AGEOD Forums

Posted: **Sat Nov 17, 2007 6:47 pm**

I'm finding the 1815 scenario as the French very difficult. I think I'm going to give this scenario up for the moment and try some others, but first a few questions.

How does one utilize New and Grouchy ?? Do they need to be named corps commanders in place of those existing, or can they be used to somehow supplement the command abilities of the corps they are with ?? Can there be more than one French Army in this scenario ??

I lost a battle with Napoleon and seem to have lost the HQ of the Army of the North. Can this happen ??

I seem to be getting attacked and beaten before I can even consolidate my forces, much less advance; and I am playing on normal difficulty. Any advice ??

Posted: **Sat Nov 17, 2007 7:48 pm**

The 1815-Scenario OoB for the French has a problem, because the Armeé du Nord historically had four levels of command, gamewise, so to speak:

Army -> Wing (two corps each with assorted cavalry commanded by Ney and Crouchy and the Center with the Guard and 6th corps + assorted cavalry under Napoleons direct command) -> Corps -> Division

The engine allows "only" the more traditional three level Chain of command (without the wings), so both Ney and Grouchy are out of the chain of command entirely and, gamewise, pretty useless at the moment. However, I'm not sure how this problem can be solved: Splitting the one Armeé du Nord Army HQ into three, one for each wing and the Center under the direct command of Napoléon? That would deprive the wings from the benefits Napoleon gives entirely, since armies are seperate entities and leader boni do not extend from one Army to another. Also, historically the army never during the campaign did operate as three seperate entities, so maybe only two HQs would be in order (which would still leave one of the Wing leaders useless at any time)?

However, the way it is at present, the Armee Du Nord is way to effectively organized, with Napoleon in direct command of all corps and all corps benefitting from his special abilities. The feeling that he is hampered by the ineptitude of his direct subordinates is entirely missing.

I don't think there is a totally satisfying solution to this issue but I'm sure PT and the OoB-staff are still pondering the problem and will come up with something in the future. :coeurs:

Regards, Henry

Posted: **Sat Nov 17, 2007 8:07 pm**

Henry D:

Thanks for the inelligent response. I think you are correct.

Posted: **Sat Nov 17, 2007 8:31 pm**

I shall make a change in the setup with additional 'armies' for the upcoming patch... in the meanwhile, we need more OOB data for potential forces on other theaters...

Posted: **Sat Nov 17, 2007 10:18 pm**

To me the 1815 scenario as the French is also unwinnable. At least it has been so if I try anything approaching the historic campaign plan. The advantage of this scenario is it's short duration, it can make for a quick and brutal fight.

As to Ney and Grouchy, I tend to attach them to one of their corps indeed, that's the best you can do right now.

By the way PhilThibaut, couldn't Davout (locked in Paris) and Soult (with Napoleon) be added to give the French player an alternative to Ney/Grouchy?

Posted: **Sat Nov 17, 2007 11:40 pm**

Henry D. wrote:The 1815-Scenario OoB for the French has a problem, because the Armeé du Nord historically had four levels of command, gamewise, so to speak:

Army -> Wing (two corps each with assorted cavalry commanded by Ney and Crouchy and the Center with the Guard and 6th corps + assorted cavalry under Napoleons direct command) -> Corps -> Division

The engine allows "only" the more traditional three level Chain of command (without the wings), so both Ney and Grouchy are out of the chain of command entirely and, gamewise, pretty useless at the moment. However, I'm not sure how this problem can be solved: Splitting the one Armeé du Nord Army HQ into three, one for each wing and the Center under the direct command of Napoléon? That would deprive the wings from the benefits Napoleon gives entirely, since armies are seperate entities and leader boni do not extend from one Army to another. Also, historically the army never during the campaign did operate as three seperate entities, so maybe only two HQs would be in order (which would still leave one of the Wing leaders useless at any time)?

However, the way it is at present, the Armee Du Nord is way to effectively organized, with Napoleon in direct command of all corps and all corps benefitting from his special abilities. The feeling that he is hampered by the ineptitude of his direct subordinates is entirely missing.

I don't think there is a totally satisfying solution to this issue but I'm sure PT and the OoB-staff are still pondering the problem and will come up with something in the future.

Regards, Henry

This is too a lacking in AACW with Grant position in 1864. In the far future :sourcil:

I would like to see a fourth level introduced with a Commander in chief ( 4 stars) adding his values to army generals or just superseding them if attached to a specific army...

Posted: **Sun Nov 18, 2007 1:15 am**

Clovis wrote:In the far future I would like to see a fourth level introduced with a Commander in chief ( 4 stars) adding his values to army generals or just superseding them if attached to a specific army...

I would like to see this also.

Posted: **Sun Nov 18, 2007 6:21 am**

caranorn wrote:To me the 1815 scenario as the French is also unwinnable. At least it has been so if I try anything approaching the historic campaign plan. The advantage of this scenario is it's short duration, it can make for a quick and brutal fight.

I'm not sure the scale of the game is small enough to do the campaign justice. It's a peculiar one: two armies practically sitting on top of the objective yet Napoleon splits them and has the chance to defeat them in detail. It doesn't seem possible to replicate that without smaller provinces.

Maybe an earlier start time would help: as the game starts there is really only one direction of advance; through Charleroi, where in reality Wellington has to guess the direction of French advance and expects the NW as the most obvious route.

Maybe lock the Anglo-Prussians, allow the French the first turn to attack and recreate some measure of the surprise they achieved?

AGEOD Forums

A Few Questions

A Few Questions

In re Ney and Grouchy: