Hi
I'm about the start a PBEM but as I lack experience with human opponents I want to ask if any house rules should be agreed on to achieve our goal for the most realistic and historical correct gameplay.
So far I don't see any obvious things that need a house rule but I think the point of raids comes up from time to time on this board, so is there any house rule to use for raids?
Cheers
What house rules for the most realistic and historical correct gameplay?
"Spread word to every slave, that even the mighty republic bleeds when struck!"
Join the Napoleonic Wargame Club
Join the American Civil War Game Club
Join the The Blitz Wargaming Club
Join the Napoleonic Wargame Club
Join the American Civil War Game Club
Join the The Blitz Wargaming Club
I think three absolute rules should be that: first, no riverine movement without transports; second the North must play with McClellan until he is relieved by Lincoln, and third, Pope is the only Union general who can move east until '64.
There might be more but those are all I can come up with now.
C
There might be more but those are all I can come up with now.
C
Why the riverine transports, doesn't the pool cover it properly?
"Spread word to every slave, that even the mighty republic bleeds when struck!"
Join the Napoleonic Wargame Club
Join the American Civil War Game Club
Join the The Blitz Wargaming Club
Join the Napoleonic Wargame Club
Join the American Civil War Game Club
Join the The Blitz Wargaming Club
well it is bit unrealistic that u can just pick uo 60 000 soldiers of magic canoos and drop the of where u want? at that time it would have all the boats of missisipi to do that? My usual HR are no raiding with out of leaders except border states and no attacking moves using river transport i dont mind when enemy use RT to move friendly harbor to next but no attacking moves using that.
-
Orphan_kentuckian
- Sergeant
- Posts: 67
- Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2014 9:39 pm
- Location: Kentucky
-
Captain_Orso
- Posts: 5766
- Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 5:02 pm
- Location: Stuttgart, Germany
With regards to Riverine Transports.
When a player uses the RivTP to move troops on a river, he simply gives them the Use RivTP orders during his plotting phase and moves them off along a river, without any other planning. What bothers players about this is that the player does not have to plan ahead to do this. He simply does it and it immediately works. Also, the only limit to the size of the force to be transported is only the size of the players RivTP for the entire map. The concept that riverboats are spread out over all sections of all rivers is not considered.
One thing the devs did to balance this somewhat was to have it take 5 days for a stack using the RivTP to debark; ie moving from a river region onto a land region. Unfortunately this also carried over to troops debarking from on-map Riverine Transport Units; only the gods know why.
What a good house rule might be to work around these shortcomings is difficult to say. Completely forbidding the use of the RivTP would be unhistorical and too restrictive, but to allow unfettered use of the RivTP would be unhistorical as well. Something in between would probably be reasonable, but also probably not greatly affect the game. Why? Because it should be possible to move a very large force on fairly short notice with the RivTP.
It is not not practicably posable to historically support a framework for how much of the RivTP should be usable for moving land stacks, because reality does not differentiate between the games on-map Riverine Transports and those in the RivTP. There are also not a lot of cases of large forces being ferried on the rivers. Sherman use riverine transports to attack at Chickasaw Bayou, Grant transported some of his force at the outset of the Fort Donelson campaign, and probably the largest troop movements by water I can think of would be McClellan's Peninsula campaign, which used a lot of oceanic transports to move from northern Virginia to Fort Monroe.
Although the comparison is very limited, it illustrate what organization and determination can achieve. On the 23rd of September 1863 the XI Corps and the 2nd Division of the XII Corps, 3 division in all, began transportation by rail from northern Virginia to Bridgeport, AL, arriving on the 30th of September. The orders were given by Stanton directly after having received the news of Rosecrans' defeat at Chickamauga on the 20th. This is not even nearly possible in the game, as it would take about 4-5 to move anything that distance, and was an extremely difficult task at the time considering that in the era of the war railroads were not a network of continuous rail lines. Rail lines when from one city to then next and actually only went through smaller cities. To transport goods or troops through a large city, they would have to be debarked from the train on the rail line bringing them into the city, carried or marched to the next rail line out of the city on the other side, and re-embarked on to the next train on that line out of the city on the other side. This had to be done in every large city along the way, which meant that trains had to be ready and waiting for the troops and/or goods to be moved along on their journey.
Riverboats had no such restrictions. They could move from one harbor to the next unhindered, and bypass cities and harbors, were they had no interest. They were slower in linear speed and had to follow the bed of winding rivers, but they could easily carry hundreds of tons of goods at a time while trains could carry only 1/10th of that. But I've digressed enough.
