Albert Sidney Johnston

Amen! I asked about that when Washington first came out, and if I recall, "probably" was the answer. I REALLY hope they do! Washington is so awesome! And I don't play the Union very much, so it would be so cool to be able to play The Battle of Richmond without slogging through the whole campaign.

Alright. So what happens if Johnston isn't wounded at Seven Pines? I'm afraid I'm still rather pressed for time, and cannot give an answer as eloquent as I would like. However, in my humble opinion, I think that The South still looses. Not only do they loose, but that defeat is more humiliating and destructive then in our timeline. The Army of Northern Virginia wasn't like other armies. It survived on daring, on tenacity. If fought best when the odds were against it, when its fate hung in the balance. I just don't think that Davis would have allowed a purely defensive campaign like Johnston wanted to carry out. I just can't imagine the armies of the South watching as Union troops slowly but surely grind closer and closer to Richmond with each and every day, doing nothing but fighting battles on their own ground. It's a little like The Turtle and the Hare: Johnston was the slow and steady, and Lee was the quick and daring. Johnston's strategy might have worked in the long term, but I think Southern soldiers would have lost faith in him far before then. General Lee was just, well... flashier. He was fearless, he took risks, and that made him forever endeared to the armies of the CSA. I just don't think slow, cautious Johnston could have done the same. Can you imagine a dusty Texan private, with tears streaming down his face, exclaiming "I would charge hell itself for that old man!" for Johnston? I certainly can't. Were Johnston's strategies intelligent? Yes. Would they have worked? Probably. But I just don't think he had the same incredible charisma, nor could he have inspired the same loyalty from his troops, as the ever-legendary General Lee.

I agree with most of that, however I think Lee was more successful then you give him credit for. I think that Grant was a fair army commander (The Vicksburg Campaign was a work of sheer brilliance), he still simply received credit for beating an already depleted, hungry, under-supplied Army of Northern Virginia. Sure, he was a good commander, but I don't think he would have done better then Lee, had the roles been reversed. But anyways, I do think Johnston would have been successful in the West. I'm a bit biased, (given my username :P), but I genuinely think Johnston would have done as well in the West as Lee had done in the East. Many people argue this saying that his service in the early Civil War before his death, wasn't enough to warrant such a prediction. I agree, that his Civil War record alone isn't enough, however the American Civil War was certainly not the beginning of his military career. Read a book on him sometime! He's fascinating! He fought in the Texan War of Independence, starting as a private, and rising to the rank of senior brigadier general in just one year! After the war, he even became Secretary of War, and fought a lot of successful campaigns against the native americans that I don't have time to delve into. After Texas joined the US, he served in the Spanish-American War, and the Utah War, rising to brigadier general in the US army as well! When he died, personally leading a successful charge against the entrenched Union position at The Hornet's Nest in Shiloh, Jefferson Davis said that he considered him the best general in the entire CSA army. So, uh... yeah, I was kinda fanboying there. Sorry

Ah! Someone that actually reasoned to the purpose of thread! Thank you! Interesting take on Jackson's death, I totally forgot about Hill's corps. Anyways, I have an interesting response to the first query about Johnston's injury, but I don't have time to type it out at the moment. I'll respond when I can, and thanks for the intriguing answer!

Again, where are you getting this? What in the name of Elbereth makes you think that "they sure as hell wouldn't let women vote", and that slavery would have continued into the 20th century? Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Do you have actual data to support these outrageous claims, or is this just wild speculation based on you presupposed view of the "evil" South? Because I'm highly suspecting the latter...

Propaganda. I try not to overuse that term, but dear heavens, not even in the Nazi wartime films have I seen propaganda more ridiculous and unbelievable then that film. I apologize for saying so, but... wow... there's literally nothing realistic about it. Basically all it does is say, "Everyone from The South is evil and racist, good thing they didn't win the war. If they did, they would somehow completely annex America and Mexico, even though all they wanted was their independence. And they would somehow keep slavery into the 21st Century. How? Why? Lol, IDK, but they totally would, because the South is evil like that." It's literally straight-up propaganda against the South. I just won't mince words on that one.

I know this is a game forum, and not a civil war history forum, but we talk about history here all the time, and I'm sad to say that I don't know many Civil War buffs in real life. So I hope you don't mind if I start a purely history-oriented discussion. "What if..." The greatest single question in history. How fragile is the path of time, that even the slightest change in events can utterly change everything. What if Johnston had survived Shiloh? What if Lee had never lost his secret orders before Sharpsburg? What if The Union had never attempted the assault on Fredericksburg? This is the place to discuss these, and many other questions. The little things that changed the course of the whole war. To kick things off, what do you think would've happened if Stonewall Jackson had survived Chancellorsville? I personally think it could have changed the course of the war. Not because of Jackson himself, but because of the effects his death had on Southern morale, and on General Lee himself. Lee's decisions at Gettysburg have often come under scrutiny. His indecisive and inept leadership was shocking, especially from a man of such incredible military genius. May I suggest that perhaps he was still grieving over the loss of his best friend and right-hand-man? Was he perhaps nervous and cautious, out of fear for loosing another good general? I think so. I think that if Jackson doesn't die at Chancellorsville, Lee is much more energetic and decicive, his men in much better spirits, not to mention the effect of Jackson himself. Thus I think that The South wins Gettysburg handily. Whether or not this means The South wins her independence is another discussion for another time, but I think that with Jackson on her side, she stands a more then fair chance.

And perhaps Georgia wouldn't have been utterly sacked and pillaged to the point that it never recovered. Honestly, the Western Theatre in general was just one sad disaster after another. If only Johnston had survived past Shiloh...

Exactly! He was promoted above his talent. As a brigade commander he was excellent, but in no way does doing a good job executing orders carry over into being a master strategist! I don't blame Hood for his failures at all. I blame Jefferson Davis, for appointing Hood to a job he simply wasn't good at.

What's your favorite battle to play? Note that I don't mean easiest, I mean the most fun and challenging. I always play as the CSA. Antietam is one of my favorites, though I've never actually been able to win without getting 90% of my army destroyed. Honestly, I think Vicksburg in fine Final Campaign was my favorite minor battle, perhaps my favorite battle overall. Trying to find a way to pierce the indomitable Union fortifications was quite a challenge, and it took a good deal of strategy and careful planning to come out on top. I absolutely loved the challenge!

Wait... does this mean I should have tried for a draw at Vicksburg, too? Because I went for the victory on that one...

Tonight we water our horses in the Tennessee River! Though hopefully, my charge doesn't come to the same result as Johnston's

I love that one! I even learned to play it on the guitar.

Wow! Thanks so much for the advice!

Finally blazed my way into the final stage of my CSA campaign. I just finished the Siege of Vicksburg, which was one of the coolest, most challenging battles yet. I've kind of hit a road block at Nashville, though. I can't devise any decent strategies besides blindly hurling my men US Grant-style into the Union fortresses. Anyone have any advice to minimize casualties?

Undoubtedly, Bonnie Blue Flag. It has good words, and an incredibly catchy tune. I find myself whistling it on an almost daily basis.

Thank you so much! I always feel a little bad at this game among the amazing strategists and tacticians around here, but for once I think I did something right! It was costly in veterans, but if what people say about the massive casualties of Cold Harbor is true, I think it was worth it in the long run. all 5k of the casualties were from low quality, cheaply-armed, 2-star brigades. The tricky part is that you can only loose less then 40% of your force, or else you fail the victory conditions. My whole force was fully-loaded with 2500 men infantry brigades. I thought about throwing in a melee cavalry brigade, but decided against it. I split my force in half. The first half rushed the center of the Union fortifications, securing the Old Cold Harbor objective early. You absolutely have to get the objective timer ticking early, or else the overall time will run out before you "capture" it. The rest of my army rushed along the far north of the map, and settled down in the heavy woods to the far northeast, right next to where the Union force first enters the battlefield. When the main Union army arrived they were instantly met with fire from my heavily-fortified troops. They were forced to stop and deal with them, costing a lot of valuable time. The good thing about trying a phase one victory, is that time is always on your side. All you need to do is delay the enemy enough to achieve victory. My division in the northern forest kept them at bay for almost the entire timer, and actually managed to inflict more casualties then they took! In the south, my men were sniped to death, but due to their obvious advantage in numbers over the Union skirmishers, didn't take overwhelming losses. Finally, my men were forced out of the northern forest, and I wasted no time in setting up a second line of defense in the farm just north of the objective. Here again, my troops gave better then they took, and held the Yankees at bay until the end of the battle. Overall, it was a very hard fight, but a convincing Confederate victory. There were a few things I could have done better (at one point, one of my brigades towards the south got isolated and obliterated by Custard's cavalry), but on the whole It was a good fight, and I'm rather proud of my fine Army of the Arkansas.

Meant the first phase, sorry. I don't know much about the battle, since I didn't play through it much

Whoa! It was costly, but I actually achieved a first phase victory at Cold Harbor, on Brigadier General difficulty. I only lost 5k men and one officer (RIP James Longstreet. I'll always remember you ;( ). So is this, like, an amazing achievement? Or is getting a first phase victory a normal thing?

