Message Board Archive Vol. II

Last updated: September 16th, 1998

Thanks to Doug Adams for editing the Message Board content into this usable format.

This Questions and Answers page is an attempt to archive the questions posted to the "For The People" website, along with the Designer's replies. The Designer's answers are in italics.


The number "8" symbol on the Washington DC hex just means that the Union receives 8 SP at the hex. Right? Yes, the 8 is a reminder of the 8SPs received in DC.


Card 3 - Forward to Richmond: I have a problem understanding card 3. If I am counting correctly, Frederick MD and Washington DC are within 4 spaces of Richmond. How far must the US player go (all the way or is one space anywhere closer good enough)? Must he attack any and all CSA forces in the way? If he isn't forced to move and attack, why would the CSA player bother to play the card?
The Forward to Richmond card (my personal favorite) necessitates that the Union move must be toward Richmond, its full movement or until it reaches Richmond.

Card 3 - Forward to Richmond: When used by the Confederates as a card, presumably to draw the army away from Washington and 'trap' it is there a limit to 'dropping off' SP's. Basically, knowing this as the Union, I would want to leave behind most of the army as a corps to protect Washington and just send a few into the trap - is this possible ? Also, can the army expend additional points to place friendly PC's as in a normal move or does it have to move to Richmond as quickly as possible, meaning the confed's can usually get it out of supply before battle. Finally, is the card drawn from the Union hand discarded or played by the rebs at a later date, thus giving him an extra card play for the turn.
First off you cannot leave any forces back, this is to prevent you from trying to circumvent the driving political pressure calling for a decision to the war. You can expend extra Movement to establish an LOC, you are not required to attack out of supply. You must try and grind forward. If you win a battle and had 2-1 or greater odds, you need to continue, etc. The card drawn from the Union hand is discarded. The Forward to Richmond card is really quite simple, but as I have learned I clearly don't have a clue. First, if the Union plays the card, its an event card. Everyone seems clear on that. If the CSA plays the card, he reaches over to the Union hand, without looking at the hand, randomly draws a card and then immediately places it on the discard pile. The CSA does not get the card and cannot use the card drawn. By the way there is no process in the entire game where you can draw an enemy card and then keep it to play later. Second, the army, assuming its the AoP must now advance off to attack Richmond, all of it goes, otherwise, as someone intimated people will try and get around its intent. You can place PC markers with the army as you advance. Its a good reason not to leave your army in Washington, as you can leave yourself vulnerable. If Richmond has already fallen it is probably a useless Union play and in the case of the CSA you can think of it as making a Union army march on Richmond to quell civil unrest. I hope this clarifies the situation.

Card 3/25/27: How do you proceed if the card to be discarded due to play of 3 (Forward to Richmond), 25 (Conf. RR Degradation) or 27 (Choctaw Indians) is 81 (Emancipation Proc.) or 82 (Foreign Intervention)?
The Forward to Richmond card is discarded, the Conf RR degradation is discarded, the Choctaw Indians card is discarded, if the card is the Emancipation Proc - if the conditions for it have just occurred, then it is immediately enacted, if not it is discarded which causes an auto reshuffle, Foreign Intervention, if the conditions are fulfilled then it immediately happens, otherwise it is discarded which causes an immediate reshuffle.

Card 4 - Costly Mistake: Can this card hit a commanding general?
NO, the costly mistake card is specifically targeted against subordinate Generals, never commanding Generals.

Card 14 - Red River Campaign: Does the Union just place a PC on or adjacent to Grand Encore? Or, must the Union be forced to conduct some sort of amphibious op to Red River or pay the penalty?
Red River Campaign is an objective. If the Union can't conduct an operation using the OC value then he is penalized. If the Union can use the OC an accomplishes the objective then there is no penalty.

Card 14 - Red River Campaign: The card just says "must place on PC on or adjacent to Grand Encore, La." and describes penalties for failing to do so. Taking the card literally, I would think the union player just has to PLACE a PC on one of those spots, which does not seem very difficult (and doesn't require much of a campaign). Do you mean that the PC must be in a LOC, meaning that the union player will have to send troops into La?
The Red River Campaign is an OC card for both sides, but for the Union its also an automatic event. This card had more text at one time, but during production we had to cut it down some to fit and it appears too much meaning was lost. The way the card works is the Union must place a PC marker in one of the objective spaces. The only way to do this is to move an SP into one of the spaces which the event then allows an immediate PC marker placement. Sorry for the confusion.

Card 14 - Red River Campaign: I'm still confused with this card: it doesn't seem to do anything other than force the Union to discard it, or play it as a 3 OC and lose 5SW.
Union uses the card as an OC, if at the end of the turn there isn't a PC marker in any of the spaces then the Union takes the hit. If the Union gets and SP into one of the designated spaces he gets to use the event and immediately convert the space. If you already have PC markers in that area, then you still need to move an SP because the card states "place". The intent is a military move into this area must be made to affect French intentions in Mexico.

Card 19/66 - Wilson Creek/Belmont: Do the SPs move like a Division or a Corps? Like a Corps since they move as if they had a General present.

Card 28 - Franz Sigel: You either play the event or the Operation value. Therefore, the CSA player can not use card 28 to activate an army with a 1 Strategy Rating leader and get the plus 2 DRM a resulting battle. Correct the Sigel card is either played as a Battle DRM out of sequence, or by the Union as an event as his normal card play, or by either player as his normal card play as a one OC.

Card 28 - Franz Sigel: Can the Union place a SP in St. Louis even if St. Louis is in Conf PC control? No you can't use the Sigel SP if St Louis is CSA controlled.

Card 29 - Crittenden Compromise: Can the PC markers be placed in Southern Resource Spaces? NO, amend the card to read in spaces without SPs and which are not Resource or Capital spaces.

Card 30 - Glory Hallelujah: Can these Union SPs be placed in a space without an LOC? YES, each card specifies whether an LOC is required or not. Assume an LOC is not required if the card doesnt explicitly state an LOC is required.

Card 41 - Governor Harris, Tennessee Confederate: May these SPs or any others generated by the Confederate be placed in Pro-Union spaces? NO, Confederate player is prohibited of directly placing SPs into Pro-Union spaces, although they can subsequently be moved there through Strategic movement.

