GeekGold Bonus for All Supporters at year's end: 1000!

9,283 Supporters

$15 min for supporter badge & GeekGold bonus
17 Days Left

Support:

Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
6 Posts

The Civil War» Forums » Rules

Subject: Rule 2.1.13 rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Robert Martz
United States
Walnut Creek
California
flag msg tools
mb
Could someone please clarify what exactly is meant by Rule 2.1.13. The 3rd edition rule states, "a force may move from the mainland to [Ft. Pickens, Ft. Pulaski, and/or Roanoke Island]. However, a force may
not cross a navigable river into a hex containing an enemy-held supplied
fortress." It seems to imply that:
(1) The CSA has no way of attacking a Union-manned Fort Pickens.
(2) The Union could not attack a CSA-manned Fort Pulaski overland from Savannah; an amphibious invasion.
True or false?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave Turansky
United States
Shreveport
Louisiana
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
1) The CSA has no way of attacking a Union-manned Fort Pickens.


Correct, with one exception. Should the Confederates gain control of Washington, Ft. Pickens would no longer be in supply. See 4.1.6.


(2) The Union could not attack a CSA-manned Fort Pulaski overland from Savannah; an amphibious invasion.
True or false?

An overland attack is not the same as an amphibious move. The Union could attack Ft. Pulaski overland if it is unoccupied and out of supply. If unmanned and out of supply, Ft. Pulaski has no effect. See 14.4.1.

The placement of Ft. Pulaski is confusing. Eric Smith has acknowledged that there were problems with the mapboard's shoreline in some areas. It might be helpful to color in a swamp hex where Ft. Pulaski is located. It cannot be "skirted" in a backdoor attack on Savannah.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Martz
United States
Walnut Creek
California
flag msg tools
mb
Thanks, Dave. I think I get how it works now.
BTW, there was a problem with my original post. I meant to write, "(2) The Union could not attack a CSA-manned Fort Pulaski overland from Savannah; an amphibious invasion would have to be used."
At any rate, I see now that my statement is false, and the key to the rule is that the Forts in question must be in supply.
As to Fort Pulaski, the map shows what appears to be a navigable river hexside between the Fort and the swamp hex 4424 immediately north of it (and northeast of Savannah), and 4423 north of that contains a railroad, so theoretically the Fort might still be in supply even if Savannah falls but the rail line remains connected for supply purposes?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave Turansky
United States
Shreveport
Louisiana
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
goldenbearflyer wrote:
Thanks, Dave. I think I get how it works now.
BTW, there was a problem with my original post. I meant to write, "(2) The Union could not attack a CSA-manned Fort Pulaski overland from Savannah; an amphibious invasion would have to be used."
At any rate, I see now that my statement is false, and the key to the rule is that the Forts in question must be in supply.
As to Fort Pulaski, the map shows what appears to be a navigable river hexside between the Fort and the swamp hex 4424 immediately north of it (and northeast of Savannah), and 4423 north of that contains a railroad, so theoretically the Fort might still be in supply even if Savannah falls but the rail line remains connected for supply purposes?


That's correct.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Warren Bruhn
United States
Roseburg
Oregon
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Seems to me that a manned Fort Pulaski would still control the navigable river hexsides of the Fort Pulaski hex. So a force still could not cross to the Fort Pulaski hex to attack even if a manned Fort Pulaski is out of supply. Am I wrong about that?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave Turansky
United States
Shreveport
Louisiana
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Warren Bruhn wrote:
Seems to me that a manned Fort Pulaski would still control the navigable river hexsides of the Fort Pulaski hex. So a force still could not cross to the Fort Pulaski hex to attack even if a manned Fort Pulaski is out of supply. Am I wrong about that?


From the unofficial rules revision with the changes in bold:


6.3.4 A force cannot enter a hex occupied by an enemy fort or fortress (manned or unmanned) by crossing a navigable river hexside. Thus, the Confederate player cannot enter Fort Pickens (2730) or Fort Pulaski (4425) if they are occupied by a Union SP or are unmanned but in supply, since they are separated from hexes 2629 (Pickens) and 4325 or 4424 (Pulaski) by navigable river hexsides.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.