice as fast. In the meantime, the Union essentially stops building units just to replace casualties and by the time they're ready again, they might as well not bother.

Hey, I know, just turtle entirely and build everything you can and then march in March 1864. Can't lose then.

Sorry to sound bitter, but starting to wonder if the Union has any advantages left.

Seriously. Oh yeah, you can build twice as many regiments - some of which are needed for guards and garrisons, even with Auto-garrison now. How about any overseas landings? Want to do anything way out in the Far West? How about a serious Blockade, more than 50 - 60%? That takes ships, lots of them, and a Blockade Squadron takes darn near a year to build. Oh, and you want a river naval force, too? Have to build all of that, all of it, really, no freebies like the CSA gets.

Geez, how can we counter the CSA Leadership advantage? I know, I'll build lotsa Support units! More Resources - and you can run out of those, I'm near the end of Med units.

So, now, what do we have? Project Build Up, that's what, including possible investment in Extra Industry so you don't have the Horrific Money Crunch in mid-game, or at least reduce it.

Note I have not Mobilized - at all, in this game. I'm not even recruiting, now, my Men are around 900, Turn after Turn.

So, here you are in the first 18 months, getting to Divisions, getting to Corps, getting to the EP, investing, building a real Blockade, 24 dozen ironclads on the river, shiny Support units - gee, how about riflemen? Artillery? Lotsa Cav needed, too.

Oh, don't forget all the Wagons you're going to need - and you'll need a LOT. I'm on my 30th or so. Amazing how needing Depots to try to wipe out hits in place, in situ, can chew thru those trundly lil' wheelspinners. 'Cuz you don't want to lose a good position just cuzza Gotta Go to the Depot. So you build 'em, right there, just to recover hits.

In the meantime, all the CSA player has to do, really, is just keep building megabrigades under Awesome Leaders who can MTSG Like Lightning on Defense. Add a doubled Hit Recovery rate - oh yeah, that's fair.

After a Big Battle, Wow, that was Close, Almost Won - oh yeah, get to spend the next three Turns just sitting there, trying to get Strength back. Do a few of these in a couple of campaigning seasons and guess what? The CSA has 156 NM, that's what.

We've 'balanced' the game so much that it's getting hard to see how the Union can win before January 1866. I mean, I'm not even close - I'm still trying to take Nashville???? In April 1864???

[havi]

Now Gs call down! it no roses in this side either! i think i made big mistakes in KY and u eated up like Clinton in Lewisky if i may say that.. but then i but some steel in the D of nashville and throw u back in there with help of good rolls because it wasnt far of u winning then if u should pushed on the attack i would back down but u gave me to time to breath and build up and move the troops its not the athenas blame that i saw your move! same in the litle rocl i was decided to defend to springfield it is there and when u kick me out there i fall back in litlle rock and i get a break to got better leaders in there change them on charge and they just raped u! as i said every move has the counter move! and by the way im in university in here to learning strategy thinking so it helps me a little bit i think!

[GraniteStater]

I don't usually gripe in public and try to be of good cheer, but...

well, I'll post the results of this last Turn on the game thread. Not shabby.

[havi]

u r a good sport and i respect u a lot! U have those rabbits in the hat of lot and im just been lucky.. I rase my hat for u my friend dont be so grim, life is good and sun is shining and how knows maybe i name my new son for name of lee nobyde knows

[GraniteStater]

You're a good man, my Most Esteemed Opponent.

[RebelYell]

And this, from the Replacements/Hits thread, just chimes right in.



Seriously. Oh yeah, you can build twice as many regiments - some of which are needed for guards and garrisons, even with Auto-garrison now. How about any overseas landings? Want to do anything way out in the Far West? How about a serious Blockade, more than 50 - 60%? That takes ships, lots of them, and a Blockade Squadron takes darn near a year to build. Oh, and you want a river naval force, too? Have to build all of that, all of it, really, no freebies like the CSA gets.

Geez, how can we counter the CSA Leadership advantage? I know, I'll build lotsa Support units! More Resources - and you can run out of those, I'm near the end of Med units.

So, now, what do we have? Project Build Up, that's what, including possible investment in Extra Industry so you don't have the Horrific Money Crunch in mid-game, or at least reduce it.

Note I have not Mobilized - at all, in this game. I'm not even recruiting, now, my Men are around 900, Turn after Turn.

