Matrix Games Forums

How about an option to merge weakened brigades?

I won't argue the union can build horse farms pretty fast by 1862 if you start in the July 1861 Scenario and can make up the gap. But its cost a lot of money for all those mansions you need to build. And I've never seen the AI do this as the Union.

Rook

Is there any possibility of adding an artillery rating for generals?

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

Iron and Money drive what you need in the game, and it is much easier for the Union to load up and gain both then it is for the CSA

In a sense, true, but again, neither money or Iron will win you the game outright, if they did I wouldn't need camps to replace the troops I am losing in battle.

The simple fact of the matter is, whether historical or not, the CSA starts with a decided advantage in horses, and thats before you do any adjustements.

At most, if you want to minimax Union horse production while still maintaining some Iron production, you can get 30-38 horse a turn, and still have a respectable Iron output.


The CSA can get 39 Iron and 54 Horse, which isn't bad, and still lets them build camps faster while maintaining a respectable Iron production. And given that with British and French "donations" and Blockade Runners they can get decent amounts of Iron, they can and sometimes do come ahead, especially early on...

So, they are building camps faster, replacing more soldiers sooner,.

Sounds about historically accurate to me....now wheres that irony key....

Thresh

ORIGINAL: General Quarters

Victory Points & National Will

I had barely started playing and was not aware of having lost any battles and my VP turned up -2. I probably just missed something. It would be nice if there were a place one could see a breakdown of how those VP and NW points were won or lost.

I have not focused on the National screen where there is such a list. Sorta. I would like it if one could go to something that told what battles, etc., had what VP result. Now that I think of it, that would be a nice feature of the battle reports on the Events Report -- if you told you that you just won or lost 1 VP.

Hi Thresh

the point I was trying to make, you do not need to be taking more losses then the CSA is, you are banging your head against a wall, when you do not have to

and, I got to sort of disagree, money and Iron will win the game for you, once you spend it, if you going to go heavy into Seiges, you need Seige guns or gunboats, and the Guns need to be upgraded, and the buildings or or reseach you need to get to the good ones, are also easyier to get

but, again, that is based on my playstyle

ORIGINAL: Thresh
So, they are building camps faster, replacing more soldiers sooner. Sounds about historically accurate to me....now wheres that irony key....

Thresh

It may sound "accurate" to you..., but it's not reality. Jeff Davis was really worried by the Spring of 1862 as Confederate enlistments were way down. Bull Run had given a false sense of well-being to the situation and the South was facing a huge Union advantage in numbers. Lee and Jackson "earned" their reputations out-manuevering and side-stepping thie Union Mass in the East...., but in the West the numbers were beginning to tell as the South was simply unable to meet all the threats coming it's way.

There should be a manpower cost to build a camp.

If you can tell me a way to conduct a seige where I don't lose more troops than my opponent, I'd be glad for it.

Hell, if you could tell me why I have to take out three forts before I can seige Memphis, I'll be all over that as well.

Thresh

Which is why I was looking for the Irony key...that or a "rolling eyes" one....

Thresh

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

ORIGINAL: Thresh
So, they are building camps faster, replacing more soldiers sooner. Sounds about historically accurate to me....now wheres that irony key....

Thresh

It may sound "accurate" to you..., but it's not reality. Jeff Davis was really worried by the Spring of 1862 as Confederate enlistments were way down. Bull Run had given a false sense of well-being to the situation and the South was facing a huge Union advantage in numbers. Lee and Jackson "earned" their reputations out-manuevering and side-stepping thie Union Mass in the East...., but in the West the numbers were beginning to tell as the South was simply unable to meet all the threats coming it's way.

ORIGINAL: Thresh

If you can tell me a way to conduct a seige where I don't lose more troops than my opponent, I'd be glad for it.

Hell, if you could tell me why I have to take out three forts before I can seige Memphis, I'll be all over that as well.

Thresh

How many Eng's are you using ? , how many Seige Guns (and how strong are they) how many troops do you have, do you have any Gunboats ?

with 3 Forts, you only have to fight one at a time ?

and, if it is not a major need, why are you fighting the forts ?
(the other areas of Tenn are more importent, and then head on to Selma)

if there are no moble CSA troops around, place a Div in that province and move on, the Div will block the province for building troops and passing on it's goods to the south
(with the forts, you are not going to be able to plunder it, to take it out, but the troops in place will block it)

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

ORIGINAL: Thresh

If you can tell me a way to conduct a seige where I don't lose more troops than my opponent, I'd be glad for it.

Hell, if you could tell me why I have to take out three forts before I can seige Memphis, I'll be all over that as well.

Thresh

How many Eng's are you using ? , how many Seige Guns (and how strong are they) how many troops do you have, do you have any Gunboats ? With 3 Forts, you only have to fight one at a time ?

I generally try to create a "Siege Train" Division of 2 13" Mortars and three Brigades with "Engineering" and "Artillery". Keep it on full supply and it will chew up forts fairly quickly

and, if it is not a major need, why are you fighting the forts ? (the other areas of Tenn are more importent, and then head on to Selma)

Gonna take a WAG that he's hoping to clear the Mississippi River for the Victory Condition. It's the only way to get the Game to "give you credit" for cutting the South in half... Do it anywhere else and you get "zippo".

if there are no moble CSA troops around, place a Div in that province and move on, the Div will block the province for building troops and passing on it's goods to the south (with the forts, you are not going to be able to plunder it, to take it out, but the troops in place will block it)

Isn't "plundering" supposed to have a "negative effect" on your score/morale/something? Thought I'd read that somewhere in the rules...

I wish we could take the discussion elsewhere and leave this thread for wishes.

Sonny,

I wish I could play this game as historically accurate as I can, and still get a reasonably accurate outcome.

Currently, thats not possible.

Thresh

On my game, clicking on "Play" on the opening screen does nothing. I tried several times to start the game to no success but my cursor happened to wander over the game name and turned into a little hand and I got in. Wish: Make "Play" open the game.

ORIGINAL: Thresh

Sonny,

I wish I could play this game as historically accurate as I can, and still get a reasonably accurate outcome.

Currently, thats not possible.

Thresh

Much better, You are getting the hang of it.[:'(]

Plundering can impact the national will, but only of the side plundered. Kill a mansion or a plantation and the owner takes a -1 hit to will, that in turn affects the quality of replacements which drags down the quality of the army.
Go on a plundering spree across Tenesee, if you can meet up with a couple of divisions doing the same from the seaward side, won't take long before CSA National Will is in the toilet and replacement morale for the CSA is dragging his elite units ever closer to the level of the Union forces.
Playing against the computer on a high level, avoid battle, get to Wheeling, Cincinatti and Cairo? first and pack them with low quality troops armed with a semi decent weapon, the computer is stupid, if you back off they will attempt a seige and lose huge quantities of troops. While they are doing it, just sit and tool up your relieving force, when you can't lose surround the beseigers with Union controlled provinces and then hit them and watch them surrender. While you are doing it send the rubbish off to loot and plunder your way around the unprotected cities of the south.
Easy win on Major so far

Oh and that is with Quick combat only.

Plundering seems too powerful to me. In my game, Ky went rebel. The Union came in and plundered Louisville and then Frankfort and my National Will was in the tank. This doesn't seem historical either. The Union did not plunder and had no reason to plunder cities like Nashville, Memphis, or New Orleans and, if they had, it is unlikely it would have reduced the southern will to fight. Maybe this effect should be limited to a few cities, such as Atlanta and Richmond, where it might well have reduced Southern will.

Plundering should have an adverse affect to the plunderer as well.  Frank Hunter made it affect European relations which I thought was pretty cool.