• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
The British were really offended by their earlier defeat, weren't they?

I'm honestly shocked that you're doing this well against Britain, Mexico, and internal traitors. How are the Confederate rebels doing anyway? Were they crushed?
 
Yeah, I was pretty shocked too! :D

I remember a brutal war with France in my I Am Siam AAR and was expecting something similar to that.

The Confederates went away pretty quickly. Just figured I'd mention that it happened and the distractingly bad timing.

Thanks for reading and posting! Any lurkers out there?

Rensslaer
 
Trying to make sense of a jumble of information from which to percolate the next update. Hoping to have an update soon.

Rensslaer
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
A second war with Britain? They certainly didn't waste any time trying to get back at you for that last war. I'll echo HistoryDude; you've done well not only holding your own but making gains considering the situation. Are you looking to make more gains off the UK for their involvement in the war, or go easy on them in hopes of a future rapprochement? There's enough territory to be gained off of Mexico that you could focus on them, but I would understand the desire to make Albion pay for its perfidy.
 
Thank you! I won't answer your question about what I'm going to do, because I'll need that information for the cliffhanger... You know my AARs, right? :D But good to be thinking and anticipating.

Rensslaer
 


So the United States, to the end of 1856, had held the overwhelming force of the British at bay while gradually conquering bits and pieces of Canada. By the end of that year the US Army had regional superiority in eastern Canada. It allowed the shifting of resources south.

There had never been a serious tasking of forces in the west because there was just too much territory. The British were bottled in by the US Navy at Vancouver Island, but the threat of the Royal Navy perhaps breaking the blockade meant the Seattle garrison couldn’t move to the offense.

Further south, the Mexico war was squirrelly because I was concentrating in too many directions – couldn’t bring full force to bear. Most US war strength was committed in the north against British Canada. Mexico became a catch-as-catch-can war.

My strategy in such situations is generally to move in and occupy territory with brigade size forces while having an army large enough to deal with concentrations of enemy army. But in Mexico, with its strength, compared to the smaller overall force commitment in the south, meant they had more large armies than I had.



As 1857 dawned, tentative efforts were made to extend American power into California and Colorado. Even so far as New Mexico, bypassing small Mexican armies instead of reckoning with them. Colorado was chosen as the first new war goal.

As resources moved south, a more coherent strategy began to develop. Always, always, always, priority has to be the reduction – en masse or gradually, as practical – of enemy armies so that they don’t just run. They have to disappear. I have to remove them from the map entirely, or they will grow and we’ll just have to fight them again.

Early on, the battle for northern California set up Gen. Tomas Barragin (again) as our primary nemesis. Gen. Mark Brown was set up in opposition, but could not overcome Barragin’s genius (+4 attack).

By mid 1857 Gen. Christopher Belknap had begun to show promising victories over the Mexicans, forcing Gen. Antonio Escandon to retreat first from Zacatecas in June, then facing him again and soundly defeating him at Durango in July.



The US had struggled to gain serious warscore against the British/Mexican alliance, since there had been few American victories against the real target of the war – Mexico. Individual Canadian provinces or Caribbean islands had little affect versus the size of the British Empire. But these victories raised American warscore to 27%.

Belknap positioned his army in the mountains of Parral in order to meet Gen. Barragin and cut him off from the rest of Mexico. He caused a delaying engagement that also claimed many Mexican troops and sapped Barragin’s strength. The -5 modifiers in the mountains, against his dug-in troops, offset Barragin’s +4 attack advantage.

Belknap’s immediate force retreated once sapped, but reinforcements had arrived that continued to hold the line against Barragin. Eventually, even that line gave way.



But a commander as savvy as Tomas Barragin realized that although he was winning battles, he was also trapped. He continued to move south toward Mexico City, where his army was needed more than where he was.

Ultimately, there was no escape possible. Belknap’s defeated army pursued Barragin’s on a parallel. And other armies awaited and dug in to await the approach of the inevitable battle.



Barragin probably knew he was falling into a trap, but either did not flinch from the fight or he assumed the weak organization of the American armies would not be sufficient to bring him to heel. In the end, he was right. Six armies converged upon San Luis Potosi, under the leadership of Gen. Joseph Grant. But Barragin escaped. This time he moved north instead of south.

Mexico City fell in October. And Gen. Belknap caught up with Barragin again at Monclova. Because Barragin was fleeing, and no longer had the initiative, Belknap was able to pick a fight on his own terms. His enemy was no longer the brilliant opponent, but rather an already beaten and flagging foe.



After four different American generals had chased Tomas Barragin and his army back and forth across half of Mexico, he was finally cornered at Torreon in the first month of 1858.

Gen. Grant accepted his surrender on January 17, 1858. Starting a year previous in California, his army had been whittled down from 19,000 troops to nothing. But it was such a gradual process, and at great cost to the American armies.



With Barragin’s defeat, the Mexican Army essentially ceased to exist. American troops spanned almost all of Mexico and were slowly establishing irreversible control.

The British Empire still stood strong, at nearly 600 brigades (nearly 2 million men) and 150 ships. But Mexico was beaten, and the British were having increasing difficulties projecting power against America.



Acquisition of the region of California was added to the existing wargoal desiring cessation of Colorado.

And -- shockingly enough – in April the United States actually demobilized its civilian conscripts, it being felt that the Mexico theatre was winding down and the existing professional army elements would be able to carry on the war.

The next stage of the war began as the Mexicans brooded upon now no longer the question, but rather the timing of their capitulation. By May even the British were sending peace overtures, albeit ones the United States government had no intention of settling for.

We landed troops in British Guyana, hoping to be able to take that colony. But as soon as we landed we realized they had a superior force that was descending on our army. I think maybe they had been busy in Brazil and had just returned or something? Not quite sure. Maybe they landed the troops fresh, after my first observation of the region.



During the middle of 1858 I was busy scouting out the rest of the British Empire, looking for opportunities and vulnerabilities. We landed troops in the Falkland Islands, ironically deposited by my slow-moving 3 remaining sail transports.

We even checked out New Zealand, and gosh – it really looked like they hadn’t garrisoned it at all!

But I’ve been burned by incomplete scouting previously. I spend a little extra time, and… Yup. There’s the doomstack hiding behind that small moon.

Amidst the confused fighting in Guyana Gen. Lucas Kimball – honored veteran of 15 years of American wars – fell to a British sniper.



But before the end of August, 1858, we had moved more troops into Guyana from Venezuela (and from Trinidad, recently captured). Guyana was a lost cause for the British, by this point. We were wearing them down and would eventually prevail.

So we’re in a good position, overall. I still have western Canada to conquer… And I judge that I CAN do that. Guyana is coming into place. There are surely other possibilities.

Again, I shall ask, what do you think I should do?

And, quite a different question – what do you think I did?? :)
 
Last edited:
  • 1Like
Reactions:
America is doing very well. I figure that you took at least California and Colorado. Maybe New Mexico was also added? Did you also take portions of Canada to punish the British for daring to intervene in your war?
 
Given your success occupying swathes of Canada in both wars and interdicting the Royal Navy, I think I'd lean towards not taking any of it this time around. I'm operating under the assumption that there will be a round 3 (and probably rounds 4 and 5) with Britain, so leaving Canada available as relatively easy warscore for the next time makes sense to me. I'd focus on getting as much as possible out of Mexico instead. Heavy territorial losses on their part and a shorter, more defensible border will reduce the headache they can cause you in future conflicts.

As for Britain's oversea's possessions... I don't remember where all the choice resources in Vic2 were, but if snatching up some provinces that produce rubber or suflur or the like is on the table, I'd say go for it.

You know my AARs, right? :D
I suppose I should've seen that one coming ;)
 
Apologies for not doing direct feedback-to-feedback yet. I've actually written responses to both of you into the next update.

Thanks for reading!

Rensslaer
 


So… Did I want to continue the war against the UK or just end it here and now with Mexico?



I contemplated the idea (illustrated I believe in my I Am Siam strategy AAR) of declaring a war goal against the UK (the War Leader), which is the only way to make a separate peace with Mexico (you can’t make a separate peace with a minor partner and continue war with the War Leader unless you have a War Goal specifically against the War Leader themselves). Many players are unaware that you can make such a separate peace.

