River Obstructions?

[soloswolf]

Any chance of adding in an option to disrupt river transit? Something in the same vein as destroying RR.

It would take a fair amount of time I'd imagine. Maybe double what it takes to destroy rails, and would need to be repaired in the same fashion or block river transport from the pool, and perhaps hinder movement of troops aboard transports.

Thoughts?

[arsan]

There was any historic case of this on the main rivers?? I mean, apart than the "obstruction" by guns on land or afloat
I can't remember any but i´m far from being a ACW buff
Or are you talking about "torpedos" and the like?
Regards!

[W.Barksdale]

5+ entrenchments and forts will stop riverine transport.

Most obstructions can only work on relateively small rivers anyway. Remember Banks' Red River Fiasco? Those sort of tactics wouldn't work on the Cumberland or the Mississippi. No use wasting time with it.

[Jabberwock]

Yes, it was done quite a bit. Three common methods:

• booms, chains, and nets from shore to shore
• sinking hulks (or even functional ships) where obstructions were needed
• driving pilings into the riverbed

Sometimes the current would break the chains, or move the sunken hulks, or carve a new channel, so anything done with this should have a chance of degredation or failure.

This is how we would keep ships out of those rivers with no forts at the mouth ...

[Jabberwock]

5+ entrenchments and forts will stop riverine transport.

Most obstructions can only work on relateively small rivers anyway. Remember Banks' Red River Fiasco? Those sort of tactics wouldn't work on the Cumberland or the Mississippi. No use wasting time with it.

What about the Altamaha? Or the Lumber River? the Santee? I can get to some pretty important stuff sailing up those rivers.

[W.Barksdale]

What about the Altamaha? Or the Lumber River? the Santee? I can get to some pretty important stuff sailing up those rivers.

Yes indeed. An Atlantic side invasion up these routes is very possible. While small relative the Mississippi they are not small rivers themselves. I can't really see how chains or flaming barges or anything of the like could seriously impede a fleet for more than a day.

[soloswolf]

I'm not sayin' it should be automatic. I'm not sayin' it should be free. I just think that there is precedent and it's worth some discussion.

With regards to it's chances of success... I am not sure how much harder ot ought to be than repairing RR. Maybe require an engineer unit's presence?

Cost wise... I think it would be less than RR, and could be governed better by the engineer requirement rather than a strict cost for the action. Maybe require the use of a ship as a cost, like arty for forts or transports for depots?

With regards to it's feasibility... If marines+sailors get their bonus across major rivers, I think this should fly as well. Certainly the skills going into spanning a river could be used in many of the methods for restricting travel up/down it.

[Jabberwock]

The obstructions were almost always covered by shore batteries. We don't have enough batteries in the game (and I don't think we would want them) to post every shore battery that was used during the war, and then bring it up to level 5. The combination fairly effective keeping the union fleet out of some of the rivers. The union used them, too, to help with the blockade.

Torpedoes, on the other hand, were often used without covering batteries.

[soloswolf]

I can't really see how chains or flaming barges or anything of the like could seriously impede a fleet for more than a day.

What if they have no manpower to work with outside of their crews? Would they risk them ashore with no support? Would they have the tools/resources to deal with the obstructions?

Again, many of the examples that exist are on smaller waterways, but the Yazoo route around Vicksburg took thousands of men weeks to clear only to be thwarted by a cotton bale fort.

[Jabberwock]

There was a chain and boom combo between Ft Jackson and Ft St Phillip. The river broke it, and when it was put back together, union ship crews broke it again while under fire from the forts. Until that time, it was what kept the Union fleet from sailing right past the forts and into New Orleans.

The net (and torpedoes around it) at Charleston between Ft Sumter and the north shore certainly contributed to the defeat of the monitors there.

[W.Barksdale]

Well I guess it would be cool to have these sorts of things. Must not make them too effective\powerful though.

[Jabberwock]

Well I guess it would be cool to have these sorts of things. Must not make them too effective\powerful though.

exactly.

[soloswolf]

What do you fellas think of the cost ideas?

[soloswolf]

Well I guess it would be cool to have these sorts of things. Must not make them too effective\powerful though.

So you are against ships being sunk by them? Free units spawning from their locations? That sort of thing, or is that cool?

But seriously, I agree. I think it could be a neat addition if we could balance it well.

