Newbie Questions

[FightingBuckeye]

Hey all,

I played some CW years ago, all against Athena. Recently, I purchased CW2 and have played 2 games (also against Athena). I've read through the manual and have some decent background in strategy games; Axis and Allies, Hearts of Iron, Europa Universalis, etc. I've also been lurking on here for the past week or so. I've been reading through other people's questions, some AARs, strategy discussions on proper division builds. You guys are great btw! I've really enjoyed reading your guys' thoughts and insights, I know you guys have really helped my gameplay.

So I think I'm starting to nail down some of the basics and I hope to be able to at least make someone pause a couple times to think before proceeding to beat me down in a PBEM game in the near future. That being said, I still have a whole host of questions that I'm hoping someone will be kind enough to answer for me.

1a. The draft RGD card: Does the size of the city affect the number of produced conscripts? Whenever I've played them, I've chosen a region with the highest loyalty as far away from any (possible) front and most important of all one that has no/little industry. I figured I didn't want the lower loyalty to affect any production I might have in a given region. But someone in an AAR chose Richmond as the target of this card. Given it's importance in production I found this odd. So is it a case of weighing a greater return of conscripts vs lost production?

1b. Related to the above, but with the requisition and plunder RGD instead. I use similar conditions for requisition. For plunder I choose a region with the no/little production, outside my supply path, and ones with the lowest loyalty (if they don't like me anyway . . .). As the Union, some of the Virginia Tidewater regions are great for this.

2. This may be a tad early as I doubt people have playtested this much if any yet. But with 1.05, does the 25% counterbattery chance negate some or all the benefits of having all infantry and all artillery divisions? Yes, there's still the higher number of combat troops in those infantry divisions. But with counterbattery, are those arty now under greater exposure to enemy arty? Or would they be under the same exposure to counterbattery regardless of whether they were in a division with infantry present vs an all arty division?

3. How do you take NO without losing a good chunk of your fleet? I played a game as the Union and gathered a small 3 division army in a fleet with 2 armored frigates + a bunch of brigs, frigates, steam frigates, and enough transports. My fleet was under the command of I want to say it was Farragut, whoever it is who has the fort runner ability. I placed the fleet in P/P and evage combat for the final run through the forts and had the units distant unload directly onto NO. Once the orders were run, my fleet got absolutely ravaged. I didn't bother making a note of exactly what all was present shipwise before the forts demolished me. But I do know I lose quite a few ships and many others were severely damaged. I see now that I should've tried just running the one fort, can't remember the name, vs trying to go through both the other forts. Other than that, what did I do wrong? Or was I just the victim of poor luck that sometimes strikes in war? Against Athena, I don't think it would make much difference if I didn't run the forts at all and just unloaded next to NO in order to save my fleet. But against a human player I don't think I'd care to give them a turn's warning of what was coming. I also don't care to have my fleet shot up, so how do I play this different? Smaller fleet with a smaller initial landing force? Did I wait too long and give Athena time to really entrench her arty and give that hit increase? I want to say it was early '63 before I gathered the units as I wanted a force large enough to mimediately start spreading out once I made the initial landing.

4. I've read that busting forts is a common Union strat in order to increase blockade and also give good commanders some experience/promotions. I really didn't focus on this too much in my previous games. But I think I probably should in future games. What's a good force composition fleet and army wise for these expeditions? And who are some good candidate commanders to lead these assaults?

5. Say I land a small division and take a fort only for the enemy to immediately besiege me with a much larger force. If I had enough transport capacity for everything, including captured guns, could I load everything onto the ships and sail away despite the siege? Assume both situations with and without enemy blockade/ships to muddle things up.

6. MTSG: Common hypothetical, I'm facing a line of entrenched enemy army/corps. I want to attack territory x, the only problem is it's flanked by territories y & z who have corps of the same army as my objective terr and will likely MTSG. If I were to send a corps level attack against each of terrs y & z with the feint/probe (green) posture while also sending a force large enough to hit terr x with the sustained attack posture (orange). Would my spoiling attacks on the flanking territories delay and/or possibly stop any attempt to MTSG in support of my real attack?

