Naval dispositions and employment questions

[midnight]

After recently finishing my first game in CW2 (and ageod games in general) as the union against athena (sergeant difficulty) I realised that I still know very little about the naval aspect of the game. In my first game I almost completely neglected the naval aspect and completely neglected my blue water navy, only building a handful of ironclads and gun boats to prevent river crossings from Saint Louis to Pittsburgh and feel like I have missed out on an important aspect of the game (and history).

Am I right in thinking that the primary purpose for the blue water navy is for the naval blockade and secondary the support of naval invasions i.e. Norfolk, New Orleans, Charleston etc. and the brown water navy is to control (and deny) the rivers, prevent crossings and allow for naval invasions down the Mississippi? Is there anything I am missing?

I know this maybe a very naive question without a "right" answer, but I would love to hear peoples opinions and rationales behind creating an effective navy in terms of role, force composition, amount of resources dedicated to the navy, the importance of a navy etc. There is much I want to learn about the game, specifically the considerations and decision making process undertaken by the better players out there.

Thanks

[Gray Fox]

In the so-called Anaconda plan, Scott wanted to coax the south back into the Union. He planned the blockade to make use of the Union's naval superiority to stop imports/exports and thus ruin the economy of the South. His plan was ridiculed as armed diplomacy and was actually discarded until 1863, although some of its parts were pursued. Eventually, a "total war" startegy was used in which the Union attacked everywhere to inflict as much damage as possible to break the will of the southerners.

If you put 3 full blockade squadrons (BS) with one of the partial BS from your starting navy in both boxes along with several transports for supplies, then you get a 35% blockade. IIRC, you can only get to 40% with just a blue water blockade, but you would have to build several more BS to achieve this. They take a while to build and are expensive. For brown water blockades, only the number of ships counts, not blockade points, so you could just spam cheap 2-ship brig units and blockade major ports like NO and Charleston. Again, this costs resources that are not used to create Divisions.

If your navy gets 100% blockade for the whole game this does not add VP's or NM or capture regions. That's what your Divisions do. I am not an advocate of a stronger navy for this reason.

[GraniteStater]

After recently finishing my first game in CW2 (and ageod games in general) as the union against athena (sergeant difficulty) I realised that I still know very little about the naval aspect of the game. In my first game I almost completely neglected the naval aspect and completely neglected my blue water navy, only building a handful of ironclads and gun boats to prevent river crossings from Saint Louis to Pittsburgh and feel like I have missed out on an important aspect of the game (and history).

Am I right in thinking that the primary purpose for the blue water navy is for the naval blockade and secondary the support of naval invasions i.e. Norfolk, New Orleans, Charleston etc. and the brown water navy is to control (and deny) the rivers, prevent crossings and allow for naval invasions down the Mississippi? Is there anything I am missing?

I know this maybe a very naive question without a "right" answer, but I would love to hear peoples opinions and rationales behind creating an effective navy in terms of role, force composition, amount of resources dedicated to the navy, the importance of a navy etc. There is much I want to learn about the game, specifically the considerations and decision making process undertaken by the better players out there.

Thanks

You're on the right track. Next time out, go for the Big Navy, both river & sea, if you wish. Now, I have done so in a current PbeM (and Esteemed Opponent has developed some nasty counters), but I have played a lot of AACW and had a pretty good feel for what to sink into the navy and how much to leave for the army - and major Industrialization, too.

However, one learns by doing. Conceptually, I don't think you're overlooking much. Some people might want to emphasize coastal landings more, or even seizing CSA coastal forts (to blockade and other things), but you are on the right track.

The USN can be a very effective tool.

[GraniteStater]

In the so-called Anaconda plan, Scott wanted to coax the south back into the Union. He planned the blockade to make use of the Union's naval superiority to stop imports/exports and thus ruin the economy of the South. His plan was ridiculed as armed diplomacy and was actually discarded until 1863, although some of its parts were pursued. Eventually, a "total war" startegy was used in which the Union attacked everywhere to inflict as much damage as possible to break the will of the southerners.

If you put 3 full blockade squadrons (BS) with one of the partial BS from your starting navy in both boxes along with several transports for supplies, then you get a 35% blockade. IIRC, you can only get to 40% with just a blue water blockade, but you would have to build several more BS to achieve this. They take a while to build and are expensive. For brown water blockades, only the number of ships counts, not blockade points, so you could just spam cheap 2-ship brig units and blockade major ports like NO and Charleston. Again, this costs resources that are not used to create Divisions.

If your navy gets 100% blockade for the whole game this does not add VP's or NM or capture regions. That's what your Divisions do. I am not an advocate of a stronger navy for this reason.

Choking off up to a theoretical 45% of CSA production (not Men) at all CSA ports? A Blue Water Block only, just in the boxes, is 20% cut off. 35, 40% of CSA PortProd is something that's not shabby, IMHO. You present the CSA player with choices he might not want to make, like building more Brigs than he would want to, or investing in Industry more. The CSA isn't really in a position to win an outright arms race.

Now, along with the USN, I have, in this PbeM, Industrialized to the max - and I like the numbers I'm seeing. RebelYell was at 73% of my Combat Power a year or so ago, at his peak - he's now down to 61%. I keep adding to my army, comfortably, my big bills have all been paid. We've spilled some real blood lately and I can afford the Replacements and add brigades, too.

Once you're in the black, you'll never go back.

[Jim-NC]

In regards to the question, most people fall into 1 of 2 camps. Either don't purchase much more than you start with (as exemplified by Gray Fox), or build a big navy (as exemplified by Granitestater). Both option have pluses and minuses. As has been stated earlier, as the blockade % goes up, the amount produced by CSA harbors goes down. But it costs money and WS to get to that point.

Personally, when playing the union, I will want to increase the blockade %, and spread out the defenses in northern Virginia. Thus I build some more ships to allow naval landings of certain CSA forts/cities. If you capture/blockade certain southern ports, the blockade % increases. I do not build much more navy than I start with, as I feel that I need troops, and lots of them.

[GraniteStater]

Ah, I was hoping you'd chime in.

Yes, my experiment so far has been just that. I had never deliberately gone for the Big Blockade and navy before, had never pursued an economic attrition strategy against the CSA. I wanted to see what could happen, particularly in a PbeM.

Jim-NC has reported favorable results with taking Forts, particularly ones that blockade targeted harbors. I have liked what I've seen, though RebelYell has devised a counter with his ironclads. These are difficult to counter, in turn. Building "sea" monitors in Philly, for example - well, they can't go out to sea, they must hug the coast and must run hostile Forts to do so. In short, might as well just take the Forts, in that case. The Union gets four Armored frigates only - could use these judiciously, but the quantity factor is low. My eight element Blockade Squadrons have been shot up by RebelYell's 'clads, I am distressed to report. OTOH, the CSA probably can't afford to build a lot of them, so one can play peek-a-boo with the the brown blockade, I guess. IOW, I haven't evolved a true solution to his counter. I'm sure there might be a couple of things I could try.

The river navy is extremely useful in the Western theater - and has to be built from scratch, really.

If one is embarking on these naval strategies, bear in mind that one must start to build them early - the build times on some units are quite lengthy. For what I did, I had to make a Real Commitment, early on.

[Gray Fox]

Check out Athena's CSA economy when your blockade is up, then remove all ships from the boxes and take another peak with zero blockade. You'll find that the CSA regained 1 conscript company and 1 WS. Only the correct percentage of money was removed by the blockade. Even at 100% blockade, the CSA will lose about $100 per turn. Of course, per turn income is only one source of cash. With taxes, bonds and the printing press the CSA can still make over two thousand dollars per year. A total blockade will only take about a third of their cash away, leaving them enough money to create 15 Divisions per year. If you buy ships or factories in 1861 and the CSA buys brigades, then when Divisions become available in Oct. '61 some aggressive, merciless Confederate SOB with a heart of stone (like me) will storm D.C. with a several thousand power stack of rebels and spend Christmas at home.

