Great game design makes the complex simple, replayability maximum, and abstraction credible.
It’s not how well you roll that counts but how well the dice suit the game.
Retracing my way through the rules I’m pretty lucky to have the latest version at my disposal seeing my box is 2000, so things like river control and combined ops are going smoothly.
But I’m just wondering if there’s something missing from the design note to 6.6 Union Naval Control? It reads:
6.6 Union Naval Control
DESIGN NOTE: Union Naval Control should be thought of as a pressure that is exerted along all navigable rivers from the North and against Confederate coastline spaces from the Sea. Union naval pressure prevails unless the South can block the pressure with forts or ironclads. One way to think about it is Union Naval control emanates from where the Ohio (both ends), the Wabash and the Mississippi rivers flow off the North edge of the map (even though they are not navigable at those points). At the beginning of the Campaign game Cairo is con-nected to those sources of Union naval pressure that flow down the Mississippi, Ohio, Cumberland and Tennessee rivers. The Confederate fort at Dover, TN (Forts Henry and Donaldson) blocks this pressure from reaching Nashville, TN. The Confederate fort at Columbus, KY blocks this pressure from reaching south along the Mississippi.
Looking at the highlighted last sentence, I’m trying to make this gel with the four ways the Confederacy can negate Union river control but it doesn’t seem to match any of them.
Is this note simply saying that pressure is blocked flowing south but of course you need to invoke Case 3 or Case 4 to actually negate Union control beyond Columbus along the Mississippi?