Recommend
5 
 Thumb up
 Hide
7 Posts

The Civil War» Forums » General

Subject: 1862 scenario -- where are all the CSA SPs? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Alan C
msg tools
I can't believe I never noticed this before, and maybe I've forgotten how to add or something, but the Confederates in the 1862/ GT4 scenario seem to be way understrength. By my count they've lost 17 SP over three turns, and it seems the Union hasn't lost anyone at all causing those losses. The CSA's a lot weaker in the scenario than in any GT4 I ever saw when playing the game from GT1

Is there a problem here? And if so, is the problem the scenario, or the GT 1-3 CSA reinforcement schedule?

Anyone have any experience playing the 1862 scenario?

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave Turansky
United States
Shreveport
Louisiana
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
It is my long-held opinion that the SP's in the campaign game understate the Union strength. The scenarios possibly provide a closer troop strength estimate; but few players ever play the scenarios.

It's my understanding that the USA gets a total of 196 SP's to 132 for the CSA during the course of the campaign game. That total does not include militia, naval troops, fortification garrisons, or intrinsic defense strength for amphibious invasions. Some troops not represented by counters would be guarding rail lines and supply depots. Some would be detached to prisons, camps, supply trains, headquarters, or on leave. The reinforcement disparity does not appreciably widen until 1864. It has always seemed to me that the Union should have more SP's. Of course, one would never be able to determine gross troop strengths at various points during the war with reasonable accuracy.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Fred Finkenbinder
United States
Maryland
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
The fixed reinforcement schedule is a matter of debate in the game, because there is nothing one can do to alter the amount of reinforcements. For example, if a CSA state is converted, shouldn't the manpower shortage be felt? This is something that "For the People" does differently and to some people, better than TCW. Personally, I like both systems when it comes to reinforcements, even if TCW has more of a fixed historical script when it comes to this.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Fred Finkenbinder
United States
Maryland
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
And I would have to disagree slightly with Dave on the Union needing more SPs. It has been my experience that the SPs given in the game emulate the North's ability, over time, to appropriately fight a war of attrition like Grant did in 1864 if it comes to it. Remember, the north does have to guard supply lines but once the South is pinned it doesn't need the SPs to defend territory as much as the South does, especially in the early game. I know this is all subjective though so I can't argue too hard against it. Then again, Dave is usually playing competent CSA players
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
frank gallagher
United States
tulsa
Oklahoma
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
It's been awhile since I played the game, but IIRC, there's a scenario (1862?) where the Union starts with one more SP than it could have had in the campaign game with all reinforcements even if it had never lost a single SP. Always bothered me . . .
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Warren Bruhn
United States
Roseburg
Oregon
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I've never played the shorter campaigns. I don't think I've met anyone who has.

As for SP in the full campaign, there was some discussion of this on CSW in the past. Both USA and CSA historical strength is somewhat under represented by the SP in the game. However, local defense forces are reflected in the defense against amphibious invasion. Also, a lot of troops were lost during the war due to disease. The Union certainly needs plenty of SP to garrison conquered VP cities. Otherwise the CSA just sends an SP to take them back. I think the number of SP in the game provides a fair representation of the forces available for movement and battle.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Fred Finkenbinder
United States
Maryland
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I personally have no issue with the number of SP in the game besides the fixed reinforcement schedule (and that isn't really a big issue either), due to the fact that disease and desertion (forces didn't have to be demoralized to suffer this) isn't properly accounted for. As for the shorter scenarios, I have had fun setting those up just to see how everything looks from a historical overview, but I have never actually played them. They could be fun and, in the case of the CSA player, very challenging though.
 
 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.