User avatar
Daxil
AGEod Grognard
Posts: 849
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 7:55 pm
Location: Somewhere in the Alleghenies

Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:45 am

Runyan prints paper money.

AP Hill's command has joined Robert E. Lee's position. Lee will need the help because the entire Union Army is coming at him the next turn. After a two-week period of rest at Manassis the union divisions were completely replenished.

Off of Richmond Buchanan has beaten back the US fleet. It is regrouping and preparing to counterattack next turn.

Hooker has captured Fort Sumter and is preparing to finish the job on the final Fort- Moultrie. Both he and Patrick Kearney were congratulated for their victory and are now promotable. Johnston is now riding into the Wilmington area. Two other Confederate divisions are stationed at New Berne. It remains to be seen how this combined force will be used.

National Morale
CSA 72
USA 128

Combat Losses
CSA 14,187
USA 19,876

POW held by
CSA 1400
USA 500

Victory Points
CSA 288
USA 234

Points from Cities
CSA 19
USA 39

It's turn 13 in late August and 12 turns remain.

[ATTACH]8233[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]8234[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]8235[/ATTACH]
Attachments
b.jpg
rm.jpg
MM.jpg
"We shall give them the bayonet." -Stonewall at Fredericksburg.

User avatar
runyan99
Posts: 1420
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 6:34 am

Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:28 am

The plan is to send an army HQ to Johnston, then make Pemberton's force a corps under Johnston. Then these 4+ divisions will be able to cooperate, and by using the rail lines to shift rapidly, should be able to react together to any threat to either Wilmington or New Berne.

User avatar
Daxil
AGEod Grognard
Posts: 849
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 7:55 pm
Location: Somewhere in the Alleghenies

Sat Jun 27, 2009 5:09 am

Runyan prints paper money.

Manstein's forces are closing in on Lee's position like a pack of hungry lions in tallgrass. Dix arrives in Clarke Virginia on day one. Heintzelman arrives in Page region, north of Lee's position on day five simultaneous with the synchronously moving Union forces traveling from Manassis to Culpepper.

The battle is lopsided from the start. Lee rolls luck 51-46, but only Longstreet marches to the sound of the guns for the Confederates. Conversely, the entire Union Army assisted this time. Despite his level V entrenchments Lee is soon forced to retreat. He does get a good lick in on McDowell, however, inflicting 4000 casualties to approximately 2000 of his own. It's a testament to Lee's skills that he is able to withdraw so quickly. With such a large Union advantage in numbers his casualties could have been much higher.

There is no rest for the weary. Sensing he's finally gaining the initiative Manstein is pushing his forces hard. Sumner's Corps is marching towards Nelson Virginia and Charlottesville. While William Franklin marches South into Albemarle region and the village of Gordensville. On the opposite side Runyan is left scrambling. Lee and Longstreet both retreated back to Fredericksburg - an apparently awkward position as they have orders to shift over to Nelson and Albemarle respectively, while Jackson has a long 12 day trek to Albemarle. Longstreet, who's on the rails, will arrive at Charlottesville on day four perhaps explaining the crisscrossing of forces.

As a side-note, supply issues are becoming very acute for Runyan. Jackson has 9 and uses 60 per turn. There is no better way in this game to quickly destroy a force than to starve it and it's an unavoidable projectile coming right at Jackson's mountain-bound men. Making matters worse, the naval blockade has been re-applied to Richmond as Buchanon had to retreat for repairs.

Shifting South, Manstein has finally consolidated his hold on Charleston by conquering its last Fort, Meade. He is sending all his divisions into the city for some well-deserved R&R. Runyan's Gen. Walker has laid siege to Savannah, but apparently sensing an inability to capture it due to Burnside's close proximity in Fort Pulaski has given orders to send him to Atlanta which is under siege by Manstein's cavalry elements.

The Emancipation Proclamation will become available as an option for Manstein next turn.

National Morale
CSA 74
USA 128

Combat Losses
CSA 17,667
USA 24,166

POW held by
CSA 1700
USA 500

Victory Points
CSA 307
USA 282

Points from Cities
CSA 19
USA 39

It's turn or 14 in early September and 11 turns remain.

[ATTACH]8250[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]8251[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]8252[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]8253[/ATTACH]
Attachments
rm.jpg
mm.jpg
b2.jpg
b.jpg
"We shall give them the bayonet." -Stonewall at Fredericksburg.

User avatar
runyan99
Posts: 1420
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 6:34 am

Sat Jun 27, 2009 8:01 am

Lee was forced back from Culpeper. This is unfortunate, but not unexpected. I am prepared to make a fighting withdrawl all the way to Richmond.

It is clear that Manstein will move on Charlottesville next turn. To fight another defensive battle in the entrenchments there, I will shift the entire ANV to the west. Longstreet by rail, and Jackson and Lee by foot as fast as possible. With luck, I can smash up some Union forces there, then shift back to Fredericksburg the turn after and do it again.

User avatar
Daxil
AGEod Grognard
Posts: 849
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 7:55 pm
Location: Somewhere in the Alleghenies

Sun Jun 28, 2009 6:51 am

Manstein has emancipated the slaves gaining 150 victory points and four national morale points.
Manstein is besieging Atlanta, but achieved nothing this turn.

This is a confusing turn to understand. I'll do my best. Lee arrived in Albemarle region on day three, while Franklin arrived there on day five. The battle, however, is in Charlottesville. Edwin Sumner arrived there on day five just as Longstreet was occupying the level V trenches in that region. Initially Sumner actually attempted to retreat and failed. On the battle report both sides are indicated to be on the offensive, but that is because one of Runyan's militia elements was in attack mode. In reality he is on the defensive. Longstreet, the initial general in charge, rolls luck 52-50. For some reason it is indicated that the Confederates didn't open fire at range till one, which would actually be hand-to-hand combat. Sumner opened up at a range of five, which is pretty standard for his 10 and 20 pounders. The only explanation would be that Runyan's militia element was the first element engaged and it was the one listed as destroyed in the battle report. Strangely, it is listed as a regular line element so perhaps it converted between turns.

Regardless, clearly Runyan's artillery was involved beyond that point. We could say that that little element was a picket force alerting the Confederates to the approaching Union lines. As can be seen Sumner is absolutely slaughtered. Approximately 3 divisions are wiped out, but Franklin and Dix marched to the sound of the guns, as did Jackson and Lee, continuing the battle. In real time this battle lasted about a minute, despite both sides having normal attack and defense stances, so it was apparent the results would be bloody. Both sides are listed as attempting to retreat, but somehow the Union is left in control. The most likely culprit for the Confederate retreat was a lack of ammunition as Longstreet had no wagons.

Longstreet and Jackson retreat North into the mountains- a rather awkward position for Runyan. Lee retreats to Albemarle, and encounters Franklin again. He is able to retreat back to Charlottesville explaining his presence there in passive posture alongside Sumner, also in passive posture. It can only be left up to speculation as to how the union gained 59% military control at Charlottesville by being in passive posture. My best guess is Sumner was blocked when he attempted to retreat in passive and reverted back to attack and then back to passive again when Lee arrived, but there's no explanation in the report. Note to designer: we need more after action battle description :-) A strange battle indeed.

So now we're looking at a dramatic race back to Richmond. Hooker has magically transported North. He and Meade have been promoted and are charged with capturing that city. After all the region to region cautiousness Manstein has ordered Meade to jump over three and land straight on top of Richmond. He has also ordered Porter to jump on Fredericksburg. Runyan has ordered Lee and Longstreet as well as Pemberton from the South to converge back to the Richmond fortifications. Jackson, whose troops are enfamished is marching south into the Roanoke region and over to Amherst region South East of Charlottesville. Inevitably the crisscrossing forces will collide somewhere.

In the southern regions Manstein has captured Atlanta, but is under siege there by Walker who arrived on day 15. Manstein has also ordered the three divisions at Charleston to set sail with Dahlgren again, destination coastal Carolina.

National Morale
CSA 88
USA 122

Combat Losses
CSA 29,067
USA 49,591

POW held by
CSA 900
USA 2100

Victory Points
CSA 332
USA 476

Points from Cities
CSA 18
USA 40

It's turn 15 in late September and 10 turns remain.

[ATTACH]8267[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]8268[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]8269[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]8270[/ATTACH]
Attachments
rm.jpg
mm.jpg
b2.jpg
b.jpg
"We shall give them the bayonet." -Stonewall at Fredericksburg.

User avatar
runyan99
Posts: 1420
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 6:34 am

Sun Jun 28, 2009 8:43 am

Where to start? I got the defensive battle I wanted at Charlottesville, but the end result was a problem.

In the battle, we destroyed 29 enemy elements, or the majority of a Union corps, inflicting about 14,000 more casualties than we took. However, the army would not stand their ground.

Unfortunately, Jackson and Longstreet choose to retreat west into the mountains, where there is no supply, instead of east. As Daxil points out, one Union corps remains at Charlottesville, gaining military control of that region.

Lee's corps after marching to the guns goes back to the Albemarle (Chancellorsville) region, but in passive posture, not defensive. This puts him at the mercy of any Union force that moves into the same region during the turn, which in fact happens. This means Lee is forced to retreat out of the Albemarle region.

Now for reasons totally unknown to myself, Lee retreats back to Charlottesville, which by this time is already in enemy hands. Based on what I know about retreats, I would have expected Lee to retreat to a region with a city, or at least a region with 100% military control. As far as I know, Lee SHOULD have retreated back to Fredericksburg, but instead retreats to an enemy region.

On the whole, this is an inexplicable disaster. The entire ANV is not where it is supposed to be, and the Union corps all have the inside track to Richmond. All my corps are what I call "off their balance", which means that they are in passive stance, in the wrong place, with less power than the surrounding enemy stacks, and thus in a position to get pushed around at will by enemy forces for the next couple turns. This is a very difficult situation to recover from.

The random retreat directions that the game enforces has here taken events out of my hands. In a campaign where keeping your army between an important objective and the enemy army is of paramount importance, uncontrolled retreats often lead to early disaster. It would be as if after the battle of Gettysburg, Lee retreated not southwest back towards Virginia, but back north where he came from, to Carlisle Pennsylvania, and then to make matters worse, stayed there for 10 days. Such a situation would likely have led to the destruction of the Confederate army, and these kinds of extreme results are often the result in the game.

When playing Birth of America this was a big issue as well. Too often the Continental army would fight a battle, and generally being the inferior force would be forced to retreat. No problem there, but often the game would choose a retreat region that would lead to the bottling up or surrounding of the American army. When trying to fight, say, Washington's battle of New York in 1776, instead of retreating west across the Hudson, you might find that the army has retreated onto Long Island, from which place there is no place to go and no escape.

Frankly, these uncontrolled retreats are not the game system's strongest feature, but are in fact a weakness. Expert 2-player play like this match against Manstein rapidly exposes weakness like these. In Manstein's turn as the CSA, he perhaps wisely chose to withdraw to Richmond early rather than risk any possibility of an adverse retreat result. However, I don't think my attempt to do a bit more fighting in the field in front of Richmond should be so disproportionally risky. In fact, in the full 4 year campaign, the ability to do this kind of back and forth fighting becomes mandatory for the CSA if they are to hold Richmond for more than a year, but again, because of the unpredictable retreats and the uneven forces available, Confederate survival can be ahistorically difficult, particularly against a skilled and aggressive USA player.

Ideally there really needs to be some means for players to designate where armies retreat to. This is particularly true for the ACW, where armies were extremely hard to corner or turn because they were so large, and almost all major battles ended with the defeated side making an orderly withdrawl in the direction of their choice.

Compounding the issue is the basic fact that forces made to retreat automatically go into passive stance for the rest of the turn, and are powerless before any enemy for the rest of the turn. In this particular example, we fight the battle on day 5 at Charlottesville, after which Lee goes passive, and he is then immobile and helpless for the next 9 days. That imposes an additional handicap for the game player vs the historical commander.

Going back to the battle for a moment there is another unexpected result. Contrary to my expectations, destruction of the enemy regiments is worth zero victory points, because I 'lost' the battle and retreated. The manual states on page 10 in the Victory Points section simply that destroyed units count for points, but after consulting with the developers, I have learned that this actually only applies to battles that are 'won', where your side ends up in control of the ground.

Since the Confederacy will in all situations have a manpower disadvantage vis a vis the Union, and thus may have a hard time taking ground against superior forces, I feel this treatment of VPs puts the Confederacy at a distinct disadvantage. This is a game feature that I have been unaware of until now, and I suspect that most other players have been equally unclear on this point.

The other major result of the battle was a shift in National Morale. By destroying the enemy forces, I gained 11 NM. This is the kind of political reward I would expect for doing great damage to the enemy, but alas this dynamic is also unclear to me. The dialogue box says I lost the battle and lost 11 NM, while my actual NM total increased turn over turn from 74 to 88. I'm trying to discover if this is a bug, or what the treatment of NM for battles won and lost will be under the next patch 1.14. Let me say for now there is some discussion on this issue.

Going back to the AAR, there is little for me to do now but to try and rush Longstreet or Lee back as fast as possible to occupy the Richmond entrenchments where they may be able to stand their ground. This will be diffucult however because they are not positioned along a fully controlled rail line, and are weaker than the Union corps. If they meet Union forces in one of the regions along the way, my smaller corps are likely to be simply pushed out of the way.

User avatar
Manstein
Brigadier General
Posts: 489
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 5:57 pm
Location: Cádiz, Spain

Sun Jun 28, 2009 11:39 am

Image

User avatar
Manstein
Brigadier General
Posts: 489
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 5:57 pm
Location: Cádiz, Spain

Sun Jun 28, 2009 12:09 pm

About said by Runyan:

I think that Runyan is right about the unexpectibility of the retreats. When I played against Johnycai as CSA at West scenario, I defended Memphis and my whole army was defeated with few casualties, but my forces didn´t retreat to rail south from Memphis, they crossed the Mississippi, then, my territory was undefended and I could lose because it, but I get recross the Mississippi and win the game, but the retreat of my army was very ilogical.

Anyway, I think that a general cannot control all at a war, and if we are playing a role as president of USA/CSA, we cannot control the retreat way taken by our army commander. It places a interesting unexpectability and no control of our forces that make more realistic war situations.

Here each player uses the possibilities that the game gives to us, so, when a situation is not suitable for us, we complain because it. I understand to Runyan that he complains about cavalry swarn and ilogical retreats, but he should complain too about the unrealistic situation about the trenches at Charlottesville battle. He had one militia unit (about 450 men) at Charlottesville, and 20.000+ rebel soldiers reached to the field battle one day before the battle and they took advantage the trenches level 491 thought and made by 450 men. It is a old trick that all the gamers take advantage, but it is very unrealistic and very much players place one militia unit more one artillery unit at strategic situation, for when that zone is needed for to be defended, send a corps and take advantage of those trenches.

O.K. about the things thet this game can be improved, but we must not forget that it is only a game (the best PC game that I have ever played), and a game never can replace the real life (thanks God, but I could be wounded)

User avatar
runyan99
Posts: 1420
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 6:34 am

Sun Jun 28, 2009 10:29 pm

Manstein wrote:
Anyway, I think that a general cannot control all at a war, and if we are playing a role as president of USA/CSA, we cannot control the retreat way taken by our army commander. It places a interesting unexpectability and no control of our forces that make more realistic war situations.



Unexpected, yes. Realistic, no. It bothers me greatly when large armies retreat away from their own communications. To use your Memphis example, clearly any general with a brain would have retreated south, along the rail lines and your rear, instead of west across the Mississippi where there is nothing but a small town and a bunch of swamp.

User avatar
Manstein
Brigadier General
Posts: 489
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 5:57 pm
Location: Cádiz, Spain

Sun Jun 28, 2009 11:23 pm

Perhaps the solution can be that a defeated force must be retreated one zone to the closest controlled depot independently who has the military control of that zone

User avatar
Daxil
AGEod Grognard
Posts: 849
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 7:55 pm
Location: Somewhere in the Alleghenies

Mon Jun 29, 2009 12:53 am

runyan99 wrote:Unexpected, yes. Realistic, no. It bothers me greatly when large armies retreat away from their own communications. To use your Memphis example, clearly any general with a brain would have retreated south, along the rail lines and your rear, instead of west across the Mississippi where there is nothing but a small town and a bunch of swamp.


What if they end up routing and blocked as yours were. A flank could have collapsed meaning there was no route of retreat save for North. In most situations it should be orderly, but in terms of routes it's often pure chaos. Besides, this is a strategic game, not a tactical game, and choosing how and where to retreat would be a tactical decision.
"We shall give them the bayonet." -Stonewall at Fredericksburg.

User avatar
runyan99
Posts: 1420
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 6:34 am

Mon Jun 29, 2009 5:17 am

My units were not blocked. The way was clear to the regions east of Charlottesville and Albemarle.

As far as routs go, there was only one large scale rout during the entire Civil War, and that was at First Bull Run. Even that army retreated along its communications and back to it's capitol, not some other location.

Perhaps part of the problem is that the game is declaring too many battles as routs. A rout should be a very rare thing. Based on the results, I certainly would not classify the Charlottesville battle as a rout, but the game did. I believe this caused an additional loss of 78 hits above and beyond those shown in the battle report. Why it should be a rout is a mystery. Although Union corps that marched to the guns were perhaps not shown, the battle report says I had a stronger force and inflicted more losses on the enemy...and yet my side routs?

Manstein mentions the issue of small units creating or 'saving' entrenchments for large forces. This is certainly an aspect that is worthy of discussion, but I don't see it as wildly out of whack. Clearly there are places, like Richmond, Washington or Vicksburg, where we would expect large scale entrenchments to exist, regardless of the number of troops actually in place. Therefore I don't see a problem with allowing small forces to occupy these entrenchments most of the time. In many places, it is reasonable to expect that entrenchments would remain and be just as useful even if abandoned and occupied later. Had the Confederates, hypothetically, left the Petersburg entrenchments at some time in 1865, and then returned a few weeks later, it would be reasonable to expect they could reoccupy the same lines with equal effectiveness. There would likely be no need to re-construct an entirely new line.

Whether a place like Charlottesville should be able to retain such a ready system of entrenchments is perhaps less clear.

User avatar
mikee64
Brigadier General
Posts: 413
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 12:13 am
Location: Virginia
Contact: Website

Mon Jun 29, 2009 3:25 pm

runyan99 wrote:
The other major result of the battle was a shift in National Morale. By destroying the enemy forces, I gained 11 NM. This is the kind of political reward I would expect for doing great damage to the enemy, but alas this dynamic is also unclear to me. The dialogue box says I lost the battle and lost 11 NM, while my actual NM total increased turn over turn from 74 to 88. I'm trying to discover if this is a bug, or what the treatment of NM for battles won and lost will be under the next patch 1.14. Let me say for now there is some discussion on this issue.


This has been reported on several occasions in the "Help Improve" topic. I even posted a saved game at one point; Pocus confirmed all the mechanics are WAD and the issue is just the incorrect mailbox message. So both your NM totals should be accurate per the current engine; its the message that is wrong.

Since you guys are not using 1.14beta I don't know if it's fixed there or not. I should probably find and bump the old thread to check w/ Gray, but don't have time atm.
Mike

User avatar
runyan99
Posts: 1420
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 6:34 am

Mon Jun 29, 2009 6:06 pm

Manstein wrote:Perhaps the solution can be that a defeated force must be retreated one zone to the closest controlled depot independently who has the military control of that zone


At first that seems like it would be better logic to use. Using the Memphis example though, a force at Memphis would still retreat west towards the depot at Madison, AR or even Little Rock, AR both of which appear closer to Memphis than Jackson, MS.

User avatar
runyan99
Posts: 1420
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 6:34 am

Mon Jun 29, 2009 6:10 pm

Daxil wrote:Besides, this is a strategic game, not a tactical game, and choosing how and where to retreat would be a tactical decision.

I disagree. Lee clearly retreated after the battle of Gettysburg, but the direction of the retreat is crucial. Whether he moved the army north towards Harrisburg, PA or south towards Winchester, VA is a strategic decision of the most important sort.

User avatar
Manstein
Brigadier General
Posts: 489
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 5:57 pm
Location: Cádiz, Spain

Mon Jun 29, 2009 7:02 pm

runyan99 wrote:At first that seems like it would be better logic to use. Using the Memphis example though, a force at Memphis would still retreat west towards the depot at Madison, AR or even Little Rock, AR both of which appear closer to Memphis than Jackson, MS.


Yes, you are right, but I would place other rule where the retreats could be not cross a major river, except if the attack was crossing a major river, where the attacking force could recross the major river, but having the double of pursuit casualties.

tagwyn
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 4:09 pm

Mon Jun 29, 2009 7:19 pm

Forces frrom Memphis would retreat to Corinth, MS. where there should be a depot. t

User avatar
Daxil
AGEod Grognard
Posts: 849
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 7:55 pm
Location: Somewhere in the Alleghenies

Mon Jun 29, 2009 7:56 pm

runyan99 wrote:I disagree. Lee clearly retreated after the battle of Gettysburg, but the direction of the retreat is crucial. Whether he moved the army north towards Harrisburg, PA or south towards Winchester, VA is a strategic decision of the most important sort.


Yes, but it shouldn't be up to you to make that decision imo. Without knowing the logic in the game engine I can't say if I agree or disagree with your opinion that it needs to be tweaked.

Back on topic, the next round's posting may be delayed a day or two as I'm busy right now.
"We shall give them the bayonet." -Stonewall at Fredericksburg.

User avatar
Daxil
AGEod Grognard
Posts: 849
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 7:55 pm
Location: Somewhere in the Alleghenies

Thu Jul 02, 2009 7:09 am

Manstein prints paper money.

Runyan prints paper money.

Disaster for the Confederacy! Walker's unable to recapture Atlanta and most of Jackson's command is melting away. He's down to about 10% strength before he even moves. Longstreet is using up the last of his supplies this turn too. So, the race begins. Lee and Meade collide in Amherst Virginia on day three. Both sides are in offensive mode. Lee takes the worst of it, but is able to disengage and continue the race to Richmond. He intends to enter the city and combine with forces there-one division of approximately 6000 troops. Fredericksburg falls on day five to Porter. Lee makes it to Richmond on day six and is able to combine with the Garrison there Before the Union forces arrived en masse!

Unfortunately, it's the wrong Lee. It's WHF Lee and his 5000 troops from the South. Robert E. is still crossing the Pamunkey to Tollersville with orders to head south from there on the rails to Richmond. He arrives in Louisa region on day eight simultaneously with a union force. Both sides retreat, Lee continuing his path South. He finally arrives in the capital on day nine a day after Pemberton and his Corps. It just so happens that Meade arrived there the exact same day preventing Lee and Pemberton from linking or entering any of the fortifications. Also, Lee's forces in passive (I believe) so Pemberton ends up taking the brunt of the attack and simply is not strong enough to hold against Meade. Lee is forced back North to Louisa while Pemberton falls back South. Richmond is under siege!

Further west Jackson and Longstreet are stumbling along seemingly doomed to starvation. Runyan has given orders for Lee and Pemberton to launch a desperate counterattack on Richmond next turn, but the Federal grip is rapidly tightening. Making matters worse Richmond is absolutely unprepared for siege. The troops inside only have enough food for 1 1/2 months!

At Wilmington, Dahlgren is heading North to Fort Monroe. He stayed off the coast of Carolina just long enough to freeze Johnston. Now with the rail lines completely torn up it's unlikely he can be effective help for Runyan at Richmond.


National Morale
CSA 88
USA 120

Combat Losses
CSA 41,177
USA 55,276

POW held by
CSA 900
USA 2900

Victory Points
CSA 350
USA 528

Points from Cities
CSA 18
USA 40

It's turn 16 in early October and nine turns remain.

[ATTACH]8331[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]8329[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]8330[/ATTACH]
Attachments
b.jpg
rm.jpg
mm.jpg
"We shall give them the bayonet." -Stonewall at Fredericksburg.