Also, an exploit exists wherein a Union fleet of wooden ships can sail right up to a fort and the defending guns will not fire one shot. So your landing force can overwhelm the defenders. However, if your Divisions are taking forts and assaulting New Orleans in 1861 and are not defending you-know-what, then don't say I didn't warn you.

[Captain_Orso]

But of course , use every bit of resource you have in the first year to build as many troops and artillery in the East (don't even think about the West, where nothing has any meaning), march on Washington in November once division commands have gained optimal control over their formations and of course you will win by Christmas



.... and then the big, bad, wolf said, "I'll huff, and I'll puff, and I'll blow your house down". And the second little piggy ....

Whaaaaat? I thought it was story time.


Back to reality

Premise I: don't put all of your eggs in one basket.

You get 6 full Blockade Fleets from events, plus 2 partial Blockade Fleets. I like to have 5 in each Blockade Box, which should give you about 50% Blockade value; so I alway buy 2 more as early as possible.

By the time you have enough money to spare for more Blockade Fleets than 5 in each, it make more sense to put that money into invading coastal towns; (the longer you have a Blockade Fleet in the Boxes, the better your ROI (Return On Investment).

I always buy every single Oceanic Transport the game offers and put nearly all of them in the Shipping Box. The bring in money and WSU every turn and will soon have paid for themselves. The rest is profit.

There are only a couple of forts along the Atlantic Coast that can bombard passing gunboats. You'll want to take these so that you can pass gunboats up and down the coast freely, plus a couple near Charleston and Wilmington so that you have a quick place to rest your coastal fleets that guard these harbor-exits. These are not necessarily for brownwater blockades, but they can catch brigs trying to run in and out and other mischief the South might undertake.

In the West, if there were no guns on the rivers, you would only need small gunboat squadrons to block as much movement (mostly across rivers) as possible and allow for you to land forces behind the enemy where marching against an army might take much longer. Waterways are also great avenues for supplies to follow that cannot be destroyed, which is not to say that the enemy cannot disrupt supply distribution on the rivers, but he has to have forces present at all times to do this.

Since there are forts and big guns on the rivers, you need ironclads to slough of this artillery fire to allow you to pass troops down the rivers. EG the ony viable way to take Island Number Ten is to sail to below it and then land on it with troops. It causes the least cohesion loss of any way to enter the region (other than sailing into a friendly harbor) and keep them supplied while they siege the fort.

Ironclads are the best way to stop such invasion forces, so congruently, IC's are also the best way to defend your invasion fleet from other IC's.

How many gunboat squadrons you should have to control rivers?... I've never had too many, so it depends on how many you want to afford and it has a lot to do with luck and experience. If so rebs are sneaking across unprotected river sections, you may have too few gunboats to guard where you need to. A smart guy once said, A. Divide, B. Conquer.

[Gray Fox]

http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?34770-Do-you-believe-me-now

And the CSA lived happily ever after.

[havi]

Touché mr.fox

[Jim-NC]

To expand a bit on Captain_Orso, to block river crossing, it's the number of elements of combat ships. Any transports just allow you to keep your ships supplied longer (they don't help block crossings). If you wish to, as either side, you can close the river crossings just north of Nashville for example. In my current tournament game, as the union, I was able to completely block that whole river section from Ft. Donaldson to east of Nashville. This helped stop a CSA attack aimed at KY dead in it's tracks. They couldn't cross the river, and the terrain north of Knoxville is not condusive to fast movements, not to supply distribution.

[Captain_Orso]

Yes, you need 4 naval combat elements to block crossing a river region; transports will just help them stay on patrol for as long as possible.

