Beginner Advice needed!

[midnight]

Being new to the the Civil war period I decided to purchase AACW and Civiil War 2. After deciding to start with Civil War 2 I began by reading the manual, AARs, completing the tutorials and smaller scenarios numerous times. Now I *think* I am ready to delve into my first campaign against the AI. The problem is that I am not really sure where to start! I tried the April 1861 start and met with some difficulties.

Broadly I understand that as the Union my general strategy should be roughly:

1. Pressure the East (Manassas, Richmond, Norfolk etc.)
2. Split the confederacy in 2 by working up and down the Mississippi (Fort Henry, Fort Donaldsen, Island 10, New Orleans etc.)
3. Not sure what to do in West, hold?
4. Blockade the southern ports.

Now my problems are that I am a bit overwhelmed at the start. In terms of what exactly should my opening couple of moves be? When should I start thinking of going on the offensive? What units should I build, treasury/government choices, what do to do in the west and center?

So far I have the following:

1. consolidate eastern defences hold Washington at all costs
2. reinforce & reform armies.
3. Take harpers ferry / Manassas (when? asap?)
4. Look at taking fort henry, fort donaldsen, island 10 (when? Before 1862?). Aggressive naval strategy
5. Reinforce Fort Monroe, Pittsburgh? Pickens?
6. Send ships to blockade (how many?)
7. Use militia to entrench

Apologies if these questions have been asked before, but I couldn't find much on the internet or forums and any tips are greatly appreciated!

(On a side note, if anyone has any good book recommendations that would be much appreciated, I'm currently working my way through Foote's trilogy and loving it!).

[Jim-NC]

Welcome to the forums . Everyone plays the game a little different, so what works for me for example might not work for you. In this thread, Mickey3D has some good links (post 6).

As the union, you want to not lose the war the 1st year. In the east, defend for a while, then consider attacking (FYI - to attack you want approximately twice as much power as the enemy). Depending on how much you spend in the naval game/western theater, it might take you a while to get that big of an army. I would aim for sometime in mid-late 1862 for offensive operations. You will need to know that there will be events that will cost you NM in the east (the "on to Richmond" events - if you don't take Manassas by a certain point, you get a 10NM penalty for example). In the west, you can try to beat the real union timeline (capture New Orleans, Nashville, Island # 10, Forts Henry and Donaldson, and Memphis) by approximately mid 1862. The far west (beyond the Mississippi) is very open, and there is a lot of room for movement/maneuver. Against the AI don't worry about that area too much.

Don't forget sea invasions of the CSA coastline. You have a navy, use it.

[ArmChairGeneral]

Welcome to the forums, nice to have you on board! Sounds like you are on the right track strategically based on your post and Jim-NC's advice (+1 on that link BTW).

I can't speak to all of the specifics on exact early moves for the Union, because I am a CSA player. But from that perspective, a couple of comments on your second list:

1. Defending DC is your single most important task. The CSA is able to gather enough power to make a rush at DC in the first year or so of the war if they commit to it. As of 1.03 Athena does not do this, but if you make mistakes around Washington, she is definitely able to take advantage.

3. Both Manassas and Harper's Ferry are important positions, but be careful not to overextend yourself early, Athena is quite capable of punishing eager-beaverism (as either side) at that stage of the game. The CSA stacks are strong in the early going and dangerously close to your capital should you make a mis-step. Manassas in particular is a tough nut to crack. You could probably force your way in there, but it would be to the exclusion of a lot of other things. Harper's Ferry is an easier target early I would think. Athena is quirky about shuffling troops around, look for opportunities to draw defenders away with threats to something else she thinks is important, you may be able to get something on the cheap.

4. The River Forts are useful tactical positions, you want them for sure, and the South can't defend them all at the same time. Keep in mind that they are important tactically and operationally, but not strategically. Owning those forts helps you operate more freely and fight winning battles near them (and winning battles is the biggest source of NM) but strategically, the major cities are the goals because of the recurring VP, loyalty and infrastructure effects (and the one-time NM gain). The Tennessee river forts are important to the extent that they help/hinder you from taking the big cities near them, but no need to take them until you are ready.

