Rail lines

[lightbrave]

It says in the destroy rail lines button that if the region is loyal I will receive war supply. As iv been told, war supply is one of the most difficult things to come by as CSA.

Does cutting rail lines actually give you war supply?

Should i go ahead and cut rail lines in areas i dont think i will need them? Like parts of Texas, those little rail lines east and north of Baton Rouge, Falmouth Virgina exc...

Norfolk and Suffolk - evuntually i think these will come into the hands of my Union opponent. Will cuttings rail lines in Norfolk and Suffolk keep supply from Norfolk (while im holding it) from moving in-land? I would think it would move slower but move all the same. Would it be a wise dicision to go ahead and do this while i have control?

By the way does rebuilding rail lines cost you war supply? If so, is it the same amount as you recieve from tearing them up?

[Gray Fox]

The tooltips do not state how much WS is gained or lost and neither does the message when you repair a Rail line. However, your unique proposal for the CSA to scavenge its own rail lines sounds worthy. Bravo!

[Captain_Orso]

Damaging a rail line in a region does bring you 1 WSU per region. I'm not sure if Loyalty is the only factor in gaining the WSU. MC may also play a role. Also, it might reduce the development level in the region, which might make it more difficult to move supplies and troops through the region beyond simply not being able to use rail movement.

Repairing a damaged rail line in a region cost not only 1 WSU, but also some money IIRC.

Supplies always have the possibility to move through any non-blocked region. Of course, if you've damaged a rail line in the region it will be much more difficult to move supplies through that region. It will also prevent you from using the rail line to move troops quickly, so I'd advise being very cautious when damaging your own rail lines for WSU.

[lightbrave]

The tooltips do not state how much WS is gained or lost and neither does the message when you repair a Rail line. However, your unique proposal for the CSA to scavenge its own rail lines sounds worthy. Bravo!

Thank you!! I'm thinking in future games I may recruit 2 or 3 militia units to just march around and eat up rail lines that are of no value to me. Like the areas I mentioned before and maybe the rail lines in Florida as well. Being able to use the militia units later in game, I feel like its worth it. Even if I just get 1 WS per region, I think there are enough regions to where this would be a minor benefit. Although minor, its a benefit all the same. This will counter the inevitable rail lines I will have to repair in the future (cut up by my enemy in important regions) and maybe even get enough to make an artillery unit or two.

By the was if anybody else plans on doing this, make sure your not using the rail line to transport your militia units from region to region as this would eat up WS and defeat the purpose. It will probably take about a year or 2 to get them all with 2 militia units.

[lightbrave]

Supplies always have the possibility to move through any non-blocked region. Of course, if you've damaged a rail line in the region it will be much more difficult to move supplies through that region. It will also prevent you from using the rail line to move troops quickly, so I'd advise being very cautious when damaging your own rail lines for WSU.[/quote]

Thanks Captain but i need a little more clarification. When you say possibility to move through any non-blocked region, assuming i have MC, is there any reason why it wouldnt move supply. There is not "roll" to move supply is there?

I assume and am pretty sure cutting the rail line will slow down movement of supply but it will still move.

Although cutting the rail slows down movement of supply, does it effect the amount of supply moved?

For instance my Norfolk and Suffolk option.........................

If i cut lines in Norfolk (which has the factory and a large supply output), will it effect the movement of supply (besides the speed of movement)? Lets say it takes 15 days for supply from Norfolk to reach Richmond with railroads at full capacity and none of them cut. Lets say it moves 100 Supply per turn. If i cut the rail line in Norfolk and Suffolk it may take 30 days to reach Richmond but will it STILL be moving 100 supply per turn. Does keeping the rail line move MORE supply per turn? I hope this isnt confusing

[Gray Fox]

You're most welcome. They say that genius is when you look at something everyone has looked at and you see something no one else has seen.

I believe that militia can't destroy track. You'll need a regular unit to do the work. Good luck!

[Straight Arrow]

Damaging a rail line in a region does bring you 1 WSU per region.

Smart, very smart. That's thinking outside the box.

[Citizen X]

I applaud your creative thinking. But it has a flaw. As with any economy with scarce resources, it is not (only) the shere number of resources that needs to be taken in account. More important is effectiveness. How much output one does get out of a given input.