--

I haven't look thoroughly into the changes to the effects of blockading on coastal economies as apparently you have Grey Fox. In AACW production was more abstract. Cities of certain sized produced certain amounts of Ammo, WSU and GS. Industrialization would randomly add to the amount of a specific resource being produced. But production was greatly influenced by the owning faction's NM, and IIRC the differences in VP levels.

If a coastal city was blockaded, either per brown-water blockade and/or blue-water blockade, that city produced far less less of those three resources; 1/2% production loss for each 1% of blockade. I don't think conscription was ever affected by blockading, but I may be wrong.

In CW2 most Ammo and WSU is produced through structures. Many structures produce only 1 WSU per turn or 1 Ammo although a few may produce far more. AFAIK they are not influenced by blockade nor NM or VP differences. They just produce their set amounts.

If this is the clear situation, then blockading has experience some hobbling in it's effectiveness in reducing the South's ability to build units. On the other hand, cash is still a factor in that, and although you have stated that you have more than enough cash to build all the units that you need to crush any defenses your opponent might put up in Washington if you only work at creating an army for that sole purpose. BUT ignoring the ability to reduce that amount of cash would be foolhardy at the best and allow the South to increase her odds correspondingly.

The Union is hampered by the facts of its situation from the beginning; leadership --or the lack there of-- being the greatest, followed by troops with lower quality and being forced to act offensively at set and known points in time, where the Confederate player can strategically work systematically to simply prevent the Union player obtaining these objectives and thus at key moments thwart the Union player's efforts to maintain position until he can overcome his own disadvantages.

From the Union point of view there is little chance within the first 2 war years of extracting from its yet slumbering industry the might to enact a sudden thrust of irresistible glory. As Grey Fox has stated, "An army of lions led by a rabbit, will always be overcome by an army of rabbits led by a lion." In the American Civil War the South not only had Lions in their leadership, but also in their ranks. The Union soldiers learned quickly and time and again proved that they could also play the part of the lion; but without good leadership, their courage would eventually wain. Nobody would gladly lay down their lives for a battle being lost.

I will also not that in the thread in which you demonstrate your victory over the Union defense of Washington, Grey Fox, that Butler is in Offensive Posture. How that came to be, I have no idea, but in OP the "defending" force enjoys no advantage of any entrenchments it has nor those which the terrain might afford, and the clear terrain around Washington is prime defensive territory for a 2-1 artillery advantage. I'm seeing is a quirk --I hope-- in which the AI-Union commander threw away his only chance at resisting an offensive maneuver by an albeit smaller, but non-the-less far better lead force.

[RebelYell]

Choking off up to a theoretical 45% of CSA production (not Men) at all CSA ports? A Blue Water Block only, just in the boxes, is 20% cut off. 35, 40% of CSA PortProd is something that's not shabby, IMHO. You present the CSA player with choices he might not want to make, like building more Brigs than he would want to, or investing in Industry more. The CSA isn't really in a position to win an outright arms race.

Now, along with the USN, I have, in this PbeM, Industrialized to the max - and I like the numbers I'm seeing. RebelYell was at 73% of my Combat Power a year or so ago, at his peak - he's now down to 61%. I keep adding to my army, comfortably, my big bills have all been paid. We've spilled some real blood lately and I can afford the Replacements and add brigades, too.

Once you're in the black, you'll never go back.

I am really excited to start a game with the new financial options, it should open some new possibilities for CSA also.

[GraniteStater]

After our game is over, I wouldn't mind seeing a report from you on how badly, or not, the Big Blockade hobbled your Resources.

* Some clarifications:

> I thought a Box Only Blockade could reach 40%, max.

> Manpower is not affected by the Blockade.

> AFAIK, $$ & WS are affected by the Blockade - in CSA ports, not inland cities.