But that would have dragged the war on, and as I debated, I decided I had what I wanted and didn’t want to goad the British Lion more than I already had. We’d ended up at war with the UK quite unexpectedly anyway (that’s twice now!). @VILenin ’s thinking was correct, though he took it a step beyond my conscious considerations in pointing out that it was kind of nice to have the easy-pickings of Canada nearby where I could build warscore against Britain if this happened again. Not to say having Canada so close as a base for British troops couldn’t have its downsides…

@HistoryDude was also correct in thinking that I wanted more than just Colorado and California. At the last moment I added Utah/Nevada. I chose to forego the “Cut Mexico Down to Size” wargoal, because it only reduced their military over a 5-year period and its effect on Prestige is useless in almost all cases.



That’s not to say “Cut Down to Size” is completely useless – it has its benefits if properly employed. I just felt it didn’t gain me much here, and I wanted territorial gains instead.

Paradox/V2 1.3 makes the historical “Manifest Destiny” outcome for the US rather difficult, since it’s not possible to take all of what I took but also Arizona and New Mexico in one fell swoop, as happened historically.

Nevertheless, with the revised borders the United States of America cuts an impressive figure. Mexico looms as an obvious target for future pruning. But those new territories give us new access to the Pacific Ocean and much more land on which to expand our industrial strength. More POPs too, which will also inevitably help. As I’ll note in a minute, many of those new POPs are Mexican.



In an obvious step, I immediately declared California as the newest state of the Union. It joined as a Free State.

As you can see, this clearly upset a great many of the southern POPs. In what is probably a bug, I notice Texas wasn’t included in that Militancy event. More on that later.



The US is beginning to become an economic powerhouse. Our 335 Industry score didn’t seem like much, but it got us 5th ranking in the world, so it’s not too bad. The US is among the top 5 producers of iron, steel – even machine parts. Top world producer of clipper convoys (sail ships) and 3rd ranked producer of steamships. Well positioned for timber, lumber and furniture. Martial industries were building… And artisans seem to be manufacturing a hell of a lot of paper. :)



The US had the ability to implement some political reforms, so voting became more secret. I was getting tired of the Democrat Party, frankly, which was historically very conservative during this period. For instance the Ideology of the US population in 1859 was 61% liberal, but the voting electorate was 72% for the conservative Democrats.

I hoped that political reforms would shake things up a bit. I will say now (to avoid having to say it 50 times) that whereas my Upper House began to include more Liberals and (eventually) Socialists, the US Presidential elections never produced less than 100% for the Democrats. It’s been very frustrating. And this period of reforms became unique, because even with 60% Liberal/Socialist control of the Upper House I could never cobble together more than 50% support for social reforms. More on this later.

It's 1859 now, and historically the Civil War occurred in 1860. I’m still trying desperately to find some way to end slavery without the Civil War, but I’m becoming desperate in fishing about for an answer. I started flipping switches, engaging the Nashville Convention and Kansas-Nebraska Act (popular sovereignty), trying to see if I could shift something. I’d heretofore avoided these as “sullying compromises” which basically condone slavery on some level. But I wasn’t going to get what I wanted, it seemed, no matter what I tried.



Another of my “pocket goals” I’d had in mind since the beginning was to have a freer, more cosmopolitan, America (not that America hasn’t typically been mostly free and mostly cosmopolitan). My population is a bit more diverse than it was historically at this time. I have a good number of British, Mexican and Caribe pops. Slaves at 8%, Afro-American at 9%, and you can see at the bottom of the image an example of that. The vanilla game (even House Divided, which is odd) doesn’t offer any events or choices that I recall that might advance a true abolitionist policy. All there are are compromises and half-measures. Granted, historically, those were the only realistic choices. Abolitionist politicians were rare – not even Lincoln was an abolitionist.

I actually have a fair number of non-slave Africans. Some of them are artisans. This is probably NOT that a-historical. There was a small but significant population of non-slave Blacks even in the South during this period. Umm…. Though they probably weren’t allowed to make explosives in Chattanooga. :D I do have 100 free-African shipwrights in Shreveport. Another 500 in Wheeling (that’s West Virginia, which is kind of interesting, because it’s inland (so is Shreveport, though it’s on the Mississippi River, so it's not as impossible). I have a small population of Albanians and Ashkenazi (Jewish) and starting to pick up some Hindus and Muslims. A fair amount of Cherokee in Oklahoma even though I haven’t done the Trail of Tears event. Hmm… They were traditionally in Georgia and Tennessee as I recall.



