Chickasaw Capital

[Tanaka]

Is it normal for the Union to take this capital the turn after they join the Confederacy? Is this WAD? Never happened to me against the AI but in my first PBEM it did. Just curious? Thought it strange they did not last even one turn?

[BiteNibbleChomp]

It's possible. I've known this strategy to be possible since the day I coded that "evacuate the forts" DE about three years ago. Is it intentional... even I'm not sure on that one. The only real alternative I would have is giving the Chickasaws a unit, and another Indian unit in mid-1861 is a significant increase to CS strength in that part of the map (keeping in mind, neither side accomplished much in that area until about 1863 historically). I don't think that's any better, indeed it's likely worse for game balance &c.

TBH I don't think there's really much point to this tactic. The only way a player is likely to pull it off is if the Union doesn't evacuate the forts, and then uses the garrison regiment in the southernmost fort to capture the Chickasaw capital. That gets them about 5 MPP worth of plunder, and maybe 2 MPP per turn thereafter, which is nothing. No unit morale or FS bonuses either. If they stay in the Chickasaw capital, the fort is going to be open, easily captured by the first CS unit to show up, and then the regiment will be on supply 3 (and regiments are pathetic in combat to begin with) with no entrenchment. If they pull back to the fort, the strategy gets nullified as soon as the CS shows up with a unit to liberate the Chickasaws.

All it really does is prevent the CS from purchasing a Chickasaw unit for a few turns. Given the Union did historically have garrisons in the Indian territory that could have been used for exactly that purpose, I don't see the problem. I suppose if the CS did buy a Chickasaw unit as soon as they entered this would be lost, but this is very easily avoided by just buying other Indians instead until a garrison has been established for the Chickasaws. There's plenty of Indians available for the CS even without them.

TLDR, the consequences of this strategy are pretty minor, I don't have an issue with it.

- BNC

[Tanaka]

It's possible. I've known this strategy to be possible since the day I coded that "evacuate the forts" DE about three years ago. Is it intentional... even I'm not sure on that one. The only real alternative I would have is giving the Chickasaws a unit, and another Indian unit in mid-1861 is a significant increase to CS strength in that part of the map (keeping in mind, neither side accomplished much in that area until about 1863 historically). I don't think that's any better, indeed it's likely worse for game balance &c.

TBH I don't think there's really much point to this tactic. The only way a player is likely to pull it off is if the Union doesn't evacuate the forts, and then uses the garrison regiment in the southernmost fort to capture the Chickasaw capital. That gets them about 5 MPP worth of plunder, and maybe 2 MPP per turn thereafter, which is nothing. No unit morale or FS bonuses either. If they stay in the Chickasaw capital, the fort is going to be open, easily captured by the first CS unit to show up, and then the regiment will be on supply 3 (and regiments are pathetic in combat to begin with) with no entrenchment. If they pull back to the fort, the strategy gets nullified as soon as the CS shows up with a unit to liberate the Chickasaws.

All it really does is prevent the CS from purchasing a Chickasaw unit for a few turns. Given the Union did historically have garrisons in the Indian territory that could have been used for exactly that purpose, I don't see the problem. I suppose if the CS did buy a Chickasaw unit as soon as they entered this would be lost, but this is very easily avoided by just buying other Indians instead until a garrison has been established for the Chickasaws. There's plenty of Indians available for the CS even without them.

TLDR, the consequences of this strategy are pretty minor, I don't have an issue with it.

- BNC

Thanks for the very detailed clarification on this! Very helpful!

[OldCrowBalthazor]

I would always evacuate the forts as Union as these regiments are actually very valuable in places like West Virginia for example. They can't be bought back either so using one of them on the Chickasaw Capital to annoy the CSA is a waste.
It can't be held, and one the capital is retaken, a Chickasaw Indian Cav can be bought again as far as I remember.

[Tanaka]

I would always evacuate the forts as Union as these regiments are actually very valuable in places like West Virginia for example. They can't be bought back either so using one of them on the Chickasaw Capital to annoy the CSA is a waste.
It can't be held, and one the capital is retaken, a Chickasaw Indian Cav can be bought again as far as I remember.

Nice to know!