Destroying the CSA again

[battlevonwar]

Finished my last Union Game and the South Surrendered due to morale loss. The opponent went out of his way to try new things. He flanked around Maryland into PA and used nearly 8 Indian Cavalry in an attempt to get into Missouri. He invaded the Far West and got Kentucky through Diplomacy but in the end... I just waited ended his trade and his country literally fell below 10% FS in November of 1864... It was a slow grind through '62-'63 but steady grind. I suppose I could of ended it earlier but it was rather entertaining to drain him. He built tons of fortifications throughout Richmond and they were tough for a bit but you just hammer them with Artillery or go around them and they are never going to be enough to hold out or to put up a real defense.

I had one CSA Minor Victory against me in all my games. Sort of a fluke... Never seen the CSA able to withstand the Union so far. Even when I played them.

All this to boot I'm not the best player at all. Many of my games I made multiple errors! I think I'd of never lost a Union Game had I looked at the game rules.

Seems the South has issues as the MPPs stand with holding it's objectives to ever get a result of doing better than history. Also Virginia is very easy to cakewalk over. I almost think it would be better if there was a ton more Objectives in Virginia and Stealth Trade(like dropping off boxes of Ammo and Guns-Cannons-picking up Cotton in Makeshift Ports across the map)

plus an Engineer on turn 1...

[Beriand]

Yeah, that is more of less reality of 1.02. I mean, when games ends at the end of 1864, it is not so far away from reasonably strong CSA, but still not there, definitely. Thus we wait for 1.03 coming someday soon, with changed forts/trade/fortifications, though it seems someday never comes

[OldCrowBalthazor]

I'm playing CSA v1.01 and clobbering my Union opponent.
Still....v1.03 (when it comes) would of made things easier. Hell, v1.02 would of been a boon with getting Longstreet and 300 MMP extra.
I would have to say I'm using every trick in the book to keeping my head outa the Federals nooses.

[battlevonwar]

Yeah I remember your Union, you clobbered me. Of course I tried to hold the front and that was viable against rookies. I think with a little boost to MPPs, Forts and Trade it will give the CSA a few more Divisions/Corps in 1864-65 forcing the Union to really be strict with it's units. Not tossing them away as she can do now. I had 140 losses to a 120 losses against my last CSA Opponent yet still won the game.

Yeah, that is more of less reality of 1.02. I mean, when games ends at the end of 1864, it is not so far away from reasonably strong CSA, but still not there, definitely. Thus we wait for 1.03 coming someday soon, with changed forts/trade/fortifications, though it seems someday never comes

[battlevonwar]

OldCrowBalthazor,

I am not sure who you're playing but I don't think they're properly playing the game. Is he trying to fight you too early? I find that doesn't work with the Union. You sort of sit out 1862 and wait for your built in leadership(leadership tech to take over) Then you also can afford and have more Corps in the field. Plus 5 Marines swimming around will tie down about 10 Divisions/Brigades on Mobile+NOLA+Wilmington+Savannah and Charleston. Unless he wants to give those up and that will be about 20-30%^ FS right ... reality is the CSA needs a Corp/Cav/HQ or 2 to counterattack any strong objectives too... Think that's 1750 MPPs-2500 MPPs right there just to keep trade open!

Considering you don't have any of your own ports that you really worry about as the CSA can't afford a Marine or 2, 100% of your units are on the frontline. Meanwhile the CSA has to guard Richmond(Surrounding Cities) and all it's Objective Cities. She can't afford to go on any offensive. Once buried behind the DC Riverline and waiting in Kentucky the Union just waits for a Pile of Units and Stalingrads the CSA. Then Flanks with her Superior Numbers in '64. It's really hard if the CSA wants to back up just in time. If she has forts but Richmond can't hold for certain and the only thing that really stops the Union is the Supply Issues. On a diet of 900 MPPs or less you can't rebuild what he destroys from June '62 on.

By Middle of '63 the Game should entirely swing Union, the CSA has to give ground city by city. Praying that the supply is so bad and her counterattacks KO enough Union Units to give her a Minor Win.

This is if the CSA Player is good enough to know when to retreat! You have to give up Northern Virginia in '63 entirely but Richmond and let the Union slowly grind on your Forts there/Forts around Tennessee's Interior and Louisiana ... It's impossible for the CSA to hold her ground except where the Supply goes cold for the Union. Knowing the Supply Cities I think is key. If you can even keep North Carolina Rail open and that requires another 4 or 5 Units and perhaps Corp to CounterAttack... Gee the game is really all Union. I could show you!

