SC ACW Re-taking Ports

[Jatticus]

How can the ports taken by the Yankees in the lower Mississippi, Charleston, and Cape Hatteras be taken back? I've moved infantry down the Mississippi - which couldn't attack the ports and reduced ports with Naval attack, but they remain in Union hands.

How can these ports be re-captured?

[Platoonist]

How can the ports taken by the Yankees in the lower Mississippi, Charleston, and Cape Hatteras be taken back? I've moved infantry down the Mississippi - which couldn't attack the ports and reduced ports with Naval attack, but they remain in Union hands.

How can these ports be re-captured?

I think it was a game design decision that the small Union ports in the tip of the Mississippi Delta and at Cape Hatteras will always remain in Union hands. There is really no way to take them as they are not attached to any towns or cities and Cape Hatteras is well out to sea. As for the Charleston ports, you'd have to retake Charleston for a start if you haven't already.

[Jatticus]

Thank you. Is there anyway to confirm that it is a design decision to keep those ports permanently in Union control?

[Platoonist]

Thank you. Is there anyway to confirm that it is a design decision to keep those ports permanently in Union control?

It's just a guess on my part. However, I have been informed on this forum by BiteNibbleChomp that the inability of the Confederacy to re-take Fort Pulaski near Savannah or boost it's supply was a deliberate design decision.

Fort Pulaski is deliberate. It has to be an island or the Confederates would just recapture it easily after the Union landed there. Historically they made no effort to do so (probably because they couldn't/Union defences were too strong?).

If he or one of the developers chimes in on this thread, they might be able to tell us if it is the same for these ports.

[BiteNibbleChomp]

Yes, this is a deliberate design choice

Hatteras and the Mississippi ports weren't really "ports" in the way that say Baltimore or Mobile are, rather they were inlets that Union ships sheltered in during rough weather and eventually stored supplies at. It doesn't make sense to "capture" them - if the Southwest Pass specifically was assigned a permanent Confederate garrison, the Union would just start sheltering their ships in a different cove a little further away, and there was no shortage of such locations due to the geography of the area. The only real way the Confederates could keep the Union ships out of the area would be with a fleet of their own, once you've done that capturing the ports isn't really an issue because there won't be any Union ships left around to use them.

- BNC

[Bo Rearguard]

The Confederates never attempted an overland expedition against the Union-held Head of Passes in the Mississippi delta because you really can't. It's isolated by miles of muck and marsh no land force could cross and stay combat-coherent. The green in the picture below isn't dry land. It's mostly tall grass sticking out of stagnant water.

head of passes.jpg (295.2 KiB) Viewed 578 times

[Platoonist]

The Confederates never attempted an overland expedition against the Union-held Head of Passes in the Mississippi delta because you really can't. It's isolated by miles of muck and marsh no land force could cross and stay combat-coherent. The green in the picture below isn't dry land. It's mostly tall grass sticking out of stagnant water.

Yeah, I just tried it in hot-seat mode. My intrepid Confederate brigade is mired in the mud one hex away from the Union delta ports at supply level one and can't move anymore. They're sick of the mosquitoes and wanna go home.

[BiteNibbleChomp]

Yeah, I just tried it in hot-seat mode. My intrepid Confederate brigade is mired in the mud one hex away from the Union delta ports at supply level one and can't move anymore. They're sick of the mosquitoes and wanna go home.

Please, let them go home. And mail them a medal for bravery once they're back. They've earned it!

- BNC

[Platoonist]

Please, let them go home. And mail them a medal for bravery once they're back. They've earned it!

Minted and mailed out. Given the lousy Confederate postal system they should arrive sometime the early 20th Century.

Dismal Delta Expedition.jpg (264.92 KiB) Viewed 543 times

[BiteNibbleChomp]

Minted and mailed out. Given the lousy Confederate postal system they should arrive sometime the early 20th Century.

Very nice!

- BNC

[Molloch]

Yes, this is a deliberate design choice

Hatteras and the Mississippi ports weren't really "ports" in the way that say Baltimore or Mobile are, rather they were inlets that Union ships sheltered in during rough weather and eventually stored supplies at. It doesn't make sense to "capture" them - if the Southwest Pass specifically was assigned a permanent Confederate garrison, the Union would just start sheltering their ships in a different cove a little further away, and there was no shortage of such locations due to the geography of the area. The only real way the Confederates could keep the Union ships out of the area would be with a fleet of their own, once you've done that capturing the ports isn't really an issue because there won't be any Union ships left around to use them.

- BNC

Is the blockade runner line that go's through Hatteras working again if u besiege the "harbour" with csa ships down tro 0?

I can see why this design decision was made but in a case where a CSA player overwhelms the Union Navy it feels a bit odd that u cant get back controll over those strategic points. Such as Port Pulaski or Port Royal sound.

[BiteNibbleChomp]

Is the blockade runner line that go's through Hatteras working again if u besiege the "harbour" with csa ships down tro 0?

I can see why this design decision was made but in a case where a CSA player overwhelms the Union Navy it feels a bit odd that u cant get back controll over those strategic points. Such as Port Pulaski or Port Royal sound.

Sieging the port down won't restart the convoy.

- BNC