Emancipation imballance

[Paper Tiger]

OK couple of gripes here. 1st it is WAY to easy for the CSA to Emancipate, Either a state steps down from the war effort or it doesn't, what no chance of Unrest if the state doesn't step down? Surely there should be a chance of Unrest in each province as well with that being anything from very little to high. Also why if the Union emancipates does it not get the additional 1 level of Men in each previously slave owning state and +1 labour production.
Surely if the Union Emancipates they should get a Manpower and Labour bonus, and I would expect that to be bigger than that the South gets. I would say that the +1 Men and +1 Labour should be for all slave owning provinces irrispective of which side emancipates, and that the USA should get this bonus for each provice that of the CSA that they capture/control in addition to the existing slave owning provinces that they held at the start.
So far in every game that I have played as the Union (up to the seige crash point) the CSA has emancipated and the only province to ever stand down was Florida and on one occasion I already controlled the capital! It also seems like if ever the CSA reaches Level 4 diplomacy with France or GB they would automatically go for emancipation to prompt european intervention, and even if as a Union player you are investing in diplomacy you can get unlucky. I have had Union on level 3 and CSA on level 4 symultaneously with the same power. I was investing as hard as I could but instead of being able to bring down CSA influence all I succeeded in doing was moving mine up. Seems like a couple of problems here first I think it should be the CSA 7points ahead of the USA to prompt a war not just the CSA ON 7pts.
You could have the farcical situation of the USA being on 8 influence and the CSA on 7 and the USA gets declared war on!

[histgamer]

Paper you shouldnt as the Union gain anything manpower wise if you emancipate from the boarder states that the union holds to began with because the fact is the emancipation only applied to slaves in the CSA held southern territories it didnt free any slaves in the land that the Union held when the decleration was issued.

Also i belive you can turn the Emancipation button off, is this not correct? For the CSA that is.

[andysomers]

I agree in principle that it is too easy for the South to emancipate.  There should be major repercussions, huge loss of national will etc., higher chances of unrest as he mentions, etc.  And I should think it should only be offered as an option after a certain point in the game (either he's losing so badly that he desperately needs the manpower, or at a certain time point, late-1863 or 1864 and beyond or so).
 
I disagree that the US should get manpower and labor increases.  The Proclamation effectively freed exactly zero slaves since it proclaimed slaves free only in states still in rebellion.  In other words, the US had no power to enforce the act.  Freed slaves as areas were taken by the north composed much of the USCT in the mid-later portions of the war, this should be reflected in US manpower with or without emancipation. 
 
If the US emancipates, the chance of foreign intervention on behalf of the South should be eliminated.  There should also be minor political repercussions to the North (This is typically the way it is handled in other games of this nature).
 
AS

[histgamer]

ORIGINAL: andysomers

I disagree that the US should get manpower and labor increases. The Proclamation effectively freed exactly zero slaves since it proclaimed slaves free only in states still in rebellion. In other words, the US had no power to enforce the act. Freed slaves as areas were taken by the north composed much of the USCT in the mid-later portions of the war, this should be reflected in US manpower with or without emancipation.

AS

I do belive i just said that.[;)]

However there is a problem with making Euro intervention impossible if the USA emancipates. Everyone will do it to start. I think that maybe for the Union to do it without MAJOR repercussions you should have to be required to have a certain national will. Had Lincoln done this before Antietam he would have suffered major political problems and it would have looked like a desperate act. So I think that it would be fine making CSA’s chance of getting Euro intervention after an Emancipation by the union 0 but you would have to counter balance that with the Union needing a certain level of National Will or VPs so that the Union just doesn’t do it right away or as a last ditch effort to stop Europe from aiding the south because historically if the USA had done the thing without a victory like I have already said it would have looked like a move out of desperation and nothing more.

[Paper Tiger]

OK so what happens to the slaves in states as the USA captures them from the CSA?

[histgamer]

Before or after the emancipation?

If the Union owned the territory at the time of the act they remained slaves.

[Paper Tiger]

And afterwards?

[Jonathan Palfrey]

ORIGINAL: flanyboy

Also i belive you can turn the Emancipation button off, is this not correct? For the CSA that is.

I reckon Confederates voluntarily freeing slaves is unhistorical. I think I'll turn that button off and keep it off.

The profusion of options offered by the game is an asset. This particular option is unhistorical, but we can simply turn it off, no sweat.

[andysomers]

However there is a problem with making Euro intervention impossible if the USA emancipates. Everyone will do it to start. I think that maybe for the Union to do it without MAJOR repercussions you should have to be required to have a certain national will. Had Lincoln done this before Antietam he would have suffered major political problems and it would have looked like a desperate act. So I think that it would be fine making CSA’s chance of getting Euro intervention after an Emancipation by the union 0 but you would have to counter balance that with the Union needing a certain level of National Will or VPs so that the Union just doesn’t do it right away or as a last ditch effort to stop Europe from aiding the south because historically if the USA had done the thing without a victory like I have already said it would have looked like a move out of desperation and nothing more.