One observation:

A total blockade will only take about a third of their cash away

Geez, just one-third? Shouldn't bother then, huh?

Look, RebelYell pursued a ' build-up' strategy, too, AFAIK. The first three years were relatively peaceful and we still, in mid-64 have totalled only about 200K casualties between us. We've done a lot of maneuvering. It's been more positional than head-butting.

Perhaps an all out Charge by the CSA would clean my clock while I'm building a navy and Industrializing. Maybe not. This is why we play it.

I say baseball is about having a great lineup and three run homers. Fewer things to happen - walk, single, Gorman Thomas swats one out. Pitch just good enough to keep 'em honest and crush 'em at the plate. Someone says baseball is about pitching, defense, and doing the little things. More involved to manufacture runs, but the other guy is lucky to get six hits against your starter most days, so you win a lot of 3-2 games.

Well, we saw this in 1982. The running Cardinals won, defeating Harvey's Wallbangers. Small sample, World Series, but the Cards won.

In 1988, there was No Freakin' Way the Dodgers would beat the mighty (and I mean mighty) Oakland A's - but one stroke by an aging slugger to win Game One deflated the A's to a degree I have very seldom seen. LA, 4 games to 2. You play that series ten times, Oakland wins nine times. The record shows the Dodgers won the World Series that year.

The Boston Red Sox were down, three games to none, against the Yanks in 2004 in the ALCS. They had lost the last one 19-8, NY.

They won the next four, which had never happened before - and we Red Sox fans will always have Paris, to quote Bogey.

You pick your team, you manage it and see what happens. The proof is in the pudding.

[GraniteStater]

One more observation, responding to Da Bear: afaics, coastal Forts are size 1 harbors - so one cannot 'get the red out' with Replacements therein. I believe you need a size 3 harbor or larger to replace elements in fleets.

Supplies and Cohesion recovery are OK in size 1 harbors, though, I believe. Perhaps not as fast as larger harbors.

There are only a couple of forts along the Atlantic Coast that can bombard passing gunboats.

Which ones? tell me, tell me, I wanna know...

[FelixZ]

http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?34770-Do-you-believe-me-now

And the CSA lived happily ever after.

There needs to be a qualification to accompany Gray Fox's conclusion.

While the Fox brings very interesting subjects for discussion, readers should know that 1) so far he only engages Athena; and 2) many of his ideas are quite exotic and extreme and have not been tested in PBEM play.

If readers are looking for current guidance for PBEM play - look to Ace, Captain Orso, Jim-NC and Old Choctaw (the best of our active posters on the CW2 forum).

I do appreciate the Fox's new thinking and do consider how to modify his ideas for my PBEM games.

[anjou]

I never thought about adding NM and VP rewards for achieving +90% blockade.

[Captain_Orso]

One more observation, responding to Da Bear: afaics, coastal Forts are size 1 harbors - so one cannot 'get the red out' with Replacements therein.

Well, actually you can; but it will take a long, long time.

I believe you need a size 3 harbor or larger to replace elements in fleets.

If you mean taking an element as a replacement, then I'd say.... well, dang it, putting a replacement element into a squadron takes so darn long as it is, if I were to do that I'd send the squadron to New York or Boston to refit.

Supplies and Cohesion recovery are OK in size 1 harbors, though, I believe. Perhaps not as fast as larger harbors.

That's what I meant, just recovering cohesion and taking on supplies.

Which ones? tell me, tell me, I wanna know...

Nope, too lazy at the moment to break out the map, but the southern most fort on the North Caroline Outer Banks, was one and maybe Fort Fisher in front of Wilmington was the other, but I'm not sure.

Pickens will also bombard passers-by of the wrong convictions. Saint Philips too when crossing from the Northern to the Souther Delta or visa-versa. I found that to be very contrived as Saint Philips and Jackson are quasi land-locked and have no coastline one might sail along; only Ol' Man Mississippi rolling out to the sea.

The absolute worse place to sail the coast is Galveston. The Galveston region is surrounded by water on 2 1/2 sides going clockwise from Galveston Bay up to an harbor exit-point at the exact opposite end on the Brazos River. If you try to sail past Galveston and then up the Brazos you can be bombarded 3 or 4 times in one turn from Galveston. I only did that once before I recognized my folly

[Captain_Orso]

There needs to be a qualification to accompany Gray Fox's conclusion.

While the Fox brings very interesting subjects for discussion, readers should know that 1) so far he only engages Athena; and 2) many of his ideas are quite exotic and extreme and have not been tested in PBEM play.

If readers are looking for current guidance for PBEM play - look to Ace, Captain Orso, Jim-NC and Old Choctaw (the best of our active posters on the CW2 forum).

I do appreciate the Fox's new thinking and do consider how to modify his ideas for my PBEM games.

There's a lot of difference between playing against Athena or playing against a meat-bag ... I mean honored opponent There's nothing like the excitement of playing against somebody who can not only challenge you in ways that Athena cannot, but surprise you with things that you have not thought of yourself.

Grey Fox is one of those rare individuals who bring new wind into discussions of old concepts. A little intellectual parrying is good for the mind and if we're not careful, we might even learn something The old axiom says "Trail and Error". That means that if you are honored with a chance to fall flat on your nose, you also have a chance to pick your self up and learn something; and learning is good

[GraniteStater]

The absolute worse place to sail the coast is Galveston. The Galveston region is surrounded by water on 2 1/2 sides going clockwise from Galveston Bay up to an harbor exit-point at the exact opposite end on the Brazos River. If you try to sail past Galveston and then up the Brazos you can be bombarded 3 or 4 times in one turn from Galveston. I only did that once before I recognized my folly

Hm, that's interesting, I didn't suffer much at all...

my standard Blockade Fleet for Up Close & Personal is 1 BlkSqdn & 4 Brigs, usually in two Brig Units, plus one TP. From checking, it seems the TPs enable really long on-station times, so I haven't had to move out of the designated Harbor Exit for quite a few Turns.

learning is good

Lurning is goode. Ever sinz I took the Evlyn Woodhead Sped Redding Cours, my reading comprension has improvved one-hunnerd procent.

[midnight]

Thanks for the advice and useful insights. As suggested by GraniteStater I think I'll experiment and place more emphasis on the blockade and naval invasions in my next game and I am counting on the increased difficulty and detection settings to punish me for any mistakes I make. I think my first game was good in terms of learning the basic game mechanics so my next couple if games I can concentrate more on the advanced mechanics and overall war strategy.

A couple of questions on the river blockade strategy was to have 4 gunboats in each river section to prevent river crossings but it only seems to take a few turns before the cohesion drops right down. Now I am right in thinking that because river transports slows down cohesion loss I should add transport ships to my gunboat fleets.? However does low cohesion have an impact on preventing river crossings? If it doesn't have an impact, am I wiser to ignore adding transports if the gunboats are unlikely to be engaged by other ships?

I still have only have a very limited idea of what the CSA and Union is capable of achieving, but that will come in time and as long as I continue to learn and enjoy myself each game then I can count myself a happy man!

[Jim-NC]

Your ships are on offensive posture (orange). That kills your cohesion. You don't need to be in offensive posture to block the river. Defensive will work just fine, and your cohesion doesn't drop! Ships can stay a really long time.


In the below picture, you can see my 4 groups of ships "blockading" the river north of Nashville. They are on defensive posture, and have been guarding this stretch of river for several months (approximately 4).
[ATTACH]27684[/ATTACH]


Note: You don't have to have 4 elements to blockade, the more ships the higher the chance to stop enemy movements. Even 3 ships will usually stop an attacker trying to cross.

[Captain_Orso]

Hm, that's interesting, I didn't suffer much at all...

