A Series of Unfortunate General Swaps

[GraniteStater]

He's not giving himself enough credit as a player, though.

His defense in SW TN takes advantage of the river lines and three interlocking Corps/Army stacks that can all support one another. The east end of the line is Jackson, but if I hit him, he has two other Corps that may support him. The weak link is actually Memphis; PGT can call on only one other Corps in support, but the sum total is enough to discourage. I have assaulted it twice, each time at feasible odds (months and months ago) and came close once, but have been defeated. Finally, I took a strong Corps under McClernand and went down the Mississippi to take Vicksburg, on the theory of Quit Butting Your Head and possibly to play merry hob with his RRs and Supply, but a quick assault on Jackson, MS, has been repulsed.

Two Corps of the AoP flanked C-ville in VA and did an end run around it to attack Richmond, but the third battle of the Turn there pushed me out - very unhappy about that result.

Burnsides took Charleston. Progress on the upper Arkansas. Meade and Hooker are next door to Richmond and are a very serious threat - Lee is pinned. His line on the Rappahannock, F-burg to C-ville, is not as strong as he would like it, I'm sure.

NM is OK, tho I trail his, 118 - 109. The tide is starting to turn, I think, but there's a way to go. When spring comes, he might have problems stopping further pushes from Chattanooga, being enveloped in VA, etc.

The North was Vols only until June 63, while the South was free to do as it wished from the start (Mar 62).

But 'Shanks is clever and resourceful.

Watch out P. Cleburne, I'm learning! And a Longshanks/P. Cleburne contest would be very fun and instructive to watch.

[Pat "Stonewall" Cleburne]

Sounds like a good game going. NM is the key.

I've started a game against the veteran OneArmedMexican. I can tell I've kicked a hornets nest. I've been arguing about historicity when I should've focused on butt kicking. Will let you know how it goes.

[charlesonmission]

OAM really gave it to me. Good luck!

Charles

Sounds like a good game going. NM is the key.

I've started a game against the veteran OneArmedMexican. I can tell I've kicked a hornets nest. I've been arguing about historicity when I should've focused on butt kicking. Will let you know how it goes.

[Longshanks]

I learned a ton in my game against OAM. "All y'all" should def post an AAR. Please.

As for my game with GS, "thanks!". He won't let up. I can't demoralize him. Every time I blow up one of his depots, he builds two more.

I have to survive the winter of 63-64 and then deal with the summer campaigns of 64. I've never heard a rebel player say there was anything fun about the summer of 64.

[Fingolfin]

Exception here, Blutch called for a truce in June 64 in our last July 61 game

Although our situation was quite different, I didn't believe It was possible to win so late

[Longshanks]

Exception here, Blutch called for a truce in June 64 in our last July 61 game

Although our situation was quite different, I didn't believe It was possible to win so late

Which side were you playing?

[Fingolfin]

CSA, with the Union morale back to the 70s after a hellish assault on my positions in Montgomery, MD with 20K+ casualties on each side.

[Longshanks]

Here's another update on the "western front" aka, the interlocking corps under General of the Army Stonewall Jackson in West Tennessee.

The corps stretch across four regions: Memphis (Shelby TN), Hardemann TN, Jackson TN, and Corinth MS. In these regions are, respectively, Beauregard, Hardee, Breckinridge, and Jackson.

However, due to GraniteStaters flanking manuvers, I pulled Breckenridge back out of Jackson TN, moving him to the right of Stonewall, just east of Corinth MS. There's yet another corps in the town just east of there: so now it's a total of five corps that interlock, but perhaps not so neatly as before.

Grant came after Hardee in Hardemann TN (coincidence on the names or karma?) in L Dec 63, with the report showing up in the E Jan 64 turn. Jackson and Beauregard once again MtGs ... twice.

First Battle:



Second Battle:



This makes the third time that Jackson has bested Grant in a big battle. Losing 20,000 men and 16 units is a blow even to the Union (I hope!).

Earlier I had said "Jackson better win me the war." after I spent 10 NM on promoting him. Well, as of E Jan 64, the CSA is sitting on 139, to the USA's 80. It ain't over, but I can see "over" from here.

[GraniteStater]

I don't think Longshanks would mind. This is the wrap-up. I lost when NM went to 57; Defeat was 60.


COMMENTS

GS in roman; LS in italics

I had a chance or two at Memphis. The end run around C-ville was viable and came close to pulling off taking (which I actually did) and holding (which I did not) Richmond. An early loss of Richmond is always Not Good for the CSA.