Output is action days and more material. Every invested piece of a given resource ideally pays back on every given turn. It all goes down on the simple formulas regions/ turn, resource gain/ turn, achievement/ turn. Troops on sentry are denying that ground to a hostile investment of about the same size, as well as defensive frontline troops, offensive frontline troops or troops that make the enemy alter their plans. Investments not only cost their price on the day they are being payed. But also EVERY turn they do nothing of the above. This means that moving troops are NOT paying back. Unless they enter an enemy region or provide you with an advantage THAT VERY turn.

This is of course very much simplified, just to illustrate my case. Wich is: I doubt that destroying one's own rail provides enough resource effectiveness to come out positive.

Second I try to hold Norfolk as long as possible, because losing it means a severe blow and to defend it effectively you need that rail. When the day comes to abandon it for good I destroy the rail of course but then I have troops already there. That is the case with every rail line on the map because

Third I cannot think of a rail line that I haven't already put to use.


The only resources that really count in the game are objectives and turns. Where turns are imperative because they can't be substituted or gained.

[Captain_Orso]

Supplies always have the possibility to move through any non-blocked region. Of course, if you've damaged a rail line in the region it will be much more difficult to move supplies through that region. It will also prevent you from using the rail line to move troops quickly, so I'd advise being very cautious when damaging your own rail lines for WSU.

Thanks Captain but i need a little more clarification. When you say possibility to move through any non-blocked region, assuming i have MC, is there any reason why it wouldnt move supply. There is not "roll" to move supply is there?

I assume and am pretty sure cutting the rail line will slow down movement of supply but it will still move.

Although cutting the rail slows down movement of supply, does it effect the amount of supply moved?

For instance my Norfolk and Suffolk option.........................

If i cut lines in Norfolk (which has the factory and a large supply output), will it effect the movement of supply (besides the speed of movement)? Lets say it takes 15 days for supply from Norfolk to reach Richmond with railroads at full capacity and none of them cut. Lets say it moves 100 Supply per turn. If i cut the rail line in Norfolk and Suffolk it may take 30 days to reach Richmond but will it STILL be moving 100 supply per turn. Does keeping the rail line move MORE supply per turn? I hope this isnt confusing

No, this idea is wrong. Supply does not move at a speed.

If an hypothetical Supply Unit could move from region A to region B within one turn Supply can be moved from region A to region B.

If moving an hypothetical Supply Unit from A to B could not be completed within one turn, no supply will be moved between those region. This is very dependent on weather and other factors which can influence movement.

Additionally, the longer the path Supply has to move during the Supply Distribution Phases, the less Supply will be moved.

[lightbrave]

Supplies always have the possibility to move through any non-blocked region. Of course, if you've damaged a rail line in the region it will be much more difficult to move supplies through that region. It will also prevent you from using the rail line to move troops quickly, so I'd advise being very cautious when damaging your own rail lines for WSU.

Thanks Captain but i need a little more clarification. When you say possibility to move through any non-blocked region, assuming i have MC, is there any reason why it wouldnt move supply. There is not "roll" to move supply is there?

I assume and am pretty sure cutting the rail line will slow down movement of supply but it will still move.

Although cutting the rail slows down movement of supply, does it effect the amount of supply moved?

For instance my Norfolk and Suffolk option.........................

If i cut lines in Norfolk (which has the factory and a large supply output), will it effect the movement of supply (besides the speed of movement)? Lets say it takes 15 days for supply from Norfolk to reach Richmond with railroads at full capacity and none of them cut. Lets say it moves 100 Supply per turn. If i cut the rail line in Norfolk and Suffolk it may take 30 days to reach Richmond but will it STILL be moving 100 supply per turn. Does keeping the rail line move MORE supply per turn? I hope this isnt confusing

No, this idea is wrong. Supply does not move at a speed.

If an hypothetical Supply Unit could move from region A to region B within one turn Supply can be moved from region A to region B.

If moving an hypothetical Supply Unit from A to B could not be completed within one turn, no supply will be moved between those region. This is very dependent on weather and other factors which can influence movement.

Additionally, the longer the path Supply has to move during the Supply Distribution Phases, the less Supply will be moved.

I see, so in my example, if Richmond is 5 regions away from Norfolk, then it would presumably take 5 turns to get supply from Norfolk to Richmond (if supply took one turn to move from region to region)?

So railroads have nothing to do with movement of supply?

Say i have a huge battle near Winchester Va early in the war and my supply is almost gone. I assume the depot in Manassas sends supply over to The Army of the Shenandoah in Winchester. What determines how much and how fast supply gets sent over there? Also, im under the assumption that if Manassas sends supply to Winchester, then Richmond (if there is nothing going on down there) will trickle up supply to Manassas.

