Army of the Potomac strategy

Army of the Potomac strategy (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Forge of Freedom: The American Civil War 1861-1865

Message

ABridgeTooFar -> Army of the Potomac strategy (1/22/2007 8:37:06 PM)
What do you guys usually do with the AOP. At first it would just sit there in the Potomac River since I can never win as an attacker against the ANV. As a defender I do okay winning around 75% of the detailed combats. As the attacker, fahgetabutit. The AOP morale is just too low to last very long in a firefight. But that strategy is just too boring so in the last few games I try at least one maybe two offenses each summer. Yes, I get my butt whipped and suffer in VP's but at least I am doing something. What do you guys do? Any tips or advice. Lately I have been adding some zouaves and medical attachements but I need many more to have any impact.

Hard Sarge -> RE: Army of the Potomac strategy (1/22/2007 8:44:15 PM)
one, you really are not going to be able to do too much in 61, you need to rebuild your forces and let the West be the major area of action you need to upgrade your troops, build new troops and replace the one olds, the old ones can become good, but it is going to take a lot of battles to do it, build new ones in the large states, build Training grounds (with the upcomeing patch, it is will work better) build Reseach sites buy add ons, buy add ons that down what you do or want (if you have the horses, buy scouts, reseach anything that helps your scouting chances) let the AOP be the anval, the forces in the West are your hammer, springfields are good, imp Spingfields are great, and the others are super with the upcoming patch as it is, the Union should have a much better chance at doing something, earlier in the game then most players are having now

General Quarters -> RE: Army of the Potomac strategy (1/22/2007 9:34:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge you need to upgrade your troops, build new troops and replace the one olds, the old ones can become good, but it is going to take a lot of battles to do it, build new ones Are you saying that newly built troops have higher ratings? Do they get better over time, or as a result of research or something?

Gil R. -> RE: Army of the Potomac strategy (1/22/2007 9:37:51 PM)
Yes, if you purchase infantry they start off at 5.0, whereas mustered/conscripted troops are about half that. I guess you must always muster and conscript...

General Quarters -> RE: Army of the Potomac strategy (1/22/2007 9:50:05 PM)
The troops you have at the beginning are mostly rated below 2.50. 1.80 is not uncommon. What is the reason for newly built troops being so much more highly rated? Is it to make it more worth the cost to build them?

Gil R. -> RE: Army of the Potomac strategy (1/22/2007 9:53:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: General Quarters The troops you have at the beginning are mostly rated below 2.50. 1.80 is not uncommon. What is the reason for newly built troops being so much more highly rated? Is it to make it more worth the cost to build them? From a game-design point of view, yes. But the rationalized explanation is that purchased troops take three more turns to appear, during which time they've been getting in a lot more training.

ABridgeTooFar -> RE: Army of the Potomac strategy (1/22/2007 10:33:04 PM)
HardSarge, I do that whole hammer-anvil thing very similar to history and it works well. The other stuff sounds great but it all costs a TON of resources. It sounds like it would take until '64 to be able to pull all that off. Plus I rarely build many, if any, infantry units (outside of conscription). I usually build around 4 siege units and 4 regular artillery and maybe a handful of cavalry. I am not sure that I can afford to rebuild the entire army.

Erik Rutins -> RE: Army of the Potomac strategy (1/22/2007 10:53:04 PM)
Purchased/produced units start at 4.00, IIRC. ~2.00 level units (Musters/Conscriptions) can get up to that level in about three battles, if they don't suffer too badly and do reasonably well.