-- Yes, you caught me there. That was a close one. My interlocking corps along the Rappanhannock were all halved, but held up, largely due to Longstreet who was everywhere all the time. The flanking move was the way to go. I kept expecting you to flank me in Caroline VA (just east of F'burg), which I did to you in our previous game if you recall. It's a vulnerable position for the Rebs, because the next move is to cut supply for F'burg, then force the Rebs to attack you there or move out of F'burg. I was relieved that you never attempted that move.



I've never tried to take a Fort at N.O. In 62, the Union is practically ready to go - I don't think the CSA can build the Arty and the Fort within three Turns. Maybe four, maybe. The Union can have forces by four Turns, even three, maybe two (but I don't think so) landed at N. O. They may not be the strongest, but they are enough, IIRC, if things break favorably and the CSA hasn't thrown the kitchen sink in.

--If you had hit it early you probably would have taken it, as I was underdefended there for at least 6 months. Finally, my army got so big there, that I was able to take 3/4 of it to respond to the Vicksburg attack. That move was a very good one, but you learned what I learned in previous games: taking it by storm is not so hard, but holding it while Memphis stands tall is very hard indeed...unless you have N.O.



Not attempting N. O. could well have been a fundamental error. The loss of it is huge for the CSA, really crimps the $$, AFAIK. My preferences are for a small Army, even under Butler, to take and hold it. Perhaps I should have just gone out of the gate. Electing SC wasn't really a bad idea, there are forces in place already, but the jockeying delayed the capture of Charleston for too long. I can see that there's only two thngs to do from the Sea Islands - take Charleston, or a reverse March from the Sea to Atlanta, or both.

-- I was worried about that, for sure. You did not attack my raillines, which I used repeatedly to move from Savannah to Charleston and back. My nearest depot was in Camden SC (other than Savannah where I risked getting caught with a weak army needing reinforcements), which is way north of Charleston, so losing Camden was a worry, esp. since that jeoparized material flows north. BTW, supplies in VA in 64 were VERY tight, often I had empty depots everywhere (but never the armies).

Concentrating on N.O. is probably better; more significant payoff and more to pursue, namely Vicksburg from LA or Mobile, or both. (N. B., comment on comment: I did cut rail lines, but his movement, if slowed, wasn't by much - somewhat strange)


I needed to take Jackson, MS and broaden that landing. Either because of the Fort or entrenchment level, there was no Supply connection to V-burg and without further seizure of Depots or an opening of the Arkansas from Little Rock (for Supplies).

-- I was surprised you didn't send the whole MO/AR army to take it. I would have scouted it (via a riverine move), then landed the whole army next door, then taken it by storm, thus avoiding the severe naval landing penalty. I had one weak division there, even if it was heavily fortified. The turn you attacked, I had JUST reinforced it with a couple of weak brigades, so we were about equal in force. Not good for you. the Supplies run out much too quickly for Corps-sized forces.

I can't recall if I had insufficient riverlift for more than the Corps I floated downstream. Two Corps may have been better.

-- Your force was plenty big. You could have also taken 4 supply units but that's not a great solution either ... buys a LITTLE more time. Every turn you passed Ft. Memphis I'd get this message "The Union took 50 hits. You got 4 in return." Man, I loved those statements. I thought your ironclad construction was way too light. You need to OWN the waters, not merely contest them. Blow the rebs away on the water!!!



PC is right, I'm too impatient. Partly, though, I wanted to see what would happen. I suspected I would have problems with Supply in Vicksburg, I was right. Looking back at it, I should never have attempted the winter river landing assault at Little Rock - that was for relief of Vicksburg's Supply conduit, in case you were wondering. As it turned out, I could get a naval offload fleet down there in time to get them out and should not have attacked Little Rock - that's what drove the final nails home, losing entire Corps is not good for NM at all.

With no Vicksburg and no defeat at Little Rock, I'd still probably be in acceptable shape. Oh, well, it was entertaining.

It is quite apparent that a human opponent who knows the rules and can play is orders of magnitude tougher than the AI, no matter the setting.

-- Absolutely.

Once more, congratulations, well played. Looks like I'm going to have to find some eight year olds to beat up on.