5. Taking Ft. Monroe would be huge for the CSA tactically and strategically, but it's REALLY hard. If you had a division with artillery there they would need 3-5 divisions to take it. Pre-division, 200 actual power (don't count the coastal artillery) in the fort would require a 700-900 PWR stack. Either way, it is a huge commitment for the CSA, while it is trivial for the Union to steadily trickle in just enough to hold them off. (CSA Athena has historically been known for trying too hard to retake Ft. Monroe.) Send a couple of brigades there early and then build up to roughly a division's worth over time and you will hold it the whole game.

I wouldn't worry too much about Pittsburgh or Ft. Pickens. Retaking Pickens is a waste of time and resources for the CSA, IMO: same problems as with Monroe but without the payoff, plus everything has to be built from scratch. If CSA Athena tries, it is to your benefit. Pittsburgh is under no immediate threat; the CSA force in WV is their worst stack in the game and comes on the map in an untenable supply position. Unless the CSA takes Morgantown or Wheeling, Pittsburgh is safe.

[Gray Fox]

1. Crush the east.
2. So far, no benefit accrues for splitting the Confederacy in two. Taking the Mississippi does not aid the Union economically or militarily.
3. In the Far West, take Tucson (5 NM) and then El Paso. The CSA does not have a large force to defend here and no supplies. Many of the Regional Decision Cards in Jan 1862 can aid you in this (build depots, muster militias, partisans, land sailors and strip two 12-lbers from the fleet in California).
4. You start with more than enough ships to enforce a 35% blockade and that is all I recommend.

In 1861, you'll get about twenty free brigades with a light infantry element and two volunteer elements. Entrench two of these each in St. Louis MO, Cairo IL, Evansville IN, Cincinnatti, Ashland and Marriette OH, Wheeling WV and Pittsburgh PA. Rail in a 3-1-1 General with a Supply Unit to each of these cities. Now build a Sharpshooter, a brigade with 4 infantry and a 6-lber and 5 state militia to fill out a future garrison Division for these Generals. Have a 9th similar Division formed in Indiana across the river from Louisville KY to garrison that city as soon as Kentucky enters the war. Use cheap river transport to build depots in Evansville, Louisville and Marriette. This gives you a line of strongpoints along defendable rivers to secure the geographic center of the Union. If you put together 30 2-gunboat units and 15 river transports, then you can blockade the river zones from St. Louis to just outside of Cincinnatti to any CSA land movement. A few ironclads next to Cairo should keep Athena's river forces at bay. You have enough starting cavalry to form a Division or two to chase down any partisans or deep raiders in the midwest to MO area.

You are allowed three army stacks in '61. One should take and hold Harper's Ferry ASAP. In fact the first units you get should head to HF and take it immediately. Another army should entrench permanently to defend D.C. The third, under McDowell is your reserve. It should also be positioned in D.C. but can react to any developments. If Athena charges off to Pittsburgh or Fort Monroe, then take Manassas. Build as many Divisions as you can over the winter (I can get a total force of 30-36 Divisions done by spring '62). Don't build ocean-going ships, don't do amphibious invasions, don't attack coastal forts and don't lose your capital.

In 1862, take Manassas (if you haven't already), Culpepper, Charlotteville, Amhurst and Buckingham. This puts your army on the doorstep to Richmond and you don't have to fight a river-crossing battle to get there. Take Richmond and continue down the east-coast if the CSA does not surrender outright. Good luck!

[RebelYell]

1. Crush the east.
2. So far, no benefit accrues for splitting the Confederacy in two. Taking the Mississippi does not aid the Union economically or militarily.
3. In the Far West, take Tucson (5 NM) and then El Paso. The CSA does not have a large force to defend here and no supplies. Many of the Regional Decision Cards in Jan 1862 can aid you in this (build depots, muster militias, partisans, land sailors and strip two 12-lbers from the fleet in California).
4. You start with more than enough ships to enforce a 35% blockade and that is all I recommend.

In 1861, you'll get about twenty free brigades with a light infantry element and two volunteer elements. Entrench two of these each in St. Louis MO, Cairo IL, Evansville IN, Cincinnatti, Ashland and Marriette OH, Wheeling WV and Pittsburgh PA. Rail in a 3-1-1 General with a Supply Unit to each of these cities. Now build a Sharpshooter, a brigade with 4 infantry and a 6-lber and 5 state militia to fill out a future garrison Division for these Generals. Have a 9th similar Division formed in Indiana across the river from Louisville KY to garrison that city as soon as Kentucky enters the war. Use cheap river transport to build depots in Evansville, Louisville and Marriette. This gives you a line of strongpoints along defendable rivers to secure the geographic center of the Union. If you put together 30 2-gunboat units and 15 river transports, then you can blockade the river zones from St. Louis to just outside of Cincinnatti to any CSA land movement. A few ironclads next to Cairo should keep Athena's river forces at bay. You have enough starting cavalry to form a Division or two to chase down any partisans or deep raiders in the midwest to MO area.

You are allowed three army stacks in '61. One should take and hold Harper's Ferry ASAP. In fact the first units you get should head to HF and take it immediately. Another army should entrench permanently to defend D.C. The third, under McDowell is your reserve. It should also be positioned in D.C. but can react to any developments. If Athena charges off to Pittsburgh or Fort Monroe, then take Manassas. Build as many Divisions as you can over the winter (I can get a total force of 30-36 Divisions done by spring '62). Don't build ocean-going ships, don't do amphibious invasions, don't attack coastal forts and don't lose your capital.

In 1862, take Manassas (if you haven't already), Culpepper, Charlotteville, Amhurst and Buckingham. This puts your army on the doorstep to Richmond and you don't have to fight a river-crossing battle to get there. Take Richmond and continue down the east-coast if the CSA does not surrender outright. Good luck!

This is against the AI, no proof this will win a PBEM game.

[Gray Fox]

"I am ready to delve into my first campaign against the AI."-midnight

In May I will be ready to delve into my first campaign against anyone.

[tripax]

There is lots of good advice here. Mine is that national moral (NM) is more important than $, WS, Loyalty, Conscripts, etc. NM helps cities add to those other parts of the economy. My rule is to never give up NM if I can help it. That means not loosing stacks and minimizing playing options that hurt moral. Also armies march on their stomach and saving lives (with support troops and minimizing attrition through supply lacks) is often smarter than replacing troops.

(On a side note, if anyone has any good book recommendations that would be much appreciated, I'm currently working my way through Foote's trilogy and loving it!).

I'm reading Grant's memoirs (since it is on the public domain and easy to download onto my phone for reading on commutes) and enjoying it very much. I've read Foote (and am rereading) and Hurst's biography of Forrest. I'm thinking about reading other memoirs next, possibly Early's (I don't know much about the "Lost Cause", so I think his work will be interesting.

[midnight]

Thanks everyone for the kind words and very detailed advice. I think I am in a much better position and now just need to take the plunge and jump into a game! Just so I can gain a better understanding, why doesn't splitting confederacy in two offer military or economic benefits? I was under the (maybe mistaken) impression that it will aid the blockade and act as a springboard for operations to capture the VP cities?

I'm reading Grant's memoirs (since it is on the public domain and easy to download onto my phone for reading on commutes) and enjoying it very much. I've read Foote (and am rereading) and Hurst's biography of Forrest. I'm thinking about reading other memoirs next, possibly Early's (I don't know much about the "Lost Cause", so I think his work will be interesting.

Thanks for the recommendations Tripax. So far I've got Grant's memoirs, Sherman's memoirs, Battle Cry of Freedom and Bruce Cattons "The American Heritage Picture History of the Civil War" on the list. Although it may be some time until I've finished Foote!

Thanks again

[Mickey3D]

national moral (NM) is more important than $, WS, Loyalty, Conscripts, etc.

NM is undoubtedly very important but sometimes you must accept to loose some of them to increase your force. E.g. it may be worth loosing 2 NM to play the "raise taxes" decision if it gives you the money to raise more troops (obviously, I will first use the two other decisions before this one) : if you don't have the troops to fight battles, you will loose NM sooner or later by loosing objectives.

[Philo32b]

The link below is to a strategy guide wiki for AGEOD's first Civil War game, and it is still very relevant. These concepts and tips from Runyan99 are gold!

http://www.ageod.net/aacwwiki/AACW_strategy_guide

[tripax]

NM is undoubtedly very important but sometimes you must accept to loose some of them to increase your force. E.g. it may be worth loosing 2 NM to play the "raise taxes" decision if it gives you the money to raise more troops (obviously, I will first use the two other decisions before this one) : if you don't have the troops to fight battles, you will loose NM sooner or later by loosing objectives.