Card 44 - Western Virginia: says "Declares its allegiance to the US", but only allows placement of 3 PC. Since it takes 4 spaces to control WV, I assume that if the CSA player still holds the other 4 spaces this card by itself does not cause the conversion of the state. On the W. Virginia card the answer is yes, the card is not sufficient to give the Union auto control.

Card 47 - CSA Recognizes Ky, MO, Md, De: Do the CSA get to place a grand total of 2 SPs on the board, in spaces meeting the criteria, or may they place 2 Sps in each and every space that does so, or 2 Sps in each state with a space meeting the criteria?2SP's total

Card 73, Ball's Bluff: This card did not have the extra specification that the Union remove the SP . Card #65, Enlistment Expire, specifically states that it is the Union choice. So, can the Conf. remove the SP if playing #73?The CSA removes the Balls Bluff SP. Card 79 Indian Allies: Says to place one SP "in any friendly or neutral space in Arkansas." What is a "neutral" space in Arkansas? Any space without a union SP or PC is a "friendly" space, right? The Indian card shouldn't have the word 'neutral' on it since in the context of Ark. it has no meaning. You are correct, any friendly space is one without a Union SP or PC marker.

Card 81 - Emancipation Proclamation: As I read it, a 10 to 1 overrun qualifies as a medium battle which would be enough. Is that your intent? The Emancipation Proclamation: when it required a large battle, never occurred very often, the idea was that the Union needed a success, how big historically is hard to say since they used a practically drawn battle (Antietam) to justify, but in game terms a 10-1 overrun if you can get one is sufficient.

Card 81 - Emancipation Proclamation: On turn 1, the north receives "Emancipation Proclamation". Immediately, I run upstairs, log in to somebody's web site, and re-read a certain Eastern Strategy article in which it says (in part): "...This can be accomplished because the Army of the Potomac can collect the local forces and attack Beauregardís 3 SP force with 9 SPs." What 9? I see 5 in DC, 1 in Frederick, and 2 in Harper's Ferry for a total of 8. The 9th SP is the one in Philadelphia.

Card 82 - Foreign Intervention: I just noticed that the card and the rules differ slightly on the effects of Foreign Intervention. The card states the Union suffers -10SW, and -1 blockade. The rules state -1 blockade, -2 reinforcements for the rest of the game. The way I play this is that when the card is played, the Union suffers -10SW and -1 blockade immediately, and -2 reinforcements per turn for the rest of the game. Is this correct? Correct, it is the combination of the card and the rule.


Rule 2.2; Is there Strategic Movement on the first turn of a scenario or the Campaign game? NO

Rule 2.6; Addition, All spaces in KY, WV, and MO (except the St Louis space which begins under Union control and the Columbus, KY and New Madrid, MO spaces which begin under Confederate control) are neutral and are initially not controlled by either side.

Rule 3.32 May certain cards be played during the enemy turn? Examples: #28 Franz Sigel #1 Empty Haversacks. In HRvC some cards may be played at any time and not count as a card played. 3.32 states that depending on the way cards are played one player may have more cards than the other player.
There are a few cards that can be played to "counter" enemy card play. I don't have the cards in front of me, but Mud March, Sigel, Empty Haversacks, and 3 Cigars are probably the only ones in the deck. I may have missed one, but the cards are pretty explicit that they are played in response to another players card. This "counter" does not count as that sides card play. The disadvantage of using this powerful technique is you will typically run out of cards before your opponent during the turn and hence 3.3.

Rule 4.3 What happens when the CSA runs out of forts? Any way to dismantle one so you can build another?
The only way to get forts back for other uses is to lose them to Union attacks. Unless the CSA puts its forts in useless spaces, which is not in his best interests, the forts are in places such as Richmond, Vicksburg, or in Peter's example Is 10. If the Union were to avoid these places then at a minimum the Union can't get the Mississippi bonus which is often critical before the Fall 1864 turn.

Rule 4.42 It seems to me that if I have a stack of bad generals (Banks, Freemont, Butler) and I want to make an army I should move one of those leaders with all but 1 SP to another space, then the next card play create the army. Then I wont be stuck with a bunch of crap in my stack, so if I sack the top guy I dont have to promote Grant over many leaders. People can play the game as they like within the rules. As far as putting Generals into a small army in order to get their identity, that's fine, just be careful you don't lose the army, its -10SW.

Rule 4.5 Can you remove ANY general by paying the S.W. penalty, or can you only remove army commanders? Only Army commanders are relieved, what other situation is there. In Corps situations you just need a redeploy to move the bad ones out.

Rule 4.52 If during promotion of a general, you wish to transfer the general just relieved, are their any restrictions on which army the relieved general can go to? Do you just pick up the general and place him with an army anywhere on the board? Thanks! There are no restriction on which army the transfer occurs into, although both armies must have an LOC, if the LOC exists, just place the General in the new army.

Rule 4.8 A Player can only play one Campaign Card, total, as a Campaign, in a single turn (either a Major or a Minor) but not one of each? You are correct you can play one Campaign card, either one Major or one Minor, but NOT one of each.

Rule 5.10; Can only Confederate Generals moving alone use these paths or can they be accompanied by SPs? Additionally, can armies use these paths? No, Confederate Generals with SPs and Confederate Armies can move along these routes.

Rule 5.16 Picking Up and Dropping Off SPs: Can a general who is not the commanding general or highest political value non-commanding general in an army leave the army and perform a corps move (taking SPs out of the army)? You definitely can deploy lower ranked Generals out of an army with some of its SPs.

Rule 5.16 It states, "Additionally, the highest political value non-commanding general in an army can never be dropped of." How do you get rid of these bums? Can you (A) Move them out voluntarily, with SPs or as a general transfer (would this be different from dropping them off?) or (B) can you demote them, paying the applicable S.W. penalties? Especially in early game Union armies, you need to get rid of the 3-0 bums who are not the commanders, but are the highest ranking non-commanding generals, so the CSA player can not pick them to be the subordinate general used for the drm (because early on most CSA armies will have better battle ratings).
You can't get rid of the second in command, but need to promote someone over them who gives the Union the ability to pick their own Generals for DRMs. I left no provision to get rid of these second in Commands on purpose so you can't clean up the army to make it cheaper to promote superior Generals into command.