--
One house rule for the RivTP might be to restrict it's use to transport troops to, at the most, be 50% of the RivTP (or what ever the players agree upon).
- The US, as far as I know, did not build any riverboats other than the armored variety.
- The US did lease and hire riverboats extensively on all shippable rivers of the US, where they needed supplies and troops transported.
- Riverboats carried far more supplies for the US than the rail did during the war.
- The Riverine Transport Pool (RivTP) is a pool of generic transports, not on map, representing riverboats leased, or constantly hired, by the US for transporting supplies and troops.
When a player uses the RivTP to move troops on a river, he simply gives them the Use RivTP orders during his plotting phase and moves them off along a river, without any other planning. What bothers players about this is that the player does not have to plan ahead to do this. He simply does it and it immediately works. Also, the only limit to the size of the force to be transported is only the size of the players RivTP for the entire map. The concept that riverboats are spread out over all sections of all rivers is not considered.
One thing the devs did to balance this somewhat was to have it take 5 days for a stack using the RivTP to debark; ie moving from a river region onto a land region. Unfortunately this also carried over to troops debarking from on-map Riverine Transport Units; only the gods know why.
What a good house rule might be to work around these shortcomings is difficult to say. Completely forbidding the use of the RivTP would be unhistorical and too restrictive, but to allow unfettered use of the RivTP would be unhistorical as well. Something in between would probably be reasonable, but also probably not greatly affect the game. Why? Because it should be possible to move a very large force on fairly short notice with the RivTP.
It is not not practicably posable to historically support a framework for how much of the RivTP should be usable for moving land stacks, because reality does not differentiate between the games on-map Riverine Transports and those in the RivTP. There are also not a lot of cases of large forces being ferried on the rivers. Sherman use riverine transports to attack at Chickasaw Bayou, Grant transported some of his force at the outset of the Fort Donelson campaign, and probably the largest troop movements by water I can think of would be McClellan's Peninsula campaign, which used a lot of oceanic transports to move from northern Virginia to Fort Monroe.
Although the comparison is very limited, it illustrate what organization and determination can achieve. On the 23rd of September 1863 the XI Corps and the 2nd Division of the XII Corps, 3 division in all, began transportation by rail from northern Virginia to Bridgeport, AL, arriving on the 30th of September. The orders were given by Stanton directly after having received the news of Rosecrans' defeat at Chickamauga on the 20th. This is not even nearly possible in the game, as it would take about 4-5 to move anything that distance, and was an extremely difficult task at the time considering that in the era of the war railroads were not a network of continuous rail lines. Rail lines when from one city to then next and actually only went through smaller cities. To transport goods or troops through a large city, they would have to be debarked from the train on the rail line bringing them into the city, carried or marched to the next rail line out of the city on the other side, and re-embarked on to the next train on that line out of the city on the other side. This had to be done in every large city along the way, which meant that trains had to be ready and waiting for the troops and/or goods to be moved along on their journey.
Riverboats had no such restrictions. They could move from one harbor to the next unhindered, and bypass cities and harbors, were they had no interest. They were slower in linear speed and had to follow the bed of winding rivers, but they could easily carry hundreds of tons of goods at a time while trains could carry only 1/10th of that. But I've digressed enough.
--
One house rule for the RivTP might be to restrict it's use to transport troops to, at the most, be 50% of the RivTP (or what ever the players agree upon).
I guess the rail pool is somehow problematic too when I can use him completely in a single corner of the country.
A "local" pool would have been great. I imaging for example to make the Mississippi and all rivers connected some kind of "Theater" and assign a local riverine pool just to be used on that theater, and I do that with every other river system too. I may could do that with rail too, maybe along the different gauges or rail companies.
That should solve the lacking depiction of the general pools.
A "local" pool would have been great. I imaging for example to make the Mississippi and all rivers connected some kind of "Theater" and assign a local riverine pool just to be used on that theater, and I do that with every other river system too. I may could do that with rail too, maybe along the different gauges or rail companies.
That should solve the lacking depiction of the general pools.
"Spread word to every slave, that even the mighty republic bleeds when struck!"
Join the Napoleonic Wargame Club
Join the American Civil War Game Club
Join the The Blitz Wargaming Club
Join the Napoleonic Wargame Club
Join the American Civil War Game Club
Join the The Blitz Wargaming Club
BigDuke66 wrote:I guess the rail pool is somehow problematic too when I can use him completely in a single corner of the country.
A "local" pool would have been great. I imaging for example to make the Mississippi and all rivers connected some kind of "Theater" and assign a local riverine pool just to be used on that theater, and I do that with every other river system too. I may could do that with rail too, maybe along the different gauges or rail companies.
That should solve the lacking depiction of the general pools.
Man that is an excellent idea! I doubt it could be done but, wow, would it be cool or what?
!Well I really don't know what the engine is capable to do, but one can be surprised when looking at the "Ultimate Enhancement Mod" for EAW that considerably expanded what was in the stock game.
We could really need a similar mod for CW2, even if it would come as DLC.
We could really need a similar mod for CW2, even if it would come as DLC.
"Spread word to every slave, that even the mighty republic bleeds when struck!"
Join the Napoleonic Wargame Club
Join the American Civil War Game Club
Join the The Blitz Wargaming Club
Join the Napoleonic Wargame Club
Join the American Civil War Game Club
Join the The Blitz Wargaming Club
So this is why the 'pool' of rail and river capacity makes sense historically. In reality as in the game, river movement is on the Mississippi/Ohio and branches river system. It does not happen anywhere else with efficiency. The Union can use it against Virginia, but the Chesapeake river system alone could have provided the watercraft. The river assets could easily be pooled to cover a major transport. With the rails, the Union pretty much had an unlimited rail pool, but like the South, it could gather lots of trains when needed. The most famous instance had the South over-reaching its much worshiped notion of state's rights to gather transport for an army.
Captain_Orso is correct in suggesting if players wish house rules for this a ratio of built units to pool units would keep things within historical margins.
Captain_Orso is correct in suggesting if players wish house rules for this a ratio of built units to pool units would keep things within historical margins.
-
Captain_Orso
- Posts: 5766
- Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 5:02 pm
- Location: Stuttgart, Germany
The gauge was only consequential with regard to economics, and that only to a limited extent. Essentially every engine and car was hand made. There was no mass production of parts, and changing from producing one gauge of stock wheels to another was not a great issue.
In the north, where the gauge was practically universally the same, it still did not change the fact that the actual railroads did not meet each other, and this was on purpose. Railroad companies purposely built their own local monopolies into the infrastructure and lobbied for laws to support these. For example, until the beginning of the 20th century, IIRC, to travel from Philadelphia to Washington D.C. through Baltimore, you had to debark from the Philadelphia, Wilmington and Baltimore rail line, and take a street car or coach for the ten blocks to reach the Baltimore and Ohio rail line to continue the journey on to the nations capital. Only in the 1900's was the first railroad built to actually circumnavigate the city center completely.
The one instance where the standard gauge did play a role was in producing the stock wheels for cars in surplus. Since the wheels could and often did wear out and needed to be replaced quickly, in order to keep rolling stock on the rails, the Military Rail Service had stock wheels produced and warehoused en mass.
The South had several major issues to deal with, but the greatest was not gauge. The South did not build rail lines specifically to facilitate trade, because the South had very little producing industry. Cotton went down rivers to sea ports to be sold and transported overseas, while goods purchased from overseas returned by the same route.
The Confederate government never dealt with the issue of treating the railroads as a strategic infrastructure, as was the case with the Federal government, which created the Military Rail Service. Each time the Confederate military required the use of the rails, it had to be negotiated locally, and government business was not generally given priority, which meant that the government had to pay extra for priority treatment if it were necessary. This made using the rail lines extremely expensive for the government, which became more and more expensive as time went on with the government competing with the private sector for the use of a shrinking commodity.
Railroads needed constant maintenance. Road crews should have been walking the lines daily to insure the tracks had not shifted from use and weather. Manpower shortages curtailed this greatly to the extent that rail crews eventually were only repairing the railroads once they had broken, which was a cause for regular irregularities in services almost from the start of the war.
The south had a very real shortage of iron, which at first did not affect the railroads. A stretch of railroad could be expected to hold for two years before rails would have to be replaced. Starting in 1863 this began to greatly affect the serviceability of many rail lines. Once rails were worn down to the point they could not carry traffic, they had to be replaced. But without iron to make rails to replace them, rail lines started be fall out of service. The South actually conducted some raids to steal rails from northern lines, but of course, to carry off quantities, which would actually change the situation, was impossible.
Gauge was the least of the South's worries during the war. The lack of organization and resources played far greater roles.
In the north, where the gauge was practically universally the same, it still did not change the fact that the actual railroads did not meet each other, and this was on purpose. Railroad companies purposely built their own local monopolies into the infrastructure and lobbied for laws to support these. For example, until the beginning of the 20th century, IIRC, to travel from Philadelphia to Washington D.C. through Baltimore, you had to debark from the Philadelphia, Wilmington and Baltimore rail line, and take a street car or coach for the ten blocks to reach the Baltimore and Ohio rail line to continue the journey on to the nations capital. Only in the 1900's was the first railroad built to actually circumnavigate the city center completely.
The one instance where the standard gauge did play a role was in producing the stock wheels for cars in surplus. Since the wheels could and often did wear out and needed to be replaced quickly, in order to keep rolling stock on the rails, the Military Rail Service had stock wheels produced and warehoused en mass.
The South had several major issues to deal with, but the greatest was not gauge. The South did not build rail lines specifically to facilitate trade, because the South had very little producing industry. Cotton went down rivers to sea ports to be sold and transported overseas, while goods purchased from overseas returned by the same route.
The Confederate government never dealt with the issue of treating the railroads as a strategic infrastructure, as was the case with the Federal government, which created the Military Rail Service. Each time the Confederate military required the use of the rails, it had to be negotiated locally, and government business was not generally given priority, which meant that the government had to pay extra for priority treatment if it were necessary. This made using the rail lines extremely expensive for the government, which became more and more expensive as time went on with the government competing with the private sector for the use of a shrinking commodity.
Railroads needed constant maintenance. Road crews should have been walking the lines daily to insure the tracks had not shifted from use and weather. Manpower shortages curtailed this greatly to the extent that rail crews eventually were only repairing the railroads once they had broken, which was a cause for regular irregularities in services almost from the start of the war.
The south had a very real shortage of iron, which at first did not affect the railroads. A stretch of railroad could be expected to hold for two years before rails would have to be replaced. Starting in 1863 this began to greatly affect the serviceability of many rail lines. Once rails were worn down to the point they could not carry traffic, they had to be replaced. But without iron to make rails to replace them, rail lines started be fall out of service. The South actually conducted some raids to steal rails from northern lines, but of course, to carry off quantities, which would actually change the situation, was impossible.
Gauge was the least of the South's worries during the war. The lack of organization and resources played far greater roles.
Again a very informative post, and some points to consider if this game ever gets an "Ultimate Enhancement Mod" like EAW did.
"Spread word to every slave, that even the mighty republic bleeds when struck!"
Join the Napoleonic Wargame Club
Join the American Civil War Game Club
Join the The Blitz Wargaming Club
Join the Napoleonic Wargame Club
Join the American Civil War Game Club
Join the The Blitz Wargaming Club
-
Cardinal Ape
- General of the Army
- Posts: 619
- Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2012 1:59 am
To the OP, Veteran Activation is key, if the Union player knows which of his lazy commanders are inactive its too easy.
I've played a few games as the Union against people who insist on using actual river transports to launch attacks instead of the river pool. I find it rather trivial, building a few transports to accommodate is a barely noticeable loss. If you are the defender you would rather have the enemy land via river pool movement than ship since they incur higher beach-landing penalties... Actually, I find the house rule to favor the North more.
I really enjoy the topic of railroads during the war. Good thing I'm short on time now or I'd ramble on about it for a good while... I remember listening to a lecture about rails that really peaked my interest while playing a game against SA. It doesn't have the depth of a good book, but it still has enough meaty details to give a good crash course. Its amazing how good the Union got at building rails by the end, they even began to flaunt it. A lighter point in the video is when someone asks why the South didn't smuggle in more railroad parts from Europe with their blockade runners and the lecturer responds, 'That would be like going to Home Depot and shoplifting bricks.'
Considering how important the rails turned out to be, it boggles my mind why CSA Naval officers decided it best to take what little rail stock they had in the beginning of the war and welded them onto ships for armor... A small action, but it goes a long way to show the difference in mentalities between the North and the South.
I've played a few games as the Union against people who insist on using actual river transports to launch attacks instead of the river pool. I find it rather trivial, building a few transports to accommodate is a barely noticeable loss. If you are the defender you would rather have the enemy land via river pool movement than ship since they incur higher beach-landing penalties... Actually, I find the house rule to favor the North more.
I really enjoy the topic of railroads during the war. Good thing I'm short on time now or I'd ramble on about it for a good while... I remember listening to a lecture about rails that really peaked my interest while playing a game against SA. It doesn't have the depth of a good book, but it still has enough meaty details to give a good crash course. Its amazing how good the Union got at building rails by the end, they even began to flaunt it. A lighter point in the video is when someone asks why the South didn't smuggle in more railroad parts from Europe with their blockade runners and the lecturer responds, 'That would be like going to Home Depot and shoplifting bricks.'
Considering how important the rails turned out to be, it boggles my mind why CSA Naval officers decided it best to take what little rail stock they had in the beginning of the war and welded them onto ships for armor... A small action, but it goes a long way to show the difference in mentalities between the North and the South.
Cardinal Ape wrote:I've played a few games as the Union against people who insist on using actual river transports to launch attacks instead of the river pool. I find it rather trivial, building a few transports to accommodate is a barely noticeable loss. If you are the defender you would rather have the enemy land via river pool movement than ship since they incur higher beach-landing penalties... Actually, I find the house rule to favor the North more.
Mh I thought using real transports gives a chance for interception by enemy naval units & forts, I don't think this happens if using the river pool or does it?
"Spread word to every slave, that even the mighty republic bleeds when struck!"
Join the Napoleonic Wargame Club
Join the American Civil War Game Club
Join the The Blitz Wargaming Club
Join the Napoleonic Wargame Club
Join the American Civil War Game Club
Join the The Blitz Wargaming Club
River pool transports can be intercepted in latest patch.
Also I once had a match where Union player would land 60.000 men in Louiswille, then load them into boats and land them in Nashville, than on the next turn in Louisville.
Using river transports makes Union able to load outside friendly port and and make a D-day landing all on the same turn. It also makes them able to escape when cornered without ferrying some transports to them first (one turn tempo advantage)
Also I once had a match where Union player would land 60.000 men in Louiswille, then load them into boats and land them in Nashville, than on the next turn in Louisville.
Using river transports makes Union able to load outside friendly port and and make a D-day landing all on the same turn. It also makes them able to escape when cornered without ferrying some transports to them first (one turn tempo advantage)
-
Leibst
- Posts: 2581
- Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 6:06 am
- Location: Madrid, Spain
- Contact: Website Facebook
in my last game i saw i could buy a huge amount of Black Militia, i'm not sure if that is historical but i felt like cheating building that amount of cheap troops and transforming them into regulars with some training leaders.
Headquarter game designer of Battles For Spain, Ageod English Civil War, España:1936 and Thirty Years War
HQ website
-
Captain_Orso
- Posts: 5766
- Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 5:02 pm
- Location: Stuttgart, Germany
BigDuke66 wrote:Mh I thought using real transports gives a chance for interception by enemy naval units & forts, I don't think this happens if using the river pool or does it?
AFAIK a stack using the RivTP is exactly as susceptible to attack by enemy naval combat units as Transport Units. I know the are susceptible to bombardment too.
Ace wrote:River pool transports can be intercepted in latest patch.
Also I once had a match where Union player would land 60.000 men in Louiswille, then load them into boats and land them in Nashville, than on the next turn in Louisville.
Using river transports makes Union able to load outside friendly port and and make a D-day landing all on the same turn. It also makes them able to escape when cornered without ferrying some transports to them first (one turn tempo advantage)
I'm not sure I understand. Landing in Louisville will do nothing to the garrison, unless the landing force is in Assault Posture and ends its turn in Louisville, in which case the force landing in Louisville must ends its turn in Louisville. The same goes for landing in Nashville.
The only differences between using the RivTP and Transport Units, are:
- You have to build and move Transport Units to their deployment location first, before you can use them.
- You can sail directly into or out-of a friendly harbor with Transport Units, while with the RivTP there is a chance that a besieging force could attack your stack, while it is moving.
- When using the RivTP you can easily combine marching, sailing on steamboats, and then continuing by marching again. With Transport Units this is not possible.
Leibstandarte wrote:in my last game i saw i could buy a huge amount of Black Militia, i'm not sure if that is historical but i felt like cheating building that amount of cheap troops and transforming them into regulars with some training leaders.
Black Militia?!? I've never ever seen Black Militia
If you have selected the correct options, you can builld Colored Troops and get additional CC's in the Conscripts Pool. But the Colored Troops cost exactly the same as comparable "white" troops.
-
Leibst
- Posts: 2581
- Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2006 6:06 am
- Location: Madrid, Spain
- Contact: Website Facebook
i meant colored troops, sorry. Cost the same but i ran out of the 'white ' troops and started to recruit the colored troops.
Headquarter game designer of Battles For Spain, Ageod English Civil War, España:1936 and Thirty Years War
HQ website
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 36 guests