RE: Early August - turn 9 (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Civil War II >> After Action Report



Message

Ace1_slith -> RE: Early August - turn 9 (11/24/2013 7:41:54 PM)

In the West, McCulloh and Price are concentrating in front of St Louis. Union forces are inside the city, so they can safely rendevue outside the city.

Lyon is battered from last turn, so I can assault Cairo this turn with no fear of counter-attack.

[image]local://upfiles/46250/D643AA0615A54F68921D4CE62319DDF6.jpg[/image]



KamilS -> RE: Early August - turn 9 (11/24/2013 10:37:47 PM)

Respect for you, but on the other hand your opponent seems to be making to many mistakes.



Ace1_slith -> RE: Early August - turn 9 (11/25/2013 5:03:42 AM)

You played him as well, you should now. Before I say anything, I must say he is very fast PBEM player, returning turns within few hours I have sent the mail to him. In that haste, he sometimes overlooks things, from generals having command penalties, to forgotten cavalries in the far west outside town not receiving supplies.
I would recomend him as an opponent if you are looking for a fast entertaining game, not for a epic juggernaut clash.
Anyway, since I am writing this 6-7 turns after it has happened, I would be happy if he popped up to this thread to give us the view from his side, what was his reasoning for his moves.



Aurelian -> RE: Early August - turn 9 (11/25/2013 7:07:25 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ace1

You played him as well, you should now. Before I say anything, I must say he is very fast PBEM player, returning turns within few hours I have sent the mail to him. In that haste, he sometimes overlooks things, from generals having command penalties, to forgotten cavalries in the far west outside town not receiving supplies.
I would recomend him as an opponent if you are looking for a fast entertaining game, not for a epic juggernaut clash.
Anyway, since I am writing this 6-7 turns after it has happened, I would be happy if he popped up to this thread to give us the view from his side, what was his reasoning for his moves.


What can I say, I have yet to get a handle on the rush north. I wasn't expecting it, and frankly, I fell into a depression.

Yeah, I play fast. Very fast. It's a hold over from when I played face to face chess tourneys. (And they always tried to keep up with me... Doesn't work too well in PBEM.)

I need to slow down and put more thought into this.

But, no matter how many times I lose, I'll keep trying. I did win once :)



veji1 -> RE: Early August - turn 9 (11/25/2013 8:43:36 AM)

One thing is that experienced "playing to win" PBEM players do lots of things to optimize their forces which are not very in the spirit. Say you have an inactive general : break his stack in small components that you all send to the objective, that way they will travel faster, engage and fight with less penalty... It sucks that this is even possible. One should be stuck with his commanding officers, actually I think detached units without officers should suffer big big penalties : having a command officer should always be better, even if he is Floyd or some other drunkard.



Ace1_slith -> RE: Early August - turn 9 (11/25/2013 9:08:31 AM)

I admit, I do that a lot, but mainly because they will travel faster. If there was a combat, such divided force would be at a disadvantage since about half of its forces would not join the combat.

There was even a proposal at AGEod forum to introduce dispersed move special order. It would increase movement speed by lowering command penalties, but induce combat penalties, if met by an enemy.

I can even imagine RL situation. Look at the above example. McCulloh is active, but I still want to speed up movement. He orders his subordinate units to detach and find its way to StLouis. Moving small units is ALWAYS faster than moving large columns, in RL and in the game. So increase in speed is justified. Of course, if there is combat, each units fights on its own, with massive penalties as in RL. So I do not see problems with it.
Potential problem with the interface is the possibility to have two corps commanders in the same region, one with empty stack and one with full stack, shuffling units to whichever is the active one. I would consider this gamey and would never do that.



veji1 -> RE: Early August - turn 9 (11/25/2013 11:50:47 AM)

I get what you are saying, but for me this is typically something that should be abstracted within a stack : ie have a "dispersed march" order, just like "force march", that makes the stack faster but with combat penalties. Because the type of micromanagement you are doing makes sense with the engine, but still doesn't feel right.

For me the big issue anyway with stacks, leaders, etc, is that the player should only know if a leader was active or not the NEXT turn. ie, you order a leader to move from province A to B with offensive posture. Based on his strategic rating, he should get there in 11 days. Well next turn what to you see ? that bastard was inactive and still hasn't reached the province at the end of his turn... or he reached it but stayed defensive and didn't attack the weak ennemy stack there...

Otherwise one can too effectively game the system. Particularly in CW2 where there are lots more leaders and armies than in AACW... Not knowing who will be active means for example that either you spread your troops in 2/3 corps and order them to attack, hoping that some will be active and the other might join in even if inactive, or you stick with 1 strong corps, but if inactive, though luck you lost a turn... This would give the player the real incertainty of war, and make all C&C decisions more difficult... I can understand this could frustrate some players, but it really should be an available option, one that most of the experienced players would always use. AND it would help the AI tremendously as she just doesn't know how to optimize C&C like humans.