Hard Sarge -> RE: Army of the Potomac strategy (1/22/2007 11:06:24 PM)
Well, that is the trade off, you have to build this or skip this, plus it depends on what setting you are using, upkeep costs on, poor ecc, or rich, spending a lot of money on Diplo or not yes, I think most Union players are not building new Inf for the most part, the starting troops are poor troops, the Union I believe start at a morale of 4.00 when built, about double what most of the troops you have are, which you do not need to replace all the troops, enough to either stiffen what you have, or to build your Shock Div (if I remember right, the Union begins at 4.00 the CSA starts at 5.00, the new Training ground, will add a .2 for each Training center in that state, so, say you put one in Nofolk, it will help any Inf or Cav built in Richmound) which of course, it may sound simple, but buy add ons for the good troops, plus remember, Muskst are good weapons, but only if you use them right, if you can get Withworths, you don't give them to a unit you plan on chargeing with plus with Upkeep costs turned on, you can get rid of old bad troops, when you get newer good troops the cost of some things you need to buy have been lowered, so camps do not cost as many horses, (which will help the Union player, but cost more money, which will hurt the CSA, plus, they count different then they did) and again, you do not need to rebuild the whole army, just enough to be worth while, in the West you can take most of the area, with out ever fighting, move and take, and pick your spots, when you see a chance for a good battle, take it, you see a bad battle comeing, move a lot of times, if you can get the AI to do a chase to engage, you can move, take some land and then fight a defence battle the next turn plus in this game, remember, it is not doing more damage that counts, it is killing units, if you can shoot a unit dead in place, great, if you can trap it and take it POW, good (killing it, gives you some exp, captureing it, only takes it out) the more units the enemy loses, the more it has to build new or be under strenghted for the next battle depending on what FOW level you play on, you can also work with what weapons you have, Springfields are better then Muskets, if the other guys have muskets stand back from them, lousy troops with longer range, does not matter, they can fire and not be hit, the Imp Springfield has a range of 4, that is better then the Minne or the Richmound musket or the miss rifle, with that, only the Lorenz, Enfield or Withworth is a worry when you do a fire attack, when ever you can, fire into the flank (you have front, left and right flank, left and right rear flank and rear) of the enemy, if you get a chance to get a rear flank or rear shoot from in close, go for it, if you only can fire into the front from up close, don't fire (unless you got the better troops) this is where Cav and Dragoon Tactics can be so deadly, move, dismound, move in a hex and fire into the rear flank or rear of a Unit, and it can shatter it, if you didn't have to move too much to get there, move away plus do like they did, work and learn a set of tactics that work for you, and then build your troops to match your tactics (IE, you build and arm a number of Sniper type troops, and then in battle see a chance to charge the enemy, not with those troops, they are worth far too much to waste on a gamble, if you do plan on chargeing, add some Meds to the unit, and make sure you have a good close range weapon, and so on)

chris0827 -> RE: Army of the Potomac strategy (1/22/2007 11:10:56 PM)
There's no reason for the AoP to have such low morale. Bull Run was more than three months earlier. The AoP was far from demoralized in Nov. 1861.

Hard Sarge -> RE: Army of the Potomac strategy (1/22/2007 11:12:24 PM)
yeap, got to agree, I don't know why nobody don't remember that the CW ended in 61

chris0827 -> RE: Army of the Potomac strategy (1/22/2007 11:26:55 PM)
Much had been done in the three months since his arrival,five days after the Bull Run disaster. The army of 50,000 which he then found waiting for him- "a mere collection of regiments cowering on the banks of the Potomac, " he called it - had grown to 168,000 well-trained, spirited men, superbly equipped and worshipful of the commander who had accomplished their transformation. Shelby Foote - The Civil War, a narrative

Hard Sarge -> RE: Army of the Potomac strategy (1/23/2007 12:05:39 AM)
and he did wonders with his well trained troops it is the design I play with what I am given, like any other game this is the mind set the Designer had this is the mind set we get and play with it fits with what the designer wants to happen

chris0827 -> RE: Army of the Potomac strategy (1/23/2007 12:10:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge and he did wonders with his well trained troops it is the design I play with what I am given, like any other game this is the mind set the Designer had this is the mind set we get and play with it fits with what the designer wants to happen Then why have the designers asked for ideas? They have stated they want to add a historically accurate scenario. Why do you have a problem with that?

General Quarters -> RE: Army of the Potomac strategy (1/23/2007 2:46:32 AM)
Gosh, Chris, you jump on this theme at the drop of a hat. Hard Sarge did not say that designers should not ask for ideas, or that they should not develop a historical scenario, or that he had a problem with that. He just expressed his own personal attitude to playing a game. I think you have a right to want the game a way that you would find much more satisfying, and he has a right to be enjoy a game as the designer designed it. I don't see why you have to jump on him.

chris0827 -> RE: Army of the Potomac strategy (1/23/2007 3:23:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: General Quarters Gosh, Chris, you jump on this theme at the drop of a hat. Hard Sarge did not say that designers should not ask for ideas, or that they should not develop a historical scenario, or that he had a problem with that. He just expressed his own personal attitude to playing a game. I think you have a right to want the game a way that you would find much more satisfying, and he has a right to be enjoy a game as the designer designed it. I don't see why you have to jump on him. I jumped on him? Are you reading the same thread? I post regarding the condition of the Army of the Potomac on nov 1st 1861 and I get a sarcastic remark. I post a quote backing up my earlier post and am told that since the designers had a different idea then it doesn't matter even though the designers themselves have repeatedly stated they want to create a historical scenario. If the game was perfect then there wouldn't be a patch coming out. No game is too good to improve. Why do some of you feel the need to muzzle those of us that offer suggestions? How do we threaten you? They're still going to have a balanced scenario. You can still play the way you want. Why can't you show some respect to those of us who have different opinions and ideas?

Hard Sarge -> RE: Army of the Potomac strategy (1/23/2007 10:13:12 AM)
What a joke, it is a simple ploy, instult and complain, and then when someone says something back, you play the good guy, just asking questions you quote somebody who pretty much did nothing but lie though out his Combat career and then ask why the game is not based on his statements ? if his troops were so good in Nov of 61, why didn't he end the war ? the question asked, was what to do with the AOP and how, I offered some ideas based on how the game works not on how I think the game should work, or how the real war would of been fought, or how I think the real war should of been fought you want to improve the morale of the Union troops in 61, do so, it is in the game plus if you follow my posts, if I come across Sarcastic, there must be a reason for it

chris0827 -> RE: Army of the Potomac strategy (1/23/2007 3:05:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge What a joke, it is a simple ploy, instult and complain, and then when someone says something back, you play the good guy, just asking questions you quote somebody who pretty much did nothing but lie though out his Combat career and then ask why the game is not based on his statements ? if his troops were so good in Nov of 61, why didn't he end the war ? the question asked, was what to do with the AOP and how, I offered some ideas based on how the game works not on how I think the game should work, or how the real war would of been fought, or how I think the real war should of been fought you want to improve the morale of the Union troops in 61, do so, it is in the game plus if you follow my posts, if I come across Sarcastic, there must be a reason for it Who did I insult? The quote was from Shelby Foote. That was his opinion of the state of the Army of the Potomac, not George McClellan's.

Hard Sarge -> RE: Army of the Potomac strategy (1/23/2007 3:27:23 PM)
Yes I understand who and what the quote was from just because somebody made a stuipd statement, the designers are suppost to use it as the background for there game ? my point of view, you are insulting the Designers of the game, since they do not agree with how you see the game should of been made besides, the War as a game, should not be winnable at the start, just because the Player works out who should be the correct General in Charge, there had to be something besides a bad General here and there was made the War last so long

chris0827 -> RE: Army of the Potomac strategy (1/23/2007 3:31:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge Yes I understand who and what the quote was from just because somebody made a stuipd statement, the designers are suppost to use it as the background for there game ? my point of view, you are insulting the Designers of the game, since they do not agree with how you see the game should of been made besides, the War as a game, should not be winnable at the start, just because the Player works out who should be the correct General in Charge, there had to be something besides a bad General here and there was made the War last so long The designers themselves say they want to add a historical scenario. Are they insulting themselves? How is Shelby Foote's statement stupid? Do you have evidence that the Army of the Potomac was in a different state than what he describes?

Hard Sarge -> RE: Army of the Potomac strategy (1/23/2007 3:42:05 PM)
Gee, I guess History is wrong then Little Mac was able to use his super Army to put down the CSA in Nov of 61 and won the War all by himself they have asked for Ideas, you are saying they are wrong, there is a bit of a difference there

chris0827 -> RE: Army of the Potomac strategy (1/23/2007 3:55:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge Gee, I guess History is wrong then Little Mac was able to use his super Army to put down the CSA in Nov of 61 and won the War all by himself they have asked for Ideas, you are saying they are wrong, there is a bit of a difference there By your logic any idea that doesn't come from the designers is wrong. They obviously think they were wrong or they wouldn't be making changes. Tell me how giving the AoP higher morale automatically wins the war for the union in Nov of 1861. The confederates still have a morale and leadership advantage and are in a fortified position. Doesn't sound easy to me.

ABridgeTooFar -> RE: Army of the Potomac strategy (1/23/2007 4:56:33 PM)
HardSarge, I see your points that you are making with Chris and I agree and disagree. Yes, I believe that the design of the game is correct in giving the AOP poor morale/quality in '61 but the Army did develop into a decent fighting force over the following years despite losing several large scale battles until Gettysburg (Antitiem was a draw). But they were able to improve and get better throughout. In this game, they have no hope of improving escpecially if they engage in battle with ANV. Overall this is not a complaint, just an observation. I am perfectly fine with how it is designed. As a gamer, I will just have to find better ways of making the AOP a better fighting force. Now if you guys can get the AI to stop charging me in column formation (talk about fruitless banzai charges).................

Twotribes -> RE: Army of the Potomac strategy (1/23/2007 6:49:33 PM)
Actually from what I can tell Training grounds DO NOT improve purchased units. I have several cities with 4 or more training grounds and the Purchased Brigades of Infantry arrive at 4.0 just like any Brigade purchased anywhere else with NO training grounds. Havent mustered or conscripted in some time, but I do believe Training grounds effect those Brigades. I believe there is a blurb about this in the rules, I will look later to see if I remember right. Personally I would suggest that there be a means to train, without combat, up to some level ( maybe 2.5) based on Leaders and or buildings. Maybe add a command for a container to "train/drill". I would even be amiable to this effecting the North more than the South. In other words have southern units arrive at 2.5 or higher to begin with.

Hard Sarge -> RE: Army of the Potomac strategy (1/23/2007 7:20:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ABridgeTooFar HardSarge, I see your points that you are making with Chris and I agree and disagree. Yes, I believe that the design of the game is correct in giving the AOP poor morale/quality in '61 but the Army did develop into a decent fighting force over the following years despite losing several large scale battles until Gettysburg (Antitiem was a draw). But they were able to improve and get better throughout. In this game, they have no hope of improving escpecially if they engage in battle with ANV. Overall this is not a complaint, just an observation. I am perfectly fine with how it is designed. As a gamer, I will just have to find better ways of making the AOP a better fighting force. Now if you guys can get the AI to stop charging me in column formation (talk about fruitless banzai charges)................. Follow what I am saying, and you can improve the AOP people are complaining about the game, with out useing what is in the game (not you) the AOP can be made into a nasty fighting force, and it doesn't take till 64 or 65 to get it done

Hard Sarge -> RE: Army of the Potomac strategy (1/23/2007 7:23:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Twotribes Actually from what I can tell Training grounds DO NOT improve purchased units. I have several cities with 4 or more training grounds and the Purchased Brigades of Infantry arrive at 4.0 just like any Brigade purchased anywhere else with NO training grounds. Havent mustered or conscripted in some time, but I do believe Training grounds effect those Brigades. I believe there is a blurb about this in the rules, I will look later to see if I remember right. Personally I would suggest that there be a means to train, without combat, up to some level ( maybe 2.5) based on Leaders and or buildings. Maybe add a command for a container to "train/drill". I would even be amiable to this effecting the North more than the South. In other words have southern units arrive at 2.5 or higher to begin with. I think you will see, that I said Training Grounds will give you a +.2 to morale of new built units, with in the same state (neither of those comments are in the rules, they are new) I also do not think Training work the way they were intended to, early on they did, and something happened to block it, it has been corrected and changed

Hard Sarge -> RE: Army of the Potomac strategy (1/23/2007 7:26:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ABridgeTooFar HardSarge, I see your points that you are making with Chris and I agree and disagree. Yes, I believe that the design of the game is correct in giving the AOP poor morale/quality in '61 but the Army did develop into a decent fighting force over the following years despite losing several large scale battles until Gettysburg (Antitiem was a draw). But they were able to improve and get better throughout. In this game, they have no hope of improving escpecially if they engage in battle with ANV. Overall this is not a complaint, just an observation. I am perfectly fine with how it is designed. As a gamer, I will just have to find better ways of making the AOP a better fighting force. Now if you guys can get the AI to stop charging me in column formation (talk about fruitless banzai charges)................. took a lot of talking, but that has been worked on, the AI will only Charge if it has a rear flank or rear attack open, it will not charge the frontal hexes (don't turn your back on the AI, you can almost see it smile when it sees you turn)

Gil R. -> RE: Army of the Potomac strategy (1/23/2007 7:35:52 PM)
The developers only admit two mistakes: leaving in the dreaded CSA navy (with its ironclad) and spelling "Murfreesboro" as "Murfeesboro" on the main map. We do not consider the balanced November scenario a mistake, but a game-design choice that we believe makes for an excellent game. However, we did not anticipate the widespread desire for a game that aims at a more historical representation of the two sides' strengths and weaknesses, so we are attempting to give the people what they want by producing a new scenario, NOT by removing the old one. It remains to be seen whether the "historical" scenario will be fun to play, but it's certainly worth trying.

chris0827 -> RE: Army of the Potomac strategy (1/23/2007 7:37:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Gil R. The developers only admit two mistakes: leaving in the dreaded CSA navy (with its ironclad) and spelling "Murfreesboro" as "Murfeesboro" on the main map. We do not consider the balanced November scenario a mistake, but a game-design choice that we believe makes for an excellent game. However, we did not anticipate the widespread desire for a game that aims at a more historical representation of the two sides' strengths and weaknesses, so we are attempting to give the people what they want by producing a new scenario, NOT by removing the old one. It remains to be seen whether the "historical" scenario will be fun to play, but it's certainly worth trying. I have never seen anyone suggest that you remove the balanced scenario.

Twotribes -> RE: Army of the Potomac strategy (1/23/2007 7:38:34 PM)
Good post Gil.... Both are quite possible with this game and its engine. One could, if they had the knowledge or just an idea of what they wanted, easily modify most if not all that is needed with out a new Scenario. I am glad your adding one.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.953125