Rule 5.2 My opponent wanted the rules for detaching leaders and strength points from armies clarified. He knows you can drop off a leader from an army (within certain restrictions). But if, say, an army is in a space, can he activate a subordinate and some SPs in a corps move and go off? You can definitely activate a subordinate from an army and launch a corps group. Check out the Q&A unless you have another specific question.

Rule 5.2 In reading your Q & A I came across the part that says "You can definitely activate a subordinate from an army and launch a corps group." Do you use the rating of the army or the corps commander to to the activation? You use the Corps commanders rating when you detach the corps.

Rule 5.2/5.3 Can an army or corps drop off SPs and then later double back to pick them up, all within the same OC move? Yes

Rule 5.2/5.3 Can I activate Jackson, move him alone without any SP, go and pick up Bragg w/ 5 SP, drop Bragg off w/ 1 SP somewhere, and then move to another space? Also, if a corps passes thru an army w/ only a commanding general and no subordinates, must the corps general stop moving since it will effectively become the highest p-value general? Does this also apply if the corps general has a higher p-rating than the other subordinate generals in the army?
The answer is yes Jackson can make the move as you wrote it. If the Corps passes through and doesn't stop, no. An army is not a vacuum cleaner that impedes your own moves. If the General stops in the space, that's another story.

Rule 5.3 It is clear that a general moving with a corps can pick up and drop off SPs during the move. However, can a general perform a corps move and move alone during part of the move? Here's the example: USA Army of Tennessee is in Cairo, IL with 7 SPs. 5 Union SPs are in Dover, TN. Grant is in command of A of TN, Stoneman is cav commander, Pope and Sherman are also in army. Minor Campaign is played. As the first move, can Sherman leave the army, move (alone) to Paducah, then (alone) to Dover, pick up the 5 SPs there, and continue moving? Is this legal, or must generals always move with SPs, unless they're moving alone in a "reorganization move?"
You can conduct the move the way you constructed it, but the General when he is moving alone cannot move in enemy controlled spaces ala 5.6.

Rule 5.3 In reading your Q&As, you say for rule 5.3, "You can conduct the move the way you constructed it, but the General when he is moving alone cannot move in enemy controlled spaces ala 5.6." Therefore, as I understand your response, a General is free to be dispatched from an Army, move out using Corps movement rate, pick up some un-General'd SPs and either bring them back or attack with them, etc. Is this correct? From the way you phrased the question this sounds right.

Rule 5.31; Can a Cavalry General conduct a Corps move? NO

Rule 5.4 Can I move the last SP stacked with a general without the general by playing a division move card? No

Rule 5.4 Can you intentionally strip all SPs from a corps/army? (i.e. moving the SPs out and leaving a lone leader in the hex.)
If you strip all of the SPs from an army its removed and the SP penalty immediately paid, so sure you can do it. Yes you can leave a leader alone in a space, but if you activate a General in a space who is not the highest P rating then you must leave one SP with the highest p rated general.

Rule 5.4/6.5 Can a confederate SP move from a port to its corresponding coastal fort and vice-versa. If so, when and how? The Confederate ability to move from port to fort is explicitly cited under the Confederate Riverine movement rule.

Rule Rule 5.5; Clarification and Change (the whole rule is reproduced for clarity). Design Note: Cavalry brigades are raiding forces whose main function is to cut LOCs. They are not faster Corps movements designed to capture territory. Although the game doesn't use explicit cavalry SPs, a cavalry general with an SP is effectively the equivalent. The intent is once formed and moved as a cavalry brigade, the unit is not intended to move into enemy territory and convert into infantry to circumvent the rules on Cavalry Raid limitations. 5.51 Procedure: A cavalry brigade may move when a cavalry general is activated (5.14). One SP stacked with a cavalry general is assumed to be a cavalry unit and moves at the cavalry movement rate. A cavalry general may not leave a space alone (even for a reorganization move) if only one SP is present unless another general (cavalry or regular) is present in the space. A cavalry brigade move ceases at the conclusion of a battle. 5.52 Cavalry Raid Limitations: A cavalry brigade can either flip a physical PC marker in a neutral space or remove a PC marker in a friendly space (one that bears the color code of that side) which contains an enemy PC marker, through the play of an OC. A cavalry brigade cannot place a PC marker in any space that was originally an enemy space or is currently a neutral space without a PC marker (e.g., in particular Confederate Resource spaces or a Capital space). Exception to Rule 11.1; A cavalry brigade (a cavalry general and one SP alone) cannot place PC markers during a Political phase. They still flip or remove PC markers during the PC phase.

Rule 5.6 Can you move the highest rated leader in a stack when a reorganization move is played? (army or corps) You can move the highest rated leader in the space as long as it's NOT an army, see army rules.

Rule 5.6 I know that you stated generals on their ? side in an army can be peeked at to see whether the promotion/demotion is legal. Now, can you also peek using Rule 5.6, generals moving alone? (I can see this as a cheap way of circumventing the rule).
Why do you need to look because you are moving alone. Basically no. You need to look because of the restriction of highest p-rating general in an army cannot leave. An army stack full of unrevealed generals is an case where I would need to know which generals I can move out alone. The goal of the unrevealed side is to cause some generals to have a learning phase and bring some uncertainty into the situation. The other point is that the higher p rated general is the one activated in a space, this is particularly important for Corps moves. If the generals are unrevealed and you want to move them alone. As far as I'm concerned the p rating isn't critical since its essentially a random draw, so no you don't need to look. It would become a cheap way of circumventing the rule. Sometimes you will benefit and sometimes you won't.

Rule 5.6 I don't understand how you can get leaders back from moving by sea unless you make another naval move just for them. I don't see any provision for moving leaders, by themselves, by sea. Have I missed it? As the Union player, I had all sorts of stranded generals. Generals cannot move by sea with a "general OC move," nor can they move at all during strategic redeployment. This seems to be a big problem. When you use an OC to move Generals, you can move them from port to port.

Rule 5.73; Does an army or corps have to be greater than 2 to 1 in size to continue movement or is 2 to 1 (exactly) sufficient? 2 to 1 (exactly) or greater is sufficient. Rule 5.73 clarification If the moving army or corps is twice the size or more of the defending force and wins the battle the army or corps can continue moving.

