User avatar
James W. Starnes
Corporal
Posts: 64
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 12:05 am
Location: TN

A few various brainstorms

Sun Oct 28, 2018 2:08 pm

My ideas all stem from the decisions.

Under the railroad and river transport sections, I think there should be decisions to expand rail roads on either side especially in the C.S.A. at the cost of WSU and $$$.

Strategical decisions to pursue at the cost of $$$, WSU, and conscripts. So, if you wanted to invest heavily in the Sibley's campaign, you could "send" supplies to him or have an event that spawns more troops, which initially would be made up of Texans and New Mexican volunteers. Or the Western or Eastern theaters. Any of these decisions can help if you are pursing a theater specific strategy such as capturing and defending KY if it secedes or if not defending TN (western), or investing in to a VA defensive/offensive strategy (East).

Besides the "Build Redoubts" card, have decisions that are specific to important cities/locations, so have an option where you can construct defenses in locations such as Atlanta, New Orleans, Norfolk, Memphis, Nashville, Chattanooga, Harper's Ferry, etc. at the cost of WSU, $$$, and a conscripts. I say conscripts also because along the defenses you can spawn fort batteries and garrisons of men.

Lastly to add more depth and historical possibility to the far west, add troops spawns in Denver and Los Angeles for the C.S.A. upon capture. Historically, there was strong pro-Southern sentiment in certain areas of CA and CO. In CO, Sibley did actually send someone up to gather recruits which was successful, but they were disbanded when he couldn't make it. I could see this encouraging players to pursue a more active approach in the FW instead of just burning, defending, and leaving it as playing the C.S.A.

Searry
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 297
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2011 7:19 pm

Re: A few various brainstorms

Sun Oct 28, 2018 3:05 pm

Why would you want to pursue any campaign in the far west? Doesn't make any sense to me.

User avatar
DrPostman
Posts: 2984
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2011 5:39 pm
Location: Memphis, TN
Contact: Website Facebook Twitter YouTube

Re: A few various brainstorms

Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:02 pm

Searry wrote:Why would you want to pursue any campaign in the far west? Doesn't make any sense to me.

The Gold mines for one, and San Francisco for another. I took it once, but it required shipping
a division across the oceans to do it, landing in LA first. Of course I've used the Copperhead
and Partisan RGDs to take the mines, at least for a while, after softening them up with the
Demonstration RGD.

As for the other suggestions you can fortify by using cannon and supply already if you don't
have enough redoubt decisions. That's probably the best use of 6pdr guns I can think of.

I'm not so sure sympathy was that strong in California for the CSA, but extra Partisans or
Rangers could be added to the pool, at least a couple. I'd like to see conscript made
available for Maryland if the CSA manages to take a majority of cities there, especially
if they can take Baltimore.

Adding railroad could be done but from what I understand in game changes to the map
would be a coding nightmare. They could be there, like roads are now when you build
them, just not visible.

User avatar
Captain_Orso
Posts: 5766
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 5:02 pm
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Re: A few various brainstorms

Wed Oct 31, 2018 8:12 am

I know I've read about popular support in California a couple of times, whether for Union or Secession, but I can never remember exactly what I read :blink: Probably because it was fairly unspectacular. I guess the population was mostly busy with getting on with their lives, although IIRC sentiments were fairly evenly split. I'm guessing the East was just too far away.

I once proposed a method for building new rail lines during the game, but it was deemed to be too difficult to implement, although IIRC it would have been done with only RGD's, and a couple of Surveyors units. Just now thinking about it, you could add a couple of disc-marker (you know those round icons denoting Siege, Iced-In Harbors, etc - make one showing a new surveyed region and a new railroad; easy-peasy :) ).

You would first have to plan the route, which would have to terminate in a city, or coupling with another railroad region. Then each region along the route would have to be surveyed before building could begin. You can only build in a region neighboring a current railroad region.

Of course it would always have to couple onto a previous rail line region, and would take a long time to build in a region. The more difficult the terrain, the longer it would take and the more expensive it would be. Crossing minor and major rivers would cost extra and also take extra time... and maybe it would take a little more than just writing a couple of RGD's, and adding a unit and a couple of markers... :crying:

On an historical side-note, the rail line between Keokuk and Des Moines, Iowa was actually only completed in August of 1866: How the Des Moines Valley Railroad Came to Des Moines PDF, and Sioux City in 1868: History - Sioux City Railroad Museum.

Also, the Des Moines River should be navigable up to Des Moines for steam boats, but be very susceptible to flooding and low-water blocking traffic, neither of which we have in the game.

You get conscripts if you hold Baltimore according to loyalty, the same as any other city. But if the South controls Baltimore, a small number of units should be added to their unit pool as well, which probably ought to only be built in Baltimore, or maybe also Fredericktown... (Fredericktown? Really? :8o: ).

RebelYell
General
Posts: 590
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2010 4:40 pm

Re: A few various brainstorms

Thu Nov 29, 2018 1:17 pm

Most of the in game roads should be turned to tracks, all over the map but especially in the west, railroads and rivers should be even more important.

User avatar
Captain_Orso
Posts: 5766
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 5:02 pm
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Re: A few various brainstorms

Fri Nov 30, 2018 9:40 am

I don't think so. Roads are not roads. That is, movement through a region depends not only on track/road, but also civilization level. So moving along a road in the east where civ levels are generally 70%+ is not the same as moving along a road in the trans-Mississippi where the civ level may be only 30%. Roads are not roads.

RebelYell
General
Posts: 590
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2010 4:40 pm

Re: A few various brainstorms

Sat Dec 08, 2018 5:14 pm

Captain_Orso wrote:I don't think so. Roads are not roads. That is, movement through a region depends not only on track/road, but also civilization level. So moving along a road in the east where civ levels are generally 70%+ is not the same as moving along a road in the trans-Mississippi where the civ level may be only 30%. Roads are not roads.


So roads dont help supply move faster? That was the game tells they do.

The point is that for example the Mississippi river valley can have very rich regions in supply to live of the land but logistics should be based on holding rivers and railways.

User avatar
Captain_Orso
Posts: 5766
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 5:02 pm
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Re: A few various brainstorms

Sun Dec 09, 2018 12:07 am

Yes, they do, but not exclusively. During supply distribution, the game checks how far an hypothetical supply unit could move within one turn as the basis of how far supplies can move in each of the 3 distribution phases, and this depends on non-road/track/road status PLUS civilization level. Both have their influence over and are cumulative to movement costs.

Return to “Help improve CW2”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests