Emancipation imballance

[sirduke_slith]

The reason Lincon was so pissed off, becuase he didn't want the boarder states to secede from the union as well.  I think that option should be avaliable in 1861, but like when the confederate states leave when they emancipate, some union could leave as well, or be turned to join the confederacy.  (Maryland, Kentucky, Missouri, probably not delaware though[:)])

[Paper Tiger]

Perhaps the chance should be modified by 2xthe national will + for the Union - for CSA
so if the Union is +6 the chance of unrest is 15-(2*6)=3% and if the CSA is -6 the chance is 15+(2*-6)=3
Hence the CSA will only likely make the choice in a dire position and the USA in a winning position?
And you have to balance if I don't do it will he do it this turn and which is worse?

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: Paper Tiger

Perhaps the chance should be modified by 2xthe national will + for the Union - for CSA
so if the Union is +6 the chance of unrest is 15-(2*6)=3% and if the CSA is -6 the chance is 15+(2*-6)=3
Hence the CSA will only likely make the choice in a dire position and the USA in a winning position?
And you have to balance if I don't do it will he do it this turn and which is worse?

This sounds like it has some merit. Basically, Emancipation for the South was a "last-ditch, grasping-at-straws, desperation move...., while for a substantial fraction of the North it was what the War was all about. Game really doesn't reflect this dichotomy very well at all currently.

[andysomers]

I'm a big fan of the old board game "War Between the States" - Decision Games (formerly SPI).  They have something very similar to some of the ideas laid out here.  The north can only emancipate when they are "ahead" in the game (each side gets political points).  They are then docked political points for the emancipation (I would say this is accurate), but foriegn intervention is removed as a possibility.  I would add historically speaking they should not be allowed to do so in 1861, maybe even the first half of '62.  The sole political purpose, in my mind, of the EP was to define the war as a war over slavery - thus eliminating the possibilty of foreign intervention.  Lincoln carefully calculated both the timing and wording of the document for that specific purpose.
 
I do think for the South emancipation is a last ditch grasping at straws type of thing as mentioned.  They should definately not be allowed to do something of the sort through at least 1862 I'd say.  Frank Hunter's old game had a "combat-role" short of full emancipation.  A lot of people entertained this idea (Pat Cleburne perhaps most notably). 
 
I'm 100% in favor on this line of thought - very well put!
 
AS

[dude]

From what I recall from my readings Pres. Lincoln had to wait for the right time to emanicpate the slaves... he needed a vicorty on the battlefield to show that things where going their way ... what he had to settle for was Antietam but it was good enough for him.
 
I would say let the Union do it as early as they want but with more repercussions the worse their national will is.  The better their will the less problems.
 
As to the confederates... it was either something they should have done to start with (As Longstreet says in the movie Gettysburg... "we should have freed the slaves THEN fired on Fort Sumnter." or only be allowed to do if backed into a corner.  In other words only let them do it if their Will is low enough (ie desperate enough to need support).  I believe as long as things were going their way they would never have bothered to free the slaves.

[Conhugeco]

I think that the Confederacy should only be allowed to free the slaves if the game goes to 1965. No, the date is not a typo.

DickH

[spruce]

hm, Union emancipation happened to my CSA game. I really think this is a spoiler ... it happened in may or june 1862 ... the war was just getting along - and with that nasty VP flip bug ... perhaps this VP flip bug has to do with it.

Most annoying - I was at +6 diplo rating with UK and ... bam ... the Union emancipates - you get some nice brigades you hardly can't pay for ... and all the diplo ratings destroyed ... pf ... and what's in the Union some unrest in some provinces [X(]

by the way - it seems CSA can't emancipate after the Union emancipates - dunno if this wad ...

[Sheytan]

confeds shouldnt be able to do this period, the political impact would be huge, I like the option choice though. simply enable or not. union should not get additional assets if it proclaims, however I agree that by doing so it should negatively impact confeds ability to gain foreign intervention in thier favor, in a very significant manner. confeds getting additional assets makes perfect sense to me though I do not recall what impact this did have historically, have not read CW material since college err a few years ago :} but a popular wave of recruitment of high morale units makes perfect sense. remember that wealthy individuals raised regiments on thier own accord, no doubt "fence sitters" in the south would have seen the writing on the wall in stark clarity with this proclaimation by the Union if they had not already foreseen a Union victorys impact upon those whom exploited slave labor in thier business interests.

ONE ADDITIONAL COMMENT!
We dont really understand today the mindset of people from that period, some of the screen images in the game as battles load etc bring this to the front, religion, and ones devotion to thier state was paramount to people in this period to a degree we cannot fantom today. the sacrifices people were willing to make for political and religious principals then make us all appear pale shadows in comparison, which of you would die for your home state today? :} a question worthy of pondering. the point however as it relates to this game is that I believe the south should get additional units etc if the emancipation proclimation is declared.

[Gil R.]

ORIGINAL: spruce

by the way - it seems CSA can't emancipate after the Union emancipates - dunno if this wad ...

That's deliberate. Once one sides emancipates, the other can't.