Lessons Learned for the South

[kennonlightfoot]

Lessons Learned for the South from my first full campaign against a player (see AAR) in no particular order.

(Disclaimer: Keep in mind these observations haven’t been tested against Union tactics that have been adjusted to take advantage of Rebel weaknesses)

Don’t let the AI handle your production. It likes to make lots of heavy artillery and sometimes gets stuck on making ironclads.

The CSA is in a difficult defensive position. It has two main land fronts, one in Virginia and the other in Tennessee. Then you have this seemingly endless coastal front that extends from Norfolk to Galveston. And, you have the Mississippi itself which can be dominated by Union gunboats cutting the west off. How you solve this problem determines your chance of winning or losing, particularly in 1861 when you have few men or leaders to throw at the problem.

Supply is your weakness. Don’t waste it. It will determine how many troops you can field and how effective you can fight. Managing it is a critical task.

First though Command. The South is suppose to have the leadership advantage but you might not thinks so in the summer of 1861 when you can’t even find enough qualified Generals to fill out your Command tree. Remember it only cost you 12 Political Points to dismiss Gen. Cooper later so you can use his dismissal, the promotion of one of your AC’s to replace him and then replacement of that AC to create a effective command structure for only a 12 PP cost. So pick your initial AC’s and TC’s with this in mind. I chose to not fill all the positions to keep them open. This has to be viewed as a trade off because you get PP’s for having those positions filled equal to the Leader’s Political rating each month. This may more than offset the cost of getting rid of him later.

Your first overwhelming task in 1861 is finding a way to protect your extensive shore line. Remember that most regions get an automatic militia creation when they are first invaded. This with a small garrison may be enough since the Union is rather limited in how much they can muster for these attacks. Your problems is in regions like Pensacola and Elizabeth City that don’t generate any militia and in regions like Jacksonville and Galveston that are so isolated that if they fall you can’t easily muster a force to retake them. Your first task in 1861 is finding leaders and men to garrison these. Remember you can’t be strong everywhere so try to find alternate methods of protecting. A single mobile force in the Carolinas might be able to handle multiple ports rather than heavily garrisoning each one. Galveston is an important one over the course of the war. I try to keep 2-3 trained infantry and a good leader able to handle the militia they will get. If the Union wants it they will have to pay for it. Remember a well positioned force in Virginia can cover both the Virginia and North Carolina ports.

New Orleans is a special case. You want to hold it open as long as you can because the river controls about 30-40 points of supply per turn. Put infantry and heavy artillery in the forts at the mouth as soon as you can and make the Union pay to close it. Keep in mind as the game goes on the Union will close it and keeping enough force in Fort St. Philip with its 3x supply cost can be substantial.

Now the question of forts and where to put them. It may appear that relative to your supply which at start is over 300 that there is no problem building them where ever you want. Don’t do it that cost of 11-12 supply with a good administrative leader adds up and you will find you won’t have the 40-50 points it takes to make a level 2 fort in key positions like Richmond and Vicksburg later. Build forts only in critical contention spots you aim to hold for a long period. My candidates for early forts are the coastal ports, New Orleans, Vicksburg, Memphis, Richmond and Petersburg. Don’t get carried away building fortified lines. You won’t hold them and you will run out of supply to soon. Aim to get Richmond, Petersburg and Vicksburg up to level 2 by mid 1862. Nashville, Chattanooga and Atlanta are other candidates. You have to judge whether they are worth fortifying based on how fast the Yankees are coming.

Raiders: Build about four then stop. They cost a lot, 31 points. I have found that about four do about as much political point damage as a dozen. I don’t think they capture enough supply to be worth while but don’t have much experience on that. The supply damage they do the Union won’t amount to anything.

Whether to invade Kentucky before the Union does? I have had total bad luck with this one. Every time I have invaded the Union got initiative and took everything back the next turn. So its one of those do you feel lucky things. You can pretty much bet they have their best army in Cairo waiting to go in and their second best in Cincinnati waiting to go across too. If they get any kind of initiative they will be all over you. I think its best for the Confederate to leave Kentucky alone as long as they can to act as a buffer while they get ready.

The defense of Kentucky and Tennessee. Go take a good look at the map I posted. The Union with its gunboats and transports totally dominate this area. There is a reason A. Johnston ended up fighting at Shiloh for his first major battle rather than at Nashville or Bowling Green. The South has to decide where to put their main army which is usually protecting Memphis as long as they can and where to trade space for time which is usually Kentucky and middle Tennessee. If the Union player does not handle his gunboats well you might be able to maintain control of the Tennessee River and fight on both sides but once you lose the transports you are cut in two.

Heavy Artillery is a specialty unit that has one primary function, disputing control of rivers. Rivers are the South’s weakness. Union fleets in the mouth of the Mississippi, Mobile Bay, Savannah River (haven’t checked this one) and the James will completely shut down those ports. HA positioned at key points along the Mississippi River can prevent the Union gunboats from taking over these rivers. You want to make HA’s but not too many. They are most useful in the early part of the war when it is still possible to dispute control but not later as land units make it impossible. Also, form them around good artillery leaders so they are effective and keep moving them around so the Union can’t easily counter them. A large concentration at Memphis will keep the Union from penetrating down the Mississippi River. Paducah if you can get it is the place to lock up all the rivers. Dickson is a good spot to hold the Tennessee open for defending Nashville but watch out they don’t get cut off. Remember you can’t do everything so don’t spread the guns out in one or two gun packets in every fort and port you own. Concentrate them where they can do some ship damage. Keep in mind they can’t retreat so don’t let them stay around once land armies come near. Withdraw them from places like Memphis and move them to Vicksburg. If the Union has fleets blocking rivers make up a large mobile battery and move it by rail to different ports with rivers to break the blockade, then move on before they can concentrate fleets against them.

Virginia is a special case. You can’t win the war here but you can lose it. You want to keep enough here to be sure you are keeping major Union forces tied down but no more than necessary. Manassas isn’t a good place to fight. Let if fall if the Union ever gets enough initiative to move their whole army against it. The Valley is another vulnerable area. If you get you main army stuck in it then the Union will be free to strike against Norfolk and Elizabeth City because you can’t reach them from the Valley. Best to let them over extend then knock them back with short offensive campaigns.

In my game the Union made some mistakes early on as part of the learning curve that they couldn’t recover from but against the right strategies the Union is going to be pressing you hard like during the Civil War. Expect to lose Tennessee by early 1862. Expect to lose ports and have 100% blockades up by the end of 1862. Hope that you don’t lose Vicksburg and Chattanooga before mid 1863. Just remember the only thing that really matters is the Union Political Point level and whether it’s above 1000. If it isn’t by November 1864 they lose. Your objective is to try to keep them down in the 900’s preferably the low end so no single victory will get them into a safe zone. It doesn’t matter how much of the South they occupy if they don’t have the 1000+ needed. This may even lead to a strategy of avoiding fights that might yield Major Victories. Especially when November of 1864 starts getting near and they aren’t near the 1000 level.

Hope this helps.

[Frido1207]

Hi kwhitehead,
 
thx for sharing your thoughts & insights with us.
As i´m still learning the game (don´t have so much time to play it, as i would like), its a good "check list", for my own strategical considerations.

[tran505]

Great write-up!! I agree with most, except maybe I like having more raiders out there. They can drive the Union a bit crazy, and they have to commit a lot of resources to hunt them down. Those resources will end up doing something else you will like a whole lot less if you only build 4 raiders. I also like invading Kentucky, given the chance. Starting the war North of KY appeals to me, as does having forts on the Ohio river. THis really messes up the Union transport system. Most likely though, you will not be given the chance, because the Union can afford to invade early, and even if the state goes fully Rebel, it really does not hurt them all that much in the long run.


At a slightly higher level, I think the really interesting choices the Confeds need to make are:

-- How much and how to protect the coast?
-- How hard to fight in the Trans-Mississippi?
-- When to counterattack

One of the problems iwth the coast is that if you try to protect everywhere, your field armies will probably be too lean, but if you don't protect enough, you can lose some major objective cities. My personal preference is to be big where I want to be big, and very small everywhere else. Wilmington, Mobile, and Charleston are too big to give away. Because the supply issues kwhitehead discussed, fighting for the forts is important, but also give you fair warning when New Orleans is vunerable, so N.O. does not have to be as big as the other prime objectives. I also think Galveston is very important, because of the port, and it is a great gateway to taking lots of points in Texas and Eastern Louisiana. Other cities, it gets to be more and more of a painful tradeoff between coastal strength and army strength. That being said, you also need to watch to be sure captured coastal cities are not loading up an cavalry to drive inland.

I like a tough defence West of the Mississippi. You need to deny the Union easy points, especially in 1862 when you have enough guys to do something about it. Defend Little Rock like a demon. It channels the Union offensive. Once it falls, they begin having options of where to go, which makes defending much harder. And really watch out when the upper Mississippi is cleared, and reinforcements can come in by transport. THat being said, I think there is also a time to bug out, and salvage as much as you can before it becomes impossible to get back to the main theater. When both Little Rock and Memphis are gone, you are starting to get close. When Vicksburg is threatened, it is last call to leave, or be prepared to have your troops bottled up fighting where the war is effectively already over.

Counteratacking is fun, but may only be a means where you are accellerating your own destruction by increasing the attrition. Attrition, especially after 1862, is not your friend. Sooner or later, you will get into a grind-fest, and you will lose, but don't make it any worse than it already is. The main exception may be the coastal areas. Force the Union to garrison, and make them pay if they do not. Once they get it in their head that their hard-fought aquatic acquisitions are not safe, they will put more of their valuable (and believe it or not) LIMITED troos in defensive mode. Other than that, simply be opportunistic. If you see a mistake that can be taken advantage of, go for it! If you are not sure, maybe better to take a pass and be patient.

And yes, this game is all about the political point totals. Drive the Union down and he will draft fewer times, or drive his PP total down even lower if he tries it. Drive the Union down and he will not get the EP. If he does not get the EP then he will not get black troops. He WILL pay more for each volunteer and draftee he gets (and therefore get fewer of them) and once war weariness begins becomes an issue in '63, and without black troops, he will begin to lose momentum. At this point, time is starting NOT to be his friend. The very best opportunity to win this game as the South is in minimizing PP losses in '62. Do that, and it becomes increasingly harder for the Union to get their momentum going. Don't do that, and you begin facing the Union hammer that will eventually pound you into the ground.

I am sure there are many ways to do it, but this surely is my own general approach.

- P

Anybody out there believe that invading the North in the East makes sense? Or is it a death trap? Thought about it....[&:], never tried it. [:-]

[cmunson]

Anybody out there believe that invading the North in the East makes sense? Or is it a death trap? Thought about it...., never tried it.

I've invaded the North above Harpers Ferry. The AI doesn't even really defend and it doesn't have to so no death trap. Because the rail lines don't connect to Virginia it is very hard to reinforce and sustain any kind of effort. More of a nuisance really and probably not worth the troop committment. I've tried to hook right towards Baltimore but the Union stops you dead and they have the advantage of rail transport.

I have a different view in the West. Hold line below Paducah at Humbolt at all costs and let the Union come through Kentucy like a steam roller towards Nashville. Put a strong army in Clarksville and counterattack behind them cutting off their supply. By the time the Union gets to Nashville his army is dissapated somewhat in garrison duty in Kentucy so this is easier than it sounds. Well timed cavlary raids cutting the rail behind him doesn't let him reinforce the rear area garrisons you are attacking. I frequently do a pinning attack on his main army also to prevent him coming back and helping. If this works and you might take Lexington and Louisville in the first year and assuming KY went South you have four much needed factories turning out supplies and recruits. If you do this the North will start a slow decline as they lose many pp's for invading KY and the draft and I find they never get back to 1000.

I'm a big believer in ironclads to disrupt the blockade and keep the Mississippi free of Union gunboats. I build six factories and six ironclads the first year. Far more useful to me than Hvy artillery of which I build far less than most people do as I find unless you have four or more in a level two fort it is not that useful. You get some hits but are eventually overwhelmed because the Union has so many ships. However, one ironclad can take on 4 gunboats and eventually prevail.

Chris

[kennonlightfoot]

I am curious as to peoples experience with Ironclads for the South.  I have had an opponent build and try to use them and sometimes the AI.  So far they have been totally ineffective.  One got sunk trying to take on two cruisers.  Most of the time they get stuck out in a coastal zone after and inconclusive fight and I concentrate the Union fleet against it and sink them.  It's hard to judge their combat effectiveness since their attack factor is only slightly better than a cruiser and the get a defense +1 for armor but it doesn't seem as significant as a good naval leader.

[Harvey Birdman]

Hi kwhitehead.

I am curious as to peoples experience with Ironclads for the South. I have had an opponent build and try to use them and sometimes the AI. So far they have been totally ineffective. One got sunk trying to take on two cruisers. Most of the time they get stuck out in a coastal zone after and inconclusive fight and I concentrate the Union fleet against it and sink them. It's hard to judge their combat effectiveness since their attack factor is only slightly better than a cruiser and the get a defense +1 for armor but it doesn't seem as significant as a good naval leader.

At wars end I had 42 confederate ironclads and 23 under repair or construction. 50/50 split?

The north had: on seas/repair cruisers:6/1 ironclads:21/1 gunboats:17/1 transports:68/6.

Ironclads rock against cruisers, gunboats and transports. Easy experience points for southern ironclads and easy success points for naval leaders.

Parker 9 command
Page Davis Cooke 8 command
Bulock Buchanan 7

3 6's
4 5's

Having watched a lot of confederate ironclads vs union cruisers. You were unlucky.

[Harvey Birdman]

Hi Chris

I have a different view in the West. Hold line below Paducah at Humbolt at all costs and let the Union come through Kentucy like a steam roller towards Nashville. Put a strong army in Clarksville and counterattack behind them cutting off their supply. By the time the Union gets to Nashville his army is dissapated somewhat in garrison duty in Kentucy so this is easier than it sounds. Well timed cavlary raids cutting the rail behind him doesn't let him reinforce the rear area garrisons you are attacking. I frequently do a pinning attack on his main army also to prevent him coming back and helping. If this works and you might take Lexington and Louisville in the first year and assuming KY went South you have four much needed factories turning out supplies and recruits. If you do this the North will start a slow decline as they lose many pp's for invading KY and the draft and I find they never get back to 1000.

I like the way you think.

I'm a big believer in ironclads to disrupt the blockade and keep the Mississippi free of Union gunboats. I build six factories and six ironclads the first year. Far more useful to me than Hvy artillery of which I build far less than most people do as I find unless you have four or more in a level two fort it is not that useful. You get some hits but are eventually overwhelmed because the Union has so many ships. However, one ironclad can take on 4 gunboats and eventually prevail.

Heavy artillery sucks against gunboats. They get damaged too easy and clog up factory production. At Fort Dixon (not agaainst the ai. ai doesn't send em up the Tenessee or Cumblerland. A human will to cut off your retreat route from Fort Dixon ie see retreat rule's for rivers) and the coastal fort/ports they're more useful. Cuz of the retreat rules for heavey art in forts.

Ironclads at Memphis rock against gunboats.

[kennonlightfoot]

Regarding Clarksville idea.  It can backfire.  The Union can run gunboats up the Clumberland taking the loses along the way and isolate this group.  Then attack it from Bowling Green while taking, if not already taken, the two ajoining regions.  The whole force will surrender which is something the South can't assorb.  Do it only if you have a firm grip on the rivers.
 
I am supprised the Ironclad idea works.  42 Ironclads is a lot of production.  Even with FOW the Union should get enough info to start their own building program to counter it and they have seeming endless production potential and generally better naval leaders to command them.  If they are used primarially on the rivers then I can see how the South could out produce the Union there if they can keep the mouth of the Mississippi blocked so they can't be reinforced from the ocean side.
 
The problem I am having with the value of Ironclads is the numbers don't reflect that much advantage for them.  A Cruiser has an Attack Value of 6 and a Defense Value of 23 (24 for Union after Jan63).  An Ironclad has an Attack Value of 7 and a Defense Value of 24 plus the +1 Armor.  This means that a Cruiser attack an Ironclad with an adjusted AV of 5 (6-1) while the Ironclad still has an AV of 7.  However, these are further modified by the Naval Leader and in most cases the Union Naval adjustment will make up for the difference.  While the Ironclads are supperior they aren't going to on average clear the sea of cruisers especially when the cruisers are massed.

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: kwhitehead

Regarding Clarksville idea.  It can backfire.  The Union can run gunboats up the Clumberland taking the loses along the way and isolate this group.  Then attack it from Bowling Green while taking, if not already taken, the two ajoining regions.  The whole force will surrender which is something the South can't assorb.  Do it only if you have a firm grip on the rivers.

I am supprised the Ironclad idea works.  42 Ironclads is a lot of production.  Even with FOW the Union should get enough info to start their own building program to counter it and they have seeming endless production potential and generally better naval leaders to command them.  If they are used primarially on the rivers then I can see how the South could out produce the Union there if they can keep the mouth of the Mississippi blocked so they can't be reinforced from the ocean side.

The problem I am having with the value of Ironclads is the numbers don't reflect that much advantage for them.  A Cruiser has an Attack Value of 6 and a Defense Value of 23 (24 for Union after Jan63).  An Ironclad has an Attack Value of 7 and a Defense Value of 24 plus the +1 Armor.  This means that a Cruiser attack an Ironclad with an adjusted AV of 5 (6-1) while the Ironclad still has an AV of 7.  However, these are further modified by the Naval Leader and in most cases the Union Naval adjustment will make up for the difference.  While the Ironclads are supperior they aren't going to on average clear the sea of cruisers especially when the cruisers are massed.

The AI is smart enough to make the Clarksville tactic work (speaking from experience).

[Harvey Birdman]

I am supprised the Ironclad idea works. 42 Ironclads is a lot of production. Even with FOW the Union should get enough info to start their own building program to counter it and they have seeming endless production potential and generally better naval leaders to command them. If they are used primarially on the rivers then I can see how the South could out produce the Union there if they can keep the mouth of the Mississippi blocked so they can't be reinforced from the ocean side.

At the start, halt the 3 art in production and build 33 factories. Surviving on free trade till April 62.

By minimal fort building, mounted infantry creating and spreading 2-4 infantry out on resource centres at the front you can supply inf and cal off resources instead of supply as much as possible. I also created militia training/resource foraging corps.(Hardee,Lawton, Jackson and Longstreet) to minimize supply usage and maximize leader development.

Then in April 62 you've got 66 factories and can produce 22 ironclads. Lot's of supply, art and heavy art.

The problem I am having with the value of Ironclads is the numbers don't reflect that much advantage for them. A Cruiser has an Attack Value of 6 and a Defense Value of 23 (24 for Union after Jan63). An Ironclad has an Attack Value of 7 and a Defense Value of 24 plus the +1 Armor. This means that a Cruiser attack an Ironclad with an adjusted AV of 5 (6-1) while the Ironclad still has an AV of 7. However, these are further modified by the Naval Leader and in most cases the Union Naval adjustment will make up for the difference. While the Ironclads are supperior they aren't going to on average clear the sea of cruisers especially when the cruisers are massed.

Just having watched alot of ironclad vs cruiser combat: it just seems like ironclad to hit cruiser > 50% chance whereas cruiser to hit ironclad < 50% chance.
Union ironclads vs confederate ironclads seem to get a lot of double hit kills. I lost 5-15 ironclads that way.

I think feasting on gunboats and transports made a lot of experience points. 5 3star 5 2 star 11 1 star and 21 0 star. Might explain the combat results.

The commitment rules for naval warfare make it hard to mass in the ocean. If the union masses their cruisers than the South gets more free trade supplies. [;)]

The irony is in land warfare the south has 2 threatres and a long coast to defend whereas in naval warfare the north has a lot of ocean to defend/blockade.

10.2.1 Naval Combat Unit Selection and Commmmitment
Unit Commander Selection by unattached units: Any defending unit that is not attached to a Unit Commander will automatically select one from the available leaders in the region. To be available a leader must have command points remaining and must not have moved during the reaction phase. If there is no available leader, an unattached combat unit will fight with no leader benefits.

Naval Combat Unit Commitment in River Areas: There is no commitment process and all naval units will engage in combat. There is a limit to the number of naval units that may engage in naval combat in ocean and coastal areas. The computer determines this by first figuring out the number of naval units in the area on the side with the greatest number of naval units, calling this number X. It then rolls a Die(X) to determine a number Y. It then rolls a Die(Y) to determine the number of naval units from each side that may engage in naval combat. For example, six Union naval units are in an Ocean area with two Confederate naval units. First roll a Die(6), Let’s say it is a five. Then roll a Die(5). Let’s say it is a three. Three of the six Union naval units will be committed to the battle and both Confederate naval units will be committed.