User avatar
Gray_Lensman
Posts: 497
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 4:04 am
Location: Who is John Galt?

Sun Nov 02, 2008 3:16 pm

deleted

User avatar
Captain
Captain
Posts: 169
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 11:33 am
Location: Australia

Sun Nov 02, 2008 3:18 pm

Thanks Manstein, for taking the time to upload.

I still think it clearly shows the effect of NM/cohesion on battle results.

It is clearly a major factor to be considered in all combat.

User avatar
Captain
Captain
Posts: 169
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 11:33 am
Location: Australia

Sun Nov 02, 2008 3:21 pm

Gray Lensman :thumbsup: Brilliant.

that is exactly the type of data I was hoping to generate from the thread.

So decent entrenchments can overcome NM differentials. :)

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

Sun Nov 02, 2008 3:51 pm

It doesnt seem to me like nm has much of an effect at all in battle terms if a lvl 1 entrenchment neutralizes it. I guess the cumulative effect of battle morale, money, and ws loss can be telling however.
"We shall give them the bayonet." -Stonewall at Fredericksburg.

User avatar
W.Barksdale
AGEod Grognard
Posts: 916
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 8:17 pm
Location: UK

Sun Nov 02, 2008 3:54 pm

Jabberwock wrote:I couldn't agree more. Excellent use of a pseudo-Jominian strategy in your game against soundoff. Joe Johnston would be proud. I hope we get to play in the tournament.


Thank you! I too hope to play you in the upcoming tourney!

In regards to Manstein's pics, also note that the federal forces have no supply wagon. That +10% modifier really helps especially when NM is relatively low!

Not only that, the casualties are about even in numbers. The rebels will have a much harder time replacing these losses than the yankees will. Especially mid to late game.
"Tell General Lee that if he wants a bridge of dead Yankees I can furnish him with one."
-General William Barksdale at Fredericksburg

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

Sun Nov 02, 2008 3:55 pm

Dont forget that 4+ cavalry elements up the amount of enemy casualties if they route, as well.
"We shall give them the bayonet." -Stonewall at Fredericksburg.

User avatar
Jarkko
Colonel
Posts: 365
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 2:34 pm
Location: Finland

Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:58 pm

Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't CSA have an initial edge of 12 artillery elements vs 3 Union artillery elements? If that is correct, then initially (when only artillery was involved) CSA had a murdering 4:1 advantage plus Union side had initially no sharpshooters (so CSA most likely was first-firing) and the CSA had +10% effectiveness as they had a supply wagon while the Union forces did not have a wagon at all.
There are three kinds of people: Those who can can count and those who can't.

User avatar
ohms_law
AGEod Veteran
Posts: 725
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 5:42 pm
Location: Syracuse, NY

Sun Nov 02, 2008 5:31 pm

Good points that further strengthen what's been said above, basically that national morale probably had very little actual effect on this battle overall.

User avatar
Captain
Captain
Posts: 169
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 11:33 am
Location: Australia

Sun Nov 02, 2008 11:36 pm

W.Barksdale wrote:In regards to Manstein's pics, also note that the federal forces have no supply wagon. That +10% modifier really helps especially when NM is relatively low!



Good point, but the overall odds are still an issue. It would seem NM accentuates other minor deficiences.
Winchester simply aroused the spectre of NM on the battlefield, we will need other examples to see the common thread of NM differential on battlefield results given what Pocus and Gray Lensman have said.

Return to “AACW Strategy discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests