Siege Discussion

[dolphin]

Not sure if siege is handled totally different in PvP as opposed to just playing the AI (Athena), so I thought to ask a couple questions since I am playing my first PvP game.

I have read it mentioned how you trap leaders by sieging the structure they are in and by starving them out they disappear from the game.

I am just not sure if that is only an AI function in terms of weakness, or if that is a game regularity even when you have a human opponant.

Let me explain what I did and then you tell me how I should have done it, or what might have happened had I done something different.

I have a CSA force in Manasses which gets besieged by my player opponent and I am determined to prevent Manasses from falling.

To that end I had brought in an outside force and thought to do a Feint Attack (green bottom right button), but at the last I decided to just walk in with the options set to Defend/Regular (Blue/Blue buttons) for my relieving stack as I knew I would likely lose the battle against my opponants stronger stack that was besieging Manasses. I had like 15,000 troops to his 25,000.

The troops I had in Manasses amounted to about 8,000, but I did not order them to make a sortie outside because I had no way of knowing if they would coordinate their attack with the force I was bringing in to relieve the siege and if it turned out to be two seperate attacks I knew I would lose my butt wholesale and piecemeal. I thought it best to keep them snug and fresh inside.

As I predicted I did lose the battle outside Manasses, but was not forced to retreat. I lost about 2500 men to his 1000.

After the battle I am planning my next turn and I am noticing that I can combine the two stacks I have and either keep them inside, or outside Manasses which is great. Interestingly if I pull my stack that is inside Manasses outside the "Orange Siege" indicator goes away; whereas if I combine stacks and set everything back inside it remains.

What I simply don't know though is had I not gone in with that second stack to relieve the siege would I have still had the option to simply abandon Manasses with the stack inside and run away, or would I have been trapped inside as long as there was a siege going on.

In other words did my relieving stack attack outside save them from being trapped, or not.

Don't get me wrong I am very happy with the results of the turn as I can now combine both stacks and either hole up inside, or stay outside. I just want to know what might have happened had I not done what I did.

More importantly I have other situations in the game that knowing in advance the technicalities involved in this kind of situation will help me to decide what to do.


In short I guess I am asking for experienced players to lay out their siege and anti-siege strategies against human opponants. What works and what does not work in terms of factors that need to be considered.

[dolphin]

A good question I have thought to ask as I don't remember, or know what happens when you try to do this situation.

Lets say you have a force under siege in a city and you send in cavalry with the gree/green button to retreat if attacked and the other button that sounds the retreat to avoid combat at all costs and add the button to enter the structure under sige at the end of the turn/movement to reenforce the troops inside under siege?

[Mickey3D]

Golden rule is : "Don't be stuck into a city except if you know you can quickly relieve the besieged force".

What I simply don't know though is had I not gone in with that second stack to relieve the siege would I have still had the option to simply abandon Manasses with the stack inside and run away

You could have move the stack in Manassas outside of the city and, as you already discover it, the siege icon would have disappear. Then you could give the stack a move order to wherever you want.

Now the only question is : what's the military control of your opponent in the region ? If it is higher than 95% (i.e. you have less than 5%) your stack will automatically switch to attack mode and you could find yourself engaged in a fight with the besieging force (depending on option settings there could be some delay before battle starts, delay that could allow you to sneak out of the region). So a good tactic is to set the stance of your force to blue (defense)/ green (retreat) : if a fight happens your force will try to retreat.

Another important point : what's your control in the adjacent regions ? Because there is an ennemy force in your region, there is big odds that you won't be able to move in a region where you don't have a certain amount of military control (region will become red when you try to move your stack).

[Mickey3D]

Golden rule is : "Don't be stuck into a city except if you know you can quickly relieve the besieged force".

There is exception to every rules : I would put a garrison into a city if I want to avoid cavalry raid on my supply structures behind the front line because I know that a party without supply wagon won't be able to lay a siege for long.

[Mickey3D]

Golden rule is : "Don't be stuck into a city except if you know you can quickly relieve the besieged force".

There is exception to every rules : I would put a garrison into a city if I want to avoid cavalry raid on my supply structures behind the front line because I know that a party without supply wagon won't be able to lay a siege for long.

[Mickey3D]

Lets say you have a force under siege in a city and you send in cavalry with the gree/green button to retreat if attacked and the other button that sounds the retreat to avoid combat at all costs and add the button to enter the structure under sige at the end of the turn/movement to reenforce the troops inside under siege?

You could do like this but this would just increase the number of future prisoners

And depending on the military control and the presence of cavalry in ennemy stack I'm not 100% sure you will avoid any combat.

[dolphin]

Golden rule is : "Don't be stuck into a city except if you know you can quickly relieve the besieged force".



You could have move the stack in Manassas outside of the city and, as you already discover it, the siege icon would have disappear. Then you could give the stack a move order to wherever you want.

Now the only question is : what's the military control of your opponent in the region ? If it is higher than 95% (i.e. you have less than 5%) your stack will automatically switch to attack mode and you could find yourself engaged in a fight with the besieging force (depending on option settings there could be some delay before battle starts, delay that could allow you to sneak out of the region). So a good tactic is to set the stance of your force to blue (defense)/ green (retreat) : if a fight happens your force will try to retreat.

Another important point : what's your control in the adjacent regions ? Because there is an ennemy force in your region, there is big odds that you won't be able to move in a region where you don't have a certain amount of military control (region will become red when you try to move your stack).

That clears things up nicely thank you.

You even taught me something I had not considered regarding military control.

You mentioned 95% enemy control and less than 5% of your own control.

Are those arbitrary figures, or are you saying that as long as you have at least 5% control you are not forced to take an attack stance?

[dolphin]

You could do like this but this would just increase the number of future prisoners

And depending on the military control and the presence of cavalry in ennemy stack I'm not 100% sure you will avoid any combat.

I don't think so. You see the cavalry will be getting there and actually I kinda do hope they do have a short battle before going inside the city to weaken the enemy forces as at the same time I also have a larger force of regulars and militia following them up in the same turn coming in from a different direction.

I am just hoping they don't lose the battle and retreat out of the region as I would prefer them to reenforce the cities garrison.

I am pretty sure my opponent grossly underestimates the numbers of my forces in the area. His siege will not prevail. I will deny him.

[dolphin]

Golden rule is : "Don't be stuck into a city except if you know you can quickly relieve the besieged force".



You could have move the stack in Manassas outside of the city and, as you already discover it, the siege icon would have disappear. Then you could give the stack a move order to wherever you want.

Now the only question is : what's the military control of your opponent in the region ? If it is higher than 95% (i.e. you have less than 5%) your stack will automatically switch to attack mode and you could find yourself engaged in a fight with the besieging force (depending on option settings there could be some delay before battle starts, delay that could allow you to sneak out of the region). So a good tactic is to set the stance of your force to blue (defense)/ green (retreat) : if a fight happens your force will try to retreat.

Another important point : what's your control in the adjacent regions ? Because there is an ennemy force in your region, there is big odds that you won't be able to move in a region where you don't have a certain amount of military control (region will become red when you try to move your stack).

Based on your recommendation I would like another clarification.

You say that a force under siege can always simply leave the city and attempt to escape out of the region baring Military control constraints both in the region of the siege as well as surrounding regions. Obviously you would try to sneak to a region under your control if at all possible.

Is that to say it is harder for a stack to escape if it starts the turn inside under siege, or are the same factors at play no matter if the stack is stacked inside, or outside in terms of your chances to escape?

It sounds to me that your saying it is the same as you can switch being inside, or outside no matter what. That seems contrary to everything I have been lead to believe about being trapped inside a city under siege unless your actually assaulted and lose in which case your not trapped by a siege, but simply eliminated during an assault.

