|
Erik Rutins -> RE: Army of the Potomac strategy (1/24/2007 12:21:54 AM)
|
Twotribes,
Chris is correct in that I was mainly discussing the next version, but most of it also applies to the release version.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Twotribes
Due to random "disease" hits one can suddenly have the entire army back to less than normal disposition
I haven't had this happen even in the original version. Now, your entire army may get hit by disease, but only some of the brigades generally lose disposition, not all of them. If you are already at an Inspired level, that will at most bump some of your units down to Normal disposition, as disease usually only reduces a unit one disposition level per turn.
quote:
this being true even if one spent every dime and used every slot avaialble to build Hospitals near where you have placed your armies.
Keep in mind that only hospitals in the same province as your army actually modify disease. Hospital effects from other nearby provinces (i.e. coverage) will only help regain lost disposition, not reduce actual losses. Also, in the release version disease has a wide range. The effect of hospitals is not random, but disease can vary from a minor hit to a serious epidemic depending on a die roll. The new disease rules address this whole issue completely as far as I can tell, even allowing you to spend some money on mobile field hospitals that accompany your army by purchasing medical attributes.
quote:
but then you no longer have an efficient army for defense.
I haven't had too much trouble with this, thanks to the ability to call in reinforcements, as you noted. You have to accept that disease will cause damage, but even in the original rules it rarely wrecked an army or a plan in my experience. In the new rules it's an extremely manageable factor, enough that I sometimes wish it were stronger.
quote:
But due to the randomness and ineffectiveness of Hospitals you run the real risk of disease decimating the disposition of all 3 Armies anyway.
Disease only strikes one province per turn. Given good hospital coverage and supply, you'll recover disposition quickly, so I don't see how all three armies will be of low disposition at any point in time. In any case, the whole disease issue is really non-existent in the upcoming update, but still IMHO manageable in the release version.
quote:
Disposition is not going to help, no matter the level when 1/3 of the 150k troops are so far under 2 as to be useless another 3rd is around 2 and maybe 1/3 is above 2.
That's really not true at all. Disposition makes a big difference, regardless of troop quality.
Also, if you are mustering and building, then all your reinforcement troops will generally be either 2.00+ Quality or 4.00+ Quality, depending on national will and combination of mustering and producing. The CSA is in much the same boat. Most of your troops will be no more than 1 quality level worse than the CSA troops, so Disposition and Supply end up being huge factors in how a battle goes (ESPECIALLY a quick battle).
quote:
except they are below 4 since replacements LOWERS training.
Not by much, unless you have a brigade suffer huge losses.
quote:
I have in my current game no province less than 61 in hospital coverage and yet I have had several of those 3 armies get hit with disease, granted they didnt lose a LARGE number of men, but disposition was totally destroyed, dropping one or 2 levels on every brigade in the army.
61? Wow. Of course, as noted above, that only affects disposition recovery, not losses or initial disposition loss. Only hospitals in-province affect actual loss amounts. Also, again, disease will really be a non-issue for you in the next update and since we've already posted those details, please be patient.
quote:
And the North is FORCED to go on the offense, they cant win any other way.
The north can choose where to go on the offensive. Choosing the East is usually a bad idea. The CSA does not have enough strength to defend everywhere or to continue to replace losses. Strike where they are weakest, defend elsewhere and you'll play to the North's strengths early on. Later on, you can switch to a general attack posture everywhere.
quote:
I suggest the disease thing is over done or needs some means to extend beyond rail lines and add some help in enemy provinces. You cant convince me that every time the Union Army went on an offensive they lost the morale and the number of troops that occur routinely in the game.
See my many comments above about managing disease and see my post on the next update for disease changes.
quote:
One can NOT arm the 50 or more brigades in the east and arm the ones in the west in 3 months, the amount of arms recieved in that time simply wont do it, for one thing the limits on the amount of a certain weapon one can have before it starts costing even more to buy them is way to LOW.
One absolutely can, I've done it, but it all depends on which game settings you choose. I was playing with Union Power at +2 or +3 and Richer Economy on and had no problem. A lot comes down to what you arm them with. Muskets are good enough for me for most of the first year and that's my goal. Historically, many troops did end up with Muskets and only got rifles later. Have you tried the richer economy and + to Union power setting, combined with focusing on Muskets and only upgrading to better weapons after everyone is at least at Muskets?
You only hit the support limit generally if you try for the more expensive weapons and don't research new ones. I have had no problem equipping my entire army between Muskets, Minie Rifles and Springfields. Once I research Improved Springfields and other weapons that adds more room. Even with that, it's not like a Musket or a Minie Rifle really gets that much more expensive once you're over the 75 or 100 brigade support limit for those. Also, focusing on the cheaper weapons generally helps your economy in other ways, as you are paying no additional support costs.
quote:
There is not enough resources to build enough academies, mansions and hospitals in 3 months to even remotely approximate the situation in November 1861 and this completely impossible if one STARTS that scenario. One needs to build more buildings to produce more weapons, one must build several research facilities if they dont intend to be the backward sister copared to the free stuff the CSA gets, one must have more mines and more horse farms if they have any intention of equiping brigades with these enhancements that are spoken so highly of. I would suggest NONE of this is possible in 3 months, the North simply hasnt the given economy to do it.
November, 1861 is meant to be the "balanced" scenario and I didn't comment on anything relating to buildings. However, in terms of what was done historically with the AoP, I can replicate it with historical settings. Note that I generally play the July, 1861 scenario so that's what my comments were focused on and also on using the historical settings. If you want the historical results, you need to adjust the settings to shift the balance economically more towards the North, ESPECIALLY for the "balanced" November scenario.
quote:
And if you are foolish enough to turn on upkeep, forget it, you might as well just surrender. I prefer random general stats, though I no longer hide them, since it appears they NEVER become known, ever.
With the settings I posted, I had no problems doing this and keeping upkeep on.
Regarding the hidden settings, we found that bug. It only was a problem if you never played detailed battles. Quick battles and instant battles were not revealing the hidden stats, but detailed battles were. Fixed for the next update as well.
quote:
And dont make the mistake of attacking with the Eastern Army against any Southern one any where as much as half or more your strength, chances are you lose, meaning the South gains one NAtional Will, the North loses 2 and there is usually a 12 point change on battle score as well, plus 6 for winner, minus 6 for loser. The Army of the Potamoc only need lose 4 battles to see the South win the war.
That would be a huge battle, usually it's more like +/- 3 and I really don't think that attacking in the November scenario, in the East, is a good idea. If you do it anyway, it will hurt.
Regards,
- Erik
|
|
|
|