So, here you are in the first 18 months, getting to Divisions, getting to Corps, getting to the EP, investing, building a real Blockade, 24 dozen ironclads on the river, shiny Support units - gee, how about riflemen? Artillery? Lotsa Cav needed, too.

Oh, don't forget all the Wagons you're going to need - and you'll need a LOT. I'm on my 30th or so. Amazing how needing Depots to try to wipe out hits in place, in situ, can chew thru those trundly lil' wheelspinners. 'Cuz you don't want to lose a good position just cuzza Gotta Go to the Depot. So you build 'em, right there, just to recover hits.

In the meantime, all the CSA player has to do, really, is just keep building megabrigades under Awesome Leaders who can MTSG Like Lightning on Defense. Add a doubled Hit Recovery rate - oh yeah, that's fair.

After a Big Battle, Wow, that was Close, Almost Won - oh yeah, get to spend the next three Turns just sitting there, trying to get Strength back. Do a few of these in a couple of campaigning seasons and guess what? The CSA has 156 NM, that's what.

We've 'balanced' the game so much that it's getting hard to see how the Union can win before January 1866. I mean, I'm not even close - I'm still trying to take Nashville???? In April 1864???

Never played Union but you are hitting right points with your strong navy suggestions.
Also the rivers are your fiend in supply and replacements, no need use those wagons for depots, flatboats can be used.
Use the wagons for building forts to protect your depots and river supply routes.
The great snake is truly great.

[GraniteStater]

Thanks for the reminder. A lot of my on the spot needs are not in Regions fed by a navigable river, though. I'll keep it in mind.

[Mickey3D]

30 wagons built ! I played Union only once in PBEM with CW2 but that seems really a lot to me and all of them are using most wanted money : may be are you over cautious with your supply or trying to go through long and difficult terrain ?

In my game I used landing operations to force the South to move some divisions out of its main defensive lines but I had to stay on the defensive on the Eastern theater (but still with enough force to be a threat if the line was not kept strongly).

Promoting Grant is, as in AACW, a key point in the Northern strategy. I was lucky enough to have it promoted to 3* by early 1862.

But I agree : it seems more difficult for the Union (compared to AACW) as the Confederate is able to field for a long time nearly as much troops as you and the MTSG seems pretty effective (I wonder if the algorithm has changed ?).

[RebelYell]

30 wagons built ! I played Union only once in PBEM with CW2 but that seems really a lot to me and all of them are using most wanted money : may be are you over cautious with your supply or trying to go through long and difficult terrain ?

In my game I used landing operations to force the South to move some divisions out of its main defensive lines but I had to stay on the defensive on the Eastern theater (but still with enough force to be a threat if the line was not kept strongly).

Promoting Grant is, as in AACW, a key point in the Northern strategy. I was lucky enough to have it promoted to 3* by early 1862.

But I agree : it seems more difficult for the Union (compared to AACW) as the Confederate is able to field for a long time nearly as much troops as you and the MTSG seems pretty effective (I wonder if the algorithm has changed ?).

If the CSA player does not move Jackson or Longstreet to the West, Union should be able to break the Mississippi valley defense before CSA has power to stop it, the longer he waits more difficult it comes

[GraniteStater]

The more I think about it, KY Secession is important. Regained it fairly quickly, but it did take time and the shield for building was gone.

[Ol' Choctaw]

GS, the major problem seems to be your luck.

It seems to be unbelievably bad. Approach the game knowing that you will be lucky. It has an effect.

Don’t obsess on KY.

Losing KY for a few turns may slow you down but it is no killer.

By the way the chances of KY joining the CSA is NOT 10%.

PhillT said it was only 5%. One time in 20 so you won’t have that trouble again for a while.

Now, here is the deal! You are way into this game so I don’t know how much help it will be, but you can try.

The Union has the advantage in troops. Rather than attacking CSA strong points attack where he is weak and hold him at his strong locations. You only need about 60 to 70% of his strength to do that.
You make the south defend everything so they can defend nothing.

You have the transport system to allow you to do that. You can concentrate forces easier and when he weakens on spot you can bounce to there and smash them.

Killing armies will get you NM. Don’t worry as much about grabbing land. That will come naturally.

Right now you are playing to the enemy’s strengths. Play on the weaknesses.

[pgr]

* Panning back to a bigger frame, I really started the Big Push in spring '63. After some significant bloodletting, it becomes clear that your resources are going to Replacements and very few Reinforcements are going to be built. This leads to my first bewailment - you have to avoid major losses if you want to put the Union's numbers on the field? Wait until you're assured success on the field? Doesn't seem right.