[Jabberwock]

What does it cost to repair rails?

[soloswolf]

3 WS I believe. And time of course.

Rebel scum...

I mean, Defenders of The West!

[Jabberwock]

I think putting a ship in the same region with an obstruction and leaving it there for a turn should automatically remove the obstruction. I also think that shore forces should be able to bombard stationary ships in shallow regions. I think it should require either a naval engineer to place one, with a chance and cost similar to repairing rails, or use of two transports, like creating a depot. That would get the CSA thinking about buying some of those units. I think there should be a 5-10% chance each turn that any obstruction disappears due to natural causes.

[soloswolf]

I think either engineer should do. And if I had to pick, I would say an army engineer. I think their skill set would lend itself to the construction over that of a shipbuilder and his crews. But in any case, someone with training and a mind for math and construction would suffice I'd imagine.

[soloswolf]

What about a chance of damaging the ships? I don't mean to snowball this thing, just thinking out loud.

[Jabberwock]

Torpedoes should be a low cost bought unit with two models. One for undeployed torpedoes that can move but have no combat abilities, one for deployed, that can't move, but gets one very powerful attack, with a low chance to hit. Both should have a high hide value. An event should check every turn to change any undeployed torpedoes in a water region into deployed torpedoes. Leaving an enemy ship in the same region with torpedoes should have a chance to remove the torpedoes, similar to RR repair, but with no cost.

This actually more do-able than obstructions.

[soloswolf]

Neat-o.

Why/how would that be easier? (I know nothing of this sort of thing)

[Jabberwock]

Creating two new models and an event would be database edits, which could be done by a modder. Graphics could be created by a modder. Then all that is left is the chance for their removal, which would probably have to be handled by the engine, but might be doable by event as well.

For obstructions, I think we are talking about changing the characteristics of a region, which would have to be handled by the engine. Hopefully, I am wrong about that.

[soloswolf]

I think I read in the RR mod posts something about gap size or jump points or some such? Something about the canals in the great lakes region.

Is that something that can be temporarily altered in game or is that a bigger change? Something like that could essentially just 'seal it up' for a turn or until some action is taken to remove it.

Again: I am Aaron's computer ignorant post.

[Jabberwock]

JumpLinks.

It is not currently something that can be altered in-game. I am hopeful that when the option is added to build new railroads (whenever that is - don't expect it soon), we will also get the ability to do something like this.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Jabberwock]

More ideas on torpedoes.

The undeployed model should have difficulty entering a region that has stationary enemy ships. Movement type should probably be wheeled. Build time should probably be around 30 days, less with a naval engineer. Cargo weight - 1.

The deployed model should be hostile to everybody except other torpedoes ... just like Martian tripods.
EDIT: Or maybe not. The deployer knew where the torpedo fields were, and many could only be trigger manually by a someone on shore.

And Gray is correct, Athena has no routine to handle something like this. I think it would be a fairly easy routine to write, but then I wouldn't be the one doing that work.

[barkhorn45]

drewrys bluff on the james river overlooked man made obstructions such as sunken ships and chain booms and when union ironclads attempted to advance up the james to richmond were stopped at this point and took heavy damage before withdrawing mainly because they could'nt elevate their guns enough to return fire

[Big Muddy]

I like this idea, but I think that it should be simple. Maybe just be able to sink vessel, this option could be added where bombard/evade are located for example.

I think that loss of turn would be acceptable, but no damage. And only one ship at a time, not 2/3 for loss of 2/3 turns. And when I say sink vessel thats exactly what I mean, no cost, you sink your ship. Well I guess there is the cost that you paid to pruchase.

[Jabberwock]

drewrys bluff on the james river overlooked man made obstructions such as sunken ships and chain booms and when union ironclads attempted to advance up the james to richmond were stopped at this point and took heavy damage before withdrawing mainly because they could'nt elevate their guns enough to return fire

Don't forget the effects of plunging fire. Shore batteries had defensive and offensive advantages over ships with superior elevation. (But that's another discussion)

It was the obstructions that forced the ships to stop in that position.

[barkhorn45]

i agree i was just bringing up a historical example of the effective use of river obstructions in the time period of the game.this one being important because it occured during McClellan's offensive up the peninsula which if he had'ent believed pinkertons assessement that he was out-numbered 2-1 would have ended the war imho