Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Confederate POV

 
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] >> Gary Grigsby's War Between the States >> AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Confederate POV Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Confed... - 1/28/2008 6:12:49 AM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 32265
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline 		I’ve just begun a test PBEM game with one of our testers, rjh1971 (Rafael). I plan on posting a report of the game as it’s in progress. I’ve asked Rafael to avoid reading this thread since we’re playing with Fog of War and my posts will divulge sensitive information. You’re welcome to post questions as I go along and I’ll try to answer them (and other testes are free to jump in and answer questions as well). Rafael may at some point post his own Union thread and if he does, I ask you don’t give away any information to either of us that we shouldn’t know.

We’re playing the full campaign scenario that starts in July 1861. I’m playing the Confederate side. We’re playing with the Fog of War game option on, but we’re not using the optional Sub-Commander or Limited Command Point Recovery rules. That means we won’t be dealing with attaching what are basically divisional commanders to higher-level corps commanders, and we have greater flexibility to switch units between different leaders. Playing without these rules makes for a quicker, simpler game but does cause some loss of detail and realism. Most importantly we are using the Random Leaders and Unknown Leader Ratings Optional Rules. This means that many leadership ratings are randomized at the beginning of the game (instead of being historically based), and that most of these ratings will be unknown to us until the leaders begin to use these ratings during gameplay. There are rules regarding the randomization that generally favor some of the Confederate player’s early war high level leaders, so the Confederate player usually has a leadership edge early in the war. By using these optional rules both players face the historical difficulty of identifying leaders that are suited for Army command, and those that are suited for Theater command (more of an administrative role). This can be a painful but ultimately rewarding process and makes for added game replayability.

The Union first turn followed a familiar script, with McClellan taking Grafton in West Virginia and a force of unknown size seizing Springfield, Missouri. My main concerns at this point are protecting Virginia and the various Atlantic and Gulf ports. Kentucky is neutral and the Union will suffer a big political hit if he invades it too early so I’m willing to keep fewer troops in Tennessee for now. I’ve also pulled most of my troops out of Northwestern Arkansas since any move there would be far from a railhead or river.

One of the first choices I had to make was who to promote to Army and Theatre Command. I started with one Theatre Commander (Samual Copper) while I’m allowed two. I started with three Army Commanders (Joe Johnston, Albert Sidney Johnston and PGT Beauregard) while I’m allowed up to four. The key statistic for a Confederate Army Commander is the Defense Rating (cannon ball bouncing off a wall, can range from low of 1 to high of 4). The only other commanders I have with the required 11 command points to be named as an AC are Twiggs and Polk. As I don’t know their defense (or attack) ratings, I elected to promote Polk given he has a higher infantry value (3) which will help some in combat. I considered promoting AS Johnston to theatre command given his 2 defense rating, but decided to go with only one TC for now as I didn’t want to risk Twiggs as an AC. ASJ has a high infantry value and a high command rating (18) which can be very helpful in combat. To be made a TC, the leader must be a 3 or 4 star general and I want to see how well my leaders fight before I promote them. I can live without a TC for now, especially while Kentucky remains neutral. I will pay a small price in political points for leaving this post open.




Attachment (1)
Post #: 1
RE: AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Co... - 1/28/2008 6:19:39 AM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 32265
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline 		The screenshot below shows the forces at the beginning of my turn. During my production phase I mobilized 14 additional militia units and my training went well. The Confederate player generally sees a higher percentage of their militia become infantry, while the Confederate cavalry advantage is even larger in the early years and that should become clear after a few turns of mobilizing and training. Even so, I am heavily outnumbered.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 2
RE: AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Co... - 1/28/2008 6:28:05 AM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 32265
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline 		Here is the situation in the west after my move but before production. The numbers in red on the map are the number of combat units in each area. Each unit is 2000 men (brigade) or 20 guns (battalion). The relatively light forces on the Tennesse border are counting on the Union staying out of Kentucky for a few months. I moved 4 Heavy Artillery battalions to Humbolt (West Tennessee between the Mississippi and Tennessee Rivers) in order to deter his gunboats and transports from heading south. Off screen to the south I deployed a similar number of guns to Fort Jackson and Fort St. Philip to guard the mouth of the Mississippi River. Small garrisons protect the Gulf Coast ports.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Joel Billings -- 1/28/2008 6:43:40 AM >

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 3
RE: AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Co... - 1/28/2008 6:42:42 AM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 32265
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline 		And finally, here is the situation in the East. A large army in Manassas under Joe Johnston faces off against the Union army in Washington. I've sent Beauregard to Petersburg where he commands a small force that can react to any attack made on the North Carolina or Virginia coasts. My cavalry has scouted the forces in Washington fairly well, so I have a good sense of the true strength of the forces I'm up against. Forces in Winchester and New Kent (next to Fort Monroe) should protect those areas and can react to assist other threatened areas if necessary. Off-screen, I have about 15000 men guarding the Atlantic ports in the deep south. At this point in the war I'm also counting on additional militia that will mobilize if a major port is attacked (since most of the troops on both sides are untrained).
My goal will be to try to hold in Virginia and prevent the loss of any of the major Atlantic ports. In the west, I hope to hold the line north of Memphis and Nashville as long as possible, while trying to keep Union ships from entering the southern stretch of the Mississippi River. I'll try to hold the Gulf ports as well, although I expect to lose some of the coastal areas. I don't plan on violating Kentucky's neutrality but instead will wait for the Union to attack first.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 4
RE: AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Co... - 1/29/2008 2:53:08 AM   
lancer

 

Posts: 2963
Joined: 10/18/2005
Status: offline 		Goodaye Joel,

Good to see an AAR. You mentioned the following...

"we’re not using the optional Sub-Commander or Limited Command Point Recovery rules"

are you able to talk a bit more about how both work?

Cheers,
PLugger

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 5
RE: AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Co... - 1/29/2008 5:46:59 AM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 32265
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline 		Here's the short description of the options that is in the manual. These refer to more involved descriptions that appear elsewhere in the manual:

Use sub-commanders (17.3): With the exception of leaders appointed as Theater and Army Commanders (2.1, 4.1, 5.0), the default set up for Gary Grigsby’s War Between the States has all other leaders as independent unit commanders with units directly attached. The Corps sub-commanders option allows the player to emulate the Corps and Divisional structure adopted by both sides as the war progressed. Starting in December 1861 for the Confederates and January 1862 for the Union, leaders with a command rating greater than six will be designated as Corps Commanders and can directly attach lower command rating leaders to them as Corps sub-commanders (CSCs). These CSCs do not have units directly attached, but will assist units attached to the Corps Commander in committing to battle as well as attacking and defending. The Corps Sub-Commander option can be selected by selecting the “Use sub-commanders” text or the check box to the right of the text.

Limited Command Point Recovery (17.4): The default set up immediately returns command points to a leader who detaches a unit, allowing them flexibility in attaching and detaching units throughout the turn. This option limits the players’ ability to detach and attach units by not returning any command points lost due to detachment of units until the beginning of the next turn. The Limited Command Point Recovery option can be selected by clicking on the “Limited Command Point Recovery” text or the check box to the right of the text.


(in reply to lancer)
Post #: 6
RE: AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Co... - 1/29/2008 6:04:52 AM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 32265
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline 		Not much happened on turn 2 (August). Union forces built up in Washington and no doubt also are forming on the Kentucky border. I used my Cavalry advantage in Northern Virginia to scout more of the troops near Washington and then launched a cavalry raid that captured 2 supplies and destroyed 8 more (minor, but nice to see). Most of my ports are facing a blockade, but I'm still getting over 120 supplies a turn from overseas trade. I expect this to drop a lot in the coming months and will try to remember to explain why as it happens. I started construction of a second Merchant Raider. I used my 3 good administrative/engineering leaders to build fortifications around several gulf ports. The screenshot shows the situation in the Gulf.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 7
RE: AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Co... - 1/29/2008 6:09:19 AM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 32265
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline 		Here is the forces screen just before the end of my production phase. After this I mobilized 5 new militia units, but I'm still outnumbered by 2 to 1. I forgot to mention that the Union player paid the political price to call for additional troops. My Mounted units are converting to Cavalry units much quicker than the Union, so I'm gaining a cavalry advantage.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Joel Billings -- 1/29/2008 6:10:02 AM >

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 8
RE: AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Co... - 1/29/2008 6:11:44 AM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 32265
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline 		Here is the political screen.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 9
RE: AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Co... - 1/29/2008 7:42:00 PM   
WallysWorld


Posts: 172
Joined: 12/21/2006
From: Calgary, Alberta
Status: offline 		Please continue! Interesting...

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 10
RE: AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Co... - 1/30/2008 8:41:49 AM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 32265
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline 		In September, Union troops invaded Kentucky. Kentucky remained neutral (there was a 30% chance it would go to the south). By staying neutral, the Union player can take advantage of factories in Kentucky once they capture all of the population centers. the Union will have to garrison the state with some troops. The Union lost 60 political points for moving into Kentucky first, but the regions he captured made up for the loss in the short run. But in the long run, those 60 points can hurt. Had the Union player waited until October, the cost would have only been 20 political points and the chance of going Confederate would have been 10%. By moving in September, he now has the possibility of moving into Tennessee before winter weather arrives in November. In addition to the move into Kentucky, the Union player invaded several islands in the Gulf and off the Atlantic Coast. Starting next turn these will increase the effectiveness of the Union blockade. A landing was made in Gainesville, Florida (west coast) which I opposed. Unfortunately my militia unit ran after being bombarded by ships and the remaining infantry unit could not keep the 2 attacking infantry units from taking the area. Just a minor skirmish. In the west, my cavalry raid of Paducah, Kentucky disrupted the depot there and will make it harder the Union to get initiative there in October. My cavalry scouted all front line positions but I'm still in the dark as to where three of the Union army commanders are located. The screenshot shows the position in the west. Keep in kind that the red numbers showing Union troop strength does not include any units that have not been spotted, and I know there are some unspotted units in both Paducah and Bowling Green.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 11
RE: AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Co... - 1/30/2008 12:57:34 PM   
lancer

 

Posts: 2963
Joined: 10/18/2005
Status: offline 		Goodaye Joel,

I'm enjoying the AAR. A couple of questions.

1. What do the outlines (eg. cavalry man in dark blue / ship in dark blue) signify?

2. In your Political (?) screenshot you showed you line up of commanders with a couple having a red arrow next to their name. Does this mean they are activated or that they have had help from their theatre commander in activating?

3. In the same screenshot it gives a couple of percentage figures, eg. 60% next to one commander in the same box as the red arrow may or may not appear. What does that refer to?

Cheers,
Lancer

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 12
RE: AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Co... - 1/30/2008 3:30:06 PM   
JudgeDredd


Posts: 8573
Joined: 11/14/2003
From: Scotland
Status: offline 		lancer
1. Shows that you know troops are there...you just don't know what forces make up the unit (unsighted units)...to do with fog of war...if you were to scout that region you would discover the makeup of the units (perhaps not fully)
2. The red arrow indicates they have initiative. This means any (most?) units in the same region will have initiative and perhaps a few in surrounding regions. Initiative is what is required to make an attack.
3. That is the percentage of that commander gaining initiative. You can use this to gauge where you may well be able to assault, so get moving forces around.

I'm sure this can be put more eloquently and/or in more detail, but I think that's those are the basic answers.


< Message edited by JudgeDredd -- 1/30/2008 3:32:33 PM >

_____________________________

Alba gu' brath

(in reply to lancer)
Post #: 13
RE: AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Co... - 1/30/2008 11:27:19 PM   
lancer

 

Posts: 2963
Joined: 10/18/2005
Status: offline 		Goodaye JudgeDredd,

Thanks for the reply. Got most of it but I'm still unclear on no.3, the percentages.

Does Samuel Coooper having a 60% activation roll mean that only 60% of his forces can move this turn?

Cheers,
Lancer

(in reply to JudgeDredd)
Post #: 14
RE: AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Co... - 1/30/2008 11:52:19 PM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 32265
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline 		It means based on his ratings he had a 60% chance of getting initiative for the turn (signified by a red arrow when you get it). When a Theatre Commander gets initiative, he assists any Army Commanders within range and other independent leaders with their initiative checks (increases their percentage chance). When an Army Commander gets initiative, all leaders in his area get initiative, allowing the army to launch an attack. The NA's show up for leaders whose leadership ratings are unknown (at least one of the ratings that influence an initiative check).

(in reply to lancer)
Post #: 15
RE: AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Co... - 1/31/2008 3:35:12 AM   
lancer

 

Posts: 2963
Joined: 10/18/2005
Status: offline 		Goodaye Joel,

O.K. Got it.

Thanks.

Cheers,
Lancer

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 16
RE: AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Co... - 2/1/2008 9:21:06 AM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 32265
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline 		October was a relatively quiet month. The Union army commanders did not get initiative and from what I can tell the Union player built up strength in Washington, Harper's Ferry and along the Kentucky-Tennessee border. Active scouting in Harper's Ferry and around Washington found the army in Washington under McDowell has been growing, and there is now a smaller supporting army under Halleck in Harper's Ferry. The Union army built depots in the islands recently captured in order to enhance the blockading ability of the navy. This turn I only received about 90 supplies from overseas trade. I've increased my production of artillery and reduced my supply production, although I may not be able to support this for long given my supply situation, especially as my armies grow in size. Below is the situation in and around Virginia at the end of the October turn.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to lancer)
Post #: 17
RE: AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Co... - 2/1/2008 9:35:16 AM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 32265
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline 		In the west, I've yet to determine where the Union army commanders are, but I assume they're in Paducah and Bowling Green. I've scouted both but I can't be sure exactly how many troops I'm up against. I did manage to raid the depot in Paducah again which will reduce the chance of initiative for leaders in Paducah. The Union took Newport, Arkansas (in the northeast corner of the state). In November winter weather rules apply, so movement will be reduced, and the chance for leaders to gain initiative is lowered. I expect any Union army commander that gets initiative will launch an attack given the current 2 to 1 disparity in total manpower. I've almost completed by fortification building program on the coasts (one reason I'm so low on supplies now), but I've had to strip many of the garrisons in order to reinforce my forces in Tenessee and Virginia. I'm hoping that the limited Union sealift at this point in the game can be handled by a combination of my small garrisons and any militia that will be mobilized when an invasion force appears. The current political score is Union 1038 to Confederate 990, as the captured territories in Kentucky and the other neutral states have offset the political cost of the invasion. I'm hoping for a quiet winter.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 18
RE: AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Co... - 2/2/2008 7:05:22 AM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 32265
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline 		Another relatively quiet month, although I did lose an area of Texas when the Union Navy showed up with 10,000 troops. A combination of winter and a poor leader kept my troops in Galveston from being able to march south to counter the invasion. The local militia formed up and retreated to Galveston after suffering 1000 losses. I now have 10000 troops in Galveston. I think these will be enough to prevent further losses in Texas, but in order to launch a counter attack I'll have to send better leadership. Unfortunately all my senior leaders are fully employed in other areas. This turn I was able to reinforce my heavy artillery positions at the mouth of the Mississippi River, Mobile, Savannah and Humbolt (Tennessee). I was able to advance up the Cumberland Gap with a small force and take London, Kentucky. The Union player built additional depots in Kentucky and my cavalry was forced to spend their time scouting the Union build up. These depots will make it more likely that the Union forces will gain initiative and be able to attack. With the defensive abilities of my leaders unknown, I'm very worried about my weak positions in northern Tennessee. I identified a third army commander, Lyon, located in Paducah. Most likely the remaining army commander, McClellan is located in Bowling Green. McClellan has a known attack ability of 3 (4 is best) which makes him a major threat (although he has an unknown army modifier, which could reduce his ability by 0, -1 or -2.) I can only hope that at most one of the army commanders in Kentucky will gain initiative, and I can consolidate enough of my forces to oppose an attack by whichever commander gets initiative. If both armies move forward at once I'd be very hard pressed.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 19
RE: AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Co... - 2/2/2008 7:27:45 AM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 32265
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline 		In the east, McDowell appears to have gotten initiative but declined to attack (other than sending the naval force to the Texas coast). I was surprised that the Union passed up a chance to attack with their larger forces, although with his cavalry strongly outnumbered, the locations of my forces are mostly unknown and I'd receive a substantial bonus in combat. As you can see in the screen below, I now have 9 trained cavalry units and 3 mounted units (as yet untrained) while the Union only has 3 trained cavalry and 7 mounted units. Mounted units scout and raid at about 1/4 the value of a cavalry units, so I have about twice the cavalry power as the Union at the moment. Although in infantry and militia (untrained infantry) I'm outnumbered 196 to 89, 69% of my units are trained while only 54% of the Union foot soldiers are trained. Once the frontline armies are predominantly infantry units, militia units will not be of much value in major battles. So although I'm outnumbered in infantry and militia by 2.2 to 1, I'm only outnumbered in infantry by 1.7 to 1. I've noticed the Union gunboat forces have grown, and I'm trying to expand my heavy artillery forces to counter this build up.
Rafael will be unavailable starting Sunday for about a week, so it would appear that just when things may start getting interesting we'll have to take a break.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 20
RE: AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Co... - 2/3/2008 4:49:02 AM   
WallysWorld


