Fighting Spirit Cities

[PvtBenjamin]

Instead of blubbering my way thru the game I decided to do some research. I specifically have 2 questions on Fighting Spirit because FS seems very important.

1) Correct me if I'm wrong but Texas only had a few battles in Eastern Texas during the Civil War (attached). I'm wondering why Texas then is the fourth ranked state for the South in City(Capital etc) Fighting Spirit points (40 & 4 cities)? Virginia has 105, Louisiana 60, Tennessee 55 and Texas 40 ahead of SC (30), NC/GA/AL at 25 etc. So why is Texas so high? I also don't see the historic relevance of El Paso, Santa Fe & Denver all having 5 points for the North but its only 5 points.


http://www.civilwar.com/resources/battle-map-27475.html


2) Capturing and retaking FS cities. Obviously when you take a city your opponent loses FS but it seems if your opponent retakes the same city they get 50% back (great idea!!). Is this only a one time deal or if I recapture the same city AGAIN does my opponent lose the FS points again (2x).

Below from the Guide.

"Some particularly important locations, such as Washington DC or Atlanta, are marked
with a label ‘FS Objective’. If captured, these locations will greatly decrease their former
owner’s Fighting Spirit (usually by between 2000-5000 points, although Richmond and other
key locations are worth as much as 20,000 points). Should these locations be recaptured,
their owners will receive a positive boost to their Fighting Spirit, usually worth 50% of the
loss they suffered when it fell. Furthermore, some of the more valuable FS Objectives will
also reward their conquerors with a Fighting Spirit bonus"


Many Thanks

[battlevonwar]

Not sure why Texas would have a high value. . . Should likely be more distributed? Texas itself was cut off during the Civil War and ignored as he had no value or significance without a land connection to the rest of the South after the Anaconda Plan worked.

[BiteNibbleChomp]

Instead of blubbering my way thru the game I decided to do some research. I specifically have 2 questions on Fighting Spirit because FS seems very important.

1) Correct me if I'm wrong but Texas only had a few battles in Eastern Texas during the Civil War (attached). I'm wondering why Texas then is the fourth ranked state for the South in City(Capital etc) Fighting Spirit points (40 & 4 cities)? Virginia has 105, Louisiana 60, Tennessee 55 and Texas 40 ahead of SC (30), NC/GA/AL at 25 etc. So why is Texas so high? I also don't see the historic relevance of El Paso, Santa Fe & Denver all having 5 points for the North but its only 5 points.

I'm not sure how you got those numbers?

Every settlement on the map belonging to the Union, Confederacy, or a European power, is worth 2 FS points, ie. if captured, the occupier will gain 2 FS/turn and the occupied will lose 2 FS/turn. That's what "FS Value: 2" means. Towns are 5, Cities are 25 &c. Texas has a lot of these only because it is a large state.
Locations marked "FS Objective" have some additional one-off bonuses and penalties associated with their capture - for instance the fall of Nashville drops CS FS by 5000 pts.

El Paso was the CS base for the New Mexico campaign, once it falls that campaign has clearly failed, hence CS FS dropping. Santa Fe was the territorial capital and Denver would be officially named such in 1867 (the town of Golden was technically the capital of Colorado Territory before that, but Denver was still the more important of the two).

Instead of blubbering my way thru the game I decided to do some research. I specifically have 2 questions on Fighting Spirit because FS seems very important.

1) Correct me if I'm wrong but Texas only had a few battles in Eastern Texas during the Civil War (attached). I'm wondering why Texas then is the fourth ranked state for the South in City(Capital etc) Fighting Spirit points (40 & 4 cities)? Virginia has 105, Louisiana 60, Tennessee 55 and Texas 40 ahead of SC (30), NC/GA/AL at 25 etc. So why is Texas so high? I also don't see the historic relevance of El Paso, Santa Fe & Denver all having 5 points for the North but its only 5 points.


http://www.civilwar.com/resources/battle-map-27475.html


2) Capturing and retaking FS cities. Obviously when you take a city your opponent loses FS but it seems if your opponent retakes the same city they get 50% back (great idea!!). Is this only a one time deal or if I recapture the same city AGAIN does my opponent lose the FS points again (2x).

These are one-off events - if a city is captured, liberated and then captured again, that second capture will not trigger any further FS shifts (other than the per-turn shift that affects every town).

- BNC

[PvtBenjamin]

Thank you for taking the time to answer, much appreciated. I didn't realize every town/settlement effects FS, in SC Europe there are designated NM (National Morale) cities like Moscow, all others don't count towards NM.

First Nashville has a FS of 25 so the effect is (FSx1000)/5?

I guess I don't understand why Texas would have 4 FS cities (Galveston - 5, Ft Worth 5, San Antonio -25 & Austin - 5) given they had minimal fighting in the actual war.

Actually Texas has 45-50 cities & settlements, I don't have time to add it all up but it looks like Texas is more important to reducing Southern FS in the game than NC & SC combined. Why would that be when there were only 3 fairly minor land battles in far eastern Texas?

Also why do all these cities & settlements in the middle of nowhere have 8 supply?

I have some other major questions on Fighting Spirit which I'll put in another post.

thanks again.

[Bobo2025]

Texas basically acts like a bank of CSA morale in game terms. Realistically they need to have enough morale to fight and if you jam all of that into places with actual population density then the union can take it too easily. Also, while Texas wasn't a site of active fighting it would certainly lower CSA morale if the Union was rampaging through the state.

Settlement/city supply is off. I mean Pea Ridge was sustaining a fully cutoff Confederate brigade for months - hell it was allowing it to rebuild every turn. This is a town that didn't have > 100 people in the mid-20thc let alone the 19th. This is a broader issue for me across all the SC series and the way they handle supply/reinforcing from cities/towns that are cut off from primary or secondary supply sources.

[PvtBenjamin]

Texas basically acts like a bank of CSA morale in game terms. Realistically they need to have enough morale to fight and if you jam all of that into places with actual population density then the union can take it too easily. Also, while Texas wasn't a site of active fighting it would certainly lower CSA morale if the Union was rampaging through the state.

Settlement/city supply is off. I mean Pea Ridge was sustaining a fully cutoff Confederate brigade for months - hell it was allowing it to rebuild every turn. This is a town that didn't have > 100 people in the mid-20thc let alone the 19th. This is a broader issue for me across all the SC series and the way they handle supply/reinforcing from cities/towns that are cut off from primary or secondary supply sources.

They need to get the MPP's in another way IMO. All the North needs to do is get a cavalry behind enemy lines in Texas and they can wreak havoc, everyone will figure this out in MP.

A few year ago SC Europe made some major changes to how supply works and it now works quite well sort of surprised here.

[BillRunacre]

Settlement/city supply is off. I mean Pea Ridge was sustaining a fully cutoff Confederate brigade for months - hell it was allowing it to rebuild every turn. This is a town that didn't have > 100 people in the mid-20thc let alone the 19th. This is a broader issue for me across all the SC series and the way they handle supply/reinforcing from cities/towns that are cut off from primary or secondary supply sources.

Hi

If a resource is cut off on all sides by enemy forces then (unless it's a Key Resource) it will have a maximum strength of 3, which would only allow an occupying unit to reinforce up to strength 6.

If you ever see a situation that you think is wrong please either post a screenshot here or better still, send us a saved turn so we can take a look.

Bill

[Bobo2025]

Settlement/city supply is off. I mean Pea Ridge was sustaining a fully cutoff Confederate brigade for months - hell it was allowing it to rebuild every turn. This is a town that didn't have > 100 people in the mid-20thc let alone the 19th. This is a broader issue for me across all the SC series and the way they handle supply/reinforcing from cities/towns that are cut off from primary or secondary supply sources.

Hi

If a resource is cut off on all sides by enemy forces then (unless it's a Key Resource) it will have a maximum strength of 3, which would only allow an occupying unit to reinforce up to strength 6.

If you ever see a situation that you think is wrong please either post a screenshot here or better still, send us a saved turn so we can take a look.

Bill

The unit in this case was a Regiment so at a max strength of 5 it was rebuilding every turn.

[BillRunacre]

I see, the reinforcement rule isn't proportional to a unit's maximum strength, maybe that's something for us to consider for the future.

[Bobo2025]

I see, the reinforcement rule isn't proportional to a unit's maximum strength, maybe that's something for us to consider for the future.

I don't know if the game distinguishes between "in supply" and "able to reinforce". I can see that units might be able to stay in supply by raiding civilian food stocks (we will ignore ammo) so you'd be "supplied".''

I cannot see any mechanism, ever and regardless of city size, where you can just keep recruiting people to throw into your units when cut off to reinforce.

[ElvisJJonesRambo]

What would slow the Union, don't allow them to reinforce in enemy territory unless unit is on a rail which traces to the North.

[devoncop]

What would slow the Union, don't allow them to reinforce in enemy territory unless unit is on a rail which traces to the North.

Given the scarcity of rail lines in the south that would effectively stop the North mounting any sort of general invasion of the South but presumably still allow the South to reinforce at will.

I think that would tilt thinks too far in the other direction in trying to address Union dominance at present though I see the gist of what you are trying to achieve.

[ElvisJJonesRambo]

My thinking is more on the historical side. Where there was a "true Army" (stacked with large soldier count). Sherman on his way to Atlanta kept garrison/brigade sized units guarding his rails. The rails would be most interesting in the West (Mississippi & Tennessee)

[OldCrowBalthazor]

Well as Union as you advance down through Tennessee towards Memphis and Chattanooga you probably should cover a variety of Partisan hexes in the area with brigades, regiments, or the armoured trains. Both the 'resource' off map partisans and the real McCoy partisans will dink your rail lines.

[BillRunacre]

I see, the reinforcement rule isn't proportional to a unit's maximum strength, maybe that's something for us to consider for the future.

I don't know if the game distinguishes between "in supply" and "able to reinforce". I can see that units might be able to stay in supply by raiding civilian food stocks (we will ignore ammo) so you'd be "supplied".''

I cannot see any mechanism, ever and regardless of city size, where you can just keep recruiting people to throw into your units when cut off to reinforce.

Supply and Reinforcements are intertwined, please see 7.28. Supply & Reinforcements Table on pages 164-5 of the Manual.

Reinforcing a unit in the game represents troops returning to the colours, e.g. after the chaos of battle, or after recovering from wounds, as well as from new recruits.

It's just that there's no special rule for these weak units with a low maximum strength, hence the anomalous situation for that Regiment.

That said, one thing that can make the enemy easier to destroy in subsequent turns, while also reducing its ability to reinforce, is to place 2 or more units adjacent to the resource, please see 7.15. Besieging Resources on page 155.

Bringing up a HQ to command the units attacking would also make a difference, as a cut-off Regiment shouldn't hold out for long against units of Brigade or greater strength, especially if they have HQ support. They should gain useful experience in the process too.