Rule 5.8 A situation where a Union corps is moving around a Confederate army CANNOT be intercepted by a Confederate corps from that army, i.e. only the entire army can intercept? Correct.

Rule 5.8 Can a corps leader intercept into a space with another leader? Yes a corps leader can intercept into a space with another leader, the senior generals mods are used in the battle.

Rule 5.8 Can a leader successfully intercept by himself (with no SP's attached). No, a leader alone cannot intercept, he must come with at least one SP.

Rule 5.8 Can you intercept with an unrevealed general. You can look at the General in this case because you need to know his battle rating to see if he can intercept, this doesn't reveal the general, but allows you to look.

Rule 5.8 Can naval movement be intercepted in the port it lands in, thus causing a battle? If yes, what happens when the CSA makes a naval move and it's intercepted, since the CSA can't make amphibious assaults?
The intercept occurs, this would be an exception to the ability of a Confederate unit causing an amphibious invasion.

Rule 6.1 Can you combine sea and rail move together to move SP's. Sorry to disappoint you guys, but no you cannot, however an Army receiving SPs due to an LOC is different than individual SPs.

Rule 6.1 Union Naval Movement talks about units beginning in "any" port and moving to "any" port. Does this mean, literally, that a unit in Cairo can move to Charleston (or vice versa), even if the Mississippi exit is closed? Must you be able to trace a path down (or up) river to the sea?
As per the rules for Union units moving on rivers, you cannot move from Cairo to Charleston if the Mississippi is closed to Union movement, although one running the guns procedure is allowed but broadly no.

Rule 6.1 The Union makes a classic Naval Move with 3 Sps and a general, who successfully capture a coastal fort. Now, how do I get the general back in the war? Must I expend another Naval Move to get him back into a port? Or is there some other way? Apparently, he can't move in a strategic redeployment, even though all his men can? That leaves me a bit cold.
There is another way, during a General redeployment move he can sail back to another friendly port. Also, the coastal fort with your three SPs can be used, with a Naval move as the launching point for another amphibious invasion (once you have planted the Union flag), otherwise the 3 SPs are not going to accomplish much where they are.

Rule 6.2 I noticed that New Bern is a port, but not a Blockade Runner port, yes? Also, there is no coastal fort in the area, but one wonders if a Fort built at Morehead city night protect New Bern from direct Federal attack?
New Bern and Moorehead City are ports on different sides of a peninsula. New Bern sits at the confluence of the Trent and Neuse rivers off of a channel that leads to the Atlantic, while Moorehead city is on the Atlantic with outer banks. Hence a fort wouldn't block movement into New Bern and vice versa.

Rule 6.3 Union forces may not normally pass a coastal fort using a "running the guns" procedure, correct? Forts yes, coastal forts no? You are correct, the Union may NOT run a coastal fort, except under the conditions cited on the Farragut card. Normal counter forts are eligible for the running the guns procedure.

Rule 6.4 An amphibious assault against a Confederate Fort produces a +2 CSA DRM for the fort in the amphibious assault modifier. Does the fort also produce the normal +2 DRM as part of the normal combat DRM? Or does the notation "(no Amphibious Assault)" in the combat CRM table entry for Forts mean that ALL the effects of the Fort in an AMphibious Asault are taken into account in the Amphib DRM? Correct, there is no double counting the fort effect.

Rule 6.5 My reading of Rule 6.5 "If the Union has Naval Control over that space, then the Confederate may not cross the symbol during its movement" had me playing that as long as the Union had naval control over Cairo, no Confederate move could be made from Paducah to Cairo. Yet in your Q&A here you state that Cairo could be crossed into from Paducah if there were a fort in Paducah. Even with a fort in Paducah, asuming no Confederate forts or ironclads had been placed up river of Cairo, doesn't Union naval control in Cairo still prevent the Confederates from moving in?
Confederate naval control cancels the blue "I" symbol if a fort is in one of the spaces. Paducah can travel to Cairo when there is a fort in Paducah. The fact that Cairo from the quarter the attack is coming from is not in Union Naval Control doesn't affect the situation.

Rule 6.51 I assume that a CSA fort at Falmouth KY allows them to cross into Cincinnatti, yes?
No, Falmouth is not a port, the Paducah issue is it is a port so if the CSA has a fort there it cancels the river crossing indicator. If Cincinnatti is held by the CSA with a fort then the trip from Cincinnatti to Falmouth would work. Its not necessarily bi directional. The key is the space must be a port.

Rule 6.52; Can a Confederate Riverine naval move be intercepted since it causes a de-facto Confederate amphibious invasion? Yes, this is an exception to 6.52 whose intent is to prevent Confederate amphibious invasions.

Rule 6.6; At the beginning of the Campaign game the Confederate player controls Dover, TN and Columbus, KY. Can the Confederate player cross the River at Cairo, IL, because it is between two forts? Also, can the Confederates cross at Nashville, TN since it is not technically between two Confederate forts/ ironclads?
Rule 6.6 addition and clarification Naval control is denied to the Union player in and between spaces controlled by Confederate forts and ironclads OR into Confederate ports whose associated coastal fort is Confederate controlled OR between a Confederate fort/ ironclad and the end of a river that issues from a Confederate space in an original Confederate state. Two forts on a contiguous stretch of river spaces (same river) would deny a section of the river to Union naval control.

Union Naval Control Clarification: 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) and the Mississippi river flows 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 connected to those sources of Union naval pressure that flows 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. For Cairo to be crossed into from the South, Paducah would have to be a fort or there would have to be additional Confederate forts upriver from Cairo, both on the Mississippi and Ohio rivers (e.g., St Louis, Vincennes and Louisville) Normally, the only way for the Confederate player to cross into Northern states without crossing around the end of the Ohio at Pittsburgh is to build forts at Paducah (KY), Louisville (KY), St Louis (MO), or Parkersburg (WVA).

Rule 6.6; Can Union forces cross navigable rivers where Union Naval control is denied? Yes, the Union had the ability to move gunboats past forts and had extensive pontoon bridging capability.