 
This is a good line of thought - I agree.  The US should have to be ahead on National Will, or something of the sort before he is allowed to emancipate - the button is just greyed out or something of the sort if the US player is "losing."  And even when ahead, I'd still say there are should be political repercussions (grumblings in the border states, loss of will from other Northern political factions, etc.).
 

OK so what happens to the slaves in states as the USA captures them from the CSA?

 
I think that the game should be designed so the US gets manpower bonuses by capture of CS territory, independent of Emancipation
 
Jonathan's comment about CS emancipation is good also.  Just turn it off.  However, I do think that if allowed, emancipation should be allowed only under certain circumstances as discussed.  All that said, I do think Paper Tiger's original assertion is correct - on the surface it looks like the CS is favored highly on the emancipation issue.  I haven't fooled with this option enough to know the practical applications in the game however, maybe it does work out?
 
AS

[Jim D Burns]

ORIGINAL: Paper Tiger

it is WAY to easy for the CSA to Emancipate,

I dislike this portion of the game immensely, so I toggle off the south’s ability to emancipate in the game settings. Were it better handled as you suggest it might make things interesting, but as you state it really just makes the south guaranteed to see European entry into the war.

Jim

[histgamer]

Andy i think the CSA being highly favored on the emanc issue is realistic. For while it occuring in 1862 is almost impossible had it occured there is no doubt in my mind that the UK and france would have come to their aid.

At least probally.

[andysomers]

I agree with that with respect to foreign intervention - I think we can all certainly agree the chances would have been much greater.  It's that the erosion of support for Davis et al would have quite possibly toppled the CSA government.  Several states - particularly the fire-eaters, would have in my mind "seceded" from the Confederacy (South Carolina, Mississippi, Alabama, et.al) at like a 100% chance, not a 15%.  They would have simply formed separate countries - as it stood the CSA was only a very loose allegiance of states. 
 
It's so hard to model conjecture on a totally fictional event, we can all only speculate at best.  My main point here is that I agree with Paper Tiger in that the political ramifcations are, in my opinion, too lenient on Southern emancipation.
 
AS

[Jim D Burns]

ORIGINAL: andysomers
It's so hard to model conjecture on a totally fictional event, we can all only speculate at best.  My main point here is that I agree with Paper Tiger in that the political ramifcations are, in my opinion, too lenient on Southern emancipation.

Not to mention the fact that what they gain if one or both European powers enters the war far exceeds the resources they'd lose if 3 or 4 states left the CSA.

There needs to be a much greater impact if a state leaves the CSA, perhaps having all its brigades disband in the field or go home and actually go hostile to the south would help.

Jim

[Gil R.]

Thanks for the feedback. Emancipation is an area we'd certainly consider tweaking, or even changing, based on your reactions. (In fact, some of the current rules are in the game partly in response to pre-release feedback we got.)

[cdbeck]

If I'm not crazy, and I often am, I think that I read a book about slavery in the Confederate South and that some individual slave owners would emancipate their slaves contingent that the slaves form up and help repulse any regional Union occupation force. This gave slaves incentive for fighting against the Union for personal freedom.

And the Emancipation Proclaimation, as stated earlier, only applied to the slaves in the CSA. So technically, whenever the Union army would occupy a Southern State, the slaves found along the way were freed. What might be an interesting dynamic, rather than the borrowed "cossacks/slaves/indians" appear at a certain season would be a chance for the Union, after issuing the declaration, to "find" slave regiments when they conquer Southern provinces (probably best only cities). Might not be overly realistic, but would serve to balance out that emancipation issue (Union would get free units at the front).

Also, just play with the CSA can Emancipate option off. That's what I would do if you feel the CSA is too powerful with it. Personally, I think it adds strategic depth, as the CSA player has to decide if they will lose states (I have seen the AI lose 2-3 states) in order to gain a quick burst to having England or France join the war.

Son of Montfort

[Steely Glint]

ORIGINAL: andysomers
I disagree that the US should get manpower and labor increases.  The Proclamation effectively freed exactly zero slaves since it proclaimed slaves free only in states still in rebellion.  In other words, the US had no power to enforce the act. 

That's true but it's not very politically correct to say it.

[histgamer]

Not really, whenever i hear people talk about that they always mention that fact.

[Artmiser]

What the emancipation declaration did is make many of the free black men in the north want to join the union army.   And with the emancipation proclamation the writing was on the wall so to speak.  Slavery was over, and abolished in the USA shortly after the end of the war. 

From a websight that will I believe put this subject to rest, or it should.
History of African Americans in the Civil War





"Once let the black man get upon his person the brass letters, U.S., let him get an eagle on his button, and a musket on his shoulder and bullets in his pockets, and there is no power on earth which can deny that he has earned the right to citizenship in the United States."
Frederick Douglass


History of African-Americans in the Civil War
These words spoken by Frederick Douglass moved many African-Americans to enlist in the Union Army and fight for their freedom. With President Abraham Lincoln's issuance of the Emancipation Proclamation in 1862, the Civil War became a war to save the union and to abolish slavery.
Approximately 180,000 African-Americans comprising 163 units served in the Union Army during the Civil War, and many more African-Americans served in the Union Navy. Both free Africans-Americans and runaway slaves joined the fight.