I think this is the biggest thing. If one gets too aggressive too early (in an assaulting kind of way), you can easily end up treading water on replacements. (Esp with the relative money crunch that can set in). It just makes it that much more important to pick your battles...

[GraniteStater]

GS, the major problem seems to be your luck.

It seems to be unbelievably bad. Approach the game knowing that you will be lucky. It has an effect.

Don’t obsess on KY.

Losing KY for a few turns may slow you down but it is no killer.

By the way the chances of KY joining the CSA is NOT 10%.

PhillT said it was only 5%. One time in 20 so you won’t have that trouble again for a while.

Now, here is the deal! You are way into this game so I don’t know how much help it will be, but you can try.

The Union has the advantage in troops. Rather than attacking CSA strong points attack where he is weak and hold him at his strong locations. You only need about 60 to 70% of his strength to do that.
You make the south defend everything so they can defend nothing.

You have the transport system to allow you to do that. You can concentrate forces easier and when he weakens on spot you can bounce to there and smash them.

Killing armies will get you NM. Don’t worry as much about grabbing land. That will come naturally.

Right now you are playing to the enemy’s strengths. Play on the weaknesses.

Don't worry, already witcha, homey.

There are basically six campaigns going:

* Richmond - Lee & the Gang bottled up , I hope. Some ancillary action and counterplay for havi in NoVa, and PGT is at F-burg, but we shall see how this goes.

* Sea Islands: Charleston (much preferred) or Savannah are the targets.

* Nashville/central TN: JJ has been dug in here for quite a while. Guarded enough. Keep tearing up his sole RR feeding it with light units, which he has repaired every time, but shall see again this round. This will depend on

* Memphis/Paducahland: I think I can capture Memphis this Turn. Examining things closely last night, looks very much like I wiped out a Div in that last fight. Some oppo in the neighborhood under AS Johnston, but nothing I can't handle, I think - plus ASJ is across The River. I'm sure havi anticipates that if Memphis falls, clean out Paducahland and return to isolate Nashville completely.

* Little Rock: coming soon to a theater near you. I have Ft Smith.

* Far West: I hold El Paso and have some other threats going, coming in from the Boxes to keep him busy.

[Gray Fox]

If you don't improve your NM a lot by 1864, then Lincoln won't get re-elected and it's Game Over.

You have major forces in SC, TN, TX and VA. Stop trying to do many things and do one thing to completion.
Each of these separate forces needs separate supply chains. That's where your 30 SU's are going. Also, attrition works on moving units. Move a lot of stacks all over the map and you get a lot of attrition. Focus offensive operations on one front.

The Union starts with all the industry and ocean going navy that I will ever need. Mobilize, draft, print money, raise taxes and beg-borrow-steal to build the biggest army that you can as quickly as you can right from the start.

Why is Grant trying to take Memphis and McDowell trying to take Richmond? Richmond is 50 times more important. Put Grant in command of the attack on Richmond. The Corps Commanders get a good strategy boost from Grant and should start MTTG. However, use synchronized movement to get there "first with the most". Put the best of your best into one force, do all the right things to win the battle and then fight it. Good luck!

[GraniteStater]

I think this is the biggest thing. If one gets too aggressive too early (in an assaulting kind of way), you can easily end up treading water on replacements. (Esp with the relative money crunch that can set in). It just makes it that much more important to pick your battles...

I think I was aggressive enough...it's a learning game. If I do end up losing, I won't take it hard. Look at it this way: I'd only be 0-1 in CW2 and have learned a lot. Good sized file for Lessons Learned here. I just don't want the Union to be reduced to UeberTurtling as the preferred strategy, no matter how effective it could be, partly because I don't think the designers wanted that and I don't want that. I'm fairly conservative with the Union now; I got schooled pretty good by Pat, who told me my Trait should be 'Reckless' after our first game in AACW.

KY's fate is very important, I think. I've said, 'recovered quickly' after Secession, but that still took quite a while from Aug61. You really have to watch your Supply lines there and really nail them down, Forrest is too quick, too strong, even early. Not just track ripping - ever present threats on Munfordville, BG, Lexington. I took H&D when I could, that's always a nice riposte, but was bottled myself there with Grant for a bit.

No KY Secession means the onus is on the CSA. Invade or not? In an AI CSA game I have going, that's exactly what I did, as soon as I was ready, to build a Fort at Paducah, specifically (and I have Louisville, too, but that really wasn't the primary). Athena's giving that a wide berth, so far. If the CSA doesn't invade, well, the Union has no incentive to, it's gonna open up eventually and then the Union is in good shape to descend towards BG and keep the other punch ready from H&D or southern IN, or both (plus Cairo).

The more & more I think about it, KY Seceding is important - the Union's timetable and planning has to shift and is slowed down more than a little. havi's still messing with tracks & stuff, but it's more an annoyance now than a fundamental threat.

The Union needs that manpower advantage in the field, because the Union needs to attack and outmaneuvering or defeating entrenched defensive lines of supporting Corps means you have to have the numbers, it boils down to that. You need them for a tactical win in a Region and you need them to deny the counterplay back towards your own rear.

[GraniteStater]

If you don't improve your NM a lot by 1864, then Lincoln won't get re-elected and it's Game Over.

You have major forces in SC, TN, TX and VA. Stop trying to do many things and do one thing to completion.
Each of these separate forces needs separate supply chains. That's where your 30 SU's are going. Also, attrition works on moving units. Move a lot of stacks all over the map and you get a lot of attrition. Focus offensive operations on one front.

The Union starts with all the industry and ocean going navy that I will ever need. Mobilize, draft, print money, raise taxes and beg-borrow-steal to build the biggest army that you can as quickly as you can right from the start.

Why is Grant trying to take Memphis and McDowell trying to take Richmond? Richmond is 50 times more important. Put Grant in command of the attack on Richmond. The Corps Commanders get a good strategy boost from Grant and should start MTTG. However, use synchronized movement to get there "first with the most". Put the best of your best into one force, do all the right things to win the battle and then fight it. Good luck!

Now he tells me

The game plan you sketch is not a bad one - but that's not what I did. That's all I can say. I was prepping for New Orleans or Charleston when I decided to take Norfolk instead. I should've moved faster from Petersburg, much earlier.

If I can get things going my way tout suite, I could have three Objectives fairly soon. And yes, I'm worried about the election (I don't know what the criteria are), but my NM is 100+ most of the time.

The brief occupation of Atlanta brought me ahead on NM, 131 - 130 for a Turn. There's room for hope, I think - a fairly quick turnaround in Objectives held could well deflate CSA NM sharply. I'm actually technically ahead on VP Gain/Turn, by a measly one, but hey, it's meaningful, actually. Get the Objectives in sight and even VPs could start narrowing quickly.

5 VP for Tucson is ridiculous, though. I've been successful Way Out West and am pretty sure havi regrets losing the Boxes and now El Paso.

[GraniteStater]

I am starting to think that the Union wants to Industrialize. After looking at Arsenals, Armories, Powder Houses and what they make, the fact that you'll have 3300 WS that you're not going to use every Turn is somewhat irrelevant. It's the money. Investing early and prudently might be key, so you'll have the funds you need mid-game. Not that the installations make a lot, they don't - but I think it might be a prudent course of action.

A Big Navy might be very good, too. In my game against RebelYell (now April 62), I've built Blockade Squadrons regularly and added Brigs and TPs - I now have Charleston and Wilmington blockaded, up close & personal. Each fleet is a BS with two Brig elements and a TP. The Charleston one got shot up but is OK; the Wilmington one snuck in without a shot fired. I have more of these coming. 12 elements are enough for any CSA port, I believe.

Keeping Loyalty up in Producing cities is something you want to do, I am coming to believe. Take the 3 VP hit for Habeas; you, as the Union, ain't gonna take a VP lead for a while, anyway.

Have a solid economic base - reduce the CSA's. Be patient. Play for the long term. You're not going to win in 1862, anyway.

As Nimitz said, when asked about his plans, in December 1941, when he took command as CINCPAC: "Simple. Addition for us; subtraction for them."

[pgr]

A Big Navy might be very good, too. In my game against RebelYell (now April 62), I've built Blockade Squadrons regularly and added Brigs and TPs - I now have Charleston and Wilmington blockaded, up close & personal. Each fleet is a BS with two Brig elements and a TP. The Charleston one got shot up but is OK; the Wilmington one snuck in without a shot fired. I have more of these coming. 12 elements are enough for any CSA port, I believe.

Hey Granite, I'd love for you to keep regular updates for the blockade game. I toy around with a brown water blockade, but I tend not to go after places like Charleston (I'm a bit too shy really about running the forts to get in the inner harbor). If you are having success at 1, getting into position, and 2, being able to resupply, without getting pounded by the forts all the time, I'd love to find out more.

[GraniteStater]

I suppose I can provide some Down & Dirty In Yo Face updates - have two ports now, gonna do more.

CLARIFICATION: that should be "four Brig elements" above.

Ya gotta start building these puppies right away, though. Keep adding them. They take a loooong time to build and you won't see the first until Feb 62. Brigs are a lot faster, of course.

BS (8 elements) +Brig (2 elements) + Brig + TP = 12 elements that can hang for a while (I hope).

As noted, the gunners at Wilmington were napping.

I'm doing it 'cuz I've never really done it. Want to see if, eventually, it hurts the front lines and makes the army's job easier. And I don't think many players have. In AACW, IIRC, you didn't need to - you could get a 75% Blockade thru the Boxes alone.

Just these two ports alone have brought the Blockade to 55%.

[soundoff]

Hey Granite, I'd love for you to keep regular updates for the blockade game. I toy around with a brown water blockade, but I tend not to go after places like Charleston (I'm a bit too shy really about running the forts to get in the inner harbor). If you are having success at 1, getting into position, and 2, being able to resupply, without getting pounded by the forts all the time, I'd love to find out more.

No need to be wary of any of the CSA forts. My usual ploy (and I always play Pbem) is to provide Hooker with a full division including a marine (they are so overpowered). I then move a decent sized fleet to one of the USA ports, load Hooker on board and simply sail away. Target the sea region then use the distant unload feature. The forts are not able to put up much of a fight and Hooker quickly gets advanced to 2 star. It is almost impossible for the CSA to prevent the USA from landing at most locations. They simply cannot defend everywhere.


Below is a screenshot from my current Pbem game. Date is Early March 62. Hopefully its self explanatory. If I'd have taken Fort Fisher at the entrance to Wilmington it would have announced where I was heading so I just moved the fleet off of the Carolina Coast and ordered a distant unload.





And this is the size of the fleet I'm using.....all start up units apart from a couple of purchased transports.




Please don't assume there is anything hard about achieving such situations or that it must be good play on my part. As I say its impossible for the CSA to be everywhere and the seaboard really is the Achilles heel of the Confederacy.

[Gray Fox]

Both sides have more than enough GS/ammo to last. So basically Charleston produces $22 and Wilmington/Fayetteville $12, no conscripts and 2 WS. Thus, your brownwater blockade cuts this in half for a total loss of $17 and 1 WS to the CSA.

Your flotilla of two brig units, one blockade unit and one transport unit cost you (without inflation) $265/16 conscripts/214 WS. Also, replacement chips for the ships if the fort guns actually fire or the CSA player puts several stacks of guns there would cost $10/2/6 for the Transport, $22/1/22 for the light ships and $41/1/56 for the Steam Frigate in the blockade unit.

[havi]

Yes mr.gray but everything isnt measured in money or how much it takes your resources! we r humans and we have feelings and the way u play isnt fun in my opinion it is just booring as hell! stack all up and then just ram on the other side if u want to play that way it is ok it is your way but i like more the way soundoff and GS r dooing it is more realistic way to do things! yes it is a game and u want to win and your way is now a good way to win but i like to play and have the feeling of really beeing a Mr.Jefferson or Abe and they didnt have Lupa(finnish word cant think it in english) to jsut forget the west and the people in there they had a coutrys to run and people to protect in east and west and they tryed to do that and win the war so i think that is the way game shut b played! But hey as i said we r all humans and have our own oppinions of thinks even good or bad.

[Gray Fox]

I spent half my youth as a soldier. The Civil War was an incredible tragedy that dragged on and on because most of the people fighting it were inept. I've always posted that you can have fun and play any way that you want. However, it's still a discussion forum and I'm just saying that you don't have to play with a football bat.

[GraniteStater]

Both sides have more than enough GS/ammo to last. So basically Charleston produces $22 and Wilmington/Fayetteville $12, no conscripts and 2 WS. Thus, your brownwater blockade cuts this in half for a total loss of $17 and 1 WS to the CSA.

Your flotilla of two brig units, one blockade unit and one transport unit cost you (without inflation) $265/16 conscripts/214 WS. Also, replacement chips for the ships if the fort guns actually fire or the CSA player puts several stacks of guns there would cost $10/2/6 for the Transport, $22/1/22 for the light ships and $41/1/56 for the Steam Frigate in the blockade unit.

Alekhine was once asked what his favorite piece was. "The one that gives mate!"