Since you evidently cannot be trapped in the region any worse than you could be if you were outside the city why would you not always simply remain inside the structure to gain the defensive bonuses. If your going to be in the region anyway why would you ever want to remain outside unless you wanted the enemy to attack you and you assume he definately will not attack if your inside.

I suppose the reason is because if the opponant assaults and you lose the battle you lose all your forces (eliminated from game) instead of merely taking some casualties and being forced to retreat in which case you can go somewhere safe and rest and recuperate the brigades keeping them in the game and eventually coming back at full force?

[Cromagnonman]

I prefer to keep my forces outside to protect rail lines from raiders. If feasible, I'll have a brigade in and a brigade out. You also get potentially more terrain bonuses when defending, and force the enemy to attack and lose more cohesion.

[Mickey3D]

You mentioned 95% enemy control and less than 5% of your own control.

Are those arbitrary figures, or are you saying that as long as you have at least 5% control you are not forced to take an attack stance?

Yes, if you enter a region where you have less than 5% military control, your force will switch to attack mode.

If this is a landing, you'll need 10% control to avoid switching to attack.

[Mickey3D]

Is that to say it is harder for a stack to escape if it starts the turn inside under siege, or are the same factors at play no matter if the stack is stacked inside, or outside in terms of your chances to escape?

Sorry I can't answer you as I always use the method I described in my previous message.

It sounds to me that your saying it is the same as you can switch being inside, or outside no matter what. That seems contrary to everything I have been lead to believe about being trapped inside a city under siege unless your actually assaulted and lose in which case your not trapped by a siege, but simply eliminated during an assault.

Since you evidently cannot be trapped in the region any worse than you could be if you were outside the city why would you not always simply remain inside the structure to gain the defensive bonuses. If your going to be in the region anyway why would you ever want to remain outside unless you wanted the enemy to attack you and you assume he definately will not attack if your inside.

Your ennemy will lay the siege to the city : either you starve to death or you escape the city. In both cases he get the objective without fighting.

Moreover, sneaking out of the besieged city is not 100% certain. And if you loose the fight you could find yourself trapped again in the city : it's a dangerous game.

[Jim-NC]

The best argument for staying outside the city I can muster is:

You can retreat from the region.

If you are in the city, then if/when the enemy breeches your defenses, you will start taking hits (around 10 turn turn). Also, as soon as your are besieged, you will not be gaining any supply, so will be slowly starving. Your force can surrender at some point (I don't remember the factors at the moment - but know it happens after you run out of food). Unless you are in a region with a depot, you generally will start starving on turn 3 of the siege. Your opponent doesn't have to do anything to give you hits, the computer determines it automatically.

If you move your units out of the city to escape, you lose all entrenchments you had. So at worst, you could be forced into attack posture, at best, you have no (nada, zip, zilch) defensive entrenchments, which means more casualties for your force before it can escape.

There is nothing like getting a corps stuck in a city, besieged, and watching 10 NM go down the drain when it gets destroyed.

[GraniteStater]

IOW, "cities are traps" - see the Strategy Guide in the Wiki.

This is mostly the concern of the player on the strategic defense, i. e., the CSA. As a USA guy, I have never built a fort. The USA can get trapped in a Fort or City - see my first game with P. "S.". Cleburne (but I did it to myself, I was gambling, and, it turned out, for an ill-considered attack) and that is usually Bad, Very Bad, cuz it's not the USA's game and the USA player ain't prepared for it.

I'm sure strongpoints can be judiciously managed - but I'll let Johnny Rebs amplify on that, they are much more familiar with the Care and Feeding of strongpoints.

[dolphin]

Another situation involving a siege.

Kentucky is invaded by the Union and the CSA player buys a whole bunch of brigades immediately.

One of the cities the new units appear at is besieged.

The new units are stuck in that region until they get trained up.

Can you try and hang out outside the city and try to possibly get away? The tool tip says in every situation if your attacked the units in question that are locked are immediately unlocked. I prsume that would mean new units just recruited would be as well.


Also it has been stated that sometimes when you try to come out of the city and you get attacked that if you lose you will sometimes retreat back inside the city. If you were outside to begin with is there ever a chance that if you lose a battle you will be forced to retreat inside of a city? That is one reason I can think of to possibly sit outside.

[Cromagnonman]

Units that have not finished training (still have the red bar) gain cohesion and strength faster than anyone else, but that will plummet if you put them outside the city. Basically, a brigade in training is an excellent and usually easy target for your enemy. I'd be very cautious about raising them in harm's way. And ships in training are easily captured, too, so don't build them near the front at all.

Frankly, I'm not even sure a brigade in training can sortie. If so, remember that they are rather weak.

I can't recall seeing a stack outide a city forced in. I have seen Athena's relief column defeated by my beseigers on day 14 or 15, and the next turn she cancelled their retreat and joined them to the garrison instead.

[dolphin]

I'd be very cautious about raising them in harm's way.

In my current game the Union made the decision to invade Kentucky and on that turn knowing the risk I basically raised nearly every Kentucky brigade available to create an instant army in Kentucky.

He went after my force in Lexington, Ky where some of the new units appeared. He was able to assault on the turn my relief force arrived and he did wipe out a few brigades, but a few days later on the same turn my relief force kicked him right out and I managed to prevent his keeping control of Lexington.


I suppose it is debatable that I risked it, but all the other brigades I raised made it past training safe and I still control Lexington. Just not sure for how much longer I can hold it, but a good delay in a Union advance I consider a victory of sorts. I much prefer his spending his time still trying to take Lexington than working on taking Bowling Green, or Island 10.


I appreciate all the answers as I am actually using this information in a current PBM game against someone.

[dolphin]

Here are 7 questions of great importance in my current game.


1) What seems to be the formula in terms of Attack Strength vs. Defence Strength RATIO required to pull off a successful assault?

Is it 3 to 1, or 5 to 1, or 10 to 1?


2) Given that you have the required numerical superiority to pull off a successful assault how does the Cities Defence factor in and how important is it to reduce it through siege before an assault. Another way of putting it is to ask how much more of a numerical advantage would you need to do the Assault without reducing the ciity bonus through siege first.

3) Is the Defence bonus for being in a town in addition to any entrenchment bonus, or are they the same. In other words if you siege your opponant and you finally achieve the tool tip and map icon that says the attacker has achieved a total breach and the defender gets no bonus does that negate the defenders entrenchment level bonuses too?

4) One of the advantages of holding up inside a city is the defence bonus, but a more important advantage as I understand it is that you can have your units set to Defence and on Hold at all Cost, but you still regain cohesion with a massive bonus as though you were set on PASSIVE (Green). I am asking for verification that I am correct on this.

5) Regarding a siege and starving out your enemy I am still a little muddled on how to insure it is working. I assume it has to do with causing the enemy inside to run out of supplies. Can this even be done if the enemy is holed up in a town with either a Harbor, or a Depot? I am aware that a river/ocean region does have a blockade requirement for this situation and I presume if you do not satisfy it the city under siege will continue to get supplies and replacements normally.

To put question 5 another way.

My current thinking is that if your holed up in a town with a Harbor, or a Depot not only can you get supplies, but you can also get reenforcements which makes a siege near impossible without overwhelming numbers for an assault even if you have reduced the defensive town bonus. Please clarify and verify my thoughts on this issue.


6) Question 6 should be easy. To get replacements as I understand it you need to have your damaged brigades stationed in a region that has a Level 3 City, Harbor, or a Depot. I know you get replacements in level 3 cities and ones with harbors, but I am not sure about a depot allowing reenforcements to get through. I presume you merely need to be in the region and not inside the structure in order to recieve your replacements.

7) Could someone explain the SORTY option and when it would be appropriate to use it in cases where your inside a structure and under siege.

[dolphin]

Actually I have a 8th question that has been bugging me although it is not about sieges. Might as well add it will I am asking.

The Confederate General J.Jhonston has the "Good Army Administrator" trait which adds a +15% to the Fatigue Recovery Rate.

The "FIELD HOSPITALS" add +15% to the Cohesion Recovery Rate.


Is this a kind of misprint, or are there actually x2 different ratings?

I am well familiar with Cohesion, but cannot recall seeing any ratings for Fatigue.

If there are two seperate ratings then how do you determine current levels of Fatigue for your brigades and where can you read up on the effects and recovery parameters?

If they are both the same thing, but just labeled differently does the Trait Bonus add to the Field Hospital bonus, or does only one of them count?

[Jim-NC]

Here are 7 questions of great importance in my current game.


1) What seems to be the formula in terms of Attack Strength vs. Defence Strength RATIO required to pull off a successful assault?

Is it 3 to 1, or 5 to 1, or 10 to 1?

Against an entrenched enemy, use at least 3 to 1. Depending on other considerations, you may need more.

2) Given that you have the required numerical superiority to pull off a successful assault how does the Cities Defence factor in and how important is it to reduce it through siege before an assault. Another way of putting it is to ask how much more of a numerical advantage would you need to do the Assault without reducing the ciity bonus through siege first.

I always use 3 to 1 or better. I believe the breeching of a city allows you to give hits to the enemy. I am not sure what it does from a defensive standing.

4) One of the advantages of holding up inside a city is the defence bonus, but a more important advantage as I understand it is that you can have your units set to Defence and on Hold at all Cost, but you still regain cohesion with a massive bonus as though you were set on PASSIVE (Green). I am asking for verification that I am correct on this.

Move a unit between a city and the countryside. You will notice for yourself the difference made by being in the city. IIRC, it is not as good as being on passive, but it does give you a bonus.

5) Regarding a siege and starving out your enemy I am still a little muddled on how to insure it is working. I assume it has to do with causing the enemy inside to run out of supplies. Can this even be done if the enemy is holed up in a town with either a Harbor, or a Depot? I am aware that a river/ocean region does have a blockade requirement for this situation and I presume if you do not satisfy it the city under siege will continue to get supplies and replacements normally.

To put question 5 another way.

My current thinking is that if your holed up in a town with a Harbor, or a Depot not only can you get supplies, but you can also get reenforcements which makes a siege near impossible without overwhelming numbers for an assault even if you have reduced the defensive town bonus. Please clarify and verify my thoughts on this issue.

When under siege, a region does not produce any supply, so the units inside the town can only eat what is already stored there. If it has a harbor, you must blockade that with ships as well. You should notice that your enemy goes from green to yellow to red (with the supply filter on) in a matter of turns (a depot is the exception, as it can allow you to last a long time). Without supply wagons or a depit, a unit will be in "red" supply in 2-3 turns. Once that happens, the unit starts to take out of supply damage.

6) Question 6 should be easy. To get replacements as I understand it you need to have your damaged brigades stationed in a region that has a Level 3 City, Harbor, or a Depot. I know you get replacements in level 3 cities and ones with harbors, but I am not sure about a depot allowing reenforcements to get through. I presume you merely need to be in the region and not inside the structure in order to recieve your replacements.

Depends on your attrition settings. They cause different conditions for getting replacements. IIRC it only effects replacing entire lost elements. Your understrength units will get replacements to bring them up to full strength as long as they are not moving.

7) Could someone explain the SORTY option and when it would be appropriate to use it in cases where your inside a structure and under siege.

I personally never use the Sortie button (I always move my units out the town, then attack or retreat).

[dolphin]

Depends on your attrition settings. They cause different conditions for getting replacements. IIRC it only effects replacing entire lost elements. Your understrength units will get replacements to bring them up to full strength as long as they are not moving.

What is IIRC?


To clarify I am understanding that replacements to damaged elements are basically free and are received no matter where you are as long as you do not move and is based on set percentages that varries depending on where you are sitting. A depot being the best spot as you get up to 20% of an elements full compliment per turn. (example: A damaged 600 man Regiment/Element can receive back 120 replacements per turn in a depot.)?

When I say free I mean cost no money, nor do they put a drain on your replacement pool. Do they perhaps at least put a drain on your conscript pool?

Lost Regiments/Elements within a brigade on the other hand require the use of the replacement pool itself. To get these replacments requires being in a depot, level 3 city, or harbor and you only need to be in the same region and not within the structure?

[dolphin]

Move a unit between a city and the countryside. You will notice for yourself the difference made by being in the city. IIRC, it is not as good as being on passive, but it does give you a bonus.

Your statement suggests you gain more cohesion on passive stance moving through the countryside than you do sitting still in a structure which makes no sense.

here is what the WIKI says...

[SIZE="3"] Defensive posture[/size]
Stack will not attempt to engage enemy stacks, even if they are in the same region and detected.
The stack does receive any defensive bonus afforded by the terrain it is in.
[SIZE="3"]When inside a structure, a stack in defensive posture is considered to be in passive posture when it comes to cohesion recovery[1] [/size]



[SIZE="3"]Passive posture [/size]Basically the same as defensive posture above, except that it:

will receive penalties in combat.
is more likely to retreat from combat.
recovers cohesion faster.
does not affect military control of the region it is in.
will not march to the sound of the guns[2]
will not participate in stopping enemy stacks from crossing the river that the passive stack is on[3].
A stack retreating from combat will normally assume this posture.

[SIZE="3"]If attacked while inside a structure, a stack in passive posture will be considered to be in defensive posture for combat purposes.[1][/size]


http://www.ageod.net/aacwwiki/Passive_posture#Passive_posture

My only questions after reading this is what effect if any "Holding at all Cost" would have on a unit inside a structure. Since units defending inside a structure are simply eliminated if they are assaulted and lose it seems logical to assume they are considered set to "hold at all cost" anyway.

The secondary question is if placing units inside a structure to passive stance makes any difference at all since the WIKI says they regain cohesion at the passive stance rate anyway. The only reason to opt for passive stance inside a structure that I can see is to prevent your stack from marching to the sound of the guns[2]


A third question would be if a unit in the countryside set to passive stance will gain the same amount of cohesion if it moves as it will if it remains stationary.


A fourth question would be if a unit in the countryside is ordered to end its movement inside a structure gains the passive stance cohesion recovery rate. Does cohesion recovery take place before movement, or at the end of movement?

[Cromagnonman]

Some easily-designed and -performed testing should bear out many of the answers you seek. If I Recall Correctly, units lose cohesion when moving, so even a passive stack would have higher cohesion after being still in the open rather than moving. Cohesion recocery seems to be a per day thing, so entering a structure at the end of your move should only restore cohesion commensurate with length of stay. If cohesion were gained or lost only based on what you were doing at the end of a turn, then everyone would always be at 100%.

[SleeStak]

you should check out the wiki and do some searches in the forum on forts, sieges and frontage.

When assaulting, the number of units able to fire in the combat phase is determined by the frontage of the structure. The defender has full frontage but he attacker is extremelly limited. The attacker can increase their frontage by creating breaches in the structure being beseiged, thus bringing more force to bear against his opponent. You can do this by beseiging the structure with heavy artillery and plenty of it.

This is how I conduct a seige. Bring your force in, preferably with a leader that you want to promote (sieges usually end in opponent elements being destroyed and that will often result in the commanding general being promoted or gaining seniority). Your force should have a well formed division under a corp commander (preferably with a siege bonus trait) a couple of wagons and a string of the seige mortars (I usually use at least six). I believe columbiads and Rodmans also work. Let the force sit on top of the structure for a couple of turns in a defensive posture. You are usually looking to get a couple of breaches. If the structure is on a river, bring iron clads up to bombard the structure and, after two to three turns the structure should be ready to assault. Let them have it.

Its not really about getting a specific force ratio but about creating a situation where you can apply that force.

[dolphin]

you should check out the wiki and do some searches in the forum on forts, sieges and frontage.

Some easily-designed and -performed testing should bear out many of the answers you seek.

Rest assured I am scavenging the wiki and the forum for information.

The primary reason I hit the forum with such a flurry of questions has more to do with a PBM game I am playing right now.

I simply did not have the luxery of time to learn certain things at a slow pace.

Thanks again everyone.

[SleeStak]

After reading your quote of my first sentence, I realized that I didn't express myself very well. I didn't mean that you should should search the forum and wiki because these questions have been asked before, etc. But because A wealth of information about this very nuanced game is contained in these forums.

For instance, did you know that corps artillery all fire at your opponents in combat. I didn't until I read it in the forum and tried it out in game. Including your very best artillery as individual artillery units in your corp stack significantly increase the amount of firepower you focus on an opponent. I read a recommendation in a post some time ago that your corps aught to consist of two division and as much corp artillery as you can stuff into the stack to maximize its firepower. Unfortunately, I looked for a bit last night to see if I could find the post that clued me in but to no avail. This is really good stuff you couldn't find out any other way.

To deal directly with your question though, understanding frontage and breaches is the key to knowing when to assault a unit in a structure. Its not really a combat power ratio that counts, its figuring out when your force can apply its firepower to your opponent and that, in the case of structures, is when it is completely breached.

Again, I didn't mean for my original post to sound like a 'you should have searched the forum before you came asking questions of such an august body' but more along the lines of 'you can find some real informational gems by searching the forum!'

[hgilmer]

For instance, did you know that corps artillery all fire at your opponents in combat. I didn't until I read it in the forum and tried it out in game. Including your very best artillery as individual artillery units in your corp stack significantly increase the amount of firepower you focus on an opponent. I read a recommendation in a post some time ago that your corps aught to consist of two division and as much corp artillery as you can stuff into the stack to maximize its firepower. Unfortunately, I looked for a bit last night to see if I could find the post that clued me in but to no avail. This is really good stuff you couldn't find out any other way.'

Wow! Thanks for posting that because
I doubt I would have ever figured that out on my own, by my own observations or even looking at the forum. I have read all the stickies and don't remember seeing that at all. Does the AI do the same meaning do they put their artillery in the corps stack?

[SleeStak]

I've been searching the forum looking for the post where I read it and, while I haven't found that post, I did find this one. An extremelly informitive post on divisional composition and Army and Corp artillery. If you are reasonably new to ACW or not very observant (like me) you should check it out. It will help you in your pbem games

[Cromagnonman]

For instance, did you know that corps artillery all fire at your opponents in combat. I didn't until I read it in the forum and tried it out in game. Including your very best artillery as individual artillery units in your corp stack significantly increase the amount of firepower you focus on an opponent. I read a recommendation in a post some time ago that your corps aught to consist of two division and as much corp artillery as you can stuff into the stack to maximize its firepower.

Corps-level artillery will only fire if there's support frontage left over after divisional artillery fires, right?

[Brochgale]

There is exception to every rules : I would put a garrison into a city if I want to avoid cavalry raid on my supply structures behind the front line because I know that a party without supply wagon won't be able to lay a siege for long.

Against AI I dont bother with garrisons playing as CSA. Unless it is a militia garrison created as part of scenario anyway.

As CSA in PvP that is another matter entirely! I do leave miltia garrisons to slow down yanks in the border provinces. I do Garrison CSA cities, Richmond and Nashville being obvious ones and others but I will not say which ones as my nephew who is my PvP opponent does read these forums from time to time. Darn Yankee spies!

Athena cant see through what would be gamey tactics but a PvP opponent would. I try to avoid what might be interpreted as gamey tactics. In my PvP games with nephew we have agreed limits on Cavalry raiding which can make a farce and a nonsense of a game.