awesome

[gunny3013]

...you are quite correct about the Naval aspect of the game, so much so it would be pointless to discuss amphibious capability.

[lawbreaker]

 true, we have noticed that the naval aspect is pretty non existent. hopefully they can find away to fix it. do you guys no if it is actually worth it for the north to blockade the south? i'm not exactly sure what it accomplishes.

[Ironclad]

Blockades are definitely worthwhile - indeed a must. Each port blockaded proportionately reduces the amount of goods available for blockade runners and resources supplied by the foreign powers. In addition the Union also gets extra VPs: +2 for 50% or more of CSA ports blockaded and another +2 when all CSA ports are blockaded. To qualify each blockading fleet for a port must have a minimium of 30 strength points (ie equal to three full strength vessels).

Happy New Year.

[lawbreaker]

okay thanks for that very useful information, i will definitely apply a blockade then. so i take it three full strength vessels, can be a mixture of ships, frigates or ironclads then?

[Ironclad]

The at start ships topped up by cheap frigate builds are the most cost effective combination. As ironclads are described as like ships I assume they would count too.

Another feature worth noting is that every Union ship, whether in a blockading fleet or not, has a kill possibility against a runner in the same sea province.

[lawbreaker]

 we definitely didnt know that about the kill possibility against the blockad runners. thanks for that. so if a blockade runner gets killed from ships being present, is it just an automatic kill without the possibility of just damaging it? and would it then not be in the beginning of the turn report?

[elcidce]

Sherman burned Columbia SC to the ground despite it being declared an open city. Hundreds of people starved weeks after this was done. This was hardly an accidental burning. Revenge was the motive here. Too bad women and children bore the brunt of it.

I dont hold any animosity toward the Union but I am no fan of what the Federal government has become since that time. Two fellow Citadel alumni fired the first shots to begin the war in January and later at Ft. Sumter. Its important to me that we remember the stories from both sides not just the victorious side. Its amazing how little most people know of the war and its causes.

Back on topic I have just acquired a copy of FOF, so Im learning the tip and stragegies from the board. Unfortunately I also bought the Battlefront games, AGEOD Civil War and GGWBTS. I am trying to find the time to decide which I like the best and play it.

[terje439]

ORIGINAL: lawbreaker

 we definitely didnt know that about the kill possibility against the blockad runners. thanks for that. so if a blockade runner gets killed from ships being present, is it just an automatic kill without the possibility of just damaging it? and would it then not be in the beginning of the turn report?

No it has a chance to damage the runner, not automatically kill it. However unless you are very unlucky, the runner should take enough damage to sink. Any ship sinks at 2 pts remaining, so if the report states something like:
"Runner #1 is attacked for 8 dmg and is reduced to 2", that actually means that it is sunk.
But you might get an unlucky die roll and just damage the runner, in which case the Confederacy is likely to return the ship to port for repairs.
And yes, such events are reported in the beginning of the turn report.

About the Confederacy building ships, they are able to (economically speaking), however the Union starts with such a large navy that it is a mere waste for the Confederacy to start any ship-building program.
What might work for the South however is if they really really want, to build three ICs and arm them with some heavy guns. In that case the Union fleet is in for a surprise!

[Rexor]

ORIGINAL: terje439

ORIGINAL: lawbreaker

 we definitely didnt know that about the kill possibility against the blockad runners. thanks for that. so if a blockade runner gets killed from ships being present, is it just an automatic kill without the possibility of just damaging it? and would it then not be in the beginning of the turn report?

No it has a chance to damage the runner, not automatically kill it. However unless you are very unlucky, the runner should take enough damage to sink. Any ship sinks at 2 pts remaining, so if the report states something like:
"Runner #1 is attacked for 8 dmg and is reduced to 2", that actually means that it is sunk.
But you might get an unlucky die roll and just damage the runner, in which case the Confederacy is likely to return the ship to port for repairs.
And yes, such events are reported in the beginning of the turn report.

About the Confederacy building ships, they are able to (economically speaking), however the Union starts with such a large navy that it is a mere waste for the Confederacy to start any ship-building program.
What might work for the South however is if they really really want, to build three ICs and arm them with some heavy guns. In that case the Union fleet is in for a surprise!

That's just the problem--I can't imagine playing the South and even considering building three ironclads with serious armament in this game. The resources just aren't there, where as they were, to a certain extent, in the actual war.

[terje439]

That, IMO, is a matter of how the war is turning out. Sure, I will never build those units in the first two years, but if the war is going well, and I've sent alot of Union troops to a Southern resort [;)], I might build them to kill some Union blockade ships. But, I agree there are always other things to spend those resources on, but, if you play the South well enough and do well in the war, the resources ARE there it is simply a matter of priority.

[lawbreaker]

 yeah fortunately for me i'm playing my wife who isn't exactly admiral farragut. so sometimes when i'm playing the south i can catch her slipping with some ironclads. i know that wouldn't work with somebody with some skills though.