marquo
Lieutenant
Posts: 137
Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2013 12:16 am

City Questions.

Tue Mar 03, 2015 6:24 pm

Why ever enter a city? What is the point if the frontage is so bad? Is it best to move all units out into the surrounding countryside? All the recruited militia pops up inside the cities; why not outside?

Some cities like New York, Philadelphia have more than one garrisons; why not meld them together into one larger force?

Thanks

Merlin
General
Posts: 581
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 2:41 pm
Location: St. Paul, MN

Tue Mar 03, 2015 7:18 pm

Why enter a city?

You may have a superior force within a few turn's march. but not outside the gates. In that case, hold inside and fight outside.

Combining garrisons?

It depends on CP. If you can do it and fit the forces in a single division, go ahead. Otherwise, don't bother.

User avatar
Captain_Orso
Posts: 5766
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 5:02 pm
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Tue Mar 03, 2015 9:32 pm

Especially in cities with low loyalty--<50%--you'll want to have at least a small garrison to prevent the citizenry from rebelling and forming up partisans. In strategic and objective cities you need a garrison to actually control them and collect VP's each turn. No garrison, and they revert to being 'uncontrolled' as long as you do not have >50% loyalty.

Also once the front has moved beyond the many towns and cities you'll want a small garrison to prevent raiders from picking up all the supplies you're spreading round in your hinterland. Starve them and they'll go back home or be easy pickings for the forces you must leave behind to protect your lines of communications.
Image

marquo
Lieutenant
Posts: 137
Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2013 12:16 am

Tue Mar 03, 2015 9:54 pm

Merlin wrote:Why enter a city?

You may have a superior force within a few turn's march. but not outside the gates. In that case, hold inside and fight outside.

Combining garrisons?

It depends on CP. If you can do it and fit the forces in a single division, go ahead. Otherwise, don't bother.


What is the point of keeping a force inside?? I am afraid I do not yet understand.

Rod Smart
Colonel
Posts: 326
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2014 3:32 pm

Tue Mar 03, 2015 10:17 pm

Captain_Orso wrote:Especially in cities with low loyalty--<50%--you'll want to have at least a small garrison to prevent the citizenry from rebelling and forming up partisans. In strategic and objective cities you need a garrison to actually control them and collect VP's each turn. No garrison, and they revert to being 'uncontrolled' as long as you do not have >50% loyalty.

Also once the front has moved beyond the many towns and cities you'll want a small garrison to prevent raiders from picking up all the supplies you're spreading round in your hinterland. Starve them and they'll go back home or be easy pickings for the forces you must leave behind to protect your lines of communications.


all good points, but the garrison does not need to be inside the structure to achieve those goals

donagel
Sergeant
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 4:56 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD, USA

Tue Mar 03, 2015 11:15 pm

My gut has always been, put them in the city if you want them to stand to the last man (with appropriate combat status). If you don't mind them retreating, they can go outside. Also, I could have sworn once or twice that the enemy has snuck past my forces in the field and enter the city despite my presence. But that could be just me playing at 2AM talking.
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."

-H.L. Mencken-

User avatar
Captain_Orso
Posts: 5766
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 5:02 pm
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Wed Mar 04, 2015 1:25 pm

Rod Smart wrote:all good points, but the garrison does not need to be inside the structure to achieve those goals


If it is militia, early war cavalry or partisans, they do. Regular 'line' infantry can control a location from the field--outside the location.

But what is the point of leaving them outside? Garrisons out in the field make perfect targets of themselves for every ride-by shooting the confederacy can offer. And if they lose the battle and don't retreat into the town, or lose and are lucky enough to retreat into town and the attacking force is also set to assault and go to battle again and get destroyed, then your garrison is not doing it's job, which is to keep the raiders out of the town and off the supplies first and foremost.

Again, what is the point of leaving a garrison outside of the location it is garrisoning?
Image

User avatar
Gray Fox
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1520
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 7:48 pm
Location: Englewood, OH

Wed Mar 04, 2015 2:02 pm

From the AGEWiki:

"Forts and cities have the lowest quotas (Forts are somewhat better) and they also impose a -25% quota penalty on the attacker. "

So the frontage is bad...for the attacker. Basically, a garrison in the city will defend with 4 elements for every 3 that the attacker can use.

http://www.ageod.net/aacwwiki/Frontage
I'm the 51st shade of gray. Eat, pray, Charge!

User avatar
Captain_Orso
Posts: 5766
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 5:02 pm
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Wed Mar 04, 2015 2:02 pm

donagel wrote:My gut has always been, put them in the city if you want them to stand to the last man (with appropriate combat status).


To paraphrase the horny man himself, "Frankie - Scarlett ... :blink: ... um ... frankly, Scarlett, I don't give a dang -a darn -a hoot.. what they do, just as long as the Rebs are hungry".

donagel wrote:If you don't mind them retreating, they can go outside.


In the left corner, weighing in at 1000 corn-fed, beefy western farm boys, MaaaaaaaaAAAIIIIIIIII GARR-I-SONnnnn!!!

In the right corner, weighing in at 1300 of the orneriest, hungriest, meanest men ever to have mounted a horse, TheeeeEEEEEE RAAAAIIIIII-DEEeeeeeerrrrrs!!!

...aaaaaaaaaaaand.... fight..

--and the audience goes wild!!--

ImageImageImageImage<=MeImageImageImageImageImageImageImageImage

_______________________________Image_______________________________________________


Image

It doesn't matter what happens to the garrison, as long as the Rebs don't get into the town.

donagel wrote:Also, I could have sworn once or twice that the enemy has snuck past my forces in the field and enter the city despite my presence. But that could be just me playing at 2AM talking.


Exactly that I have not seen, but similar. I've had a force standing outside the city be attacked in the field--and win!--but the attacking force still somehow then sneaked past the field force--perhaps because the field force was then spent and couldn't offer enough resistance to keep the attackers off the city. So the garrison was still attacked and partially destroyed.
Image

User avatar
John S. Mosby
Lieutenant
Posts: 131
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 2:53 pm
Location: Virginia, CSA

Thu Mar 05, 2015 2:19 am

Captain_Orso wrote:Especially in cities with low loyalty--<50%--you'll want to have at least a small garrison to prevent the citizenry from rebelling and forming up partisans. In strategic and objective cities you need a garrison to actually control them and collect VP's each turn. No garrison, and they revert to being 'uncontrolled' as long as you do not have >50% loyalty.


I did not know that and appreciate your input. I've been wondering for some time about where to stage the troops around a city. Thank you Captain.

User avatar
Captain_Orso
Posts: 5766
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 5:02 pm
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Thu Mar 05, 2015 1:28 pm

A small correction, partisans can only appear if the loyalty is at <=10% and the location is uncontrolled. But collecting VP's is as I stated, you must control the location, and to control a location with <50% loyalty, either militia/irregulars inside, or line infantry out- or inside.
Image

Bill's Boy
Private
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2014 10:40 am
Location: New Jersey

Thu Apr 09, 2015 9:59 pm

Is there some minimum size for a garrison to control an Objective Town? I ask because I have taken Norfolk as the Union player and have it garrisoned with a militia regiment inside the city but that hasn't controlled the town. I have 100% Military Control but 23% Loyalty.

User avatar
BattleVonWar
Major
Posts: 221
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 3:22 am

Fri Apr 10, 2015 2:44 am

The Garrison feature is so confusing. I read in the manual( I think it was 2am) you get less disease? So in this case it would seem you may benefit greatly from using garrisoning a large force in reserve. I think my units suffered less sickness hits in fact few in the harsh weather months or am I dreaming?(but I am pretty sure my forts got hit the same?) I am confused from the manual to the fact.. but it seemed my big stacks in Virginia survived much better the severe weather.

Aside I cannot see much advantage of a Garrison unless a small unit, for if a siege happens you are going to surrender : ( instead of retreat am I right? Which sucks (Bad on NM)

Bill's Boy wrote:Is there some minimum size for a garrison to control an Objective Town? I ask because I have taken Norfolk as the Union player and have it garrisoned with a militia regiment inside the city but that hasn't controlled the town. I have 100% Military Control but 23% Loyalty.

User avatar
Projekt Pasha
Sergeant
Posts: 97
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2014 3:30 pm
Location: Exile

Fri Apr 10, 2015 3:27 am

I love Garrisons! They make excellent food for my five Confederate Cav division stack in the west, great for promotions too. :p
Current Russian player in the third Paradox OT Forums Mass AAR.

Former Ottoman Player in the first Paradox Forums TEAW Mass Multiplayer AAR. Victor of Tripoli, Tyr, and Xanthi. Defender of the Holy Cities of Jerusalem, Mecca, and Medinah. Conqueror of Kuwait and Kitchener. Bane of the British and Sword of the House of Osman.

Militant confederate in my spare time. :neener:

User avatar
Durk
Posts: 2663
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2011 4:36 am
Location: Wyoming

Fri Apr 10, 2015 3:30 am

Bill's Boy wrote:Is there some minimum size for a garrison to control an Objective Town? I ask because I have taken Norfolk as the Union player and have it garrisoned with a militia regiment inside the city but that hasn't controlled the town. I have 100% Military Control but 23% Loyalty.


Militia do not impact control. To change control you need a regular unit of some sort. Then, the size of this force matters, but militia by themselves cannot shift the Loyalty.

User avatar
Captain_Orso
Posts: 5766
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 5:02 pm
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Fri Apr 10, 2015 5:53 am

Militia must be inside the city to control it. If they are outside control of the city is lot if loyalty is =<50%.
Image

User avatar
Gray Fox
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1520
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 7:48 pm
Location: Englewood, OH

Fri Apr 10, 2015 12:19 pm

From the AGEWIKI:

http://www.ageod.net/agewiki/Frontage

"A few specific terrain/weather combinations subtract -25% from the quotas for units in offensive posture only (so the attacker can employ fewer elements than the defender):

Wilderness/Hills/Mtn/Swamp/Marsh in Mud or Blizzard weather.
Fort and City in all weather."

http://www.ageod.net/agewiki/Supply

"A besieged force will rarely surrender as long as a Supply Wagon (with General Supply points remaining) is located inside the besieged city. Once its General Supply points have been consumed, however, this special feature is lost."

So, if you fight inside the structure, you'll have 4 defenders fighting for every 3 attackers.

If you give your garrison in the structure one supply unit, then they only have a 5% chance to surrender during a seige.

If you entrench in the structure, make sure that the structure can hold the garrison without overcrowding:

[ATTACH]33241[/ATTACH]
Attachments
Crowding.jpg
I'm the 51st shade of gray. Eat, pray, Charge!

Return to “Civil War II”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Blood and Thunder Brigade and 6 guests