How will be managed the naval side of the war ?

[Feralkoala]

My guess is that any 'minor and secondary' nature is in the complexity of the rules used to simulate them. The control of the rivers was of enormous importance, but from a *game* point of view, most of what needs to be done is giving the Union amphibious and transport capacity in using them--the Confederate efforts are going to be modelled in having forts block Union movement and the odd ironclad or two. So, the rules and game systems likely aren't very complex (especially compared to the land system), but that doesn't make the implications of gaining or losing control of the rivers trivial.

[Jasmo]

No problem with simplicity as long as it accurately reflects moving forces and keeping them supplied by land is much more difficutl than doing so by water.

[Gil R.]

Jasmo, the game does have gunboats, and these are used to besiege forts on rivers in combination with ground forces. We do not have vessels for transportation across rivers, but this is abstracted into the game in terms of higher movement costs.

[PDiFolco]

Bump, could we summarize what we'll have ?
I've understood that we'll have ships units of various types, Ironclads, gunboats ... and certainly naval battles à la CoG
But how we'll be managed aspects such as blockades and runners ? Through units or somewhat abstracted ? How will CSA suffer from blockades or benefit from running them ?
Will raiders appear as standard ships ? How will raids be handled ?
 

[Jonathan Palfrey]

ORIGINAL: Gil R.
I just spent the past few days moving.

Wow. On top of everything else that's going on, you're moving home? There could be a lot of work and upheaval concealed behind those few words...

[pixelpusher]

ORIGINAL: Gil R. All I know is that if he hasn't already come up with the Ironclad graphics, Pixelpusher better do so soon, since I'm just six turns away from completing my first!

All the units are done and loaded into the game. The ships have been done for some time, actually.

ORIGINAL: RolandRahn And what about naval war when the Brits/Frenchmen intervene?
Or, is it more klike "No greater glory", were the war ended automatically with a CSA victory when France/UK intervened?

UK and France can both enter the war on the side of the CSA player, and you can slug it out with them both on land and sea. They have regular ships of the line and also frigates. UK infantry can also show up in detailed combat and quick combat. I believe the UK units come down from Canada, and the French show up in ships. Perhaps someone else on the team can better explain how the European Powers work in-game. (Eric, Gil, Z, Sarge?)

[jimwinsor]

Actually French troops, should they enter the war on the side of the CSA, start in Texas (they are assumed to be coming from Napoleon III's expeditionary force in Mexico).  Both Britain and France send sizable fleets into US waters as well.

[Gil R.]

ORIGINAL: Jonathan Palfrey

ORIGINAL: Gil R.
I just spent the past few days moving.

Wow. On top of everything else that's going on, you're moving home? There could be a lot of work and upheaval concealed behind those few words...

No, I wasn't moving home (as in moving back in with my parents). I was moving from a job in Baltimore to one in Cleveland. But that's in the distant past now.

I just didn't want anyone thinking I still live with my parents. (Not that there's anything wrong with that, I'll hastily add, knowing that this forum is visited by gamers...)

[Gil R.]

ORIGINAL: PDiFolco

Bump, could we summarize what we'll have ?
I've understood that we'll have ships units of various types, Ironclads, gunboats ... and certainly naval battles à la CoG
But how we'll be managed aspects such as blockades and runners ? Through units or somewhat abstracted ? How will CSA suffer from blockades or benefit from running them ?
Will raiders appear as standard ships ? How will raids be handled ?

I don't have time to go into detail (I promised Eric my final contributions to the game tonight), but I'll say:
1) Runners show up as ships that one sends to whichever sea zone has the most desirable "runners goods" (e.g., 50 Weapons, 10 Money, 30 Horses), and they then have a %chance of acquiring those goods, but also a different %chance of sustaining damage or being destroyed.
2) Blockades are handled in the abstract, by a fleet in the adjacent sea zone being set to "blockade" a particular harbor. As more harbors are blockaded, the CSA is able to receive less income.

There are certain upgrades that effect these operations (see the upgrades list I posted elsewhere).

[andysomers]

If you guys look at the naval graphics and discussion that has been posted, I think you will be pleasantly surprised.  I don't want to spend an inordinate amount of time with naval combat either, but something similar to what is proposed I think is fair and interesting.  The Civil War in the West, East, South, North, wherever, was much more about the Gettysburgs and the Shilohs than the Fort Fishers, Grand Gulfs, and the Mobile Bays.  Rivers and seas play their part, but it's mostly a support role (supply, transport, guarding and controlling rivers/seas, blockading, etc.) and I'm glad to see this play an appropriate back seat role to land movement and combat.   By the same token, I like that this is simulated, even with a tactical screen!
 
Keep up the good work.
 
AS

[Sonny]

I was moving from a job in Baltimore to one in Cleveland.

[/quote]

Out of the frying pan into the fire?[:D]

[Gil R.]

ORIGINAL: Sonny


I was moving from a job in Baltimore to one in Cleveland.

Out of the frying pan into the fire?[:D]
[/quote]


It's okay -- I'm living and working in a nice neighborhood now, and the same was true of Baltimore.

[Jonathan Palfrey]

ORIGINAL: Gil R.
No, I wasn't moving home (as in moving back in with my parents). I was moving from a job in Baltimore to one in Cleveland. But that's in the distant past now.

I just didn't want anyone thinking I still live with my parents. (Not that there's anything wrong with that, I'll hastily add, knowing that this forum is visited by gamers...)

"The past few days" is "the distant past"? You have an unusual sense of time.

Don't worry, I never imagined you were living with your parents. It's more than three decades since I was living with my parents, so the idea doesn't occur to me. Mind you, some people go on living with their parents for a long time, especially in some countries (such as Spain and Italy).

[Gil R.]

My original message about moving was written back in August, which is now long past.

You're right about living at home being common in different cultures. A friend of mine married a Brazilian, and it took her a while to get used to the idea that he still lived with his parents even though he was in his thirties.

[Missouri_Rebel]

I personally would like to see a somewhat detailed naval aspect, especially a river campaign as mentioned earlier although, I have the utmost faith that these guys will put their best foot forward considering the detail shown in other areas of the game. Too early to come to a conclusion without having played it.

Alas, the funny thing is that eventually if one is lucky enough the parents come to live with you. Boy, I cannot wait to say to my father;'as long as you live under my roof mister.....' [X(]

Mo reb

PS. Am I the only one who types a reply and then re-reads it wondering what the heck my point was?

[Jonathan Palfrey]

Oh, I see. Thanks for the explanation. The dates of messages aren't very prominent on this forum, and I always have a little trouble anyway in interpreting the weird American way of writing dates. I was brought up with the British way (day-month-year) and now prefer to use the international standard way (year-month-day).

Staying longer with your parents makes more practical sense the higher the cost of accommodation in relation to income.