possible blockade issue

[bstarr]

I could be wrong, but it seems that ports are only shut off if the inlet directly attached to them is blockaded. In other words inland ports are getting a free ride. I know the blockade icon only pops up for Norfolk when I have the inlet at Hampton occupied, but not any of the other ports on the James. If I'm right this is going to play hell later in the game when the Mississippi really comes into play.

[bstarr]

It just dawned on me that this could be WAD and the 'blockaded' status only refers to units transporting in and out of the port and not the economic model.

[Toro12]

If you mouse-hover over the region port symbol, it tells you which waterway is required to blockade that port. So, Hampton Roads only affects adjacent ports, not those up the James.

[bstarr]

Well that doesn't make a lot of sense. Controlling the mouth of a river should shut down all ports on that river, perhaps with rare exceptions like New Orleans, which also shipped out of Lake Pontchartrain.

[Pocus]

We are setting up a feature that will allow that, but this is tricky and won't be generalized as you say. We must be sure it is clear enough to the players that blockading region X will result in <insert list of ports> blockaded. The game is already complex enough we feel.

[bstarr]

You know, I can see where in some cases the way the game plays now works well. For instance as it stands blockading Charleston only blocks the outer ports, those attached to the forts, leaving the main port open. This is actually pretty close to simulating historical accuracy as blockade runners were highly successful at charleston up until the fall of the outer forts. On the other hand, in real life, controlling the mouth of the james completely shuts down that river.

Wow . . . historic accuracy's a bitch, hahaha. I'd hate to be the guy who makes the decisions between accuarcy and playability.

edit: added "in real life"

[Toro12]

No kidding! I kind of relate the current rule this way (and hence, agree with it): blockading the mouth of the Chesapeake is only partially successful (in those days, no radar) because of the ability to slip through at night (hence, raiders and blockade runners). Being adjacent to a port (docks) makes it easier to see activity there (hard to prep a ship for getting underway without noise, lights, and other observable behaviors), but someone coming down the river can slip through. Just my thoughts, in any case. Besides, can Chesapeake really block all ports along the James, etc.? It doesn't really hinder inter-waterway activity, only open sea activity.