AGEOD Forums

Hi all.

I'm still a newcomer to the game, currently playing the Union in my first two full PBEM campaigns against worthy (and devious) opponents.

I have a question, having just come off a catastrophic turn in one of those games. I had a 15,000 man corps under Keyes, which moved southwards into an empty area west of Spotsylvania (I don't have the map to hand so I can't tell you what it's called). The problem was, by the time they got there, it was no longer empty; Lee and 30,000 rebs had got there the day before - so it was always going to end badly for poor old Keyes.

There was a battle...and IV Corps was completely destroyed. Every man, horse, wagon and gun. My question is, is this supposed to happen? It certainly doesn't seem very historically accurate. I expected Keyes's men to end up battered and smashed, with heavy casualties, and in needs of weeks of recovery and reorganisation before they fight again; that would have been entirely right. But his corps was destroyed to the last man - "pursued and destroyed while routing". The manpower loss is bad enough, but the -9 NM (for one battle) that went with it I'll probably never recover from. McClellan must already be planning the decor for the White House when he gets elected in '64.

I should add that this is the second time in this game it's happened - Lew Wallace had the same happen to him north of Corinth when he met a reb army twice his size coming the other way. Corps destroyed; the only remains were three wounded leaders recovering in surrounding towns.

I'd be grateful for any advice you veterans can give me. Am I making some kind of basic error?

Thanks in advance.

deleted

urbancannibal wrote:Hi all.
"pursued and destroyed while routing"

Is cavalry what contributes to the pursuing and routing part, or can any units pursue and destroy? In other words, how do achieve these results?

Hi!

Urbancannibal,
Were all the losses inflicted on the battle (did you see on the battler report a 100% losses numbers?) or was the "pursue" what eliminated your last remaining forces??
In the first case it could be a problem with the retreat chances, but it's strange, because as Gray states it was tweaked so armies could retreat no matter how much MC they had in surrounding regions.
If its the second... well, i would say its not a bug, but bad luck on your side... Bumping into Lee and the ANV is not recommendable at all

In this type of "bumps" by mistake with big enemy forces your stack usually try to auto retreat before battle, but i guess Keyes failed the roll and/or Lee succeed in his and don't let them escape.

Blackbird,
The pursue losses are calculated in some kind of "pursue roll", not a real battle.
But the number of cavalry on both sides is accounted for.
A withdrawing force with little or no cavalry being pursued by a force with a sizable cavalry will usually incur in bigger losses.
In any case, luck has an important factor her i suspect (as surely other modifiers i don't have a clue about )
Cheers!

Bit of bad luck, but I've been on the receiving and dishing out end of destruction of a corps. Sometimes even the ranking officer is killed.

Your cavalry are your eyes and ears, so don't leave home without them - scouting "empty" areas first.

Keep at it. Revenge is a dish best served cold they say.

Your orders play a small role in if your force survives or not. For example, if you select all out attack/defend at all costs, then the chance of retreating is almost zero. But if you select the minimal attack/defend, then you get the best retreat chance.

As others have said, keep at it. You can still recover (it will be tough however).

Over the course of several campaigns, I've learned to be especially cautious in how I use independent "medium size" (10,000 to 15,000) USA forces. If the CSA can double up on them, the loss of NM can be dire.

Thanks all for your responses. It's good to know that I was just unlucky to lose that heavily; it might take a while to recover but it's a tough lesson well learned. If I can start getting some solid victories under my belt then maybe I can pull this one back. Even if I can't, I'll have a lot of fun trying. And next time I advance anywhere, the cavalry screen will be well and truly in place.

Arsan: it was the second case. I received a long (and depressing) list of elements that were destroyed while routing... The casualties in the fighting itself were probably around 50% or so.

Urbancannibal, it seems you and I are destined for a future PBEM. Give me about 3 more weeks and I will be the guy posting about how I cannot figure out how you wiped out my corps.

urbancannibal wrote:Arsan: it was the second case. I received a long (and depressing) list of elements that were destroyed while routing... The casualties in the fighting itself were probably around 50% or so.

So ... how often did such a thing happen (a large force destroyed by pursuit) in the real ACW? Especially considering that a determined pursuit after a bloody battle is extremely rare in military history?

Heldenkaiser wrote:So ... how often did such a thing happen (a large force destroyed by pursuit) in the real ACW? Especially considering that a determined pursuit after a bloody battle is extremely rare in military history?

I can't think of a single occasion where it happened. Driving the enemy from the field in full rout would usually be more than enough of a victory for any commander. The victors would get the chance to enjoy the fruits of their victory, a well earned rest, and a good meal courtesy of the supplies left behind by the retreating losers.

A full-on pursuit to slaughter every man on the field belongs in ancient warfare, not the 19th century!

urbancannibal wrote:A full-on pursuit to slaughter every man on the field belongs in ancient warfare, not the 19th century!

Napoleonic wars were on XIX century didn't they?? i've heard they had their good share of cavalry pursuits there
In any case i think you are wrong reading the pursuit losses as "killed to the last men by vicious head cutting sabre armed cavalry"
As the battle losses, on the pursuit loses you should include dead, wounded, prisoners taken by the enemy, missing, stragglers, deserters, men that throw their arms and try to "walk back home" etc etc...
A complete destruction of a corps as in this case, means it is not there anymore as an organized and effective combat unit for you to give orders. Not a complete annihilation.
A pretty important % of the losses in battle or pursuit (30% IIRC) are added back to your conscript pool next turn for you to use as reinforcements or replacements.
Cheers!

arsan wrote:Napoleonic wars were on XIX century didn't they?? i've heard they had their good share of cavalry pursuits there

I can't really think of one, off-hand. Of course there was the pursuit the Prussians staged after Waterloo, but the fact that Gneisenau was so highly praised for it ever after points to the fact such an effective pursuit was considered extremely remarkable, i.e. rare!

A pretty important % of the losses in battle or pursuit (30% IIRC) are added back to your conscript pool next turn for you to use as reinforcements or replacements.
Cheers!

That I didn't know. Makes good sense.

Heldenkaiser wrote:I can't really think of one, off-hand. Of course there was the pursuit the Prussians staged after Waterloo, but the fact that Gneisenau was so highly praised for it ever after points to the fact such an effective pursuit was considered extremely remarkable, i.e. rare!

Maybe the Prussians learned some pursuit tricks when they were pursued until capitulation after Jena/Auerstedt
On a gigantic scale, the 1812 retreat from Moscow was a huge and extremely successful pursuit... the cold helped, no doubt but the cossacks and regular Russian troops had big part in it too!
Cheers!