Sun Dec 01, 2013 6:16 pm
Assessment:
I still think the Union is underpowered, even though I am losing (sort of). I made some critical errors early in this game, which makes it to me not a real good test of play balance. Here are my errors:
1. 1861 Defensive: I was very passive in 1861; I didn't realize the advantage the South had in-game, and made a pile of tactical and strategic errors such that I lost the Valley in 1861; something no other CSA player has done
2. RR: This was critical; I didn't increase Rail Cap until 1862! At all! And I wasn't checking ammo levels until I ran out of Ammo in Virginia. Since then, I have never had full rail cap due to troops movements, and I've paid for this all game
3. Virginia: I didn't realize until too late that Michael was going all-in in Viginia, completely neglecting any other theater or amphib moves
Finally, Michael is a quick learner and good opponent; we both played WITE, or War in the East, and he was one of the best players in that group, consistently steamrolling his Soviet opponents
Despite all this, and even if I lose Richmond, I probably would still win in VPs and NM; I have a big cushion in both right now. The fact is while the Union is doing well in Virginia, the USA has gone absolutely nowhere anywhere else; we did have to abandon Bowling Green due to US Navy movement, but that's literally the only gain in two years besides El Paso.
June, 1863:
Virginia:
Richmond, I think, is lost. I lost a huge battle at Appomattox, and I don't have the strength and Ammo to counterattack. My replacement pool is empty, which is a problem, and I can't dislodge him.
The problem now, after this loss, and despite my large victories in Virginia, is that he'll be able to pound me into dust until I run out of Ammo and/or replacements.
The all-in strategy in Virginia is a winning one for the Union. Outside of that theater, the USA effort is dismal, but this is decisive.
Battle of Humboldt:
Rosecran's army attack AS Johnston and Polk at Humboldt. I had level 7 trenches, and we each had roughly 30,000 troops, with the USA having a slight advantage. We won the battle, and gained 4 NM, repulsing the US with 9,000 losses in a bloody repulse
Though another army is just across from Nashville, I think we are temporarily OK in this theater; we are well dug-in, and he lacks the strength to dislodge us
Missouri:
I cancelled any further actions, and pulled my units back to Springfield. A division of Infantry under Hindman, and a Division of Cavalry under Wharton, something like 9000 men in all, are heading east. We don't really need them to defend NW Arkansas, and St. Louis is probably out of reach.
Colorado:
We are invading Colorado, and are at the gates of Denver, which is garrisoned by a lone Militia unit. I think we are going to take the city.
Our invasion is led by John Baylor, with 5 units of Rangers, an Indian Regt, and a single Texas Cav Regt. We captured a 12-lb battery from the Union at Ft. Morgan, a lucky break, along with a stockpile of food and supplies. We are attacking Denver next turn, then will move to the gold mines.[ATTACH]25853[/ATTACH]
Rangers are taking the 12-lb battery to Denver to attack the Militia, and we are going to rally in the town to recoup supplies. Union forces are headed north from New Mexico, at least 4 Regts of US Infantry and Cav, so not sure we can hold this.
Rangers are really key to making moves in the west. They move much better through Wild terrain, don't consume alot of supplies, and generally work much better than Cavalry or regular troops. My Cav Regt has suffered from really poor cohesion, while the Rangers are all in great shape. It probably helps that Baylor is leading. But I would definitely build Rangers again as CSA, or USA for that matter.
-
Attachments
-
Darius Couch? Put Miles in while your at it!