User avatar
runyan99
Posts: 1420
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 6:34 am

Thu Jul 02, 2009 5:52 pm

I could not understand how I lost that second battle with Lee and Meade, but perhaps you have it right. If Lee was in passive stance, that would explain how Pemberton got beat up, despite my having more troops in the region.

But again, this is another aspect of the retreats I'm not super happy with. In this case when Lee was forced to retreat after a very indecisive battle at Amherst, I suppose he was forced into passive stance, making him useless for the rest of the two week turn. Given the circumstances, I don't see that as optimal modeling. Sometimes two weeks is too long to be useless, and sometimes real armies were able to fight multiple engagements on the move over a course of two weeks. I don't see why after a middling battle like the Amherst one why the retiring force cannot remain in defensive stance. If Lee had remained defensive, he and Pemberton combined probably could have repelled Meade at Richmond.

User avatar
Daxil
AGEod Grognard
Posts: 849
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 7:55 pm
Location: Somewhere in the Alleghenies

Fri Jul 03, 2009 6:31 am

Manstein has promoted Meade to three-star general rank. He's heading back north with his battered Corps to link with McDowell and assume command of the Army of the Potomac.

Atlanta has been recaptured by Walker as Manstein's cav has abandoned the city.

The siege of Richmond continues. The Confederate James River fleet is beaten off and sales for James City. On land, before the northern half of the Confederate offensive can even get going Lee has to hack his way through Hooker's command. Unfortunately the entire Army of the Potomac assists Hooker and Lee is forced to retreat to West Point. Seeing the city is firmly under siege Runyan has ordered him to advance North to Fredericksburg. Pemberton arrives at Richmond on day five and is similarly repulsed with heavy losses.

Stonewalls command has melted away to virtually nothing, but miraculously on day 14 Longstreet arrives at Richmond and the Federal forces are unable to engage him in time before he is able to enter the city. Although the numbers bolster the defenses supply is still in short order and the site of Longstreet's ragtag force in reality probably would've lowered morale.

Dahlgren's command is offloading onto the beaches at Norfolk.

Runyan settles down for siege. He can do nothing more now than watch the clock tick and pray for some bad weather.

National Morale
CSA 90
USA 120

Combat Losses
CSA 54,615
USA 63,374

POW held by
CSA 2800
USA 900

Victory Points
CSA
368
USA 557

Points from Cities
CSA 16
USA 42

It's turn 17 in late October and eight turns remain.

[ATTACH]8334[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]8335[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]8336[/ATTACH]
Attachments
rm.jpg
mm.jpg
b.jpg
"We shall give them the bayonet." -Stonewall at Fredericksburg.

User avatar
runyan99
Posts: 1420
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 6:34 am

Fri Jul 03, 2009 6:45 am

Yep.

User avatar
Daxil
AGEod Grognard
Posts: 849
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 7:55 pm
Location: Somewhere in the Alleghenies

Fri Jul 03, 2009 10:56 pm

I think Runyan's enthusiasm sums up the next three turns, so fast forwarding...

The army in Richmond, starving, surrendered on turn 20. As you can see the CSA consisted of the force at Wilmington and nothing else by that time. Manstein had blocked Lee's escape at all points, had captured Norfolk and was driving South when CSA surrendered.

Good game to both of you. Shame it was anti-climactic. It literally could have gone either way. The game engine decided the outcome in the end, but props to Manstein. He's proven himself a merciless tactician having dispatched two top-notched generals so far with decisive victories.

So, the final is Benway9 vs Manstein, which is already underway.

National Morale
CSA 17
USA 190

Combat Losses
CSA 70552
USA 79559

POW held by
CSA 1100
USA 33400

Victory Points
CSA 352
USA 915

Points from Cities
CSA 8
USA 50

It's turn 20 in early Dec and the game has ended.

[ATTACH]8339[/ATTACH]
Attachments
s.jpg
"We shall give them the bayonet." -Stonewall at Fredericksburg.

User avatar
runyan99
Posts: 1420
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 6:34 am

Sat Jul 04, 2009 3:14 am

Yes Manstein is quite good, and he won fair and square.