Im really not trying to be a pain in the ass with all these questions, i truly am trying to learn the game.

[lightbrave]

I applaud your creative thinking. But it has a flaw. As with any economy with scarce resources, it is not (only) the shere number of resources that needs to be taken in account. More important is effectiveness. How much output one does get out of a given input.

Output is action days and more material. Every invested piece of a given resource ideally pays back on every given turn. It all goes down on the simple formulas regions/ turn, resource gain/ turn, achievement/ turn. Troops on sentry are denying that ground to a hostile investment of about the same size, as well as defensive frontline troops, offensive frontline troops or troops that make the enemy alter their plans. Investments not only cost their price on the day they are being payed. But also EVERY turn they do nothing of the above. This means that moving troops are NOT paying back. Unless they enter an enemy region or provide you with an advantage THAT VERY turn.

This is of course very much simplified, just to illustrate my case. Wich is: I doubt that destroying one's own rail provides enough resource effectiveness to come out positive.

Second I try to hold Norfolk as long as possible, because losing it means a severe blow and to defend it effectively you need that rail. When the day comes to abandon it for good I destroy the rail of course but then I have troops already there. That is the case with every rail line on the map because

Third I cannot think of a rail line that I haven't already put to use.


The only resources that really count in the game are objectives and turns. Where turns are imperative because they can't be substituted or gained.

From the knowledge that i have about the game (and i am learning as i go), supply moves whether you have a railroad or not. At what speed or exactly how it works im still not sure. I understand the crucial need for railroads to move troops.
And i think railroads are crucial to move supply as well but im not sure how crucial it is. However, There are a lot of remote places in the CSA where a rail line is not needed. For instance in Florida. If a sizable Union force lands in Florida, i see no reason to attack them there. i cant defend everywhere and it sure wont be in Florida. And im not wasting rail movement to get down there anyways. I might as well collect the 10 or 15 WS down there. Same with
Texas, Missouri, parts of Louisiana, parts of southern Georgia, Alabama, Upper South Carolina, Far west Virginia. There really are a lot of unnecessary off-path rail lines that hold no strategic value that you dont need to move troops from Theater to Theater. Im not at home right now but im guesstimating at least 50 regions that are useless for rail lines. If i use 2 or 3 cavalry regiments i could probably be done in a year. If you just get 1 WS per region then thats 50 WS within a year. This might build a few factories, which by the way would definitely be put near strategic areas.

I really am enjoying these discussions in the forums.

My thanks to you Veterans who have been active in my posts.

I ask you veterans, what do you think? Is there really any flaw in doing this?

Citizen X, thank you for your post as i am now concerned i might not be doing the right thing.


I definitely think this should be analyzed.

[Captain_Orso]

I see, so in my example, if Richmond is 5 regions away from Norfolk, then it would presumably take 5 turns to get supply from Norfolk to Richmond (if supply took one turn to move from region to region)?

I said:

If an hypothetical Supply Unit could move from region A to region B within one turn Supply can be moved from region A to region B.

If moving an hypothetical Supply Unit from A to B could not be completed within one turn, no supply will be moved between those region. This is very dependent on weather and other factors which can influence movement.

So, no, no supply will move between Norfolk and Richmond by land. If you have enough points in the Riverine Transport Pool, and neither harbor is blockaded, and there are no unopposed enemy units in the waters in between, Richmond could send supplies by water.

So railroads have nothing to do with movement of supply?

Railroads have everything to do with supplies, if you have a viable rail line, and points in your Rail Transport Pool.

Say i have a huge battle near Winchester Va early in the war and my supply is almost gone. I assume the depot in Manassas sends supply over to The Army of the Shenandoah in Winchester. What determines how much and how fast supply gets sent over there? Also, im under the assumption that if Manassas sends supply to Winchester, then Richmond (if there is nothing going on down there) will trickle up supply to Manassas.

Supplies are never Pushed anywhere. They are Pulled, by Supply Units, Depots, Forts, large Cities, and Harbors. Having a Stack in locations with a Depot, Fort, large City, and/or Harbor will increase the Pull. The larger the stack, the greater the increase in Pull. If the Stack has Supply Units, the Pull will be greatly increased.

A Stack with 1 or more Supply Units can Pull Supplies from a Supply Source (anywhere with a surplus of supplies), but only over a very limited distance. I've never seen it work for more than 2 region distance, in good weather, over clear terrain.

I would not depend on supply being move from Manassas to a Stack in the Valley. Build a depot in Winchester if you intend on staying there.

Im really not trying to be a pain in the ass with all these questions, i truly am trying to learn the game.

I see ....

[lightbrave]

Thanks Captain but I'm still somewhat unclear on some things. I have more questions about supply now then when i originally started the post. I will do one question at a time though.

First question - Atlanta produces a good bit of supply. Say there is no depot in between Atlanta and Richmond but there is a full rail line running at full capacity with no blockage or cut lines. I have 100% Military Control between Atlanta and Richmond.

Can supply from Atlanta (going east) ever reach Richmond? Excluding wagons of course.

[Citizen X]

I believe that the supply primer of ACW is still valid in CW2.

http://www.ageod-forum.com/viewtopic.php?f=78&t=14929

[lightbrave]

I believe that the supply primer of ACW is still valid in CW2.

http://www.ageod-forum.com/viewtopic.php?f=78&t=14929

Thanks Citizen, that link actually did help a bit. I have a question for you that's kind of related to the whole cutting rail lines for WS.

If your looking at the map

South Carolina - City of Columbia

Right to the northwest there is a region called Newbury, Laurens, Abbeville, Anderson, Walhalla, and Greenville. All have rail lines and I cant envision a reason I would need to send troops there. Cutting these lines does not interrupt supply movement from the main highway connecting Theatres. Please let me know if there is any reason at all why I shouldn't cut those lines?

And

If I was to put a depot in Columbia, would it still draw supply from Greenville (if there was any to give) even with the rails cut?

If there is no penalty then there are enough of these areas all over the confederacy that it will make a somewhat significant difference in WS early on (which can be invested early on) I'm thinking about 50 regions which is at least 50 WS from what iv been told

[Gray Fox]

I did some tests. My starting WS was 291 in early July 1861. I ran a turn and got +39 WS for late July (total 330). I then went back to early July and destroyed one rail line. Now when I ran the turn, I indeed got 39+1 WS (total 331). However, I went back and ran the turn again, this time with 5 rail lines destroyed. I got +8 WS (total 338). I did this again with 10 rail lines destroyed and got +16 WS (total 346). This leads me to believe that each rail line destroyed gets you 1.6 WS. If you destroy them one at a time, the software truncates 1.6 into 1 and you would lose three eighths of the WS. Someone should check this, in case it's just the way the software runs on my rig.

So, 50 rail lines converts into 80 WS if done in groups. If the CSA issues War Bonds, then you could build Iron Works with this and have +24 WS per turn for the loss of the rails. After 4 turns that would be 96 WS saved up, so then you could even repair the rail lines and continue to have +24 WS/turn thereafter.

Straight Arrow, this looks like a "point to know".

[lightbrave]

I did some tests. My starting WS was 291 in early July 1861. I ran a turn and got +39 WS for late July (total 330). I then went back to early July and destroyed one rail line. Now when I ran the turn, I indeed got 39+1 WS (total 331). However, I went back and ran the turn again, this time with 5 rail lines destroyed. I got +8 WS (total 338). I did this again with 10 rail lines destroyed and got +16 WS (total 346). This leads me to believe that each rail line destroyed gets you 1.6 WS. If you destroy them one at a time, the software truncates 1.6 into 1 and you would lose three eighths of the WS. Someone should check this, in case it's just the way the software runs on my rig.

So, 50 rail lines converts into 80 WS if done in groups. If the CSA issues War Bonds, then you could build Iron Works with this and have +24 WS per turn for the loss of the rails. After 4 turns that would be 96 WS saved up, so then you could even repair the rail lines and continue to have +24 WS/turn thereafter.

Straight Arrow, this looks like a "point to know".

Interesting, so cutting 5 a turn would be ideal because you would not waste any war supply. The next best thing would be to cut 2 a turn.

5 = 8 WS - nothing wasted
4 = 6.4 WS - .4 WS will be wasted
3 = 4.8 WS - .8 WS will be wasted
2 = 3.2 WS - .2 WS will be wasted
1 = 1.6 WS - .6 WS will be wasted

So if you can cut 5 a turn that would be great but for the most part you will probably be best just cutting 2. If you cut 1, 3, or 4 you will waste too much.

I would suggest have 1 Cavalry start in Texas and make your way to Florida and have another Cavalry start in Florida and go Northeast cutting 2 at a time and if by chance you have 3 units sitting in a region that can be cut, then cut those that turn as well.

[lightbrave]

I did some tests. My starting WS was 291 in early July 1861. I ran a turn and got +39 WS for late July (total 330). I then went back to early July and destroyed one rail line. Now when I ran the turn, I indeed got 39+1 WS (total 331). However, I went back and ran the turn again, this time with 5 rail lines destroyed. I got +8 WS (total 338). I did this again with 10 rail lines destroyed and got +16 WS (total 346). This leads me to believe that each rail line destroyed gets you 1.6 WS. If you destroy them one at a time, the software truncates 1.6 into 1 and you would lose three eighths of the WS. Someone should check this, in case it's just the way the software runs on my rig.

So, 50 rail lines converts into 80 WS if done in groups. If the CSA issues War Bonds, then you could build Iron Works with this and have +24 WS per turn for the loss of the rails. After 4 turns that would be 96 WS saved up, so then you could even repair the rail lines and continue to have +24 WS/turn thereafter.

Straight Arrow, this looks like a "point to know".

Interesting, so cutting 5 a turn would be ideal because you would not waste any war supply. The next best thing would be to cut 2 a turn.

5 = 8 WS - nothing wasted
4 = 6.4 WS - .4 WS will be wasted
3 = 4.8 WS - .8 WS will be wasted
2 = 3.2 WS - .2 WS will be wasted
1 = 1.6 WS - .6 WS will be wasted

So if you can cut 5 a turn that would be great but for the most part you will probably be best just cutting 2. If you cut 1, 3, or 4 you will waste too much.

I would suggest have 1 Cavalry start in Texas and make your way to Florida and have another Cavalry start in Florida and go Northeast cutting 2 at a time and if by chance you have 3 units sitting in a region that can be cut, then cut those that turn as well.

[Citizen X]

That's a lot of WS and seems worthwhile even from a strict resource capitalist point of view.

[Gray Fox]

At 2 rail lines per turn, it would take at least 25 turns to scavenge the 50 tracks.

Or one might do 10 per turn for 5 turns. With war bonds issued, one IW would be producing the first turn thereafter, 2 the second turn and all 3 by the third (total of 48 WS added thus far). Two turns later you have 96 WS and repairs of all of the tracks can already be underway. So after 10 turns the tracks were scavenged and repairs started. More importantly, three turns later, you can build the other IW from the interior list with the leftover cash from issuing bonds. Then of course, raise taxes and you can eventually build all of the armories and arsenals from that list with WS you got for free.

Everything works if you let it.

[lightbrave]

At 2 rail lines per turn, it would take at least 25 turns to scavenge the 50 tracks.

Or one might do 10 per turn for 5 turns. With war bonds issued, one IW would be producing the first turn thereafter, 2 the second turn and all 3 by the third (total of 48 WS added thus far). Two turns later you have 96 WS and repairs of all of the tracks can already be underway. So after 10 turns the tracks were scavenged and repairs started. More importantly, three turns later, you can build the other IW from the interior list with the leftover cash from issuing bonds. Then of course, raise taxes and you can eventually build all of the armories and arsenals from that list with WS you got for free.

Everything works if you let it.

I agree, im just suggesting it might be somewhat difficult to rip up 10 per turn after probably the first turn as most of these are in remote areas that would take time to get to and you would have to send troops early in the game which you might need at the front lines. I think its somewhat of a gamble to move that many troops to these remote areas. However, if your talking about cutting lines in non-remote areas to invest and rebuild soon after, then that should be tested and studied. The about 50 regions im suggesting to tear up i wouldnt rebuild because i see no use for them.

What do you think Gray?

[Gray Fox]

The pay off is getting the IW started. One could simply do this on the first turn these are available and then stretch out the scavenging. However, 75 WS are almost two whole turns of initial CSA production. So funding the IW is the key to making the strategy more than just about twisting up a couple of track for a few WS. If this is made a priority in 1861, then ten rail lines anywhere, even in VA, get scavenged. Then 10 more and so on for 5 turns. Send 10 units to the starting spots. The next turn set them to destroy the rails and also move to the next location. Six turns and the process is done. The 3 individual IWs get built and come on line one per turn. The WS from the IW is used to fix the rails the same way in reverse order. So, theoretically, 12 turns to go from zero to 50 regions scavenged and fixed, with 3 IWs in service. Four turns later the second IWs from the interior list get added, then eventually everthing else on the list.

[Cardinal Ape]

The CSA navy did seize some of their own rail stock to weld onto their own ships for armor...