Alright, I knew this would happen eventually. I do my best to stay out of these sorts of arguments, but I suppose I shall finally make an exception. I shall hold myself to this single post, then unfollow the thread. Fighting an entire war just to keep slavery.... riiiiiiiiiight... The absurdity of this propaganda comes when you understand that between seventy to eighty percent of Confederate soldiers and sailors were not slave owners! In fact, even of the minority that were slave owners, only less then three percent of the southern population could be qualified as "aristocratic", meaning the rest had five or fewer slaves, and had to work alongside them in the fields to make a living. Not only the common soldiers, but the majority of The South's most famous generals weren't slave owners. A partial list includes General Robert E Lee the southern high commander, General Joseph Johnston the famous commander of the western theater, the energetic young "Last Cavalier" General JEB Stuart, and the hero that saved the Southern army at Sharpsburg, General A.P. Hill. Before we go any further, let's make sure we clearly understand the full extent of Southern sacrifice. To put it into a modern context, let's compare the casualties to those of World War II. During the Second World War, The United States of America lost over three hundred thousand military personnel, a devastating tragedy to our nation. Here's the kicker. If America lost personnel in World War II at the same rate (per capata) as The Confederate States of America did during The War of Southern Independence, there wouldn't have been three hundred thousand casualties. There would have been six million. Six million. Mull those numbers over for a few moments. The War of Southern Independence was no walk in the park. It was one of the bloodiest, deadliest, most terrible conflicts in American history. These soldiers were going through hell. So Southern soldiers and sailors, the vast majority of whom didn't even own slaves, overseen on both eastern and western theaters high commanders who hated slavery, marched against a numerically superior and better equipped force, and endured four long and deadly years of hardships... all in order for a few rich men to keep their slaves? Hmmmmmmmm... To quote Patrick Henry when he refused to come to the Constitutional Convention, "I smell a rat!" No, somehow I don't think that the men of The South would have thrown away everything they'd ever owned and loved, and march away with The Army of Northern Virginia just to defend a luxury for a handful of aristocrats. So what was the south fighting for? George Washington Bolton of the Twelfth Louisiana Volunteer Infantry CSA, sent this encouragement in a letter to his family back home: "You seem to be in low spirits and fearful we will not gain our independence. So long as there is an arm to raise in defense of Southern liberties, there is still hope. We must prove ourselves worthy of establishing an independent Government." Ah. Here I believe we have hit the nail on the head. This is just one of hundreds of letters home in which soldiers of The Confederacy explain exactly what it is they're fighting for. And despite what absurd victor's propaganda has told you, it wasn't some evil vendetta against blacks. They fought for the very same principles their forefathers had championed over the green fields of Lexington and the far away highlands of Scotland - the right of self-government.

Hello, all! I've always been a bit of an alternate history lover, and I've read dozens of novels in the genre. However I have read very few better then If The South Had Won The Civil War by MacKinlay Kantor. It is truly a work of art. The reason I bring it up here, is that it's a fantastic epilogue to a successful CSA campaign. Certainly worth a read. I also recommend finding the version with illustrations, they were absolutely beautiful.

South Seminary Ridge? Interesting. I tried Gettysburg three times. The two times, I tried a strategy much like you described. The problem was that the Union would always hunker down in the heavy woods of Oak Ridge, and were almost impossible to dislodge. By the time I did, the day was almost over, and I had no time to take Cemetery Ridge. On the third time, I tried a new strategy: I took Oak Ridge first, and blew away advancing Union soldiers from the heavy woods. Then, I sent a division to the southwest to take McPherson's ridge, which was lightly defended. From there, I advanced south from Oak Ridge, and attacked the Union defenders at Seminary Ridge, using the division I had sent to McPherson's ridge to flank them hard. Inflicting heavy casualties, I sent them packing across the creek into Gettysburg itself. With my reinforcements from the northeast, I swept down and hit their right flank, while still pressing hard from the north and west. I took Cemetery Ridge with time to spare, and only a handful of casualties. This has been the most effective strategy for me, but every game is different.

Exactly. I think the battle description even says something to the effect of that.

Thank you, Hill. Well said. I don't understand where people get this idea that they can go around erasing history, just because they don't agree with it. They claim that it is the Southerners that wish to revise history, yet it is these anti-Southerners that try to change or destroy any record or history that doesn't jive with their particular view.

That's what I call my campaign army. I've always been rather fond of Arkansas... My first corps is The Army of the Colorado, named after the river of the same name that flows through eastern Texas. My second corps is the Army of the Arkansas led by A.S. Johnston, and my third corps is The Army of the Alabama led by Thomas Jackson. Collectively, I refer to them as The Army of the Arkansas.