RE: Recapture of CSA capitals loss of will (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Forge of Freedom: The American Civil War 1861-1865 >> Public Beta Feedback



Message

dude -> RE: Recapture of CSA capitals loss of will (4/16/2007 6:38:10 PM)

Willpower is a tough thing to pin down for either side.  As pointed out ealier in the thread I doubt the south's Will was really going to break unitl their armies started surrendering.  As to the North... they were rather fickle.  Grant lost a number of battles early in the east but I don't recall the Will of the north waning at these times.  Generally as long as the Northern armies were "precieved" to be moving "forward", which Grant did even though he lost, Northern Will held.  Antietam was a draw but was percieved as a boost to Northern Will.  So how do you model these?

My only feeling is that mass surrenders should impact greatly on both sides and that the loss of a confederate capital by the North should be no worse or greater than any other city.  A nothern city though, captured by the South should have great impact on the Northern Will.

Perhaps the north just isn't given enough troops to use for garrisons is part of the problem.  Just a thought (don't shoot me...)  I know I frequently run into problems trying to find enough troops to leave behind and still move my armies forward... I build plenty of units to build decent armies but I always seem to be short of troops for garrison duty.

Dude



dude -> RE: Recapture of CSA capitals loss of will (4/16/2007 7:02:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Paper Tiger


I send off a medium sized raiding force and take a CSA capital city hurrah, loss of 1 will to the CSA and they detach a large force from another theatre and send it off to retake the lost city. OK all going to plan here until I am forced out by the weight of numbers and the CSA recapture the capital, at which point the USA loses 2 will!
Excuse me but this is still enemy territory it is an enemy state, not like it is Ohio or something, how come the USA loses national will for this, I could understand the CSA regaining the 1 it lost but as it stands the CSA is almost better off leaving it's capitals as open cities and attempting to retake them repeatedly.


Just my two cents....
The problem, going back to the original post, is that a "raiding" force was used to take a city. I assume this means a small force of some (division size?). You probably shouldn't be "taking" cities with raiding forces. Unless you plan to take and hold a city with a sizable force then you had better plan on losing it. The North needed to take and hold ground for their Will to stay up. If you want to "raid" some place then just pillage it... don't take it.

You always look for those "Opportunities" to take something and when one presents itself you have a tendency to "go for it". The problem is, would a city taken by a "raiding" force then retaken by the owner, really affect the raiding forces's Will that much?

It's almost like you need a way to take a city... without really taking it? does that make sense? You need a means where a raiding type force can take a city but not be overly penalized for losing it. Or else just don't "take" the city. Perhaps there should only be a major penalty for losing a city after you've held it for a certain time period. If you've only had it for a month or two tops would losing so soon just be considered the back and forth of the ongoing battle?

I don't know... there are just so many factor's that play into something like this. Was the city a primary objective? was it a target of opportunity? was the force taking a main army or just a raiding force? In the end... it's what the Media bills it as... [;)]

In a game like this somethings just have to be generalized.

Dude



Paper Tiger -> RE: Recapture of CSA capitals loss of will (4/17/2007 3:50:56 PM)

I'm guessing I was having a somewhat tougher time as the result of playing the "Standard" campaign, having just looked at "Southern Steel" I was kind of expecting an up rated south and a more even match on resources. Hello what I got was I suspect the Census level resources as described above. Now on these resources I can see why the North should be expected to never lose a city once it is taken, nor does the occasional loss of a bit of National Will cause so much consternation when you can afford to actively purchase most of your troops instead of mustering and conscripting.
On the Standard scenario I was mostly facing similar sized armies opposite my US armies and the rebs were better trained and early on better equiped. I was attempting to use small forces to raid, either amphibiously or on land and grab cities or if necessary pillage. With the resources in Southern Steel that isn't necessary, and the response to my posting makes more sense.



Erik Rutins -> RE: Recapture of CSA capitals loss of will (4/17/2007 4:15:29 PM)

Paper Tiger,

That's correct - the "standard" campaign is balanced to be more challenging for the North in both force and economic balance. The "Southern Steel" campaign is the purely historical one as far as economic balance (and in the next public beta release, force OOBs too, per the pinned thread in this form). Coming Fury is also historical and the next release will also have a version of it with the Southern Steel economic balance.

For the standard scenario though, you can change the economic balance by changing the power ratings. This was the intended way to customize the default balance to match your preference. If you want more of a Southern Steel experience with the Standard campaign, for example, try Union Power +2, CSA Power -1, Greater Population, Richer Economy as options.

Regards,

- Erik



Paper Tiger -> RE: Recapture of CSA capitals loss of will (4/17/2007 5:37:07 PM)

Just wonder if we could have a switch for Northern Will, that way if you want a game with the CSA having an improved economy and the US being toned down you can also moderate the effect of the Northern public pressure, effectively a game where ebb and flow of victories and capture of cities is more expected.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.96875