This advice is better, I was thinking of the martial law card and winning battles/avoiding seiges.

[Gray Fox]

Just so I can gain a better understanding, why doesn't splitting confederacy in two offer military or economic benefits? I was under the (maybe mistaken) impression that it will aid the blockade and act as a springboard for operations to capture the VP cities?

An ancient axiom of war is not to fight on two fronts at the same time. That is why I hold in the center with a line of strongpoints along major rivers and attack in the east. If you attack down the Mississippi this would require a lot of men and supplies that you should be using to take Richmond. The so-called Western Campaign is a bad idea militarily.

In RL, everything produced for export in the Midwest was shipped down the Mississippi to New Orleans and everthing imported traveled this route in reverse. The game should reflect this as a Confederate blockade of all the harbor cities in the midwest until the Mississippi is cleared. Since it does not, no economic reason exists to clear Ole Miss.

[RebelYell]

An ancient axiom of war is not to fight on two fronts at the same time. That is why I hold in the center with a line of strongpoints along major rivers and attack in the east. If you attack down the Mississippi this would require a lot of men and supplies that you should be using to take Richmond. The so-called Western Campaign is a bad idea militarily.

In RL, everything produced for export in the Midwest was shipped down the Mississippi to New Orleans and everthing imported traveled this route in reverse. The game should reflect this as a Confederate blockade of all the harbor cities in the midwest until the Mississippi is cleared. Since it does not, no economic reason exists to clear Ole Miss.

This is where I agree with you.

[Gray Fox]

To clarify my statement about amphibious invasions, Churchill recognized that the allies in the First World War had the advantage of sea power. He argued that they should use it by assaulting...Gallipoli. Despite incredible heroism and sacrifice, this was a disaster. You might threaten to land somewhere to keep the CSA distracted, but an amphibious assault against any competent CSA player is not a good idea. It only takes 5 heavy artillery replacements to get all the coastal artillery to max strength. I always split the two batteries in each fort into two groups to further double their effect. Launch a surprise invasion of Charleston and face six batteries of "volley and thunder". Same again on the way out. I only know what I would do to an amphibious assault.

[RebelYell]

To clarify my statement about amphibious invasions, Churchill recognized that the allies in the First World War had the advantage of sea power. He argued that they should use it by assaulting...Gallipoli. Despite incredible heroism and sacrifice, this was a disaster. You might threaten to land somewhere to keep the CSA distracted, but an amphibious assault against any competent CSA player is not a good idea. It only takes 5 heavy artillery replacements to get all the coastal artillery to max strength. I always split the two batteries in each fort into two groups to further double their effect. Launch a surprise invasion of Charleston and face six batteries of "volley and thunder". Same again on the way out. I only know what I would do to an amphibious assault.

You can land somewhere else than right in the middle of that all but I am not going to start giving tips.

[Jim-NC]

As the union, you can generally land a force on a fort without taking any damage from bombardment from the fort(s). As long as you don't move 2 regions beside the fort you are OK (it's called the DAR - double adjacency rule). So if you want to take Charleston for example, move your ships in the region next to Ft. Sumter, and land troops. Then take the troops, and capture each fort in turn. It telegraphs your move, but against Athena, that is OK (she doesn't always react well to these sorts of things). In my last PBEM, Soundoff landed troops in Wilmington, bypassing the forts. He then landed an additional force to take Ft. Fisher (and was moving on to take the other fort with that force). This would have allowed him to hold Wilmington forever, as it would get sea supply. To kick him out of there, I had to place 4 divisions in the area (I already had 1 guarding NC/SC). This was 4 divisions I didn't have guarding Richmond. He almost captured Richmond the next turn.

[RebelYell]

As the union, you can generally land a force on a fort without taking any damage from bombardment from the fort(s). As long as you don't move 2 regions beside the fort you are OK (it's called the DAR - double adjacency rule). So if you want to take Charleston for example, move your ships in the region next to Ft. Sumter, and land troops. Then take the troops, and capture each fort in turn. It telegraphs your move, but against Athena, that is OK (she doesn't always react well to these sorts of things). In my last PBEM, Soundoff landed troops in Wilmington, bypassing the forts. He then landed an additional force to take Ft. Fisher (and was moving on to take the other fort with that force). This would have allowed him to hold Wilmington forever, as it would get sea supply. To kick him out of there, I had to place 4 divisions in the area (I already had 1 guarding NC/SC). This was 4 divisions I didn't have guarding Richmond. He almost captured Richmond the next turn.

