Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: ARR III

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Forge of Freedom: The American Civil War 1861-1865 >> After Action Reports >> RE: ARR III Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: ARR III - 11/1/2006 6:57:06 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		That hurt

Robert E does it again

I out for blood now

my Troops are moving to rejoin




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 31
RE: ARR III - 11/1/2006 7:25:43 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		rebuilding my Army

moving troops back to the Army

my other troops are massing for a attack on Tenn-Miss-River area

my fleet has been slaughtered


_____________________________


(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 32
RE: ARR III - 11/1/2006 7:38:18 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		this is the big one

I got a good armmed Army, got some new fangled Gatlings, Improved Springfields, a few Withworths Sharpshooters, only 1 battery of guns and 1 Cav Bde

only am not ready for battle when the first wave hits






Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 33
RE: ARR III - 11/1/2006 7:48:33 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		the 2nd wave begins

the battlefield is not as good as it looks, most of the CSA troops are not in line of sight yet (you get little spot sighting of them at times)




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 34
RE: ARR III - 11/1/2006 7:57:31 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		this battle, I was able to form a line and have a Div in Reserve, it is coming in handy

the CSA has done damage, rushes and flanking attacks, but that has no staying power

they will bleed themselfs dry pretty soon, if they don't break though the line




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 35
RE: ARR III - 11/1/2006 8:01:02 PM   
spruce

 

Posts: 404
Joined: 9/23/2006
Status: offline 		great AAR !

(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 36
RE: ARR III - 11/1/2006 8:01:07 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		this I do not like to see

he should of stayed with the Artty




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 37
RE: ARR III - 11/1/2006 8:07:35 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		the northern battle line

the Iron bde has been shattered




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 38
RE: ARR III - 11/1/2006 8:08:46 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		the southern front




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 39
RE: ARR III - 11/1/2006 8:19:01 PM   
Gil R.


Posts: 10821
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline 		In case this hasn't been pointed out, those triangular piles of cannonballs represent that a unit is out of supply, and either needs to have a supply wagon resupply it or head to a nearby town/village, where it gains one supply level each turn.

Units that are out of supply can still fight (after all, they can still scrape up a few projectiles and grains of gunpowder here and there), but are FAR less effective, and therefore easier to destroy.

(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 40
RE: ARR III - 11/1/2006 8:39:23 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		Entreachments and firepower is key

that was a very good battle, it was fun and touchy, the CSA even broke my line, but the power it took to break it, kept them from being able to follow up with enough power to do anything

that should be the last Hurrah of the CSA in this game

next turn a major battle should be fought in Tenn-Miss-River, it should be around 124000 vs 35000 (4 forts, so take off 12000 lousy troops from the total for the CSA)

most of the CSA friends overseas have left them

and as Gil says, I pretty much out of supply not getting much supplies in my battles (but overall my fault, I not upped the supply levels of my Armies)






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Hard Sarge -- 11/1/2006 8:43:27 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 41
RE: ARR III - 11/1/2006 8:42:50 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: spruce

great AAR !


thank you sir !



_____________________________


(in reply to spruce)
Post #: 42
RE: ARR III - 11/1/2006 9:55:55 PM   
Joram

 

Posts: 3198
Joined: 7/15/2005
Status: offline 		Holy cow, what setting is this on? I have no doubt that you're skilled but even so should you really have defeated the South by Oct '62?

Also, the screenies you did provide showed you consistently had 2 or even 3 to one kill ratio over your opponent? While I appreciate the openness of the AAR's, this certainly isn't giving me any faith that the AI, tactical or strategic, is up to snuff. So what settings are you playing on again?

(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 43
RE: ARR III - 11/1/2006 10:34:49 PM   
Tophat1815

 

Posts: 1824
Joined: 1/16/2006
Status: offline
Slightly concerned myself on this about the ai.........

(in reply to Joram)
Post #: 44
RE: ARR III - 11/1/2006 11:20:04 PM   
regularbird

 

Posts: 161
Joined: 10/27/2005
Status: offline 		Sarge, does the CSA AI tend to be a little to aggressive? From your AAR it seems as though the CSA is on the offensive a little to often. 

(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 45
RE: ARR III - 11/2/2006 2:04:10 AM   
jchastain


Posts: 2164
Joined: 8/8/2003
From: Marietta, GA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Joram

Holy cow, what setting is this on?