I suppose it would depend on what is bombarding. The point is that your fleet gets hit 3-4 times in one move.

my standard Blockade Fleet for Up Close & Personal is 1 BlkSqdn & 4 Brigs, usually in two Brig Units, plus one TP. From checking, it seems the TPs enable really long on-station times, so I haven't had to move out of the designated Harbor Exit for quite a few Turns.

I like to leave the blockading fleet in place and just cycle the transport when its GS is running very low. You need a few extra transports, but it keep the blockade up at all times. I only send the blockading fleet back to harbor when their cohesion gets low --usually from storms, but also if the CS gets aggressive and initiates a battle or two.

Lurning is goode. Ever sinz I took the Evlyn Woodhead Sped Redding Cours, my reading comprension has improvved one-hunnerd procent.

Eeu meen wun-hunnert prozak?

[Captain_Orso]

Your ships are on offensive posture (orange). That kills your cohesion. You don't need to be in offensive posture to block the river. Defensive will work just fine, and your cohesion doesn't drop! Ships can stay a really long time.

Yes, this, (+). Your cohesion will drop, but pretty slowly. But if you have transports, it will be very slowly. The only real noticeable drops will be from combat or weather.

But don't forget that while your gunboats are in DP (Defensive Posture) all enemy fleets can simply sail by unchallenged. At the southern end of your string of blocking gunboats it's good to have a fleet of ironclads protecting their flank.

[Captain_Orso]

Thanks for the advice and useful insights. As suggested by GraniteStater I think I'll experiment and place more emphasis on the blockade and naval invasions in my next game and I am counting on the increased difficulty and detection settings to punish me for any mistakes I make. I think my first game was good in terms of learning the basic game mechanics so my next couple if games I can concentrate more on the advanced mechanics and overall war strategy.

A couple of questions on the river blockade strategy was to have 4 gunboats in each river section to prevent river crossings but it only seems to take a few turns before the cohesion drops right down. Now I am right in thinking that because river transports slows down cohesion loss I should add transport ships to my gunboat fleets.? However does low cohesion have an impact on preventing river crossings? If it doesn't have an impact, am I wiser to ignore adding transports if the gunboats are unlikely to be engaged by other ships?

I still have only have a very limited idea of what the CSA and Union is capable of achieving, but that will come in time and as long as I continue to learn and enjoy myself each game then I can count myself a happy man!

One thing I found while I was struggling to learn this game --and it was a long arduous struggle-- if something happens during a turn execution, especially something that Athena has done, don't be shy of breaking that turn out and looking at what Athena's plans were before the execution. Look at the situation from her point-of-view. This is about the only way to understand what is really happening. You can see what forces you might not have seen and maybe discover why you couldn't see them and learn to understand what you might expect.

You don't have to go over the entire map looking at every stack and their dispositions. Just check the area directly involved in the situation you are investigating. After a while you will have learned a lot and will seldom feel the need to have a peek under Athena's skirt

[midnight]

Thanks for the tips Jim and Captain_Orso, they will come in very handy! I didn't even think about checking posture, I guess I assumed the default was defensive (school boy error). I did exactly that with the ironclads but in my last game Athena didn't challenge me on the rivers at all. I'm assuming it was because of the easy (default) difficulty.

[Jim-NC]

Your welcome. Athena can be hit or miss on the naval aspects. Sometimes she ignores them completely, and other times she will do something. She tends to not challenge you as much as a human would in naval terms.

[Gray Fox]

FYI, Mickey3D and I are testing out my Union strategy in a PbeM game right now. I have started an AAR which I hope is worth reading.

[midnight]

Thanks for the update Gray Fox, I will be sure to check it out. In my game vs Athena it's march 1862 and I've still yet to launch an amphibious invasion! all available reinforcements are being sent to my armies surrounding Richmond and to Grant in Tennessee!

[Gray Fox]

Sounds great, best of luck and above all else, enjoy yourself!