You don't get VPs for Money in the Bank. Are you saying this is not a cost-effective strategy? Well, soundoff has made a sound presentation I would say (ha!) and not too many Union players seem to actually strap 'em on afloat. We talk about the Blockade - we think about the Blockade - but how many players post about their wonderful results by actually doing it, Up Close & Personal? Not too many, AFAICS.

Plus, in CW2, you have to, if you want a Real Blockade, not just 40%.

Knocking the pegs out from underneath the CSA from the start just might be an excellent strategy and quite possibly a quicker one, too. I decided to stop crying about Replacement disparities and freakin' do something about it.

And soundoff is going even further, by just taking their little red wagons away from them. I've just gotten tired of being wary of masonry and am gonna put CSA gunnery to the test, myself. Taking the piles of brick away from them is a good thing, too.

[GraniteStater]

Both sides have more than enough GS/ammo to last. So basically Charleston produces $22 and Wilmington/Fayetteville $12, no conscripts and 2 WS. Thus, your brownwater blockade cuts this in half for a total loss of $17 and 1 WS to the CSA.

Your flotilla of two brig units, one blockade unit and one transport unit cost you (without inflation) $265/16 conscripts/214 WS. Also, replacement chips for the ships if the fort guns actually fire or the CSA player puts several stacks of guns there would cost $10/2/6 for the Transport, $22/1/22 for the light ships and $41/1/56 for the Steam Frigate in the blockade unit.

And one more thing: if you wait until you can afford the builds with ease, you'll never build 'em. These are 240, 300 Day builds. The first BS slipped down the ways in Feb 62 - ordered in April 61. Individual Frigates can take eight game months.

You are deliberately sacrificing a big army in the first two years to have a Big Navy that can put the Big Crunch on the Rebs and choke 'em in their bank accounts. This is choosing opportunity costs and Risk Management (Risk, in project management, is not always something deleterious - it also embraces positive opportunities - do we forgo these or not? Buy or build? Can the whole thing and go into real estate, instead?).

This ain't Railroad Tycoon, it's about winning a war, and if I have to have 22% Inflation by game's end, and have the Rothschilds own the national debt, with 500,00 graves to dig, then so be it. "There is no substitute for victory."

Victory, above all.

Hang the expense.

[ArmChairGeneral]

Athena never does it, but I would be afraid of the Union retaking Ft Sumter with an amphib division. Charleston is the CSA's #3 producer. Holding the fort(s) seems like a cheaper and safer method to blockade it than using a fleet, and it puts a real crimp on CSA cashflow (almost a 10% reduction in $/turn during the early going).

[GraniteStater]

OTOH, now you have land units tied down in forts. And you haven't occupied the joint, still just blockading it. Do you have to bring your own cannon, or do they come with the bricks & mortar? How about the garrison?

And you have to use ships for the operation. You can go either way, but I think you have to weigh the cost/benefit against your operational objectives - i. e., what are you trying to accomplish?

The absolutely best way to deny the resources is to take the port.

[soundoff]

OTOH, now you have land units tied down in forts. And you haven't occupied the joint, still just blockading it. Do you have to bring your own cannon, or do they come with the bricks & mortar? How about the garrison?

And you have to use ships for the operation. You can go either way, but I think you have to weigh the cost/benefit against your operational objectives - i. e., what are you trying to accomplish?

The absolutely best way to deny the resources is to take the port.

Once you start taking out those forts you will generally find that two things happen. Firstly you capture the batteries....very nice. Then to add icing to the cake you spawn a 3 regiment garrison unit. That's what happened at Fort Clark in my screenie above. As soon as the CSA tried to take it back up popped the garrison unit. Has not cost me a single penny (in your currency a dime) to control and garrison those two forts I've taken. As I keep saying the seaboard is the CSA's Achilles heel and when you play an extremely competent CSA player you had better use it.

Of course take the ports and you deprive the CSA not just of half the resources but of all of them. And there is Charleston and Savannah and Mobile and.....need I go on. Far too many for the CSA to defend well....and keep the wolf from the door in the East and the Mississippi. You just have to play cute as the Union....and keep your fingers and everything else crossed that you have not met the mother of all CSA players who will screw up any strategy you have.

In my current Pbem game already I nearly lost Grant to a brilliant move by my opponent.....and that was in Jan 62....now that really would have hurt.

[Jim-NC]

I would have enjoyed killing Grant. I got really close, but alas, he was to fast with the retreat. (I'm the one playing Soundoff right now).