Strange Messages on Blockade Elements

[Longshanks]

Check this out:

1. Pre-blockade message

[img][IMG]http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/5270/8elementsatmobilebay.jpg[/img][/IMG]

2. Post-blockade message (i.e., once your ships actually get there)

[img][IMG]http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/6468/12elementsatmobilebay.jpg[/img][/IMG]

This happens in nearly all the zones.

What's up with the "lying" messages? (talk about bait and switch! :neener

[lodilefty]

Check this out:

1. Pre-blockade message

[img][IMG]http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/5270/8elementsatmobilebay.jpg[/img][/IMG]

2. Post-blockade message (i.e., once your ships actually get there)

[img][IMG]http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/6468/12elementsatmobilebay.jpg[/img][/IMG]

This happens in nearly all the zones.

What's up with the "lying" messages? (talk about bait and switch! :neener

Hmmm...

Your ships are passive for one thing, but...

...maybe a bug!

Please upload saved file per:
http://www.ageod.net/agewiki/Send_Saved_Game

[Stauffenberg]

Suits me fine!
Actually perhaps this is modeling the fact that I had an ironclad resupplying in Mobile that was hidden and then discovered once he was in the bay?

And btw this is a real problem for me--the union fleet ability to just sail past most of my forts with their "miracle 35%" admiral) and then sit there for the entire winter, bulletproof, blockading the port.

Might I suggest that shore guns set to bombard be allowed to do so every turn for ships in brown water target zones (only)?

[Ethan]

Well, the CSA can also block Union ports to bother, although it's very expensive. Or (if the Union fleet isn't highly powerful) you can build some ironclads to 'open a hole in the Union blockade'.

@Longshanks: That also happens to me many times. Because of this, I always send 12 combat units to block an enemy port.

[Stauffenberg]

I'm working on a spirited response to Longshank's incursions... including the world's first submarine:

I'm sure most here know about it:
H.L. Hunley, a small, hand-powered submarine, was privately built at Mobile, Alabama, in 1863 and after a number of mishaps, became the first sub to sink an enemy ship, sinking the steam sloop of war USS Housatonic in February 1864...

I assume this may have been missed in the game. Any chance to have a submarine build option in a future build? Talk about great added historical colour.

[Ethan]

Sorry but I disagree with you on the subject of the submarine, Stauffenberg.

During the American Civil War, the Union Navy built a submarine before the H.L. Hunley (CSA). It was Alligator.

Anyway, two submarines, both launched in September 1888, marked the maturing of naval submarine technology.

One was the Peral Submarine, launched by the Spanish Navy . It had two torpedoes, new air systems, hull shape, propeller, and cruciform external controls anticipating much later designs. Peral was the first all-electrical powered submarine. After two years of trials the project was scrapped by naval officialdom that cited concerns over the short range permitted by its batteries.

The other was the Gymnote, launched by the French Navy. Gymnote was also an electrically powered and fully functional military submarine. It completed over 2,000 successful dives using a 204-cell battery. Although she was scrapped for her limited range her side hydroplanes became the standard for future submarine designs.

Many more designs were built at this time by various inventors, but submarines were not put into service by navies until 1900.

Regards!

[Longshanks]

Lodi,

"Your ships are passive for one thing, but..."

only to get there. Once they arrive, they switch modes to kick in the blockade.

I think it's a bug, but there could be some in-game reason it says "8" but changes to "12" once you actually get there. I dunno...

Yes, Ethan, I agree... I always just send 12 anyway. But I noticed it so often, I thought a post was in order.

[Stauffenberg]

Sorry but I disagree with you on the subject of the submarine, Stauffenberg.

During the American Civil War, the Union Navy built a submarine before the H.L. Hunley (CSA). It was Alligator.

Regards!

Fair enough! Let me rephrase it then--the Hunley was the world's first submarine to sink an enemy ship in action.
There was the earlier Turtle of course, which tried and failed to sink a British ship in 1776.

You got me reading up on the Alligator, and apparently it's initial propulsion was with the use of oars, which sounds pretty dodgy. In any case Lincoln himself saw it in action in March '63. The ship foundered and sank on it's way to attack Charleston in April '63.

A "naval research option" for both sides (available Fall '61) costing a WS point and one conscript could generate a submarine unit (widely variable build times) which might or might not score some hits for either side... before sinking.

If Belle Boyd can make it in here, the CSS H.L. Hunley should too I reckon.

[Oldman]

Hmmm...

Your ships are passive for one thing, but...

...maybe a bug!

Please upload saved file per:
http://www.ageod.net/agewiki/Send_Saved_Game

With all respect to lodilefty - he's definitely an expert here, not me - I remember I've seen one more possible explanation to the change of required elements for blockade:
"...the presence of enemy troops and artillery in adjacent land regions is a factor that can make the number of ships needed to blockade a zone go up or down...."
If this is true, then those entrenched CSA troops in Mobile (which you got no intel about in the first screen) has caused this increase.
One more difference between the screens is mud in the region in the second case, but as far as I know this will only impede movement cost...

[Ethan]

Fair enough! Let me rephrase it then--the Hunley was the world's first submarine to sink an enemy ship in action.
There was the earlier Turtle of course, which tried and failed to sink a British ship in 1776.

You got me reading up on the Alligator, and apparently it's initial propulsion was with the use of oars, which sounds pretty dodgy. In any case Lincoln himself saw it in action in March '63. The ship foundered and sank on it's way to attack Charleston in April '63.

Good remark, Stauffenberg.

Greetings!

[charlesonmission]

Ethan really explains the situation well. My friend's, who recently also bought this game, relative wrote a book that I read a couple weeks ago on the Hunley. http://www.amazon.com/H-L-Hunley-Secret-Confederacy/dp/143324876X

There was no possibility of mass production of submarine ships (they added the word ship back then) during the time of the ACW. In fact, the Hunley went out numerous times without sinking a ship or getting anywhere close to a ship. An event would be cool though. However, what would be realistic is the use of mines (called torpedoes) during the ACW. The CSA sank 56 ships of different size if my mind serves me correctly. The Union sank 1, the might CSS Albemarle (which shows up in the game William Trotter, whom I think reviewed this game, wrote a great historical fiction book on that ship. http://www.amazon.com/Fires-Pride-Novel-Civil-War/dp/B000CEXTRK/ref=pd_sim_b_1

Back to the games, mines could be recruited like ships but would be stuck in the harbour where they shop up. I'm not a technical person, so I don't know how easy it could be done. Maybe something for AACW2.

Fair enough! Let me rephrase it then--the Hunley was the world's first submarine to sink an enemy ship in action.
There was the earlier Turtle of course, which tried and failed to sink a British ship in 1776.

You got me reading up on the Alligator, and apparently it's initial propulsion was with the use of oars, which sounds pretty dodgy. In any case Lincoln himself saw it in action in March '63. The ship foundered and sank on it's way to attack Charleston in April '63.

A "naval research option" for both sides (available Fall '61) costing a WS point and one conscript could generate a submarine unit (widely variable build times) which might or might not score some hits for either side... before sinking.

If Belle Boyd can make it in here, the CSS H.L. Hunley should too I reckon.

[Ethan]

I think the subject of the 'mines' would be very interesting, Charles. May even be linked to a dice roll to determine its probability of success, i.e to sink enemy ships... Who knows?

[lodilefty]

There exists a simple "flavor" event saying "the Hunley is sunk" and reducing CSA WS by 3, plus a "Housatonic sunk" message that is a News item only.

It is, of course, possible to model a Submarine, but difficult to limit it's mobility...

..of course, it (and torpedoes) could be created by event in a water region, have movement = 0, and consume no supply so they stay there.....

[Stauffenberg]

There exists a simple "flavor" event saying "the Hunley is sunk" and reducing CSA WS by 3, plus a "Housatonic sunk" message that is a News item only.

I'm impressed. Yes I was thinking more in terms of a mine function, as in little or no movement beyond where they appear.

And I appreciate the excellent information Charles. I keep imagining what it must have been like to have been in one of those. The crew were simply the equivalent of galley slaves, cranking or rowing in dark, humid, dreadful conditions. Brave men indeed those first submariners.

[Pat "Stonewall" Cleburne]

With all respect to lodilefty - he's definitely an expert here, not me - I remember I've seen one more possible explanation to the change of required elements for blockade:
"...the presence of enemy troops and artillery in adjacent land regions is a factor that can make the number of ships needed to blockade a zone go up or down...."
If this is true, then those entrenched CSA troops in Mobile (which you got no intel about in the first screen) has caused this increase.
One more difference between the screens is mud in the region in the second case, but as far as I know this will only impede movement cost...

Methinks this is the correct answer.

[ohms_law]

regardless, it would be nice if the tool-tip was written in clearer language. If adjacent land units are a factor, it would be cool if that information were available in the tool-tip.

I suspect that I'm not alone in feeling that "hidden information" isn't really a good design choice. It seems that most of us are wargaming veterans, and Pocus clearly has war game design experience. We all know that none of the game mechanics are completely hidden when playing tabletop games, and I never understood the desire to completely hide the details in computer games. Of course, it's important not to make the game mechanics overly conspicuous either, but...

Well, the tool-tip should include more information.

[Ethan]

Methinks this is the correct answer.

+1

[Stauffenberg]

+1

Yes and I was the confederate player in Mobile in that example and I can tell you I had an ironclad *hidden* in the city.
Also a prototype submarine being tested but that's another story.

[Citizen X]

Yes and I was the confederate player in Mobile in that example and I can tell you I had an ironclad *hidden* in the city.
Also a prototype submarine being tested but that's another story.

Note, that not everything that sinks is thus nescessarily being a submarine.

[lodilefty]

regardless, it would be nice if the tool-tip was written in clearer language. If adjacent land units are a factor, it would be cool if that information were available in the tool-tip.

I suspect that I'm not alone in feeling that "hidden information" isn't really a good design choice. It seems that most of us are wargaming veterans, and Pocus clearly has war game design experience. We all know that none of the game mechanics are completely hidden when playing tabletop games, and I never understood the desire to completely hide the details in computer games. Of course, it's important not to make the game mechanics overly conspicuous either, but...

Well, the tool-tip should include more information.

Remeber that Fog iof War prevents you from "seeing" all factors, and can lead to misleading information...

AFAIK, this is all WAD...

[ohms_law]

well yea, but... I mean, with some logic in the program, the tool-tip should be able to display the appropriate modifiers based on information that the player has available.

Course, that sort of thing would require changes in the .exe, so... this is more of an AACW2 sort of issue I guess. Just thought that I'd mention it, since we're talking about tool-tips here. *shrug*