Small forces performance

[Adam the VIth]

Okay, tons of variables impact combat in this game, but I have seen time and time again, a small force (say one bde w/ 2-3 elements), not dug in, escape from battle with a large corps of several divisions and inflict more casualties on the large force.

Now, sure, sometimes if the corps has withdraw orders, etc. It could happen.

Historically, small elements like this were just swallowed up with virtually no losses to the large force.

Not sure what you all think.

[McNaughton]

Every unit has a withdraw factor. See this as the units ability to escape. A small unit may have statistically high values here, while a larger unit (encumbered by slow units, such as artillery) has low values. This means that a small, light unit can escape from a much larger, yet slower, unit. Check up the US Cavalry engagement against the initial Confederate forces during the first day of Gettysburg. The Union Cavalry, heavily outnumbered, managed to fight a very successful delaying operation, inflicting loads of casualties, primarily because of their manoeverability on the field being greater, and their stance of fight and withdrawl.

Totally realistic, in my opinion, otherwize you just have the larger stack always beating up on the smaller stack.

[Aragos]

Excellent points. The bottom line is that it is easier for a smaller force to hide/avoid combat than a large one. The modern military calls it "signature"--a small force can hide in a wilderness, but a large mechanized army just cannot. Just think of the thousands of horses and wagons, not to mention field depots and hospitals, etc. that a Civil War-era Corps had.

[jimkehn]

I'm not sure his problem is with the small force "escaping" the large force, but escaping the large force while inflicting huge losses on the large force. I'm not saying THAT's not even impossible.

I agree with you both, though that for a small force to evade battle with a large force is not that unusual. Maybe what they are doing is hitting the large force hard in the flank while the large force is not expecting it (the "surprise" factor) and then having a leader that is skilled at withdrawing in the face of overwhelming odds.

I think AdamtheVIth is on to it with all the combat variables.....sometimes you have to imagine what might have happened. This game does not utilize a simplistic "If you roll a 4,5 or 6, you get a DE result" combat resolution.

[Jagger]

I'm not sure his problem is with the small force "escaping" the large force, but escaping the large force while inflicting huge losses on the large force. I'm not saying THAT's not even impossible.

I agree with you both, though that for a small force to evade battle with a large force is not that unusual. Maybe what they are doing is hitting the large force hard in the flank while the large force is not expecting it (the "surprise" factor) and then having a leader that is skilled at withdrawing in the face of overwhelming odds.

I think AdamtheVIth is on to it with all the combat variables.....sometimes you have to imagine what might have happened. This game does not utilize a simplistic "If you roll a 4,5 or 6, you get a DE result" combat resolution.

Or the large force is not concentrated. One smaller element of the large force is attacked and defeated badly before the rest of the force can react. The evading force hit and ran and got away. This sort of result is not that unusual in history.

Within the game engine, there are many terrain types that restrict the number of elements which can fight at one time. So the smaller force may engage with all its troops while the larger force can only fight with a percentage of their troops. All the while, the smaller force is rolling for retreat.

[Queeg]

Or the large force is not concentrated. One smaller element of the large force is attacked and defeated badly before the rest of the force can react. The evading force hit and ran and got away. This sort of result is not that unusual in history.

Within the game engine, there are many terrain types that restrict the number of elements which can fight at one time. So the smaller force may engage with all its troops while the larger force can only fight with a percentage of their troops. All the while, the smaller force is rolling for retreat.

I agree that some battle results seem unusual at first glance. But when you really study the battle chart and consider the situation, the results make sense far more often than not.

[Jagger]

I agree that some battle results seem unusual at first glance. But when you really study the battle chart and consider the situation, the results make sense far more often than not.

I agree. Certain terrain types definitely benefit certain types of troops such as Indians in the wilderness, militia in swamps, anybody in a fort, etc. What would be a clear cut victory by one strong formation type against a weaker formation type if fighting in the open can turn into absolute disaster when fighting in the wilderness or forests or in mud or blizzards. Lots of variations in performance dependent on the battle terrain/weather charts.

Although I have never quite been able to figure the exact numbers which determine how many units can fight in a particular terrain type. One day.

[Pocus]

that depends of what you call 'small' as Jagger rightly says. If you are small but are still 'filling up the matrix', ie you have the max number of elements capable of firing at a given time, and you are in a good position, a superior, say 3 to 1 force, will pay dearly the first hours, where your inferiority in number is not showing yet. The big one can replace losses, but as you escape wisely after some round, in the end it takes bigger losses...

[Huo long]

I always have seen this as the sum up of frontage and evasion rules.

The forces fight with equal frontage, taking similar damage and as the big force grow stronger the small one breaks contact and avoids further damage.

[Adam the VIth]

Well, you definitely all hit upon the issue of "tons of factors" as I had said.

Certainly, cav should be able to make lots of getaways...not talking about them per say.

...and I tend to agree with just about everyone's opinions as noted, but if you read some Civl War histories, units of 5,000 or so just tend to get eaten alive, usually barely even fighting, when facing large units. Sure, I'm sure I can spot lots of exceptions to that as well, but:

okay, I'll give you what you want: small unit dug into good terrain makes its stand --- sure, early rounds should go to it -- but once it tries to withdraw, it should have a pretty good chance of getting overwhelmed. again, I'm not sayin that is a rule, as plenty of small units crept away at night (leaving the camp fires burning).

But when you have all that happen, and the big unit take 3 casualties for every 1 in the small unit (and this is really consistent) -- I tend to think something might be amiss.

Anyway -- good discussion, which is what I was looking to see. I'll shup up now!

[tagwyn]

Gettysburg is not a fair example of Union use of cavarly. Buford ran into Heth's division in the vicinity of Gettysburg. Heth was looking for shoes. Buford realized the advantages of the local high ground and that the AoP was headed this way. Buford sacrificed his men to give Reynolds First Corp time to reach the field. Stuart was off on a wild goose chase and did not perform his duty of providing cover and intelligence for Lee's ANV.