Objective: Atlanta

[Winfield S. Hancock]

In reviewing the victory conditions for the North in the April 61 scenario, it mentions four key cities that the Union must take and hold for victory. These cities are Richmond, Memphis, Nashville, and New Orleans.

All of these cities require a forward defense by the Rebels, which is probably a good thing, but as in real life, I would think a fairly competent Union player could achieve at least 3 of these objectives by the summer of 62.

This in turn led me to wonder, why isn't Atlanta included as a fifth key objective? The fall of Atlanta was in many ways the key event of the war in 1864, with its capture ensuring Lincoln's re-election and the terrible demoralizing effects it had on Southerners who now realized that with a Northern Army directly in possession of the major city of their heartland, the cause was lost.

I am curious as to why the scenario does not include Atlanta as a fifth key objective for victory. Without its inclusion, the North could win simply by taking the other four cities, all in border state periphery. Is it really the case that if the South lost these four cities they would have surrendered? Or, with their heartland untouched, would they have chosen to fight on?

Also, might not making Atlanta a key objective city also help the AI South as well, giving it a fall back position to rally around in its heartland, far from the striking power of the main Union armies?

I would be interested in the thoughts of the designers and others on this topic.

[Crimguy]

I agree. Atlanta was certainly more vital to the hearts and minds of the south than either Memphis or Nashville. I think most scholars would agree with the statement that Atlanta was second only perhaps to Richmond in terms of importance.

I would swap out Nashville for Atlanta as a key objective, or add it as a 5th objective. I'm only creeping into 1862, but capturing Nashville and Memphis are not an issue of if, but of when. And when I think will be June/July of 62.

[DEL]

Winfield S. Hancock

It doesn't say that the Union must hold those cities. It says that control of those cities can achieve this. Atlanta IS an objective city in the game. What you are referring to is in the scenario description. That is just a general overview of the Campaign.

[Grotius]

Erm, it's November 1862, and I have taken none of the four objective cities. Granted, I made more than my share of newb mistakes. I've taken Fredericksburg and Fort Henry, but the CSA took Bowling Green from me and I had to wrest it back. I'm on the outskirts of Nashville now, but it's starting to get cold outside, and I'm not sure I'll take it before winter sets in. Maybe I just suck?

Anyway, I'm also not clear on whether those four cities actually win the game for the USA. I know the manual says taking all four will mean a win for the USA, but is it an autovictory or just a sign of ineluctable triumph? If autovictory, then I might be inclined to agree that Atlanta should be added to the list. If just a sign of progress, perhaps accompanied by a morale boost, then I dunno.

Edit: what DEL said. If it's not autovictory, then I think it's OK as is.

[DEL]

Grotius

Have you checked the Objectives tab by pressing F 9? It lists objective cities as well as lots of other useful stuff tracking the progress of your campaign.

[Winfield S. Hancock]

Winfield S. Hancock

It doesn't say that the Union must hold those cities. It says that control of those cities can achieve this. Atlanta IS an objective city in the game. What you are referring to is in the scenario description. That is just a general overview of the Campaign.

But Atlanta is not an objective city for the automatic victory determination. If the North holds Richmond, Memphis, Nashville, and New Orleans, it is an automatic win for the North. My position is that Atlanta should be added to this group, forcing the Union player to conquer at least one city in the Confederate heartland in order to achieve an automatic victory. I believe this to be an accurate reflection of history -- remember, even Virginia was not one of the 'core' Confederate deep South states -- the original seven stars on the Confederate National flag were for South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas. North Carolina, Virginia, Tennessee, and Arkansas were considered part of the 'Upper South' and left the Union only after Lincoln's call for volunteers after Ft. Sumter. Thus, I think that having a second 'Deep South' city required for northern auto victory is quite justified.

[Wilhammer]

I too have wondered why Atlanta or even Charleston is not on that list. Esp. Atlanta.

[Wilhammer]

BTW, in my PBEM, I have taken none of those Objectives, and it is late September 1862. I am 100 VP behind and at about even on National Morale points and distance to each sides NM win point.

However, West Central Tennessee has just exploded after taking Ft. Henry / Donnelson.

The primary reasons for the slow pace are;

My opponent is good; very good.
We started this way back at 1.01 to master the system, so we both had to learn ourselves into this game, much like the opponents learned themselves into war.
And, my plan; the long term Slow Grind Anaconda plan. The early rashness was not practiced per history.

[Grotius]

Is there an "automatic victory"? The manual isn't clear about it.

Yep, I check F9 almost every turn. It doesn't help me move the Army of the Ohio any faster. I'm glad to hear that someone else hasn't taken any of those cities as of 1862. Finally, in early 1863, I'm closing in on Memphis and, maybe, Richmond.

[DEL]

Winfield S. Hancock

Why do you think controlling those four cities triggers an automatic victory? The manual says the only way to trigger an automatic victory is by reaching a minimum or maximum National Morale level.

[Winfield S. Hancock]

In the briefing screen prior to loading the April 61 scenario, the briefing says 'The Union player wins if he breaks the Confederate morale at any moment. Controlling Richmond, New Orleans, Memphis, and Nashville can achieve this result"

Now I admit this is a bit vague, but this would lead one to believe that one way to acheive an auto victory is to capture all four, which is sufficient to break CSA morale.

[DEL]

You're reading way way too much into the briefing screen. The briefing just offers an ever so limited suggestion of how to break the othersides morale. As with all briefing screens, it's just meant to get you started. The rest is up to you!

[Pocus]

Indeed, there is no "capture X and win" city, it is all a matter of objective value.

[pakfront]

Indeed, there is no "capture X and win" city, it is all a matter of objective value.

Ah! That would be why I have not yet won Shiloh, despite holding the objective cities for ages. Just a VP point or too away from winning, but not quite there. FWIW, to an American reader the briefings do imply that holding all objective cites will assure victory. If you have a moment to clarify the text in the next release, I think that would prevent a lot of newbie confusion.