Inevitability?

[Koniev]

HI everybody -

I'm considering buying this as I have a new found interest in the Civil War.

One question: Is a Union victory almost inevitable because of it's larger population and more abundant resources - barring some colossal blunders, of course?

I play Pacific War and it's very difficult for the Japanese to win. It is usually considered a Japanese victory if they hold out longer than the historical period.

I've been studying the posts and AAR's and want to thank all who participate.

[Treefrog]

The joy is in the struggle. The game is rich in detail which affords both sides some interesting challenges in opportunities. Both sides are competitive throughout.

Experienced players have, I think, won and lost as both sides.

However, as in WITP, you get a "moral" victory if you do as well as the original conflict.

Good news and bad news is that nobody is keeping track of your victories, moral or otherwise.

Enjoy.

[Torplexed]

ORIGINAL: Koniev

HI everybody -

I'm considering buying this as I have a new found interest in the Civil War.

One question: Is a Union victory almost inevitable because of it's larger population and more abundant resources - barring some colossal blunders, of course?

I play Pacific War and it's very difficult for the Japanese to win. It is usually considered a Japanese victory if they hold out longer than the historical period.

I've been studying the posts and AAR's and want to thank all who participate.

One thing that makes WBTS interesting is that either side can lose a critical leader at any moment. There you are preparing that big push south to Richmond with the Army of the Potomac when suddenly an important corps commander resigns or dies leaving eight brigades leaderless while you try to find an adequate replacement. No two games are alike in this regard. While the game is weighted against the South in terms of resources, they don't have to win the war outright....they just need to keep Lincoln from winning re-election. [;)]