Bavaria, by the way, just lost its Great Power status to the Netherlands. So this is how the Great Powers stack up in 1859. The UK remains a behemoth, with a very strong industrial base. France can’t come close, but she dwarfs Austria. Prussia can’t compete on the German field – not yet, anyway. The US is well ahead of Russia, and closing in on Prussia, but Prussia’s advantage over the US in industry is strong. With the acquisition of new territory maybe that can change.

We had barely time to catch our breath after this war with the UK and Mexico. Not much time for peace. Events are afoot…









I had tried to avoid the Civil War. I had tried to end slavery without condoning it (which is what most – probably all – of these compromises did). But it was not to be.

In June of 1859 the Confederacy broke from the Union. Oddly, Texas did not join them. I wonder if there were a lot of Yankee immigrants to the newly minted state.

Texas, I would bet, swings the balance a bit. Historically, the South had less industry than the North, but they also had the loyalty of most of the soldiers and most of the really talented generals. That’s not really modeled in Victoria, which sets yet another disadvantage against them. Many troops have been raised from the North. I have to admit to doing that intentionally, not quite trusting that I wouldn’t end up at war with units drawn up from the South. But I haven’t been exclusive, and so there is definitely some military strength there.



To illustrate the disparity, though, we need only look at the brigades versus each other. The CSA has only 11 brigades, against the USA’s 59. Mexico herself, which we had just defeated, already had just as many brigades as the CSA.

And it immediately became obvious that this wouldn’t start out as a straight North vs. South war. Because those Southern-loyal Dixie troops were located all over!



The CSA mobilization generated new, low-organization brigades all over. Victoria’s migration system had led Dixie Pops all across the US, and so these mobilized troops appeared in weird places. Sorry, I didn’t grab a screenshot to show how many new brigades they got. But it’s also a good bet that most of those new brigades, and some of the CSA brigades that were located in the north, quickly found themselves beaten.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
A good peace deal, I would say. The next war should get your borders to the Rio Grande; it'll be interesting to see where you turn for expansion after that.

The US Civil War is always a bit of a letdown in Vic2, imho. The more you know about the actual event, the more you can see how the game fails to capture some of the important dynamics that were critical in shaping the war. You mentioned the split in the officer corps, which is a big one; keeping up war support in the Union is another, and the logistical challenges of pushing into the South. Unsurprisingly, then, the CSA never seems to last all that long. Which I suppose is good news for you, though, since your Civil War will probably be over much sooner than the historical one, barring outside intervention.

I don't think Texas sticking with the Union strains credulity too much. Sam Houston was staunchly against secession and had this to say:
Let me tell you what is coming. After the sacrifice of countless millions of treasure and hundreds of thousands of lives, you may win Southern independence if God be not against you, but I doubt it. I tell you that, while I believe with you in the doctrine of states rights, the North is determined to preserve this Union. They are not a fiery, impulsive people as you are, for they live in colder climates. But when they begin to move in a given direction, they move with the steady momentum and perseverance of a mighty avalanche; and what I fear is, they will overwhelm the South.

In this timeline, with the war against Mexico just recently ended, one can imagine a stronger Federal presence in the state (along with Yankee migration like you posited) might have helped keep it in the Union. I see Kentucky went with the CSA though, so alt-history isn't breaking entirely your way.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
@VILenin very true. And you're right. In Victoria infrastructure improvements are uniform across the country whereas historically there are always variations.

Anyone lurking out there? Would love to hear from anyone, young or old, veteran or newbie.

Rensslaer
 
It's a shame that the Mexican-American War didn't go as well as it did historically.

Compromises are sometimes necessary, but these didn't work. Shame. At least this makes abolition easier?

Can you switch to the CSA while starting as the US? I've never played as America...
 
@HistoryDude well that event I got - A House Divided - allows you to choose which you want to continue playing as (USA or CSA).

Rensslaer
 
Dear Readers,

I'm not tooting my own horn, and I don't expect you to do it for me. But I want to highlight that voting is now open for the Q2 2023 AARLand Choice AwAARds.

The ACAs are a tradition going back about 15 years - something that helps promote and encourage hard-working authAARs here on the Forums.

Please do take time to stop by and place a ballot nomination for your favorite AARs. I haven't been around for the last few years, but in the past I've both voted regularly and even (for a quarter or two at least) run the Awards myself. So I know also that it takes alot of time and effort to run something like this, so please encourage @Nikolai in doing so.

Thanks!

Rensslaer
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Readers,

Apologies, I'm a little behind schedule with the update. Had a busy weekend and I've been trying to read other AARs for the AARLand Choice AwAARds.