-- No, actually you're play was fundamentally good. Here's what you could have done to win (at least it's what I feared):

In the West, don't attack Memphis, or my interlocking corps under Jackson. They were all heavily entrenched and mutually supporting. A nightmare to attack. As you found out after the first assault, it was impregnable. Instead, move the bulk of your forces to Middle Tennessee to support Thomas's coup of Chattanooga. Man, I tried everything to starve him out!!!! By moving to Middle TN, you force me to respond by moving my corps. But I have to leave the Memphis defence force behind, or at least most of it. In Middle TN, you would now be on even terms - I might still be interlocking, but I won't be entrenched. You have a shot, plus your ultimate reward is Atlanta, esp. if you couple the Middle TN move with the "march to Atlanta in reverse" option. To get troops for that, go on the defensive in VA, and move at least a corps to SC. This forces me to respond in kind, and now I'm defending down there without entrenchments. (N. B. comment on comment - that was the intent of the Chattanooga operation, but somehow just never had enough extra guys to put the spike in the middle - I had thought about diverting some other forces, but...c'est la guerre)

or

Take the NO option early (in the scenario we played anyway). Busting the MS River is great for the Union supplies. It doesn't really hurt the CSA that much supply wise, but the loss of Memphis, V'burg and N.O. is a severe blow.

So, it's all about manuever, as I'm sure you've heard 'em say. To that I would add "and getting your NM higher than your opponent's, with 106 being the touchstone. Attacking head on should be last on your options list. Mine reads like this:

1. Go where they ain't.
2. Destroy the weak.

3. Manuever around the biggies.

4. Make them have to attack me.

5. Attack head on.

Re the economy.... I was short mostly on conscripts after the first year. I had plenty of money (never had to print paper money) and usually plenty of WS. What I was short on this game was conscripts. When I got them in the late 63 mobilization and the early 64 "Third Consciption Act" event, I REALLY rebuilt my depleted units. It was like a 40-50% boost in combat PWR. That saved me, cause I was heading towards collapse. My inflation was at 30% at the end, but the only thing I needed more of was conscripts. Oddly, when you're short on them, and them alone, you can build engineers, hospitals, artillery, etc. pretty much as you please. So, most of my corps had an engineer unit to speed up that entrenchment

One question in public, LS - what do you see or know that others don't, i. e., why do you say 106 NM is a threshold?

[Longshanks]

"One question in public, LS - what do you see or know that others don't, i. e., why do you say 106 NM is a threshold?"

IIRC, that is the point at which your units get a cohesion boost. I read it in the forums in several places. Being AT or ABOVE 106 gives the boost, being below it doesn't. There's also a cohesion penalty below 80 or so. I think. Someone who really knows can tell us both.

Again, I want to recommend GS as an opponent. He is courteous, prompt, funny, scholarly... in short, a gentleman. I am quite sure he'll give you an enjoyable game, cause I had great fun in the two PBEMs we had so far.

EDIT: Jim-NC posted this just a few minutes ago in another thread. So, with his permission, I hope:

"106 is where you start getting bonuses to your production and cohesion. IIRC, your modifier is +5% for 106-115, +10% for 116-125, +15% for 126-135. Below 95, you start having a negative modifier (which is very likely as the union at the beginning of the game.) "

[Jim-NC]

Not a problem. When you mouse over your NM, it tells you the modifier for your level (just like everything else in the game). I am going by memory (a bit fuzzy at this time).

[SleeStak]

GraniteStater and Longshanks, Thank you both for posting your impromtu AAR. It was extremelly enjoyable and enlightening to read, especially the last post with the recap.

[charlesonmission]

Thanks guys, it was brilliant.

[GraniteStater]

You are welcome.

I've had the game for three and a half years, near enough, starting with 1.09, I believe. As you can see, I've still got stuff to learn. My two serious contributions to the AACW forums have been a short summary of how and why I play the Union naval game (http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?p=145788#post145788) and a short monograph on Supply (http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?t=20413). I mention these, particularly the latter, because it probably took me twenty starts (some rather short, very short) just to figure out how to keep people from starving to death in the middle of Pennsylvania or Missouri.

The copy and paste of the individual posts are below.

Union Blockade

Like airpower in a certain WWII game, ya gotta make a commitment to The Blockade. I play with the Standard Rule, being a salty type.

* The investment is worth it, IMO. 'Sides, I like my jolly tars - one area where those perfidious Rebs take a back seat.

* Various people say that BlkSqdns are best for the BlkBoxes. I haven't crunched the numbers, but am willing to grant the point. Use BlkSqdns with a Frigate or two, and one or two Brigs (the latter for the scouting component).

* In the early game, 40% or so is all you can reasonably expect - you have other things to do, you can't pour everything into the Navy. As you build a bigger Navy, you can get to 60%, maybe more. These are the Boxes, natch. I keep enough Union Shipping with a modest escort force to ensure 100% Sea Supply/Transport abilities - I could care less about the $$ and WS; even with Light Industrialization, I have more than enough WS by mid-'62.

* Now, for the close blockade - I effect a 'semi-close' Brown Blockade. Some spots you can do a true Close Block - Bogue's Inlet to block Morehead City, NC, is an example. CSA guns can't hurt you there, although there's a fort nearby. Hover the mouse over the Harbor icon on CSA cities to see where the Block Point is. In the example just mentioned, you can effect a true ClsBlk and suffer no damage from the shore batteries. For other spots, e. g., Charleston, SC, I park myself off the river mouth. I'm not truly blockading the Harbor (see Tooltip per above), but I'll engage a fair amount of Runners. I'll miss a bunch too, no matter my Aggresion, but...well, I dislike having to build new ships for sunken ones. If your units lose a battle (rare) or are weakened, they can end up shorewards a water region, inside an estuary. Not Good. You'll lose ships on the way out to the batteries. Ships are expensive and take months to replace. I don't like losing ships, at all, unless it's for a major objective.

* My BrownBlock Sqdns are one (1) BlkSqdn with 2 Brig Sqdns (four Brigs altogether) and one (1) Transport Sqdn. 12 Elements, enough for any region on the charts (only a landlubber would say 'map' ).

* I don't build a whole lotta Frigates - *sigh*. Too bad, lovely vessels (I don't mean the stinkpots). I generally use these for my 'semi-Blue Block': crusing one region outwards, to sea - you'll catch the occasional Runner out at sea.

* Put Transports with as many fleets as you can - they stay out longer. Keep some TPs at Pickens, the Keys, Monroe, and anyplace you grab, also, to attract Supplies.[WRONG - Need a Depot to attract Supplies]

By mid-'63, you should be able to effect a 50%+ Blue Block, have a more than good sized Navy and be putting the squeeze on up close and personal. If you wanna bring Monitors south beyond the VA Capes, ya gotta seize the NC coastal forts, otherwise it's just throwing tin at the bottom of Cape Hatteras.

SUPPLIES ACCORDING to GS

Now, in a nutshell (I know the Union; the Southern mileage may vary):

Let's take a certain unit you get in southern PA in a 61 start. At first it is locked. It stays locked for about two turns. Then it unlocks. Then you click it to move it and discover that your brand new brave boys, rarin' to go, are starving to death. In Pennsylvania. In the summer.

This is because (a) no Wagon; (b) not next to, or on, a town or city, a Depot. The system knows the unit is there; the system wants to give them supplies, ammo, and so forth, but it can't, because of (a) and (b) just mentioned.

Depots, Forts, Towns of size 3+, Wagons and Transports request Supply. Towns of less than size 3 generate small amounts of Supply, but never request it. The system is a network of pipelines: NYC, Philly, Chicago, etc., generate huge amounts that are pushed along the system of RRs and Roads and Rivers not interdicted by Bad Guys (i. e., MC of 25% or more, not subject to enemy Forts blocking riverine traffic, etc.). The Supply goes to them who ask for it - them's that asks, git.

So you need to be adjacent to, or on, a source of supply, or something that requests supply. If that something is not a fixed Fort, Depot, or 3+ Town/City, it had better be a Wagon or a Transport, cuz otherwise, the waiter ain't takin' your order.

Also, it is important to keep RRs and Rivers up to 100%, Full Capacity, cuz Supply is pushed in three phases and only goes the last mile (like your cable connection at home) if the third and final phase is up to snuff. You can get by with Average, but some guys might not get that extra helping of beans at dinner, cuz the third phase never got to them that turn.

I finally drew the conclusion that if I want to go Reb hunting, I had better darn well make sure I took a Wagon with me. Fire up a 62 start as the USA and check out Burnside, sunning himself on the shore in SC. Go thru two Turns, maybe three. Then check out Burnside - he is about to go poof!, because you didn't build a Depot - Beaufort, SC, is not a 3+ Town, there is no Fort, no Depot. You can park Transports there, that do request Supply, but they will not do the trick, they're too small a capacity, it doesn't work, I know, believe me, I know. The solution to the 'overseas' Burnside problem is to build a Depot there with a Transport unit(s). Then everyone's much happier and has something to eat and something to shoot, cuz the system says, "Hey! I gotta keep that Depot in Supply!" The Shipping Box plays an essential role in this case, BTW.

It's a rough sketch and I'm sure Gray and others could iron out some details, but that's I how I think of it - seems to work.

Goin' huntin'? Take a Wagon. Goin' down Ole Man River to squash Vicksburg? Take Wagons and Transports. Goin' over the seas to land in Mobile and surprise Johnny Reb big time? Wagons and Transports.

Pushin' towards the interior from Nashville? Seize every town and Depot you see, secure your RRs, assert MC and keep the lines open, cuz you gotta keep your Wagons stocked.

Hope that helps. Have a good war and have a good breakfast.