I'm playing CSA v1.01 and clobbering my Union opponent.
Still....v1.03 (when it comes) would of made things easier. Hell, v1.02 would of been a boon with getting Longstreet and 300 MMP extra.
I would have to say I'm using every trick in the book to keeping my head outa the Federals nooses.

[OldCrowBalthazor]

I'm playing Gaming With The Colonel. I have layed traps and faked retreats to get over on him. You are right about letting them come to us (as CSA).
We both have an on going series with both p.o.v. on YT.
Shameless promotion here but here are links to my current turn and his channel. There's a link to my channel on my profile signature.

CSA Turn 28 Oct 4, 1862: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N88eO6432U0&t=1096s

Gaming With The Colonel: https://www.youtube.com/c/GamingwiththeColonel

Atm I am booked up with future planned matches with other YouTubers that also do episodic series of the SC games.
One that is long planned with another person who is a very strong player should be starting this fall. We are waiting at the very least till the next version starts out.
I am also am working on my spare time testing some mods in the alpha and beta stages of development...and this alone is sucking up considerable time. Fun time..but time.
Perhaps in the future we can give it a go.

[BiteNibbleChomp]

Thus we wait for 1.03 coming someday soon, with changed forts/trade/fortifications, though it seems someday never comes

That's on me, sorry about that
I had been told that the patch had been sent to Matrix on IIRC the 17th. 1.02 went out within 48 hours of being sent to Matrix, I was under the impression that 1.03 would be the same. Turns out the powers that be have decided to do this one a bit differently (or maybe 1.02 was the outlier given we wanted it out for the Steam release - I'm not sure, this is the first time I've done this ).
In the couple of weeks since we have gotten a few more improvements into the patch, so the delay does mean you'll be getting an even better update than originally planned. For what it's worth, Matrix has this revised version now.
Thanks for your patience, and apologies for any disappointment my previous comments have caused.

- BNC

[metabagel]

I was his opponent. I tried a tactic which is very effective against the AI, which is to spam brigades. You can build more brigades than the build limit if you spam them before the scripted brigades spawn. I don't know if this is a bug, but you can build a ton of brigades. Brigades build faster than divisions, so there is a window of opportunity where you can outman the union by something like a factor of 2-to-1.

This works well against the AI, because it tends to leave gaps in its line early on. You can use those gaps to break out into the backfield, cut units off from supply, and encircle them.

Against a human, it's not nearly as effective, because even under effective southern generalship, brigades are ineffective offensively. You've got to get into the backfield and create some chaos. And a human opponent will make sure not to allow you into the backfield, and if there is a risk of that, they can always bring in reinforcements by rail from the west.

After failing to outflank the union, I was able to send some brigades to southern coastal cities, and was pretty effective at defending them from marines. But, brigades are really weak later on.

There are things I would do differently. I'm not sure that spamming brigades is a viable strategy against a human opponent. I should have turtled and traded space for time sooner. As it was, there was one turn when the union destroyed 7 divisions in one turn. I want to say this was in mid-1863. I would have liked to have turtled exactly one turn before that fiasco.

Lasted until September 1864, which is decent. Lost due to national morale, but Atlanta would probably have been lost in the next few turns. Richmond fell shortly before the end of the game.

[metabagel]

I agree with battlevonwar regarding Garibaldi being OP (overpowered). I probably wouldn't play another full campaign with the Garibaldi scripts enabled. In reality, the first couple of years in the east was one ass-kicking after another for the slow and incompetent union generals. It's difficult for the south to go on the offensive against a Garibaldi-led army. It tends to turn into a back-and-forth stalemate, which favors the north.

[metabagel]

I'm playing CSA v1.01 and clobbering my Union opponent.
Still....v1.03 (when it comes) would of made things easier. Hell, v1.02 would of been a boon with getting Longstreet and 300 MMP extra.
I would have to say I'm using every trick in the book to keeping my head outa the Federals nooses.

I'll check out the game. I watched it a bit earlier on.

Don't count your chickens. I am playing a game as Union, and my opponent cleverly was able to outflank and destroy Grant and his entire army early on. However, it's now 1863, and the Union is well in the driver's seat. Richmond has fallen. It's just a matter of time.

I believe there was no 300 MPP extra with v1.02. That was for one of the shorter campaigns.