7. Last one, for now at least! Could someone explain their common raiding tactics in some detail and also maybe how to stop raiding? IE, force composition, targets, timing, etc for both raiding and raid stomping. Or maybe you have a game file I could look at. This and logistics are probably the biggest obstacles I will have to overcome once I go up against human players. I've figured out what (kind of works) against Athena. But she's pretty suicidal and it's common for me to trap and kill corp/division level forces at the end, or completely out of, of her supply line. I can't really expect this against a human and so I'm not sure what the proper response to deep raids should be. Also, somewhat related, I had turned up Athena's detection value among other things to make her more challenging. I've read conflicting things on how to stop some of her suicidal behavior and one thing someone had mentioned was lowering her detection bonus and she's less likely to send stuff against Pittsburg, Great Lakes area, etc because she won't see they don't have much/any garrison to speak of and will instead concentrate on areas she can see. Anyone have luck with this option?

Sorry for the questions and the long post!

[Mickey3D]

Hello, welcome on the forum.

1a) No, the city size changes nothing.

1b) Same as 1a. Use Plunder against regions not under your control (i.e. send a cavalry party on an ennemy controled town and play the RGD).

2) Don't know. Gray Fox should be able to tell you more on this.

3) The more ships you have the more the hits are distributed among them. Put Farragut at the head of your fleet, he will lower hits received.

4) Hooker or Grant with 2 divisions.

5) Without ennemy ships, you can enter the fort with your fleet and exit it the next turn. Your ennemy should not be entrenched enough so he won't be able to fire at passing ships.
With ennemy ships, you have the risk to be intercepted.

6) No, Spoiling attacks on y and z will not prevent the MTSG. But you can weaken the forces in these regions. But maybe it is best to use your two corps to help your main attack on x.
If your attacks on y and z happen before the one on x and you win, the ennemy force will have to retreat and it might end in a position where MTSG is no more possible.

7) Huge subject. You can raid with partisans (they consume very few supply and have a very good evasion value), lone cavalry/ranger/indian unit or cavalry division. To intercept them : cavalry, cavalry, cavalry, ....

[Gray Fox]

I have never noticed any counter-battery fire. As I understand it, your artillery will receive C-B fire no matter if the batteries are in a mixed Division, loose in a stack or in an all artillery Division.

If your Divisions have line or elite infantry and theirs have militia, you're going to have an advantage. Similarly, if your stack has only 10, 12 and 20 pounders taking up the frontage every round led by one good Division commander and theirs has mostly 6 pounders taking up the frontage led by several 3-1-1 Generals in mixed Divisions, then you get an advantage. The same advantage would be there if you do normal fire or C-B fire.

[Rod Smart]

3- take the fort next too New Orleans rather than running multiple forts. Or as Mickey said, use more ships than you need. Not blockading for two turns is worth getting New Orleans.
4- whoever you need promoted. The board suggests Grant and Lyons, since those are the guys that need promoted in late '61. I use an elite division. Plus one or two random militia or conscript elements, that I leave with the garrison after I conquer the fort, to beef up the defense.
5- you can also use the riverine movement option, if you're only retreating to a nearby region. Watch for interception.
6- no. Feints don't work.
7a- raiding: depends on the goal. If you just want to cut random rail lines, use small forces. If you want to live off the land, make sure you have infantry or late war cavalry, so you can capture towns with depots. If you want to distract their forces from more important things, use larger forces. I once used a three division corps on a raid, moving north through PA and NJ, to distract forces from my goal of capturing Washington.
7b- stopping raids: build a cavalry corps, put him in command of someone with the fast mover trait, and keep it behind the lines to run down these raiders.
7 additional question- turn down Athena's detection value. If she sees that you are not garrisoning Ohio or Western PA, she will force march through the West Virginia mountains to capture these undefended territories. If you turn it down, she'll concentrate on the things in front of her. Which leads to more army on army fighting, and close quarter maneuvering, rather than divisions chasing each other across Indiana.

[Rod Smart]

1a- he may have chosen Richmond because of the other cards available. If you drop loyalty in Richmond from 100 to 90, you can use the entrenchment card the next turn to get it back to 100. If you drop loyalty from 100 to 90 in Houston, its staying at 90 the rest of the game.
Also, leaders and units police values increase loyalty. I have no idea how that works, but I've seen discussion elsewhere on the board about police values. So that helps, because theres a lot more leaders and units in Richmond than in some backwater Texas town.

[FightingBuckeye]

Thank you all for your responses!

I guess any feints I do in CW2 will have to be at the theater level and not a tactical one. Oh well, flanking manouvers and/or straight head on attacks will have to do.

As far as those RGD cards go, that's about what I figured. I still don't get the decision of going for Richmond instead of another region with the draft card. It seems like it'd be easier not having to worry about getting the loyalty back up and using the draft card in a region with little/no industry, but to each their own. These types of strategy games would be pretty boring playing against another human player if we all made the same types of decisions. That diversity and flexibilty is what makes playing against human opponents more enjoyable.

As far as NO goes, bringing in the blockade fleet is something I hadn't thought of. It does make sense though, thanks for the suggestion! Say I take at least 1 of the 2 forts at the mouth of the Mississippi and keep the guns there to blockade the river. And at the same time, either place some artillery to blockade the shallow branch or put a fleet there to blockade that route. Having cut off all paths to the see, would my blockade at the mouth of the Mississippi impact all the production up the river similar to Ft Monroe and Richmond?

For the fort busting route up and down the coast, it seems like that strategy would me more conducive to a longer term strategy and not a quick death blow. Not that that's a bad thing, especially in light of the early Union deficit in good leaders. I've never really gone that route against Athena, but I doubt a human player will make the same mistakes that let me win early with Union. So maybe a longer term approach to the rebs isn't such a bad thing.

[FightingBuckeye]

Also Grayfox and Mickey3D, I really enjoyed reading through both of your AARs of your recent game!

[John S. Mosby]

Welcome to the forum!

[FightingBuckeye]

Welcome to the forum!

Thanks!

[Gray Fox]

Also Grayfox and Mickey3D, I really enjoyed reading through both of your AARs of your recent game!

This was my hope with the AAR. I learned a lot from Mickey3D's mentoring.

[Rod Smart]

- with the requisition card, you can play that in any town on the map. The draft card has to be played in a town that's size 3 or above. So the free money card should be played in some backwoods area that produces nothing. But there are only so many size 3 towns in the south, and with the number of draft cards you have, you're forced to play them in a city that produces something. I would prefer not to play it in Richmond either, but if I have to chose between Richmond and Mobile/Charleston/New Orleans/Memphis, I'm choosing Richmond.

- I hate taking the forts at the mouth of the Mississippi, because the region between those forts and New Orleans is a swamp with no roads, with means a 2 turn death march from the forts into town. As to other places where theres a fort and a city (Mobile, Galveston, etc), there doesn't seem to be a consensus on which one to take first.

- there are two forts on the outer banks of North Carolina that aren't reachable from the mainland. If you take those, the south can't take them back. If you take other forts, the south can simply march there and take them back (and possibly destroy your division if they show up with an army and you can't retreat). So when talking about cheap victories to promote leaders, we're talking about Hatteras. Fort busting the entire coast of the CSA requires a lot more commitment.

[Bullman]

I guess any feints I do in CW2 will have to be at the theater level and not a tactical one. Oh well, flanking manouvers and/or straight head on attacks will have to do.

I am kind of surprised by this. I thought I may have even read that attacking as described by the OP is a way you can attempt to counter defenders MTSG when attacking.

In the manual it says: Feint/Probe Attack: A Stack attempts to withdraw from the battle beginning with the second combat round unless it appears as if victory is at hand. The chances of succeeding in withdrawing from battle are greatly increased. Losses for both sides are significantly reduced. Isn't that what you want from a tactical feint attack?

In theory, I can see that any battle (feint or otherwise) does take up a certain amount of time. Yes, a feint posture may result in a very short battle, but still, depending on when the main attack occurs in the adjacent region, even a Feint/Probe posture attack could sap time from a corp unit that would have otherwise spent MTSG of an adjacent battle. I don't understand why categorically people are saying "no, feints don't work". Not even in some cases?

Perhaps we might get a better understanding of how and when to use the Feint/Probe attack posture if someone could explain an ideal situation in which to use it, because the only person this "feint" attack is fooling it seems is the attacker :/

[FightingBuckeye]

This was my hope with the AAR. I learned a lot from Mickey3D's mentoring.

Mission accomplished!

But there are only so many size 3 towns in the south, and with the number of draft cards you have, you're forced to play them in a city that produces something. I would prefer not to play it in Richmond either, but if I have to chose between Richmond and Mobile/Charleston/New Orleans/Memphis, I'm choosing Richmond.

True and this is especially true early on before more states start seceding. Are you not allowed to play draft cards in the same region over multiple turns? IE, play one and then a turn or two later play a 2nd one in that region?

- I hate taking the forts at the mouth of the Mississippi, because the region between those forts and New Orleans is a swamp with no roads, with means a 2 turn death march from the forts into town. As to other places where theres a fort and a city (Mobile, Galveston, etc), there doesn't seem to be a consensus on which one to take first.

- there are two forts on the outer banks of North Carolina that aren't reachable from the mainland. If you take those, the south can't take them back.

Those swamp can also protect those forts from a counterstroke. Any force that marches after you is going to take it's sweet time getting there, it could face supply issues, and will also take more cohesion hits than normal. That doesn't account for the Union player dropping a division plus sized force behind them and cutting off their retreat and supply lines. Show me a confederate player with enough force in NO to protect the city and also go after a fort and you'll also show me a player who's going to be losing a lot of ground in other theaters.

If you take other forts, the south can simply march there and take them back (and possibly destroy your division if they show up with an army and you can't retreat). So when talking about cheap victories to promote leaders, we're talking about Hatteras. Fort busting the entire coast of the CSA requires a lot more commitment.

It would take quite a commintment from the Union player, but they have a lot more to play with and stretching the Confederates is always in the Union interest. I guess it boils down to how the Union player wants to play it, but they definitely have the werewithal to pursue extensive amphibious operations if they so choose. As far as getting one of your divisions destroyed, the same thing worried me. That's why I asked about the possibility of shipping out even if besieged. Another consideration is you could bust a fort that can be reached by land and then pull your division and the captured guns out with you. Now you force the Confederates into making a decision with bad outcomes regardless of what he does. Commit forces to retaking and regarrisonning them? Or leave the Union player with that intel and a possble invasion route?

[Cardinal Ape]

The idea of a feint attack to stop MtSG reminds me of board games with orders like Diplomacy or Machiavelli wherein you can cancel a units support orders with your own raid or attack orders.

I guess if one had their attacks coordinated on the same day you could greatly diminish possible MtSG with feint attacks. But getting your troops to arrive in a region on a specified day is rather tough to do in this game, usually it involves a rather gamey circular a train ride.

[FightingBuckeye]

Is there a way to keep a force locked like the auto garrisons? As the game progresses, it's pretty common to have a ton of stacks everywhere. It'd be nice not to have to cycle through some of those semi-permanent garrison forces that you leave out to guard key regions.

[Cardinal Ape]

Yes. Its the 'S' key to put stacks in permanent sentry mode.

[FightingBuckeye]

Yes. Its the 'S' key to put stacks in permanent sentry mode.

Thanks, that's saved me a lot of time!