I hope to have it up in a couple of days.

Thanks for reading!

Rensslaer
 


As the American Civil War got underway in 1859, the Federal army, or Union Army, held many advantages. One advantage they did not have was in leadership. The vast majority of the Northern Union generals possessed middling skills and talents, at best, whereas the brightest minds who had graduated from West Point Military Academy had hailed from the South.

This can be seen, for instance, in the +3 to Attack for General Robert E. Lee, and the +5 (!!) to Defense for General Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson. This is, by the way, very much as it was historically. This could turn what seemed at first like an easy fight into a long war.

The Federal United States had a singular advantage the Confederates couldn’t compete with – the United States Navy, with its commanders disproportionately drawn from the seafaring cultures of Boston and the rest of the New England coast, remained almost exclusively loyal to the President.



The one major military debacle on the Federal side, during the war, took place at New Orleans. United States troops battled Confederate soldiers in the region from day one of the conflict, eventually prevailing at the beginning of August. By the end of August reinforcements had been landed, under the direction of General Eugene Ward.

But by this time the hard-fought campaign had sapped the strength of the professional army soldiers, and the reinforcements were mostly conscripts from the North. When General Stonewall Jackson attacked on August 26th, Ward was hard pressed.



Ward’s command was evacuated by sea in mid-September, yielding New Orleans, temporarily, to the Confederates.

Otherwise, Union troops generally pressed in from Texas in the west (not in sufficient force to relieve Ward’s besieged force at New Orleans) and into Virginia from Maryland. There was very little opposition in Virginia, so the first major battles were fought in North Carolina against Gen. Lee.

On the northern front the game was primarily to take territory and maintain and reinforce a front against the remaining Confederate armies.



By September Union troops were fighting small campaigns in Kentucky, with Gen. Edward Tyler victorious at Bowling Green. He then advanced on Nashville, Tennessee.

Gen. Ward’s defeated army was landed at Tallahassee, Florida, where another isolated Federal contingent hung on against the Confederates. The United States was determined to hold this enclave, however. By the end of October the “panhandle” of Florida (the region surrounding Tallahassee) had been secured under full Federal control. Most of Virginia and coastal North Carolina had as well.



The Confederate armies were too few, and too scattered, to put up much of a front against the Federal onslaught. They lacked the financial resources of the North, and the combined industrial might of the North and West of the country.

Kentucky, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana… Each fell in their turn.



In November, 1859, the remaining organized resistance of the Confederate States had been backed into the Carolinas, where Gen. Simon Armistead was run to ground at Asheville, North Carolina, Gen. Robert E. Lee was defeated at Charlotte, North Carolina, and Gen. Stonewall Jackson made his final stand at Columbia, South Carolina – costly for both sides – where he surrendered the last of the Confederate commands.

From then on it was only a matter of time before the Confederate States of America ceased to be.



Union armies spread out and resumed enforcement of the laws and sovereignty of the United States of America to the rest of rebel territory. As they did so, slavery was rolled back and men and women and children freed from bondage.

Soon, Federal US troops were occupying Louisiana, Mississippi and Florida – the final holdouts – and peace was just around the corner.



The United States was able to resume focus upon moving America forward on a worldwide stage, once more united (on paper) and at peace.

American doctors and scientists announced medical discoveries – some advanced by the requirements of war – that improved survival during surgery and protection against diseases such as malaria.



And, its attention once more focused outward, the United States was able to extend its influence across the Pacific Ocean, with Korea being drawn into the USA’s Sphere of Influence and influence also being advanced in China and Japan.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
At least that’s one issue resolved. Now America can move on to doing other things… like Manifest Destiny and Imperialism!

Where was the capital of the CSA?
 
@HistoryDude the CSA had (historically and in my game) its capital in Richmond, Virginia. I've always thought that was kind of a lame-brained place to put a rebel capital (within a short ride of the enemy capital??), but that's where it was.

It seems to me like in some Paradox games if you took control of a capital the enemy would be forced to relocate, but that isn't the case here. Nor do they surrender.

Thank you for reading! Anyone else lurking out there? I'll try to get another update up this weekend.

Rensslaer
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Just goes to show you that politics is rarely logical. They just wanted to insure that Virginia would join and stay true to The Cause. I believe there was some doubt. (?)
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: