Matrix Games Forums

I just spent an hour setting up a game as the Confed. to see how
building some ironclads would work on the blockade. built 2 in
Norfolk (Virginia and Tennessee) sent them out and the Fed fleet
backslapped them back into port at 50% damage no problem with
little or no damage to themselves. So much for history! I expect
this is why when i play the Union the Confed AI does not bother with
ironclads. You would have to spend tons to build enough to make
any difference (and arming them with Dalgrens). Also never build
a gunboat on a coastal port. You cannot move them up or down
the coast to support attacks on forts. Your infantry must do it alone.
Fleets have no effect on coastal attacks nor can they run the guns
on river forts to go upstream. This all needs to be addressed in
any possible future FoF2.

You moved your Ironclads alone then I guess, not in a fleet?
If you buy good weapons for them (remember that more will be available if you chose the heavy artillery upgrade (a weapons upgrade)) and place them in a fleet, two ironclads should see a normal Union blockade fleet running 9/10 times. They can REALLY take a beating!
IF I decide to build a fleet as the Confederacy, I will keep the two ships you start with, gather them in New Orleans, build a fleet container, upgrade their weapons and keep them there untill I have built atleast one ironclad in New Orleans as well.

Terje

I had two Reb ironclads in a fleet box upgraded with Dalgren guns. facing this were 9 Federal
ships/frigates. I know the units represent groups of ships so it actually is probably 4 Reb
ironclads vs about 18 Union ships but there were no Union ironclads so I should have totally
disrupted them and sunk some. The outcome of the battle had both Reb ironclads down
50% in damage and only 2 Union ships damaged. Seems totally out of place in an 1862
naval battle when just the Virginia could destroy 4 or more Union ships as it could have and
almost did at Hampton Roads irregardless of how the Union ships were armed.

Basic gunboats seem unable to move at all except by river so building one at Boston is
useless as it will only be able to sit right there.

Don't get me wrong, the game is fun but needs some real work on the naval aspect
so that there is a reason to do anything with them. I would rather have 2 siege gun
units with big Rodman guns than 2 gunboats attacking forts. There is no reason really
to upgrade ships guns as you rarely, if ever, use them on anything. you cannot attack
forts with fleets nor "run the guns" and move fleets upriver.

I really do hope that an FoF2 strategy game or upgrade patch is done. This game has
all the basics needed for a classic ACW game with all the bells and whistles. It sadly
just never went far enough. Almost an afterthought game just using the Napoleonic
game system.

Well, if this game had been released AFTER CoG:EE I guess naval battles might have been a possibility. But as I said, I never see those results you get in my games.

Terje

ORIGINAL: battlegroundvehicles

I just spent an hour setting up a game as the Confed. to see how
building some ironclads would work on the blockade. built 2 in
Norfolk (Virginia and Tennessee) sent them out and the Fed fleet
backslapped them back into port at 50% damage no problem with
little or no damage to themselves. So much for history! I expect
this is why when i play the Union the Confed AI does not bother with
ironclads. You would have to spend tons to build enough to make
any difference (and arming them with Dalgrens). Also never build
a gunboat on a coastal port. You cannot move them up or down
the coast to support attacks on forts. Your infantry must do it alone.
Fleets have no effect on coastal attacks nor can they run the guns
on river forts to go upstream. This all needs to be addressed in
any possible future FoF2.

The AI doesn't really think the way you're concluding it does. If it's not building ironclads it's largely because there are better uses for the money and iron, than that the AI expects defeat.