[Oldman]

Not a problem. When you mouse over your NM, it tells you the modifier for your level (just like everything else in the game). I am going by memory (a bit fuzzy at this time).

Exactly. Precise numbers are:
....
76-85 NM - 90% cohesion;
86-95 NM - 95% cohesion;
96-105 NM - 100% cohesion;
106-115 NM - 105% cohesion;
116-125 NM - 110% cohesion;
....

and so on down to -25% or up to +25% bonus to cohesion.

[Longshanks]

As an update on using Jackson as a 3-star ....

I also promoted Longstreet finally to a 3-star, once I had another general in VA as a corps commander with a 5 defense to take his place (not that 5 is as good as 7!)

I sent Longstreet to Vicksburg to form an army and take charge, but this was right as our game ended so I didn't get to see his abilities as an army commander fully.

However, what I did see didn't look too impressive. He's a 3 strategic, which means he's not active that much and has a short range for commanding his corps. Yes, he has a 7 defense (your results may vary, Longstreet had 2 stars of experience in my game and the points didn't go to the Strategic rating, but to offense and defense). I needed him to take V'burg, which he did, and then go chase down the Union relief force and beat it, which he did not. I didn't really get to set him up correctly, compared to Jackson, so the test is unfinished. He might be really, really good in an area where you are strictly on defense.

Summary: Jackson is a heavy-hitter, bats 3rd and will be in the Hall of Fame as a 3-star. Longstreet: a great defensive infielder who is always reliable. Otherwise, keep him as a corps commander under Lee or Jackson and he will always hold that key position, and run to help every other corps nearby. Lee is still top dog, except in one respect: in my experience he has a lot more losses than Jackson does. A lot more.

[Longshanks]

I'd like to add another observation on something I saw twice in our game that I've never seen before:

After a battle in which corps Marched to the Sound of the Guns, the corps that marched were shown in two regions. At once. Yes, Corps A was on my map in Region A AND IN REGION B. Corps B was also in both.

In the first case, it was clear that the "offending" corps had to be moved back (that is, when I clicked on it, I was allowed to move it back to where it started). However, the "move" that showed on screen was from its original location back to that same location, only it took 5 days unless I entrained it, in which case it took 1 day. Never seen that. Imagine 5 days to move the region you're in to the region you're in. Weird.

The second example had no such solution. The two corps (Culpeper and Nelson VA) that fought together both appeared to be in BOTH regions. I didn't know what to do with that, so I told GS and did nothing. Next turn it sorted itself out and each was back in his original starting place. Very odd.

I assume a corps had MSTG and then didn't get back. But this is an odd duck. The owner can't tell where they are and whether he needs to move one or not. The opponent may have to fight both corps no matter which region he attacks - a force multiplier if I ever saw one.

[GraniteStater]

Afraid it's not that unusual. It's very obvious to an attacker to say, "I'll attack here and while that supporting Corps is busy here, I'll also attack there and have very good odds and break through in the second spot."

And then the supporting Corps shows up. The only thing I can think of is that the code allows it because during a design meeting, someone said, "They're two week Turns - MTSG should be allowed in more than one Region."

I swear, sometimes I've seen support by the same Corps in two different places within days, if not on the same day.

It means two favorite tactics by attackers are wholly negated - soaking off and pinning attacks. This is why I was so reluctant to try to break your lines head on - if I could've pinned you in one Region and attacked overwhelmingly in another, I wouldn't hesitate. But the Magic Support Machine negates that.

I would like to see the code altered so that a second supporting MTSG can take place, but only after some period of time within the Turn, say five days, nine days. I dunno what the number should be, but right now, the CSA can have Longstreet in Culpeper, receive attacks in Charlottesville and Fredricksburg on the same day or within three days, and Longstreet rides to the rescue on both.

Somewhat discouraging to an attacker. MTSG is an excellent feature, no other well known game has it, but yes, Virginia, you can have too much pitching.

[Longshanks]

GS, let me ask you a question about another matter.

How desparate was your supply situation in Chattanooga? Although I perpetually cut rails and interdicted your overland rail route to Nashville, I was never quite sure whether supplies got to Nooga anyway overland. By March 64, I had two Lvl 4+ entrenched stacks along the Tenn River, along with units occupying the railline to Nashville.

Did those actions block supply?

[GraniteStater]

I was never in any trouble that I could see.

Some spots generate a good amont of Supply. N. O., for instance - I like to have a route open, but AFAIK, it's not strictly necessary - N. O. seems to generate a very good stockpile, I've never had Supply issues with N. O. under any circumstances.

I wasn't bean counting a C-nooga, but as far as I could tell, not close to any real concern.