Rule 6.6; Can Union force cross navigable rivers into a space with a Confederate ironclad? Yes

Rule 6.6 How does a fort at Paducah allow an advance north from the CSA? The only way is up river (not allowed due to Union Naval Control) or up to Cairo (also not allowed as the USA hold it and have Naval Control from the Mississippi - can't cross that symbol thingy). I don't understand how a fort in Paducah allows the move north.
A CSA fort in a space allows you to cross TO or FROM that space, even across a "blocking symbol." The rule in 6.6 uses the phrase in and between. The Union pressure is to explain what is "between", but you always have control over the crossing point if you have a fort in the space.
"In and between" doesn't include Cairo, as the Union is getting Naval Control from the Mississippi. That means the fort at Dover has no countering effect on Union Naval Control at Cairo. This means that the "crossing point" is in Union hands, as it's at Cairo (isn't it?) so the CSA cannot use that road from Dover to Cairo.
I'm not sure what is throwing you, but let me go space by space. If there is a fort at Columbus and Dover, then the South can cross the Mississippi from below Columbus to New Orleans etc. Dover blocks the Union pressure on Dover, Clarksville and Nashville. Paducah's crossing is blocked by Union pressure. However, regardless of all of that if the Confederates had only one fort on the Mississippi, lets say at Vicksburg, the CSA could cross the Mississippi at Vicksburg. The crossing point is covered by the guns. In the Paducah case, a fort at Paducah opens the crossing space into Cairo because the fort covers it's own space. Its not because its between anything, it just covers its own connections.

Rule 6.6 I'm not clear on Union naval control. If A, B, and C are all port spaces on the Ohio river, say, and the Confederate player captures A and C, and builds forts in those two spaces, then can it cross the river at B (imagine B is Cincinatti if you need to), even though B is still Union controlled? I would think not, because gunboats could still emanate from B. So I would appreciate that being clarified.
See Q&A, but yes the South could cross at Cincinnati in your example. Without gunboat counters there will be some abstractions, but the naval pressure is defined as emanating from the end of the rivers just for definition purposes.

Rule 6.9 May a land moving Army, corps or division enter a non-garrisoned Fort space, destroy it and continue movement normally? Yes the fort is destroyed and you can continue moving.

Rule 6.91 I thought that any force moving by land could enter an ungarrisoned enemy fort without combat (rule 6.91). Some recent posts seem to imply that this is not true and you must fight the fort to enter the space. Which is it?
You are correct, an ungarrisoned if entered by land is eliminated, no combat. The questions on overrun were whether a garrisoned (with one SP) fort was subject to overrun, the answer is yes. Of course ungarrisoned forts (either flavor) entered by Amphibious assaults still require a combat die roll.

Rule 6.91 If empty forts have zero SP against amphibious assault, how is a force ratio modifier calculated? I was sure rule 6.91 was wrong and it should have said empty forts should be treated as though they had one SP, but one of your previous answers seems to support the zero SP reading? As far as forts go, a fort has zero SPs consequently any size force that attacks them gets the +4 modifier for force ratio.

Rule 6.91 Any force moving into an ungarrisoned coastal fort will have infinity to one odds. What does this mean? Can it overrun? Does it get only a +4 modifier? You are correct, but there is no modifier greater than +4 which you correctly surmised.

Rule 6.92 If the north takes a port (Charleston) by land what happens to a lone southern SP in the coastal fort? It is not affected by attrition and it blocks the naval movement. Does it surrender, or must the north take it. As far as the SP in the Coastal fort, it sits there indefinitely, unless the Union amphibious assaults it.

Rule 6.93; Can Fort Monroe be attacked by land by more than one SP since the Confederate can never occupy a coastal fort with more than one SP?
Yes, the Fort Monroe space is an exception to 6.93, the Confederate player treats this space like any other non-Coastal fort space for stacking purposes.

Rule 6.94; Addition, An ungarrisoned Confederate controlled coastal fort changes sides (place appropriate Union PC marker) if its associated port changes sides to Union control. No, basically, once a coastal fort is Union controlled, it cannot revert back to Confederate control.

Rule 6.94 Back to your Q&As. For rule 6.94 is says "Addition, An ungarrisoned Confederate controlled coastal for changes sides (place appropriate Union PC market) if its associated port changes sides to Union control. No, basically, once a coastal fort is Union controlled, it cannot revert back to Confederate control." Not sure what the No means? Is the first statement true? ungarrisoned Confederate controlled coastal for changes sides (place appropriate Union PC market) if its associated port changes sides to Union control? Also, does this mean that after a coastal fort is Union controlled (has a Union PC marker in it), the union does not need to garrison the fort? No confederates could take it back, even if empty? With the exception of Fort Monroe. Yes, once a coastal fort is Union controlled, it cannot be retaken, no garrison is necessary.

Rule 7.2 If cavalry can retreat into enemy controlled area automatically, it makes them impossible to kill when they get behind your lines. Then every PC phase they convert it to enemy control. Any tactical suggestions?
First off if you move behind enemy lines you can't move the Cav General off because a General cannot move into enemy territory without an SP. Second, a Cav General cannot make a Union space Southern controlled, it can convert a space in a border state or Conf state. Cavalry Brigades are annoyances, but they can't really do anything except interrupt LOCs. Cavalry can fight cavalry if both sides desire it, but if they don't then historically it was very hard to bring them to battle. The Union was never capable of stopping them in a meaningful way. The game tactic is to chase them off of your LOCs. If they convert a space, they can't hold it, and one space per turn doesn't change anything unless its a key space, in which case you need to chase them off. If you get them up against a river they can't retreat and have to fight you. Another frustration of the period the game forces you to deal with.

Rule 7.24 Retreat before battle, states that a force may move into any adjacent friendly or neutral space. Now, if a Union force is in a Port space, can it retreat into an adjacent space, or must it retreat into another friendly port? The philosophy behind how these rules were written was to not repeat rules multiple times to avoid creating contradictions. Hence, the Union force in the port must retreat to another port.

Rule 7.32 1 SP under Forrest attacks 1 Union SP. Forrest, with his +3 DRM gets a 1*, the Union gets a mere 1. So, since the 1* is considered the "smaller" result, under 7.34 the Union SP is destroyed and Forrest is victorious and totally intact. Correct? Correct.

Rule 7.32 and 7.8; If a fort is ungarrisoned, can it generate losses since it is 0 SPs and a force can generate no more than twice its SPs in losses? Also, does an ungarrisoned fort always lose battles since it generates no losses as per 7.32?
The loss calculation for winner or loser is the losses on the CRT, not those actually taken. Further losses in a battle cannot be reduced below one. Rule 7.32 Clarification: The side that took the most losses on the CRT, not those actually taken, loses the battle. Rule 7.8 Addition: No force can inflict losses in excess of twice its strength, regardless of the CRT result, but never less than one.

Rule 7.34 Is a 1 result considered a "smaller" CRT result than a 1* for purposes of this rule? Yes, see the Q & A if you get a chance.

Rule 7.34 The AOP somehow kicks the ANV out of Richmond. The capital is displaced, but the resource space is not yet burned because the movement is stopped since AOP was not twice the size of ANV. Now, the ANV counterattacked, achieving a 3* battle result, and the AOP got a 3 result. Since this is a resource space, does the AOP get to use it, and therefore, wins the battle? Or, does the resource space only benefits the Conf. player since it has the local militia/population support? The asterisk result is global, it doesn't matter which side is holding the space. This is both for brevity and the desire of the side holding it to make the extra effort due to the importance of the site.

Rule 7.34; If both sides are eliminated in a battle, but the defender received an asterisk result, is this still a tie and the defender wins? NO, the asterisk result even though the numerical result on the CRT is equal makes the attacker the winner of the battle.

Rule 7.34 '1' Sp, attacking an ungarrisoned coastal fort. The roll is tied with each getting a '1' result. The union wins all ties per 6.91. The union retain an SP per 7.34. I guess I'm wrong, I just don't know how...sorry. Could you explain?
If the fort is ungarrisoned, then in your example with only one SP and both sides get a 1 result, the Union is the winner, BUT due to 7.33 when the winner is eliminated the first case states that if the fort contained a fort or coastal fort the defender wins and the attacker retreats. If the Union attack had 2 SPs then the Union would win the battle since it would have 1 SP remaining. I hope this clears up the misunderstanding.

When do you use; 7.34, 'When both sides are Elim'? If I use 7.33 for all cases, 7.34 will never be used. And, 7.33 states 'If the defender wins the battle wins and is totally eliminated the following procedure is used..." I thought it would not apply because the Union won the battle.
I see where your confusion is coming into this. The key is the fort not the garrison. The fort still exists and hasn't been eliminated. Even though the garrison is 0SPs there are folks manning the guns. Casualties have been taken etc. The key issue is trying to take a coastal fort with 1 SP. Its not possible with one SP. Here's how 7.33 and 7.34 work. If the attacker wins but is eliminated, it assumes some defenders live then the attacker has won a meaningless victory. In the case of the fort the 1 Union SP was eliminated, but the fort wasn't because someone has to enter it and stay to take it out, there is something still there. Think of the scene from Glory, there aren't many defenders left in the fort, but there are no living attackers. 7.34 is where one SP attacks another one SP force. Its a 1/1 situation, then the attacker bounces and both sides retain their one SP. If its a 1/1*, then the defender is eliminated and the attacker survives with one SP. The moral of this story is the Union despite the modifiers needs two SPs to take an ungarrisoned coastal fort. If you attack with 2 SPs the benefit is the result will likely be a 1/1 result. In this case the winner loses one SP, has another and since in this case wins ties, the fort is taken by the surviving one SP. The point here is two SPs with some modifiers have a very good chance of taking an ungarrisoned fort.

Rule 7.4 When you create an army you must pick the highest ranked leader to be the C.O. In battle this army may use two extra generals for combat modifiers. Do you have to pick the two highest ranked generals for this? Or can you pick the best ones? The Generals picked in battle do NOT have to be the highest rated p values, you can pick the best ones.

Rule 7.4 Not being able to withhold DRM in all circumstances seems odd, are you sure it applies in all cases. Assume an Army with 2 Generals (Lee, commanding and say someone also with a battle rating of 3 - I'm at work and don't recall who) with 9 SP's attack 1 SP (not an overrun). Aren't the modifiers +6 for leaders, +4 for odds (5 to 1 or more) meaning a leader loss check is automatic. Given that you must check, you have a 50% chance of losing your subordinate General. Is that right? That's the way we play it. You may place a few zero effect leaders to help lower the DRM's. You can pick which non-commanding generals DRM's you want to use. But with only Lee and that +4 for odds, if you roll a three or more, you'll have to make that leader loss check. What if you only have 1 subordinate general in the army with Lee and that General has a battle rating (which you would also have to add in). That means 1) he would be the casualty and 2) you have a 50% chance that you lose him to take out 1 SP? Seems an awfully expensive way to take out 1 SP.
Let's put this in perspective. Using an entire army to attack a 6,000 man force (1 SP) seems awfully expensive also. In reality this would likely be a division or corps attack. Weak general uses a corps to gain +4 or Good general uses a division to gain +3 (ex. Jackson with 2 points). Note each of the above examples AND the original army attack all require only ONE card. The Confederate flexibility to use one point leaders such as Jackson in this type of role is one of their key strengths in my opinion. General casualties are a fact of life. Someone can get killed at anytime. Its not the size of the battle that matters, Jackson was killed by his own men. The counterpoint is if I allow players the ability to control the DRMs, which I am not, then they are going to subvert a reality of the game. Hindsight allows the players to get out of the period and manipulate the odds. If the 1 SP unit is critical to your plan, then you have to take your chances. If you are just trolling for SPs then detach the subordinate leader with a few strength points and fight a small battle to eliminate the SP and avoid the leader loss that way. You can always find extreme examples to make a point, but in practical play it just hasn't come up many times that way. Remember the South on average is going to lose 6 leaders per game and they are not going to be the poor Generals all of the time.

Rule 7.42 I am confused about how to use the battle ratings of cav generals. If you have an army with a cav general and two or more subordinates and it is a confederate army, do you add up the battle ratings of the army commander + cav + 2 subordinates? If the army had only one subordinate and two cav generals, do you get to use them both, one in the cav box and one in the subordinate box? You use the army commander + 2 subordinates. Only one of the subordinates may be a cavalry general. However, you may never use more than one cav general ever.

Rule 7.5; Can DRMs be withheld from a battle to reduce the possibility of leader casualty? NO, DRMs, except for elite units, may never be withheld. However, when the player has the choice of which DRMs to use, such as two subordinate generals, the player doesn't have to pick the two best leaders, its his choice.

