|
Sardonic -> Battle losses are unrealistic (8/1/2007 12:33:46 PM)
|
Just fought a battle at Lexington (Ky) with Polk holding the city with level 5 entrenchments and in game terms
roughly 1500 points of defenders.
I will assume this is roughly 30k troops, mostly militia. He had Polk, Stuart, D.H. Hill, and Monsan?
I advanced upon the city with one corp, led by Grant with, Thomas, Sherman, Shields, and one other Union badass.
The divisional commanders were maxxed out with all they could command but weak on arty.
Kearny was besieging at the start with 8 CV units and 4 horse/arty.
My battle strength was in excess of 2k(in game terms) each division had over 10k men. So I would guess what? 45k men?
Polk had four arty units, and basicly, I sure wish I had brought some.
After roughly 9 rounds of combat, the Rebs were gone. If they ran away, I didnt see it.
6k prisoners.
Going by the listed losses, on the combat reports, they suffered 92% casualties.
Of the Union corp, Thomas must be a mad-dog because his division was dropped into a meat grinder.
At the start of the battle, Polk sortied, and kicked Kearny's command all the way back to Cincinnati.
At most the Union suffered 30% casualties. Each round of combat showing the Reb guns doing a great job
of shredding my Ky militia.
Which is another thing, when both are present, it seems to me militia are the ones that die the most.
(if only that were true, ask George Washington)
From what I can see, Polk had three or four full supply wagons and somewhere during the battle he ran
out of ammo. At that point, he refused to retreat, and got shredded in melee.
I could be wrong of course.
But even at Nashville, no Reb unit took that kind of beating. The men had too much common sence, and
would retreat w/o orders if they felt the command was being stupid.
|
|
|
|
