RP Discussion American Civil War

KILLTHEHIPPIE

East vs. West I doubt would be plausible, I think East and West coasts vs. Everywhere else would because of the ideological differences, but again, that would probably get political.

As for US vs. Canada, no offense to any Canadians here, but American tanks would rolling through Ottawa in a week, tops.

As for US vs. Mexico, that would certainly be a longer war (by a few days, maybe), but this is an American civil war we're talking about. I'd like to see America and no others involved.

I'd like the map to look like this, but once again, I'm afraid it's too political:


This is a delicate thread because of politics but something that might work is the reason for the Civil War is half of the country over threw the gov't because they no longer believe in it and it could be mandatory to be on the side with no politics to avoid talking about them too much
If you're talking about ingame factions, that's not a good idea, because having everybody on the same side ruins a war RP.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

masterofwar101

What about the First 13 Colonies(The 13 Stripes on USA Flag) against the others?
 

lafittejean

Hmmm... Well, how about we divide the region not by political lines, or even geographic lines, but economic lines. Most of the states share close relations with a few states in particular and that would create a few factions. However even on that ground I only have enough expertise to make alliances in the central U.S, I have no idea how what states in the east and west depend on each other...
 

KILLTHEHIPPIE

Hmmm... Well, how about we divide the region not by political lines, or even geographic lines, but economic lines. Most of the states share close relations with a few states in particular and that would create a few factions. However even on that ground I only have enough expertise to make alliances in the central U.S, I have no idea how what states in the east and west depend on each other...
I believe Southern California relies on Arizona for energy to some extent, but their political hostility would obstruct an alliance, I think.
 

lafittejean

Are you implying, that because of recent POLITICAl events, that no one would want Arizona on their side?
 

KILLTHEHIPPIE

No, not by a long shot. I'm saying that I doubt California and Arizona would get along so well. Plenty of states would want Arizona on their side.
 

lafittejean

Hmm... What would that map look like though? I think that everything west of the rockies would ally with each other, probably including Alaska who needs the food. Hawaii could breakaway completely because of its relative isolation... A southern bloc of TX,NM,AZ,UT, and CO might be there.
 

KILLTHEHIPPIE

I doubt Hawaii is entirely self-sufficient. I think they would side with California, since they could provide a lot of resources and are relatively close. I like the Southern bloc idea.
 

lafittejean

Well, Hawaii could switch its dependance to say Chile for food supply and completely isolate itself as much as possible from Civil War in the U.S. By the way there could be a bloc of northern states like, MI, WI, MN, North and South Dakota, IO, ILL, and Indiana, maybe Ohio. Another southern bloc could be Florida, Loisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, North and South Carolina, Arkansas, and maybe TN. An eastern bloc would be Virginia, WV, and maybe OH and all states west of them. Then there could be a central bloc around Nebraska, of course maybe that's TOO many blocs...
 

KILLTHEHIPPIE

Yeah, much too many. I'd like to have just 2 major factions, for simplicity.
 

lafittejean

Alright, how bout we draw a line that swoops from Oregon down to Texas and ending in Florida, everything north is A, everything south is B.
 

KILLTHEHIPPIE

I'll see if I can figure that out. In the meantime, here's my second attempt at being realistic, wile hopefully not too political.

EDIT:
OK, I've interpreted you idea to the best of my ability:

I think the biggest drawback is that a side with both Texas and California would be invincible.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

lafittejean

I don't know how invincible a Texas, California alliance would be. After all they do have the largest populations and are the states where the center of population is. However California has been cruel to heavy industry and it shows. Oregon probably has a better, more stable heavy industrial base. However Texas may cause some concern but overall I say it looks good.
 

KILLTHEHIPPIE

Oregon, however, doesn't have as much industry or as high a population. Industry, resources and population are the main factors I'm looking at, and both Texas and California have plenty, plus a good number of military bases. Texas, I think, would be the state to get, because of the reasons above, and their spirited population. Not to mention, Texas has a lot more guns than some other states. They would be a lot harder to fight than, say, Massachusetts. I know from 16 years of living in Massachusetts that they wouldn't be so much of a challenge. They have a relatively high population density, but not much room for industry or resources, and most folks living here aren't too bright.
 

lafittejean

So, lets give California as an isolated part of faction B desperately fighting against the forces of A, while the forces of B attempt to relieve California and save it from A. Thus it is more even though first California would have to be freed from A's stranglehold. I think that makes sense.
 

KILLTHEHIPPIE

I think guerrillas loyal to B would fight in the mountains in east California, while the bulk of their population sides with A in the west, and would try to oust the guerrillas. B could certainly use that to their advantage, but probably to only a small degree.