Ace1_slith -> RE: Early August - turn 9 (11/25/2013 12:24:59 PM)

I agree on the special orders dispersed march order- less micromanagment is always good. Forced march is not entirely the same, you get cohesion penalties, not just combat penalties.

Second proposal, not knowing whether he was active or not sounds interesting, and would indeed simulate uncertainties of war. I am only afraid we would get tons of complaints from players: He was supposed to attack it last turn, something is wrong with the game, or he was supposed to get there, this is bugged. If it could be done with a reality slider, it would be excellent. I only do not know if it would involve two much work for the developers to implement the changes.



veji1 -> RE: Early August - turn 9 (11/25/2013 12:55:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ace1

I agree on the special orders dispersed march order- less micromanagment is always good. Forced march is not entirely the same, you get cohesion penalties, not just combat penalties.

Second proposal, not knowing whether he was active or not sounds interesting, and would indeed simulate uncertainties of war. I am only afraid we would get tons of complaints from players: He was supposed to attack it last turn, something is wrong with the game, or he was supposed to get there, this is bugged. If it could be done with a reality slider, it would be excellent. I only do not know if it would involve two much work for the developers to implement the changes.


I agree that it would have to be an option, but honestly it would be great. First of all because suddenly you are faced with the more realistic feel of not knowing if your subordonates will carry your actions, and having more confidence that a Jackson or a Sherman will do it, than a Burnside. Just like in RL, there is uncertainty and doubt.

Second because for players that play against the AI, this is how the AI works. It doesn't game the leadership system, but players, even when trying to stay realistic and role play, instinctively game it.

It would also have the added effect of hampering the union a lot more at the beginning of the war, allowing for more soldiers to the union to compensate, rather than what we have now which is too few union soldiers to avoid Union steamrolling because a player can too easily the C&C problems that slowed the union down till end of 63 in the east.



Ace1_slith -> Late August - turn 10 (11/25/2013 3:44:19 PM)

I suggest you post your idea here- it is your idea after all, I have already posted on AGEod beta site:

http://www.ageod-forum.com/forumdisplay.php?343-Help-improve-CW2



Back to the AAR

Late August - turn 10

Late August saw some big action in three mayor theaters. I'll start with battle in front of Cairo. I've been investing in navy (I have one cottonclad) and have reclaimed river in front of Cairo:


[image]local://upfiles/46250/1BD7A3980D274A07A2ACA89BE17F7526.jpg[/image]



Ace1_slith -> RE: Late August - turn 10 (11/25/2013 9:42:19 PM)

Magruder was intercepted by Hamilton in a chance battle:


[image]local://upfiles/46250/35920A966007462BBC709A82CA40FC9F.jpg[/image]



Ace1_slith -> RE: Late August - turn 10 (11/25/2013 9:47:00 PM)

Polk was assaulting Cairo, and he nearly made it:



[image]local://upfiles/46250/E401C84C572246F08F3804DE4F88F164.jpg[/image]



Ace1_slith -> RE: Late August - turn 10 (11/25/2013 9:48:08 PM)

Lyon counterattack failed:


[image]local://upfiles/46250/DE6588598D20464BAD2AE73748F312CD.jpg[/image]



Ace1_slith -> RE: Late August - turn 10 (11/25/2013 9:50:02 PM)

Once he got to Pittsburg, Hamilton exhausted from previous battle with Magruder lost to Johnson.

[image]local://upfiles/46250/C63A25183054427B9862A998A2D1A704.jpg[/image]



Ace1_slith -> RE: Late August - turn 10 (11/25/2013 9:53:42 PM)

And the last battle of the turn. With On to Richmond event close to expiring, McDowell tried his luck at Mannassas, and failed. I have seen many players launch head on attack onto Manassas because of the event. Maybe, the event is too harsh if the battle did take place. Now, the Union will get double punishment, -10 NM from event and big losses on the field.

[image]local://upfiles/46250/52B7C8F4E1A14E7DBD99E8C0A6033BE1.jpg[/image]



Ace1_slith -> RE: Late August - turn 10 (11/25/2013 9:55:41 PM)

I will try to capitalize on my wins last turn by launching counterattacks with Jackson and Longstreet. Johnson and Beauregard have collected the wounded and are inside the cities.

[image]local://upfiles/46250/48707037CA8346418240227E3D2B7A04.jpg[/image]



Ace1_slith -> RE: Late August - turn 10 (11/25/2013 9:58:44 PM)

Two turns ago US has landed a small force at Ft Pickens. I reacted by sending 2 brigades from Nashville. They should arrive at Pensacola to lift the siege US has layed on the city in the previous turn:



[image]local://upfiles/46250/D956674959B04208910E22828B4FF43A.jpg[/image]



Q-Ball -> RE: Late August - turn 10 (11/26/2013 3:02:25 AM)

In my opinion, 10 NM is too steep a penalty on that Manassas event. That should be looked at.

It's a decent event, just 3-5 NM seems more reasonable

The other Union event with a 10 NM penalty, the "On to Richmond", also should be tempered



Ace1_slith -> RE: Late August - turn 10 (11/26/2013 3:51:21 AM)

The other Union event is more easy to acomplist, so I would not touch it.



Ace1_slith -> early Sep - turn 11 (11/26/2013 4:22:35 AM)

early Sep - turn 11

4 battles this turn, I'll start with Pittsburg battle first.
Hamilton force was caught, but it was only a skirmish. Note how 40% of my force were resting in a city during the battle.


[image]local://upfiles/46250/2ADC206128D2490C971B176D0136EFD1.jpg[/image]



Ace1_slith -> RE: early Sep - turn 11 (11/26/2013 4:25:16 AM)

New Mexico theater has come alive. Two brigades here really make a difference.


[image]local://upfiles/46250/BAB2ACD665674446A0E86F79BD731579.jpg[/image]



Ace1_slith -> RE: early Sep - turn 11 (11/26/2013 4:26:36 AM)

And two big battles, first Longstreet attack in front of Alexandria was a success:
Note how my opponent failed to combine his generals with his brigades

[image]local://upfiles/46250/9DC3DF065EE54A7EB9AAD28F8C10AF2E.jpg[/image]



Ace1_slith -> RE: early Sep - turn 11 (11/26/2013 4:31:06 AM)

And last, my Cairo troops have swollen to nearly 20.000 men, Polk got promoted, and is now commanding Army of Mississippi. After 4-5 unsuccesful attacks, Lyon force still does not have even a supply wagon with them. His force looks hastly assembled and does not resemble fight worthy Army. I am feeling more and more confident I would just steam roll past my opponent.

[image]local://upfiles/46250/BFAA6510E7D149C89E5056942595EA30.jpg[/image]



Ace1_slith -> RE: early Sep - turn 11 (11/26/2013 4:37:46 AM)

Plans for the next phase:

First, I 'll look at his options. With only 4% MC in Alexandria region, he can either retreat to Washington (better move), or he can take cover inside Alexandria fortifications. I will order Longstreet to lay siege on Alexandria. It was tempting to order an assault, but if he enters the fort with AoP, I cannot storm it. Time is my ally here. I will lay the siege. If he enters the fort, while besieged, his battered units can only recover cohesion, they cannot receive replacements. I am railing exhausted part of my Army to Manassas.


[image]local://upfiles/46250/283408078D9749D68D59878A8B5D763E.jpg[/image]



Ace1_slith -> RE: early Sep - turn 11 (11/26/2013 4:41:05 AM)

After succesful counterattack, his WV force is spend, so I can safely take the initiative. My shaken units will rest with Johnston (+15% speed in regaining cohesion trait), while Jackson will use his fast move ability to capture Morgantown. The Grafton depot located there will be a nice catch and I'll be close to establising supply line to Virginia.


[image]local://upfiles/46250/0ECAC05FF3D140CDA3DD081D84651B4B.jpg[/image]



Ace1_slith -> RE: early Sep - turn 11 (11/26/2013 4:43:58 AM)

Deep south theater.

I see he has failed to bring any supply wagons with him. So, time is my friend here, I will share a region with him until his supplies start to shrink (no forced assault for either side here snce we have 50-50 MC in the region). I am stronger than him, and I could dislodge him, but I see no point in waisting lives when he will have to evacuate by himself.

[image]local://upfiles/46250/169ED396F4C348F6AD4BECD148ED1E92.jpg[/image]



Ace1_slith -> RE: early Sep - turn 11 (11/26/2013 4:47:27 AM)

Newly formed AoM is on half of its strength from previous battles, but I am so confident in the poor state of his troops, that I am ordering march to Salem, getting rid of the command penalties surely makes me even more confident, maybe too confident since I have not scouted the region ahead or made any preparations for the offensive.

[image]local://upfiles/46250/09288968FA704A0E99139819173E2A8A.jpg[/image]



Ace1_slith -> RE: early Sep - turn 11 (11/26/2013 4:48:43 AM)

I have not seen any US purchases in the New Mexico and Colorado, so I have clear upperhand in the area:


[image]local://upfiles/46250/A379D103136247598482FEB518D17B3C.jpg[/image]



TulliusDetritus -> RE: early Sep - turn 11 (11/26/2013 1:36:38 PM)

WOW [X(]

You really are a pro! [:)]

Aurelian will certainly think there is a huge unbalaced issue here! And not without a reason.



Ace1_slith -> Late Sep - turn 12 (11/26/2013 6:09:34 PM)

Late Sep - turn 12

3 noteworthy battles this turn. I start with the first one on day 3. Aurelian thought he can land at Jefferson city behind my lines, while I was in front of St Louis. He forgot, I am standing on untouched rail line, and can react very quickly to such incursions.


[image]local://upfiles/46250/F158E9C4AB334D648075AFE0F814EA0B.jpg[/image]



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.264648