Rule 7.61 Defender states that the opposing player determines the retreat space if there's a choice. Is this right? (So, if ANV attacks AOP at Manassas and forces it to retreat, the Conf. player can retreat AOP to Frederick, MD instead of Washington DC which would be the logical choice.) The reference to the opposing player determining the retreat space is meant to refer to only situations where the retreat is into enemy controlled spaces, not under normal conditions.

Rule 7.6 Can a force which is intercepting or retreating before combat detach SP's and/or leaders as it leaves its space? No.

Rule 7.7; Addition: If an attack is made at 1-3 or less odds, then there is no defender General Casualty die roll. The attacker still makes General Casualty die rolls if applicable. If an attack is made at 5-1 or greater odds there is no attacker General Casualty die roll. The defender still makes General Casualty die rolls if applicable.

Rule 7.7 When a general is killed due to a battle die roll is his political value subtracted from SW points? NO, the only effect is the General is removed from play.

Rule 7.7 When an army rolls a ten battle result are all Generals considered for possible death or just the one's whose modifiers where used in the battle? All Generals, except army commander, are eligible for casualty whether their modifier was used or not.

Rule 7.7 I am a bit concerned about manipulation of the leader loss procedure, and conversely, being forced to deploy leaders with the prime concern being keeping a second, less valuable, leader stacked with them to improve the odds (or at least increase the cost in strength points and OpCards to assassinate them). I agree, its not something that had occurred to me nor did any other person during playtesting in that manner. I will add this to the rules. OFFICIAL There is no defender leader casualty die roll if the attacker has less than 1 to 3 odds ratio. The attacker still makes leader casualty rolls.

Rule 7.7 I had a single general activate a corps, move and attack a weak enemy force with > 2:1 force ratio. He won the battle, but the modified die roll was 10+ and the casualty check resulted in the death of the general. Can the corps continue moving even though the general that allowed their activation is no longer present? What if there was a second general along for the ride? If the move can continue, is it still considered a corps move or do restrictions on division moves now apply? My feeling is that the movement should stop when the general is killed, but I'd like confirmation one way or another. Thanks, and I'm looking forward to playing FTP for real. If the General is killed and the force is now leaderless they can continue moving, but only if they do not enter enemy controlled spaces. The move would still be like a Corps since it started that way. If another General is present he can assume the leadership.

Rule 8.1 Can CSA trace LOCs across river lines where the Union does not have naval control? Across river lines where the Union does have naval control? LOCs can be traced across rivers where the Union doesn't have naval control, but CANNOT trace LOCs if the Union does have Naval control.

Rule 8.2 states that Union wins if he controls all Conf. resource space and blockade runner ports. But Rule 17.22 states either OR ..... Which is correct? I may be missing something in your question, I believe the sentence is correct since I didn't use either or, but or alone. In either case for the South to lose under this condition 8.2 is the correct interpretation, although I think 17.22 says the same thing.

Rule 8.3 Mark, got a question on out of supply DRM during battle. Example: ANV just took DC. Union then activates AOP and moves to Manassas, converting the PC. (And, ANV fails in intercept.) So, the ANV is technically out of supply. But, if ANV now attacks AOP, the battle occurs at Manassas, which is in supply for the Conf. For the battle DRM purpose, is ANV in supply, even though it is attacking from the DC (out of supply) space? No, it is out of supply. The fact that it is attacking into a space which if it controlled would be in supply doesn't count.

Rule 10.2; Can Generals use Strategic movement? NO, only SPs can use Strategic movement.

Rule 10.2; Are Generals placed on the map before or after Strategic movement? Also, who goes first? Generals are placed after Strategic movement and whenever it matters to the situation the Union player conducts Strategic movement and General placement before the Confederate player.

Rule 10.2 If a General is stacked with a single SP, can the SP move in strat move? Yes

Rule 10.2 A Union army is in Atlanta, and it traces supply to the port of Charleston. Can the army receive SPs by strategic rail directly? Or, the SPs can only be sea lifted to Charleston? As stated in the rules, if the Army has an LOC, then it can receive reinforcements directly. As stated in the rules this counts against the Union Strategic transport total.

Rule 10.21 Any SPs may be moved by strategic movement, not just the newly received ones (in section 10.21, line 4, I believe "reinforcement" is slightly overloaded; I am guessing that in this context it means "additional SP moved into the army" as opposed to "an SP placed this turn as a reinforcement"). Does this include being able to shuffle around SP's between Armies? I would assume so. I guess my question is: can _any_ SP be moved by strategic movement, not just newly arrived ones? As per 10.21, you have to move by rail _unless_ your destination is an Army, in which case the army need only have a LOC to the moving SP - in which case it may be moved by road (I think we misplayed this one last game; we played that armies campaigning in Missouri and Arkansas could not receive reinforcements by strategic movement due to the lack of a rail net in those states). Just checking this is correct since it is slightly anti-intuitive. Yes any SP can use Strategic movement. And yes a valid LOC is all that is required, even if rails are not available for the whole route.

Rule 10.3; Can the Union take East (if not being taken into DC), Central, and West Reinforcements into more than one space? Yes, Union reinforcements can be taken into multiple eligible spaces.

Rule 10.4; Can Confederate reinforcements be taken directly into Coastal forts? Yes

Rule 10.4 Where does it say the South may take reinforcements directly into a coastal fort? As far as the Coastal fort question, where does it say that a Coastal fort isn't a space? The rule says you place the SP in any friendly space, Coastal forts included.

Rule 10.42 Other than not being able to place reinforcements there, are there any other restrictions (such as to movement or supply) applying to the pro-union areas in the South? Also, am I right in assuming that these areas are considered Confederate for the purpose of determining control of the state? There are no other restrictions for pro Union areas, other than you can't play reinf there (from a reinf phase or a card). The spaces are CSA controlled unless a Union PC marker is in them.

Rule 10.5; Can the Confederate player avoid making a Blockade Runner die roll to prevent the possibility of negative Union Blockade SW effects? NO, the Confederate player must, NOT may, make all Blockade Runner die roll attempts. Note, there are no Blockade Runner die rolls during the first turn of any scenario, or during Game Turn 3. Rule 10.5 Modification: As long as a zone has at least one open blockade runner port, the confederate player MUST attempt to make a blockade runner die roll.

