Leaders and guns as battle survivors

[Heldenkaiser]

Any idea why leaders and guns seem to survive even the most catastrophic defeats? I lost an army of three divisions nearly wholesale when they were cut off in Va. Butler, three division commanders, and 11 batteries returned, but no infantry. Now I can certainly see a general (especially Butler) to make sure he's the first out of the trouble, but would infantry sacrifice itself to save the guns? Experience would say it's rather vice-versa, i.e. guns covering the retreat. And in any case guns are cumbersome to move and would easily be lost in a rout, while infantry should get away more easily. Afterall the grunts can walk, guns need to be dragged.

Odd?

[captain curruthers]

not all troop losses are casualties.many will be from desertions after a major defeat.gun batteries cant 'go home to moma' but the troops can

[Jim-NC]

I believe it has to do with the order of casualties taken. IIRC - In the game, the infantry gets attacked 1st. The Artillery only gets attacked after all the infantry is removed. Therefore, it is very hard (almost impossible) to destroy artillery.

I have seen this results numerous times as well. After a massacre, I will have a division with 4/5 artillery units and a general. The best part, is that the artillery is usually completely untouched. After a while, infantry trickles in via replacements. It looks really weird to see nothing but artillery in a stack.

[enf91]

Game exploit: Your divisions will receive one replacement regiment per turn. However, if you divide it into brigades (beware: any brigades that have been totally destroyed will be removed if you do this), then EACH BRIGADE gets one replacement regiment. However, as mentioned, any brigades that don't have attached artillery in this circumstance will be deleted, but only if you separate the division. If you leave the division intact, it will build itself back up to strength over a dozen or so turns.

[blackbird]

Any idea why leaders and guns seem to survive even the most catastrophic defeats?
Odd?

I'm wondering the same question, albeit from the other side I keep hoping to kill or wound the leader and capture the canon, but in this case, I get the opposite. I have the force surrounded, outnumbered, outcommanded and still, no matter how many times I go back and try the different battle settings, the leader escapes and the canon die I did capture the supply wagons though
Any recommendations on how to solve this would be appreciated.

[Jim-NC]

The leader only dies if the "die" roll is high enough. Even if you destroy all his forces, he usually only comes out wounded. You have to get the correct roll to kill the general (which BTW is rather hard to do).

[enf91]

Killing the general is separate from the destruction of forces. It is possible for an army leader to die in a skirmish while the annihilation of a corps deep behind enemy lines may simply result in the leaders being wounded. It all depends on a die roll, as Jim mentioned. A game quirk is that wounded leaders (especially Raphael Semmes) can wind up in non-playable territory, in which case they are DOA (activation).

[Pocus]

Yes it is true, the guns are support elements so are generally protected from enemy fire until there is no more 'line' elements. So when there is a retreat, most of the guns survive... I know it can be weird but that would be difficult to reverse the logic of targeting just for retreat BUT

guns can be destroyed by the damages incurred when there is retreat ... so you have to optimize these damages dealt, by adding more cavalry. Also guns will take more damages in this case, this is factored: elements get more damages when they are not 'nimble' (it is deduced from several stats).

so I would say, add more cav or light units...

[Redeemer]

Yes it is true, the guns are support elements so are generally protected from enemy fire until there is no more 'line' elements. So when there is a retreat, most of the guns survive... I know it can be weird but that would be difficult to reverse the logic of targeting just for retreat BUT

guns can be destroyed by the damages incurred when there is retreat ... so you have to optimize these damages dealt, by adding more cavalry. Also guns will take more damages in this case, this is factored: elements get more damages when they are not 'nimble' (it is deduced from several stats).

so I would say, add more cav or light units...

That is a bit odd, no? Most guns captured in the Civil War were done so by infantry on the battle field.

[Heldenkaiser]

That is a bit odd, no? Most guns captured in the Civil War were done so by infantry on the battle field.

Yes, but then the ACW was an infantry fight above all. For my understanding cavalry was under-used during much of the ACW. In fact, until late in the war Civil War armies were unusually short of cavalry, compared to European standards. If these armies had had enough cavalry and used it well, they would certainly have taken the guns from a retreating enemy.