Gray Fox wrote:
As in WW II, my operation Overlord landings seems to have stretched the enemy to the breaking point. My own break-out at Garysburg has sealed the doom of VA. This was originally Grant's plan for 1864. It was deemed to be too much like McClellan's peninsula campaign against the CSA. In 1864, McClellan was campaigning against Lincoln, so the plan was denied, forcing Grant into the Wilderness.
Gray Fox wrote: I have riverine transports that provide supply while a depot is being built inside its citadel. So the sea lanes are my supply lines and I control the sea of course.
If that is indeed how many he hasGray Fox wrote:The 20 Divisions would need an extra 51 size 1 cities in VA to remain supplied. So...
OneArmedMexican wrote:Eventually, your answer to the solid line problem seems to have been a flanking move via Norflok (in other words you stretched the line). That is sensible but I am surprised your opponent didn't counter it better - after all he must have seen you mass troops there and should have been able to reinforce his own stacks on that front via his interior lines.
Mickey could siege your fortified cities one after another until the garrison eventually surrenders. Slow but effective (since those surrenders would cost you NM).
It's a good idea and complements your eastern strategy nicely since the compression of troops is certain to make supply more of an issue. Especially in RuS there used to be a critical mass of troops that the country simply couldn't supply but again a good opponent is anything but helpless against such a tactic: build new depots, strengthen your supply lines and the issue can be solved. If Mickey didn't and supply should indeed have become a massive issue for him as a result, it's entirely his fault.
Mickey3D wrote:- In CW2, landing is a more effective weapon than in AACW because you can move and land in the same turn (In AACW you should first move and in the next turn land).
Mickey3D wrote:- Wisely, GrayFox chose not to land in Norfolk but in Edenton (just south of Norfolk) : a swamp area with no railway so no way for the CSA to quickly move force there. Moreover, as CSA you think first to defend Norfolk, not Edenton.
Mickey3D wrote:All the cities were also Harbor (Saint-Louis, Cairo, Louisville, ...) so you must also blockade the harbor to cut the supply.
OneArmedMexican wrote:But I remember a crazy amphibious invasion of New York in BiA2 that took my PBEM opponent completely by surprise since my navy wasn't parked before its coast before landing there.
So let him have that swamp hole (no offence to anybody who might live at Edenton) - the interesting part starts when he wants to get out of it. I probably would have given up Norfolk (danger of being cut off) then put a force between him and Petersburg.
I wrote about bringing along enough artillery. If he has a harbour to keep his force supplied, then your artillery advantage (siege arty!) needs to be considerable enough to enable you to win the siege rolls and completely breech the fortification. Next you storm it with your superior numbers and get even more NM out of the affair. ? At least in my experience from older AGEOD PBEMs is that it is rarely a good idea to risk major forces being besieged.
you two have written a very enjoyable AAR - thank you!
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests