Forced March

[Hobbes]

It just occured to me that after nearly a year of playing AACW I have never used a forced march. Does anyone use this feature? I did a few times in BoA but it rarely seems to be worthwhile in AACW. One reason could be that I can't remember what the penalties are and the tooltip doesn't decribe them. Maybe a tooltip update would help for this feature?

I wonder what other areas of the game people rarely use? I think I saw a thread about people not using the loyalties screen some time back. I have never felt a need to use it myself. The question then I suppose is has the feature been implemented correctly? However I think not all featues of a game have to be in use all the time, sometimes it's nice to just have them there and once in a blue moon you may decide to use them. Some players may find a strategy others miss.

My hat is off to AGEOD to have spent the time developing areas of the game that may see little use. The main one being the work they have put into foreign intervention. Most players will never see it but it adds a lot to the atmosphere of the game just knowing it is a possibility and if it doesn't happen you still have to keep a wary eye on this as Union (it's also nice to be able to look through all the British, French and Mexican units).

Cheers, Chris

[grenna]

I also use this much more in BOA. I use it at times in AACW, particularly if it will get me somewhere important before the next turn. However, I tend to rely on rail and river transport for speed, if available.

Regarding filters, I tend to use the supply filters for both games - supply can give me fits at times!

Gene

[Coregonas]

I ve used once in my recent games

Grant with 8-10 divisions attacked Nashville.

My army (3 divisions aprox) retreated to the nearby city.

I forced march to get to the southern depot before him.

[Jabberwock]

I use it. Not for large stacks, mostly for raiding and early territory grabs.

Sometimes a raider unit can rail or river move across Kentucky, and almost get where I want it. so I push the FM button in addition to the rail move, and hope. Sometimes it can mean the difference between capturing a town, or burning the supplies in that town and capturing the next town.

I tend not to use it much in Missouri/Arkansas/IT. Distances are too vast, supplies too scarce, no rail to march towards. The possible fatigue cost slows a unit down on subsequent turns. I hate to see a unit starving because it is trying to forced-march towards supplies.

[Ethy]

i too tend not to use the forced march option. i tend to think that forced marches are quite unessesary and dangerous if you tend to use the forces that are marching for reinforcments. the risk of loosing a battle purely because the reinforcments recieved from another division wernt fresh doesnt sound like a chance i want to risk.

as for the thing about the loyalties panel, i check up on it every once and awhile (if only for recreational purposes to know that my civilian poplulation is happy and in support of the war). however the loyalty of the population in different states affects the chance of rebelions and partisans being spawned in different areas. for example i had a union game going on and early on in the game baltimore was only 17% loyal and two brigades worth of militia where spawned for the CSA whilst baltimore was under USA control... kind of annoying when you have to send back a few brigades to deal with the situation

[Jabberwock]

In a couple of games against Athena, when the border states were disloyal, I created "loyalty programs" for Kentucky or Missouri, where I would flood the state with militia, then start playing with loyalty settings. It was just entertainment, no real effect on the outcome of the war. I think the loss of MC when I left a given region might have been slowed, but I'm not sure. The game is certainly playable without it, since nobody really uses it. It could probably stand a rework to make it more interesting.