Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Southerners used the rivers very actively.
And we need a stronger influence of river fleets.
For example, a complete blockade of traffic on the river. (rather than individual ports) - With a strong impact on the economy. and the impossibility of transporting troops.
This is at least...
Not sure what economical impact it has. But I think it does have an effect.
Unfortunately like with everything with this game - all of those threads asking the same or similar question have responses of "We have no idea - the enemy just sails through river fleets regardless".
I still put up a potomac river guard and it seems to still "deter" the enemy from attempting river crossings (haven't had an enemy attempt a crossing; I guess this would also technically be sea crossing???) BUT I have on the ohio river, the enemy seemed to sort of of be ignoring the river fleets to a degree.
I say to a degree because the enemy corps was moving faster then the ships. It sort of seemed like it bounced/skirted its way around and out (marching and hopping on transports) .
I did get a message saying that the enemy's troop transports incurred 2 troops of damage 1 time
Thats a good idea!
+1
+1