I played to win but I have to say, I am somewhat glad I lost. With the issues I pointed out during this AAR, I have to say I am not satisfied with the current state of the game in 1.13b for competitive 2-player play. Real players do things, and expose problems, that the AI does not exploit or even knows exist. I wouldn't want to play the full campaign twice under the circumstances if it was to be in actuality a sentence to play the 'whack a mole' cavalry game again for three years. Additionally, the retreats, and the way battles are sometimes handled, irks me increasingly the more I study it.

With that, I'd like to make a prediction for the final, which I will be watching with some (morbid?) curiosity.

I don't know what kind of player Benway is, but unless he is the best player in the world, I predict that when Manstein plays the USA side, he will take Richmond before the cut-off date of October 1863. Given some of the game issues, I think it is just too hard for the CSA to last long against a skilled USA player.

Thanks to Daxil for running the tournament, doing our hosting, and posting the AAR.

User avatar
Manstein
Brigadier General
Posts: 489
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 5:57 pm
Location: Cádiz, Spain

Sat Jul 04, 2009 6:50 pm

Thank you Runyan, but I think that you trust at me too many.
I think that the easter scenario is very unbalanced. If the federal player is aggressive, the CSA cannot maintain Richmond. I think (sorry by the designers) that the scenario is very bad done, about troops but about food too. Then, when I played against the IA (for know something the scenario, because out the championship I ever played the GC), I realized that the key was Richmond and only Richmond. If the federal player wants, Richmond will be conquered, then I when played as CSA, I left the rest of objective cities for defend only Richmond and I don´t know how, I had more divisions that you at Richmond front (12 full divisions), more a corps with 4 divisions for support 4 or 5 zones south, more 1 cav division defendinf the rail lines. When you tried advance to Richmond, I joined the 16 full divisions and I stopped your advance.
I think that you problem was playing as USA, because you played very conservative and when you saw my Richmond defense, you decided not to bite the bone and look for easier objectives. You won the game with 600 VP of difference, but I knew that really the winner was me, because I would conquer Richmond as USA. I knew that was impossible for you maintain Richmond, because I joined 25 full divisions under McDowell command, and my advance to Richmond would be unstoppable, more when you only had 7 divisions front me.

I think that the GC at this game are more balanced (not 100%) than the scenarios and really, now I can say it to you, the cavalry swarn and the strange retreats were not important for your defeat, but your passivity playing as USA and not try to conquer Richmond.

User avatar
runyan99
Posts: 1420
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 6:34 am

Sat Jul 04, 2009 7:29 pm

It is true I did not try to take Richmond as the USA, but chose to send divisions south to take the points available along the coast.

That would have worked fine, as long as I could keep Richmond as the CSA. The cavalry swarm was important as it cut the rail lines south of Richmond, preventing me quickly moving my coastal forces by rail to support Richmond, and it also made the terrible food situation somewhat worse at times.

Still, the real killer was the one battle at Charlottesville that scattered my army to the four winds, preventing a real defense of Richmond. I still suspect I might have been able to hold the Richmond entrenchments (level 7 or 8) to the end of the game, had I been able to get my whole army there. Maybe not, they might have all starved out before the end.

I agree that the full campaign is far more balanced than this scenario, but my prediction holds. You will take Richmond in the full campaign too if you make a similar effort. As shown by this AAR, just one battle that disorganizes the Confederate army can lead to the rapid collapse of the entire Virginia theatre. As the CSA, avoiding that collapse can be extremely tricky in the face of larger USA forces.

tagwyn
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1220
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 4:09 pm

Adjustments to Game

Sat Jul 04, 2009 7:46 pm

Dax: Does the new beta version attempt to deal with the problems set forth by Runyan99 and Manstein? t :confused:

User avatar
Daxil
AGEod Grognard
Posts: 849
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 7:55 pm
Location: Somewhere in the Alleghenies

Sat Jul 04, 2009 10:32 pm

That's more of a question for Gray_Lensman. From what I've read, the cav problem somewhat, in that early cav can't capture cities anymore. In regards to the retreat issue I don't know that anyone has even brought it up yet.
"We shall give them the bayonet." -Stonewall at Fredericksburg.

Return to “1st AACW PBEM Tournament (2008/2009)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests