Show your greatest victory!

[boajack]

Show your greatest victory on the field of glory


My greatest victory was against the ai (current patch) today. The whole Army of the Potomac was destroyed in two battles.


First round:




Second round:




Sadly I think the war is close to over now... leure:

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Castel]

Lol, more than 42000 casualties for the north during the first battle.

That's indeed a pretty nice victory. ^^

[runyan99]

Both of these screens show that this game is still in major need of adjustment casualty wise. These battle results are outright ridiculous, and not even close to historical.

Not necessarily. Don't jump to conclusions.

The screens show that McD was surrounded, and attacked by a superior force. There are high numbers shown as captured. In such a case, it isn't unlikely that the Union force would become unglued and eliminated.

I still find the battle results quite good, and normal situations do not lead to abnormal results in my games.

[mikee64]

I still think results like this are more a function of the AI's (lack of) force organization rather than a major flaw in the combat engine. Look at the scales showing global combat value here: The CS force was much stronger despite the disparity in elements. There are also no 2* leaders for the US, meaning no corp structure at all. Even if we assume each of those 6 1* leaders was commanding a division, that still accounts for barely over 1/2 of the US elements under command of any sort.

In 4 pbem games dating back several patches I've never seen anything close to this. My disaster on the other thread notwithstanding.

Edit: runyan you beat me to it; I can see this as feasible given circumstances. Now go over to my pbem results and explain those to me!

[PDF]

Great victory indeed !
If you look at the message box, there is a total of 25,000 prisoners, so only 17,000 feds remaining as KIA/WIA/MIA, vs 8,000 for CSA side.
It's not ridiculous at all and quite plausible if the US were surrounded, broke and eventually surrendered.
Look at all elements before judging...

Also note that the battle screens are confusing because the 2 lines of elements aren't enough to show everything, so some the forces (inf regts mainly !)are *not* shown.
It's a small interface glitch yet to fix (the screen was ok for BoA but in ACW forces are much bigger and varied).

[Bodders]

Yes, surrounded and cut-off, a whole army surrendering is not outside the realm of possibility.

We don't know the level the ai was on or as I've discovered the aggressiveness level which makes a big difference to how it performs. On low aggression it seems much harder to trap it.

Yes, the command chain also needs work for the ai and that would make a big difference but I'm not surprised it can't do that too well - it's pretty complicated

I wouldn't take the evidence of any ai game as to the value of the settings in the options file, personally. This is just a thread for gloating I think

I don't have a screenie but my best was a 14 day assault which wiped out Beauregard's defending 60 000 army, costing me 60 000 casualties at the same time. Again, ai though

[McNaughton]

Anyone have a story about your greatest defeat against the AI? I would really like to hear how the latest AI handles an aggressive human player (what settings lead for the most optimal opponent), and how the AI actually managed to hand a human a defeat.

I wonder how common victories like the above are? Historically, armies proved to be extremely elusive in regards to mass surrenders. The largest was at Harpers Ferry, with 12 000 men surrendering, but most others rarely get above 5000 (even in the most devestating of battles over a period of days). I wonder if the inherent 'retreat from battle' ability isn't too low, due to how common it does appear to totally annihilate an opposing force. Any more examples of very skewed battle situations? However, maybe this is an isolated incident, with the Federal force put in a horrid situation that historically it never faced.

[boajack]

The difficult level in this game was normal with a slight bonus in detection for the ai.


I tell the story of the combat tomorrow (1 am here) . I do not think that this result is a problem with the combat engine. It was a big strategical mistake by the ai witch resulted in desaster.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[McNaughton]

This is probably the reason I am concerned about the results. Allowing for the fact that it is a game and events such as this can occur, wouldn't it make more sense if a greater "retreat from battle" resulted and maybe the "retreated" numbers some how show back up in the "Conscripted" manpower for reassignment to new units?

A percentage of wounded units do return as manpower.

[Queeg]

In this instance, it's not a retreat problem. I had a similar victory in Stafford. Look at the map. If you cut the Federals off from Alexandria and trap them against the Potomac, you can destroy them. In my case, more than half the Federal losses were POWs, which is entirely reasonable.

[bloodybucket]

Sadly, I have no such victory story, but in my first full game as the Rebs I suffered a devastating defeat of almost the same proportions, for, I think the reason mentioned above: No line of retreat, my force low on cohesion, just after a change in command. leure:

I assumed that the AoNV was bulletproof once Marse Robert took command, but I proved that theory wrong.

[Pocus]

seeing the number of losses, it means the battle lasted quite long, and without a retreat triggered. Baring a bug, the battle code would have retreated Mc Dowell if possible well before his troops are destroyed to such extent. So for me, it is a case of 'surrounded then destroyed', and nothing more, until we get more info.

[boajack]

Ok here comes the battle setup:






This shows the turn before the two big battles.


In late january my troops were still in their winter postitions. Everyone is in the towns to avoid attrition. The ai started suddenly an assault on Richmond. A small part (about 400 ap) arrived by ship and directly assaulted Richmond. Luckily I built a fortress there. The standard locked garrision and the just in time arrived Texas brigarde defended the city succesful. During the same phase the Army of the Potomac bypassed my defences at Alexandria (Jacksons corp in the town) and marshed directly after Fredericksburg. There Longstreet with his flullstrength division could fend the Army of the Potomac off (low intense battles). It seems that the Army has force marshed to Fredericksburg and had suffered a considerably amound of winter attrition.

At early February as shown above my troops are ordered to cut the supply lines and close the way of retreat. Jackson with 2000 ap was ordered to marsh over Stafford to Fredericksburg to support Longstreet. J Johnston moved to Alexandria to secure the back.

During the next turnresolution phase the Army of the Potomac was defeated once more from Longstreet (low intense fighting) and retreated to Stafford. There Jacksons Corps engaged and the result were the both combat screens from the first page.

Relativ strength during the battles:

1. CSA 1718 ap, Union 145 ap !!! (monst likly out of ammo and very low on organisation)

2. CSA 1265 ap, Union 13 ap !!! (Johnston supported from Alexandria this round)

So the combat result is plausible for me. Only the ai was the "problem". Maybe it rates corps in garrison not as much as corps in the field? It looked like the ai thought there is nothing on the way to Fredericksburg, let´s go there .

PS:
The ai was set on balanced aggressive level.

[Clovis]

Ok here comes the battle setup:






This shows the turn before the two big battles.


In late january my troops were still in their winter postitions. Everyone is in the towns to avoid attrition. The ai started suddenly an assault on Richmond. A small part (about 400 ap) arrived by ship and directly assaulted Richmond. Luckily I built a fortress there. The standard locked garrision and the just in time arrived Texas brigarde defended the city succesful. During the same phase the Army of the Potomac bypassed my defences at Alexandria (Jacksons corp in the town) and marshed directly after Fredericksburg. There Longstreet with his flullstrength division could fend the Army of the Potomac off (low intense battles). It seems that the Army has force marshed to Fredericksburg and had suffered a considerably amound of winter attrition.

At early February as shown above my troops are ordered to cut the supply lines and close the way of retreat. Jackson with 2000 ap was ordered to marsh over Stafford to Fredericksburg to support Longstreet. J Johnston moved to Alexandria to secure the back.

During the next turnresolution phase the Army of the Potomac was defeated once more from Longstreet (low intense fighting) and retreated to Stafford. There Jacksons Corps engaged and the result were the both combat screens from the first page.

Relativ strength during the battles:

1. CSA 1718 ap, Union 145 ap !!! (monst likly out of ammo and very low on organisation)

2. CSA 1265 ap, Union 13 ap !!! (Johnston supported from Alexandria this round)

So the combat result is plausible for me. Only the ai was the "problem". Maybe it rates corps in garrison not as much as corps in the field? It looked like the ai thought there is nothing on the way to Fredericksburg, let´s go there .

PS:
The ai was set on balanced aggressive level.

and a slight intel advantage I believe... I suspect a medium intel advantage could be needed because AI was delayed in Fredericksburg region due to the Longstreet presence, when some niehbouring regions have harbour which would have allowed Potomac army to be supplied... But AI was certianly thinking Richmond road was totally clear after Alexandria...

[pakfront]

I can't say I'm a good player, but I find I can lure the AI into a Sedan-like kessel with a little pre-planning. They have yielded similar results. As did Sedan in reality.

[Clovis]

I can't say I'm a good player, but I find I can lure the AI into a Sedan-like kessel with a little pre-planning. They have yielded similar results. As did Sedan in reality.

What was the AI intel level? I obnoxiously suspecting AI should be better with medium intel advantage...

[pakfront]

Default settings. Can I up the AI difficulty in mid-game?

[Clovis]

Default settings. Can I up the AI difficulty in mid-game?

Yes for both intel level and Ai difficulty.

[PJL]

I would not recommend letting the AI have a slight fog of war bonus, certainly not at Normal aggressiveness or above, as it seems to go wild on the offensive and completely neglect it's defences. I did this in a Union game against the CSA AI, and I walked into Richmond with each in 1862, while the AI was busy raiding Pennsylvania. The situation was more troublesome further west though.

[Jacek]

I have just had a similar battle in Stafford, VA.

Settings:
Normal difficulty, Low aggressiveness, Small FOW bonus, No Activation rule.

Basically Beauregard (in Stafford) and Jackson (supporting from Manassas) against McDowell, who went for Fredericksburg and tried to retreat to Alexandria.

They funny thing was it was McDowell who was in Offensive posture. He should have just sit in defensive posture (he had 8 supply units = 32 supply elements!) and wait for relieve force (Banks and Butler in Alexandria).

The outcome was pretty much along the line of the boajack's battle in the first post with fewer causalties cause stacks were smaller.

[Jacek]

Coming back to the topic here is probably my biggest victory so far.
Don't think McClellan was that bad; I softened him a bit in the previous turn when he was crossing the river south of Evansville though in the next turn he must have suffered from inactivity hence the result

[Bloody7th]

Here's my biggest victory:

[Jabberwock]

Nobody said it had to be a tactical victory.

Burble.

[MOI]

My best victory :

[AndrewKurtz]

Most notable thing is that all the "greatest victories" have huge numbers of enemy units surrendering. A MAJOR concern of all generals during the war was lines of supplies and retreat. Why where they concerned? Because if brought to battle, they would lose their army.

Issue seems less with the combat results and more with one side getting cutoff.

[PBBoeye]

Issue seems less with the combat results and more with one side getting cutoff.

Really makes me wonder how many have read this thread (it needs to be moved to another forum and stickied, really):

http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?t=5492

I wonder how that would affect all of this? I am also using Clovis' mod, which seems to help.

[MOI]

Thanks for the link.

[jackfox]

Just for grins, here's the costliest battle I've been involved with from way back in May.