Don't broken railroads have a chance to repair themselves? It might be based on their development level. If they auto repair themselves does it cost WS?

[khbynum]

So, if I can scrape together 5 single CSA regiments capable of destroying/repairing railroads, I could send them to some obscure part of Florida where they would be safe and supplied. Then, they could each destroy the railroad (for 1.6 WS) in their district and rebuild it (for 1 WS) next turn. Each iteration gives 3 free WS. If that actually works, it would be not only gamey, but would violate the laws of economics and physics.

Seriously, the idea of the CSA tearing up unneeded railroads for WS is an excellent one. It was actually done during the war to provide iron for warship armor and repair of other railroads.

[lightbrave]

So, if I can scrape together 5 single CSA regiments capable of destroying/repairing railroads, I could send them to some obscure part of Florida where they would be safe and supplied. Then, they could each destroy the railroad (for 1.6 WS) in their district and rebuild it (for 1 WS) next turn. Each iteration gives 3 free WS. If that actually works, it would be not only gamey, but would violate the laws of economics and physics.

Seriously, the idea of the CSA tearing up unneeded railroads for WS is an excellent one. It was actually done during the war to provide iron for warship armor and repair of other railroads.

Although I truly am enjoying this game (especially the more I'm learning about it), there are quite a few aspects that I consider being very gamey (this one included) but this IS a game so there will have to be things that are gamey.

[Straight Arrow]

I did some tests. My starting WS was 291 in early July 1861. I ran a turn and got +39 WS for late July (total 330). I then went back to early July and destroyed one rail line. Now when I ran the turn, I indeed got 39+1 WS (total 331). However, I went back and ran the turn again, this time with 5 rail lines destroyed. I got +8 WS (total 338). I did this again with 10 rail lines destroyed and got +16 WS (total 346). This leads me to believe that each rail line destroyed gets you 1.6 WS. If you destroy them one at a time, the software truncates 1.6 into 1 and you would lose three eighths of the WS. Someone should check this, in case it's just the way the software runs on my rig.

So, 50 rail lines converts into 80 WS if done in groups. If the CSA issues War Bonds, then you could build Iron Works with this and have +24 WS per turn for the loss of the rails. After 4 turns that would be 96 WS saved up, so then you could even repair the rail lines and continue to have +24 WS/turn thereafter.

Straight Arrow, this looks like a "point to know".

So let it be written. So let it be done

[pgr]

I'm not sure its worth the strategic cost. Railroads are critical for supply because of their capacity (bandwidth if you will) Terrain, weather and road type all bottleneck supplies as they pass through them. Rail allows an unlimited amount to flow through (well limited by your rail pool).

Even more important is your strategic mobility. Rails allow the CSA to react with lightning speed, and cutting the lines makes it hard to do that.

I know WS is tight, but I'd rather skimp on a few artillery builds and do an Iron works (or some brig blockade runners) than run around ripping up my own rails.

[Gray Fox]

The point of building the Iron Works from scavenged rail lines is that you then rebuild the rail lines with the initial WS from the IW and you still then have the IW.

[pgr]

The point of building the Iron Works from scavenged rail lines is that you then rebuild the rail lines with the initial WS from the IW and you still then have the IW.

Someone else can do the maths, but tearing up track and then rebuilding it seems like a waste. You need x number of turns to tear up the tracks. (And which tracks? Anything close to where I normally have forces, I'll want to keep the tracks to be able to rapidly add troops, tracks that are far enough away that I don't care about require time to send the track attackers, time to rip up, and then time to shift them back someplace useful.) Then the IW requires a certain to build, and then a certain number of turns to produce the WS to cover the cost of constructing the IW...and then you will reduce the output by rebuilding the rail you tore up.

Sure you can do it... it just seems like a vary microy and troop intensive thing to do.

I don't really see the point of tearing up track that I'll need to rebuild later. (Now if I plan on withdrawing for one reason or another...then ya I'll tear up track and let the yankees rebuild it).

[Gray Fox]

The simplicity of the plan is that in 1861 you use 10 units for 5 turns to scavenge the track. You build 3 IWs. The IWs produce 24 WS per turn for the rest of the game. You then have 10 units for 5 turns to fix the track (or not if they are in Yankee hands). The units can be a single combat capable regiment of regulars and the whole process could be done in 12 turns. The IWs continue to produce. From the WS, you might build the second set of IWs and then everything else on that menu. You get a considerable something for next to nothing. Anything that can be organized, can be done. The enemy will thank you for not giving 100%.