Rule 10.5 Regarding Q & A, Rule 10.5 Modification... something to the effect that if there is at least one open blockade running port, CSA must roll. What happens if there is no open running port? For example, if New Orleans and Sabine City are both Union controlled, does CSA automatically loses 2 SW for that zone? Yes!

Rule 10.6 Do you place reinforcement leaders in a cup, point to a space, and pick one general out, etc. (i.e. totally random, not even knowing if you're going to pick an inf or cav general). Or, do you place them on the table first, knowing at least which ones are the inf or cav? You get to separate the cav from the inf before placing them.

Rule 10.6 When placing generals, I play as follows: identify where a general will be placed, randomly pick one general, LOOK AT HIM (to see if he is a cavalry gen. or if I'm CSA to determine if I want him face up or down), place him, repeat with next general. The question is, should I be designating all general placements before I look at any of them? You should place all leaders before looking. Cav leaders should be obvious since they are marked as such on both sides of the counter.

Rule 10.6 When the Confederate is placing multiple generals when does he 'flip' them. You place them all before you can look at them.

Rule 10.61; Can a General be placed in a space that does not have an LOC? NO

Rule 10.62; Can a General be placed in a Leaderless army that does not have an LOC? NO, if this situation occurs the player is free to place any other Generals in other spaces since he cannot fulfill the requirements for 10.62.

Rule 10.64; If a Commanding General is being relieved can other unrevealed Generals in the Army be examined to determine if additional SW penalties are in order to determine if a General is being promoted over higher P rated Generals? YES, in this situation the unrevealed Generals can be examined to determine penalties, but the Generals remain on their unrevealed side.

Rule 10.64 Do the northern leaders all start unrevealed? Also, since the south gets to pick the norther subordinate leader if their army rating is higher, how is the north supposed to reveal its leaders? Through the use of a campaign card? There are many northern leaders and if the south can always pick the same revealed one, then the north will take a long time to find Burnside and Pope. Yes all Union Generals start unrevealed, but your second point is a little off. If a stack of unrevealed Generals goes into a battle they all get revealed, not just the one the South picked for the battle.

Rule 10.64 A general is revealed only when his battle rating is required. Should he also be revealed when his political rating is required (i.e., when forming armies or when promoting a subordinate general)?If not, how do you handle a situation in which you are forming an army and you have one or more unrevealed generals? This may have been answered by implication but I'd like to get an explicit answer. The answer is you can examine, but not flip over Generals when you need the P rating if you relieve a General. As far as forming an army goes, you would form the army without firm knowledge of which unrevealed General is actually in charge until they enter battle. Then the highest p rating would be the commanding General.

Rule 12.12 Delaware is only a 2 space state. So, does the Conf. player still gain +5 SW and Union -5 SW if both boxes have Rebel PC? What about Washington DC? Any penalty besides relocation of the capital? No, Delaware doesn't have 3 spaces and can't supply the penalty. DC is not a state. The only penalty is for relocating DC.

Rule 12.13 I take control of West Virginia as the Union player. The Confederate player still controls three spaces. Does he, that very turn I take West Virginia, get a 5 SW gain and me a 5 SW penalty? That seems rather unfair. As unfair as it seems that's the way it is played. This assumes that he has no SPs in those spaces. Consider it a ground swell of PC support.

Rule 12.13 I believe you are in error in your reply to someoneís question. The person asked what happens if a state (WVA was the example) has 3 CSA PC markers and the rest are northern markers, and the north has enough PC markers to take control of the state. He asked if the south gets a +5 and the north -5 penalty, and said that seemed unfair. You said that while unfair thatís what happened. But Look at rule 12.13. At the end of the turn the state becomes union controlled and all southern PC markers are flipped unless there is an SP in that space. There wont be any southern SPs to inflict the penalty. Only if the South has an SP in each space would he be able to gain his bonus. Furthermore I ask what are you trying to simulate if you allow this penalty on the turn the north takes the state. It makes no sense that the state joins the union if the south has that much of a presence. I think it would be more historically accurate to delay the entry of that border state into the war. It should remain neutral with no bonus or penalty until the north controls it cleanly (no 3 CSA PC markets with 1 SP per space).
I don't recall the question being worded that way. But if you are correct, then you are correct. I thought the question was if the state was already Union controlled and the South had 3 PC markers, did the South get the +5/-5 benefit. I didn't understand that the state had yet to be controlled by the Union. As far as my second point, once a state gains the requisite amount it converts. As far as historicity goes, many southern states left the Union without majority positions. Even though three of the seven precincts are Southern, once the majority went one way or the other the locals in the locations with the CSA flags come out in strength and convert them, unless there is a Southern garrison to back them up. So, I think the rationale is strong enough to let it stand, but modify it if you desire a more involved procedure.

Rule 12.13 At the start of the turn Missouri is still neutral. During the Political Control Phase the USA has PC markers in 7 spaces and the CSA has PC markers and SPs in 3 spaces. As per 12.13, the USA gains control of Missouri, and gains 10 SW, but does not flip the 3 CSA PC markers because of the SPs. Does the USA then lose 5 SW as per 12.12, or does this only occur before control of border states is determined? The loss of points due to CSA presence in a Union State would occur next turn if the condition persisted, but not at the instant of conversion since the state wasn't Union controlled at the beginning of the PC phase.

Rule 12.4 Does changing fortunes of war modifier apply to SW losses and gains caused by the play of Event Cards? I assume it does because nothing says otherwise. This makes those lose one SW point cards very useful just after your opponent has won a large battle. The FOW change is always in effect, especially for card plays. Yes they are more important to play when you get the bonus.

Rule 12.8 Does the Union need to control all those (Mississippi) spaces listed or just destroy/capture any Conf. forts? The rule says Naval Control, so you do not need to control all of the spaces, but you must control Ft. Phillip/Jackson and their can be no other CSA forts or ironclads on the river.

Rule 15.2; In the beginning of the 1863 scenario is a Union PC marker placed in the Fort Philip/ Jackson, LA space since New Orleans is Union controlled? YES

Rule 15.2; Are Union Generals Pope and Buell removed like McClellen? Yes

Rule 16.2; Tennessee and Florida are Union controlled states. Union Set up additions; General Hancock is with the Army of the Potomac, General McPherson is with the Army of the Cumberland, and General Reynolds is removed from play.