Prev: [SG] Looking for rules for Kra'Vak? Next: Re: Thoughts on FB3

Re: A little more on trade

From: Allan Goodall <agoodall@i...>
Date: Mon, 08 May 2000 20:44:58 -0400
Subject: Re: A little more on trade

On Mon, 8 May 2000 19:56:14 +1200, "Andrew Martin" <Al.Bri@xtra.co.nz>
wrote:

>> For the military side of things, I've seen "what-if" calculations
about
>possible European involvement in ACW. Essentially it boils down to that
>European powers might have sent infantry, but probably not much cavalry
--
>due to the difficulty and expense of shipping the horses.
>
>Might they have sent cannon? And/or perhaps rifle barrels and/or firing
>mechanisms? Perhaps multi-barrel mechanisms? Or experienced generals?
Or
>maybe blockaded ports? Or intercepted shipping? Or assaulted/looted
towns or
>cities?

For the record, Britain had plans for putting pressure on the Union
north by
way of Canada. This would have involved infantry, artillery, and
probably some
cavalry. However, some of this would have been from units already in
Canada at
the time, initially, so there may not have been a lot of need to import
horses. Rifles Britain could have supplied. Multi-barrel mechanisms were
still
very much a curiosity during the American Civil War. Experienced
generals? I'm
not sure you'd WANT the South run by British generals. *S* They didn't
know
the terrain, or the people, and most of them came up via peerages, with
the
Crimean War being their main source of experience. 

Port blockading would, however, have been Britain's biggest asset. Or
rather,
they could have broken the Union blockade on Southern ports. The same
for
shipping interception and town/city looting. The Royal Navy would have
given
the Union a hard time (although it wouldn't have been a once sided
battle).

Other powers were likely to intervene. Prussians were observing the
Union.
Russia was also pro-Union at this time. France was pro-Confederacy.

Does this sound feasible in the Tuffleyverse? You bet. I'm not sure what
power
you would have representing the Union and the Confederacy (as they are
part of
the NAC) but you could use the ACW for an analogous campaign, with the
NAC and
FSE aiding one side, and the NSL and ESU aiding the other. 

Another good analogous war is the Seven Years War (everyone except
Americans
are taught that the "French and Indian War" was just the North American
phase
of the Seven Years War). You could base a good FSE (and possibly ESU?)
vs. NAC
and NSL campaign there. You even have analogs for Old World combat
(perhaps
core worlds) and New World conflicts (outer worlds). 

19th century wars make for good sources of inspiration. Individual
battles
(naval more than ground) can make for good FT scenario inspirations. 

Allan Goodall		       agoodall@interlog.com
Goodall's Grotto: http://www.interlog.com/~agoodall/

"Surprisingly, when you throw two naked women with sex
toys into a living room full of drunken men, things 
always go bad." - Kyle Baker, "You Are Here"


Prev: [SG] Looking for rules for Kra'Vak? Next: Re: Thoughts on FB3