What year? You can reinforce the forts, more and more every year. He will have to come with such force that is also away from elsewhere for him.

[minipol]

That's the reason I do attack the coastline as the union. It forces the CSA to send troops they need elsewhere. Positioning troops to dislodge the entrenched enemy

[RebelYell]

That's the reason I do attack the coastline as the union. It forces the CSA to send troops they need elsewhere. Positioning troops to dislodge the entrenched enemy

That is the reason why CSA should reinforce those coastal areas as the Union will have to come with force, that is away from Virginia and Tennessee for the Union also.
If Union does not come even better, the free ports will pay the investment back.

CSA can make the fort busting very slow.

[Jim-NC]

What year? You can reinforce the forts, more and more every year. He will have to come with such force that is also away from elsewhere for him.

Soundoff came at me in Early 1862. In late 1861, he took 1 of the NC Outer Banks forts (Ft. Clark I think), then moved to another, captured a coastal town, then attacked Wilmington with several divisions. This was before May.

[midnight]

A quick update, it is 1861, Early Nov. and I have mainly been consolidating and defending. I have taken Manassas, Harpers Ferry, Winchester and am making my way down the Shenandoah river (without a fight, total 4.9K losses so far to 5k for confederacy). The only silly thing I have done so far is to leave Morgantown WV undefended and lost it. I have built up my defences and depots from Saint Louis to Pittsburgh along with ironclads and gunboats and moved int Luoisville and Lexington KY. Beauregard has moved back to hold the line at Charlottesville. I've also been using Gray Fox's tip of using Habeas corpus and forts etc to boost loyalty and therefore production in New York, Philadelphia, Boston, Northern California etc.

A couple of questions so far, how do you increase blockade percentage? I have added a load more ships but it is not moving at 15%. Also what is a "development point" and what is a good strategy for telegraph poles, build them in developed places like New York, Boston etc or underdeveloped places?. I searched the manual and couldn't find much

The only real headache I seem to have is reorganising my armies and divisions! So far I only have a single army stack with McDowell and obviously want to create new armies and reduce that 35% penalty ASAP. Who are "good" division commanders, I tried making a division with a couple of generals (grant) and then watched their stats plummet (undo undo!). Am I missing something / doing something wrong? I am also thinking that I want to get my better generals involved in as many fights as possible to increase stats, seniority, promotions etc. so thanks Gray Fox!

The only other issues I've been having was a number of crashes one of which was fixed by removing compression of save games but I am still seeing crashes (it has just crashed as I posted this!) and frequently having to restore the backed up save file which isn't a massive deal, but slightly annoying none the less.

Thanks again for all your help guys!

[Philo32b]

The penalty a commander gets from forming a division or corps only lasts one turn. (It reflects the temporary organizational distractions of the new formation.) You definitely want to get your best commanders to be the divisional or corps generals.

[midnight]

Thanks so much Philo32b! Now I can finally start organizing my rabble. Also the link to the strategy guide has been incredibly useful, thanks!

[Jim-NC]

Development points are a measure of how developed each region is. When you hover over a region, it will say something like cleared(20), or maybe civilized (75). The number is the development. That is what you increase by playing the telegraph card. From others on the forum, the higher the development level, the more supply produced by the region (can't remember who posted that at this time).

To increase blockade percentage, you need to split your blockade fleet between the 2 boxes (Gulf and Atlantic). You can't put all your ships into 1 box. Also, capturing/blockading certain ports increases the blockade percentage (for example, Charleston, Wilmington, New Orleans, etc). There is a list somewhere in the forums.

Not sure about the crashes. Hope this helps.

[midnight]

Thanks Jim, good to know! I just managed to win my first game 1862, Late Aug by taking Richmond and by isolating Lee and Beaurgard and destroying them individually. 74K losses (and 91K prisoners) for the CSA compared to 63k losses for me and ending with 219NM.

Now after taking Richmond the first time (+50NM) I made a bit of a boo boo and moved all my units in pursuit of Beauregard who I assumed was retreating to Norfolk and moved all my units out of Richmond in pursuit only to find him retaking Richmond. Resulting in his final stand and subsequent destruction (and another 50NM). I assume this came from taking Richmond a second time rather than destroying Beauregard? Is this intended behaviour?

I must admit it was easier than I thought it was going to be, even after all my school boy errors and the extra 50NM. Maybe I need to crank up the difficulty or try my hand as the CSA.

Overall I thoroughly enjoyed my first game and my only regret was that I never really got to really use Grant, Sherman for various reasons. Thanks again everyone for the advice!

In case anyone else is in a similar situation, manually backing up the save games before ending the turn prevents you losing all your orders and hard work!

[khbynum]

An ancient axiom of war is not to fight on two fronts at the same time. That is why I hold in the center with a line of strongpoints along major rivers and attack in the east. If you attack down the Mississippi this would require a lot of men and supplies that you should be using to take Richmond. The so-called Western Campaign is a bad idea militarily.

In RL, everything produced for export in the Midwest was shipped down the Mississippi to New Orleans and everthing imported traveled this route in reverse. The game should reflect this as a Confederate blockade of all the harbor cities in the midwest until the Mississippi is cleared. Since it does not, no economic reason exists to clear Ole Miss.

By the Civil War, railroads and canals (Eire, B&O) had given the Midwest an alternative to shipping down and up the Mississippi. That was one of the economic causes propelling the South to secede, since they were losing their counter to Northern tariffs. I don't recall any major disruption of trade (in the strategic sense) caused by closing the Mississippi, since the CSA never managed to block the rivers above Cairo. In the game, opening it provides a variety of strategic options to the Union, including cutting off reinforcements form the Trans-Mississippi if you use your navy right. Is it modeled correctly? Not yet, but the game is still young.

As to your general premise about concentration of effort, another axiom might be to open a second front if it will cost your opponent more than yourself, or if he simply cannot afford it. Sometimes it works (Normandy) and sometimes it doesn't (Gallipoli).

[Jim-NC]

It might be a bug or might not (the +50NM for capturing Richmond twice). You should have only gained the 50 NM once, or lost 50 NM for losing the capital. If you did not lose 50 NM for losing Richmond, then it probably should be a bug.

Try the AI on different settings. The game plays differently every time.

[Captain_Orso]

IIRC losing your capital used to be 40NM (+ for capturer, - for loser). I guess it has changed to 50NM in CW2.

Once Richmond is in Union hands I believe it is for the Union just an Objective City, but worth 10NM. If the Union subsequently loses Richmond, it will cost the Union 10NM ( not a bad trade .... for the Union ).

If Richmond is captured, the Confederacy does not immediately declare another capital. In fact, IIRC, the player has no say in where the new capital will be and could only use the "Move Capital" option to choose a specific capital at the additional monetary and NM costs, which I don't think any SC player would do after havin gjust lost 40NM. Besides, I don't even know if there is another city from which to choose besides Atlanta. It's not something I've really looked into, but I've heard this claimed.

At any rate, while Richmond is still the official capital and in Union hands, the CS player can of course recapture it , thus gaining .... 10NM , because a captured capital is always worth only 10NM, or at least it used to be in AACW.

So if the Union captures the capital in Richmond (+40NM Union, -40 Confederacy)
then loses it while it is still officially the capital (-10NM Union / +10 Confederacy)
and then captures it again yet again (+40NM Union again / -40 Confederacy), it will be a very sorry state of affairs for the South and I doubt there are many games that would survive that set of events, or players that would be willing to continue .

This is, as far as I can tell, WAD, although I feel that it misses the point. Currently this would inhibit the CS player from retaking the capital, even if temporarily. Although it could be argued how sensible it might be to retake Richmond if it is questionable whether you can hold it. But that should be the deciding factor and not the artificial NM gain and loss.

[RebelYell]

Capital is the one place you want to hang on, that is for sure.

Richmond produces the right stuff for that, columbiads and mortars, build as much as possible and anything else you can spare, they will shoot brigade wide holes to an assaulting enemy.

Do we still get bonus in battle for defending the capital?

GS must be reading this but I think he has scouted as much.

[midnight]

Thanks guys, I'm pretty sure I only lost 5NM when I lost Richmond. I went from 118NM -> 168NM (taking Richmond)-> 164NM (losing Richmond) -> 218NM (retaking Richmond and maybe something else?)