Hard Sarge has been posting the option screens. In each AAR he has played, you can see the difficulty level in the bottom left - it is "First Sergeant". The lowest level of difficulty is "Tutorial", then "Corporal", "Sergeant" and "First Sergeant". It then continues all the way up to "Major General". So, he is playing on one of the lower difficulty settings. As has been discussed previously, the difficulty level does not directly affect the AI performance in the tactical battles, so the kill ratios he is getting at the start of the war would not likely change considerably even at very high difficulty levels. The AI simply can't compete on an even level with Sarge's rather impressive tactical prowess. What would change is that he would have far less resources to invest in raising, supporting, supplying, improving, and equipping his armies. So, over time things would get more difficult for him as his opponent applied its disproportionate economic muscle.

(in reply to Joram)
Post #: 46
RE: ARR III - 11/2/2006 2:10:20 AM   
Gil R.


Posts: 10821
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline 		Jchastain is right to point out that Hard Sarge's difficulty level is an important factor, but I'm not sure if the last part of what he wrote will be immediately clear to everyone. On the HARDer settings, the AI gets material advantages, making battles more difficult even if the AI isn't any smarter because the AI can afford more and better weapons, more upgrades, more attributes, etc.

(in reply to jchastain)
Post #: 47
RE: ARR III - 11/2/2006 2:23:53 AM   
jchastain


Posts: 2164
Joined: 8/8/2003
From: Marietta, GA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

Jchastain is right to point out that Hard Sarge's difficulty level is an important factor, but I'm not sure if the last part of what he wrote will be immediately clear to everyone. On the HARDer settings, the AI gets material advantages, making battles more difficult even if the AI isn't any smarter because the AI can afford more and better weapons, more upgrades, more attributes, etc.


Yep, in the games I have been seeing - he actually has weapons with better range than the AI. At higher difficulty levels, he would be hard pressed to purchase those upgraded weapons. That would impact his ability to inflict casualties. Supplies have a very significant impact on unit performance. With fewer resources, it would be much harder to maintain high levels of supply and after a fight or two, units would be hard pressed to replenish themselves and their effectiveness would therefore be reduced. At the highest levels, the purchase of additional attributes becomes all but impossible. So, the first few battles might not be materially different, but by 1862 and especially by 1863, the landscape should look quite different (at least it is for me but I am the first to admit that I don't hold a candle to Hard Sarge's command ability).

(in reply to Gil R.)
Post #: 48
RE: ARR III - 11/2/2006 2:28:03 AM   
Joram

 

Posts: 3198
Joined: 7/15/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jchastain


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joram

Holy cow, what setting is this on?

Hard Sarge has been posting the option screens. In each AAR he has played, you can see the difficulty level in the bottom left - it is "First Sergeant". The lowest level of difficulty is "Tutorial", then "Corporal", "Sergeant" and "First Sergeant". It then continues all the way up to "Major General". So, he is playing on one of the lower difficulty settings. As has been discussed previously, the difficulty level does not directly affect the AI performance in the tactical battles, so the kill ratios he is getting at the start of the war would not likely change considerably even at very high difficulty levels. The AI simply can't compete on an even level with Sarge's rather impressive tactical prowess. What would change is that he would have far less resources to invest in raising, supporting, supplying, improving, and equipping his armies. So, over time things would get more difficult for him as his opponent applied its disproportionate economic muscle.



Thank you for the explanation.

(in reply to jchastain)
Post #: 49
RE: ARR III - 11/2/2006 4:09:10 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		Oh well, battle is over, a new verison is out, so the AAR's may be a little slower in coming

next one I am set on Col

one thing guys, lets remember that these have been AARs based on a Beta Test, by a Beta Tester

things being seen are being reported, looked at, talked about, and then tested

_____________________________


(in reply to Joram)
Post #: 50
RE: ARR III - 11/2/2006 6:10:38 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		Battle for Wheeling

1 Div is in place, while a Corps is on the way to help

soon a 2nd Corps is moving in, but as there are a lot of Union troops on the march, the more the merrier

my other Div has been left in place, in case some one runs the wrong way

(even good Generals can learn)




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 51
RE: ARR III - 11/2/2006 6:14:09 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		really wish I had more of my replacements in place before the battle was joined, nothing like marching to the sounds of the guns

but in the end, it pays off, as they catch a long flanking move the Union was trying

good soild battle, my line is broken, but I got reservse to plug the gaps

but I lose Ewell to a Chargeing Union Bde




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 52
RE: ARR III - 11/3/2006 5:41:43 PM   
RERomine

 

Posts: 280
Joined: 7/19/2006
Status: offline 		Just in reading Sarge's reports, the AI seems like it's doing quite well. I know everyone would like to have a situation where on an average difficulty setting with equal opposing forces, the AI would win half of the battles against an average player, but I don't think that's practical. The amount of computing power it would take to accomplish that is probably beyond most PCs and I think poor Eric would die writing the code.

I've brought this up in other threads about computer chess. You have something that has been worked on for decades. It has only 64 squares to move on and none of those squares have any intrinsic value (other than row 8 for pawns). There are a total of 16 pieces on each side. Since every game starts with set parameters, all that was required was to devise a method of determining the value of positions. Back in the 1980's, I had a computer chess game I had to have on the highest difficulty level just to get a solid game. And then, I could go watch a movie while the AI decided what it wanted to do.

Any game like FoF, were 'pieces' have different values and the values change further during play and the 'squares' are more numerous and have differing values as well, it's beyond the realm of practicality to have a rock solid AI. Further complicating things is each battle is different. At least with chess games every battle is fought on the same battlefield over and over again. There are just too many variables. Getting the AI to handle the movement mechanics, operate in some form of cohesive manner and generally have a coordinated plan seems good to me.

But if Eric wants to take on the challenge to code the perfect AI, it must be complete by the year 2050

Note: Two hour turns are not acceptable with the perfect AI



< Message edited by RERomine -- 11/3/2006 7:43:56 PM >

(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 53
RE: ARR III - 11/3/2006 6:40:36 PM   
marecone


Posts: 469
Joined: 7/31/2006
From: Croatia, Europe
Status: offline 		Amen to that RERomine!

_____________________________

"I have never, on the field of battle, sent you where I was unwilling to go myself; nor would I now advise you to a course which I felt myself unwilling to pursue."

Nathan Bedford Forrest

(in reply to RERomine)
Post #: 54
RE: ARR III - 11/3/2006 8:04:45 PM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		Well, the current game has been played on Col

one of my battles, the AI was moving onto one of my forts in Kentucky, I moved a Div in to help out, but the AI then reinforced with another army, which would of been bad enough, but it then pulled off a Surprise attack

got plastered good on the opening round, but I pulled off one of my better battles, I ran away, and turned between two hills and slaughtered the troops who chased me, and then I got ripped apart, when night fell, I gave the command to retreat, but gave it too soon, and one of my Bdes was captured

the fort finnally fell

now a Union Army has marched into Tenn, my two Corps have driven off the Div guarding Cinci, the AOP has been making raids into Fredericksburg, massive battles, they have taken heavy losses but are wearing my troops down, now they have moved a Div out to sea

the next turn, may bring about 3 Major battles (Tenn-Miss-River, Tenn and Fredericksburg)

the sea raid may hurt, but should not be deadly, but I had to move my coastal Div up to Tenn

I have 2 Divs in Kentucky, that are on rest, another in the west, but that is a decoy

the Union is Hurting, the score is going against it, but all it takes is one good win to flip the score around

some of the changes made since the last few AARs are really coming to the forfront now

_____________________________


(in reply to marecone)
Post #: 55
RE: ARR III - 11/3/2006 9:00:13 PM   
spruce

 

Posts: 404
Joined: 9/23/2006
Status: offline 		Hurray! Hurrah!
For Hard Sarge, Hurrah!
Hurrah for the general 
That bears a single defeat !


(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 56
RE: ARR III - 11/3/2006 10:08:49 PM   
bigbaba


Posts: 1238
Joined: 11/3/2006
From: Koblenz, Germany
Status: offline 		yeh, finaly they got sarge.

damnd nice to read your reports, sarge. keep the good AARs comming please.

bye

(in reply to spruce)
Post #: 57
RE: ARR III - 11/4/2006 12:15:34 AM   
Oldguard


Posts: 94
Joined: 9/15/2005
Status: offline 		Sarge, great stuff, much appreciated!

(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 58
RE: ARR III - 11/4/2006 10:10:58 AM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		okay, lets see if this is the Major Turning point or not :)

this is the prebattle movement shot, this is where my troops should be




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Oldguard)
Post #: 59
RE: ARR III - 11/4/2006 10:30:27 AM   
Hard Sarge


Posts: 22741
Joined: 10/1/2000
From: garfield hts ohio usa
Status: offline 		I run into some troops in Kenawha, 85,955 CSA to 8436, I do a Quick Combat, to get it out of the way, they run

in Appalachia, Robert E runs into 9000 Union troops, with his Corps of 42566 men, this one I fight

A. I do not want these troops making it to join the main battle

B. I may get the Union to pull troops out of the South to try and reinforce the battle, if so, then I can wear then down before the main battle starts

what is a shock, the Union lands a Div on the coast, I seen it was at sea, but thought it would be headed for the deep south, not near the main lines


_____________________________


(in reply to Hard Sarge)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Forge of Freedom: The American Civil War 1861-1865 >> After Action Reports >> RE: ARR III Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.813