Further more, Atlanta Campaign (as I came to see it; although I'm no expert) was entirely depended on the roads as you said, or even better the lack of the roads... With railroad as the prime means of transportation of that time roads were usually in second plan. When studying the Sherman's Campaign in the South, you will never come across the info such as: Sherman used that road and moved all of his troops along it... in the south it was nearly impossible... now, I don't want to argue with you and I do admit that road was essential for any army, but roads (defined as: An open, generally public way for the passage of vehicles, people, and animals. and in engineering terms: an open way, usually surfaced with tarmac or concrete, providing passage from one place to another) were actually narrower paths which often didn't connect to each other... Also, ofc, that cities like Atlanta had some degree of roads developed arround them... But the question is how far did it go? It certainly didn't go through entire state of Georgia and I can bet that beside the city of Atlanta, only a handful of surrounding counties were effectively connected to the city.
Here you can see how the roads looked during the battle of Atlanta (and I'm sure you did that already) and you will notice few things:
a) many of the roads finish as dead ends
b) there is no info how wide or useful they actually were
so I see no point of arguing that allowing the CS to build only first tier of Roads (Basic Roads) isn't historically accurate... as you said yourself, there were no paved roads in the south... so why demand them if they weren't present historically?
This is a "sunken road" at Antietam... and that is in Washington County, Sharpsburg, Maryland. This is a road in the North, and not in the South... it could hardly be called a road by any engineering standards, don't you agree? so, nothing above paths and only basic roads is historically acceptable for the South... don't you think so also?
this is my original post on the subject:
see the colored and bolded part? notice the word ...were rare..? I never said they didn't exist, I just said that it wasn't the case of all the planters having plantations like that... these were very rare. Most of the South's planters owned few more than 12 slaves (limit required to achieve a status of a planter) and they were usually working their necks off on the field with their slaves. But, the fact remains, that we will not change the building levels of plantation because in the game they represent the plantation output of entire region (or a state) and not individual planters...plantations like Tara (from Gone with a Wind) or from North&South series were rare. There were under 200 planters in entire South who owned more than 100 slaves. To be a planter you needed to own at least 12 slaves, and those were hardly plantations we have in our mind when thinking about South. They had streets in the cities ofc, but there were no roads as we know them today or that were in use in the North in the same period. It was mostly horseback and coach (bumpy ride) and on foot...