On July 17, 1862, Congress passed two acts allowing the enlistment of African-Americans, but official enrollment occurred only after the September, 1862 issuance of the Emancipation Proclamation. In general, white soldiers and officers believed that black men lacked the courage to fight and fight well. In October, 1862, African-American soldiers of the 1st Kansas Colored Volunteers silenced their critics by repulsing attacking Confederates at the battle of Island Mound, Missouri. By August, 1863, 14 Negro Regiments were in the field and ready for service. At the battle of Port Hudson, Louisiana, May 27, 1863, the African-American soldiers bravely advanced over open ground in the face of deadly artillery fire. Although the attack failed, the black solders proved their capability to withstand the heat of battle.

On July 17, 1863, at Honey Springs, Indian Territory, now Oklahoma, the 1st Kansas Colored fought with courage again. Union troops under General James Blunt ran into a strong Confederate force under General Douglas Cooper. After a two-hour bloody engagement, Cooper's soldiers retreated. The 1st Kansas, which had held the center of the Union line, advanced to within fifty paces of the Confederate line and exchanged fire for some twenty minutes until the Confederates broke and ran. General Blunt wrote after the battle, "I never saw such fighting as was done by the Negro regiment....The question that negroes will fight is settled; besides they make better solders in every respect than any troops I have ever had under my command."

The most widely known battle fought by African-Americans was the assault on Fort Wagner, South Carolina, by the 54th Massachusetts on July 18, 1863. The 54th volunteered to lead the assault on the strongly-fortified Confederate positions. The soldiers of the 54th scaled the fort's parapet, and were only driven back after brutal hand-to-hand combat.

Although black soldiers proved themselves as reputable soldiers, discrimination in pay and other areas remained widespread. According to the Militia Act of 1862, soldiers of African descent were to receive $10.00 a month, plus a clothing allowance of $3.50. Many regiments struggled for equal pay, some refusing any money until June 15, 1864, when Congress granted equal pay for all black soldiers.

African-American soldiers participated in every major campaign of 1864-1865 except Sherman's invasion of Georgia. The year 1864 was especially eventful for African-American troops. On April 12, 1864, at Fort Pillow, Tennessee, Confederate General Nathan Bedford Forrest led his 2,500 men against the Union-held fortification, occupied by 292 black and 285 white soldiers. After driving in the Union pickets and giving the garrison an opportunity to surrender, Forrest's men swarmed into the fort with little difficulty and drove the Federals down the river's bluff into a deadly crossfire. Casualties were high and only sixty-two of the U.S. Colored Troops survived the fight. Many accused the Confederates of perpetuating a massacre of black troops, and the controversy continues today. The battle cry for the Negro soldier east of the Mississippi River became "Remember Fort Pillow!"

The Battle of New Market Heights, Virginia (Chaffin's Farm) became one of the most heroic engagements involving African-Americans. On September 29, 1864, the African-American division of the Eighteenth Corps, after being pinned down by Confederate artillery fire for about 30 minutes, charged the earthworks and rushed up the slopes of the heights. During the hour-long engagement the division suffered tremendous casualties. Of the sixteen African-Americans who were awarded the Medal of Honor during the Civil War, fourteen received the honor as a result of their actions at New Market Heights.

In January, 1864, General Patrick Cleburne and several other Confederate officers in the Army of the Tennessee proposed using slaves as soldiers since the Union was using black troops. Cleburne recommended offering slaves their freedom if they fought and survived. Confederate President Jefferson Davis refused to consider Cleburne's proposal and forbade further discussion of the idea. The concept, however, did not die. By the fall of 1864, the South was losing more and more ground, and some believed that only by arming the slaves could defeat be averted. On March 13, the Confederate Congress passed General Order 14, and President Davis signed the order into law. The order was issued March 23, 1865, but only a few African-American companies were raised, and the war ended before they could be used in battle.

In actual numbers, African-American soldiers comprised 10% of the entire Union Army. Losses among African-Americans were high, and from all reported casualties, approximately one-third of all African-Americans enrolled in the military lost their lives during the Civil War.

[Paper Tiger]

So effectively the CSA should only be able to even consider emancipation once they are seriously backed into a corner. A desperation act only. Say once CSA national will hits -6?

[von Beanie]

I'm also concerned about CSA emancipation. In my first game as the Union the CSA emancipated the slaves in 1861 and Virginia and Tennessee promptly quit the war. I'm not sure what that means in terms of the game--do these regions now act like Kentucky, or are they off-limts? Anyway, since I was learning the game and there appeared a substantial barrier between me and the rebels, I simply quit and turned off the option for future games. Personally, I don't think CSA emancipation was a realistic possibility--few in an agricultural society would be willing to "throw away" the critical assets needed to maintain their standard of living after a victorious war.

I'm also concerned that the Union has the option in 1861. John Fremont tried emancipation as the Union commander of Missouri in 1861 and was promptly relieved of command by a pissed off Lincoln.

When the patch comes out I'd like to see the CSA option turned off as the default, and the Union prevented from using the option until they have at least a moderate lead.