Posts: 172
Joined: 12/21/2006
From: Calgary, Alberta
Status: offline 		I noticed that in your first post you mentioned that Fog of War is turned on. With the above screen, are the Union unit figures accurate or just an estimate because of Fog of War?

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 21
RE: AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Co... - 2/3/2008 8:31:39 AM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 32265
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline 		Each unit can be hidden or spotted. The Union numbers represent the number of units I have spotted in the area. I can get a sense from my cavalry scouting raids whether there's likely to be a lot of unspotted units or just a few. I'm guessing there are around 45-50 units in Paducah and another 45-50 in Bowling Green, as both areas have been relatively well scouted. A much higher percentage of my troops are unspotted at this time due to weaker Union cavarly (plus some of the Union cav was busy taking areas in Kentucky). Once spotted, a unit must go to an area that is not adjacent to any enemy areas to become hidden again.

(in reply to WallysWorld)
Post #: 22
RE: AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Co... - 2/4/2008 2:31:19 AM   
ph4n

 

Posts: 33
Joined: 4/9/2002
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Status: offline 		But what about the force overview screen (listing trained/untrained inf, cav and so on)? Are those #'s estimations or 100% accurate with FoW?

_____________________________

regards,
fredrik

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 23
RE: AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Co... - 2/4/2008 3:02:49 AM   
WallysWorld


Posts: 172
Joined: 12/21/2006
From: Calgary, Alberta
Status: offline 		Yes, as ph4n wrote, I was referring to the force overview screen where it lists the amount of each type of unit each side has. Are these estimate or accurate numbers?

Sorry if I didn't make that clear.

(in reply to ph4n)
Post #: 24
RE: AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Co... - 2/4/2008 4:54:01 AM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 32265
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline 		The totals in this screen are accurate, but with FOW on you don't see your opponents units in production. So you know the size of the enemy army, you just don't know where they are.

(in reply to WallysWorld)
Post #: 25
RE: AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Co... - 2/4/2008 4:58:31 AM   
Joel Billings


Posts: 32265
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Santa Rosa, CA
Status: offline 		Rafael is unavailable for the next week, so I don't expect to post another update for the game until he returns. Feel free to ask questions and I'll try to answer them while we wait.

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 26
RE: AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Co... - 2/4/2008 8:29:11 PM   
ph4n

 

Posts: 33
Joined: 4/9/2002
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Status: offline 		Ok, I'll fire away a couple:

1. Regarding the previous question (FoW/knowing enemy overall strength): what is the logic behind that? Shouldn't there be some uncertainty regarding enemy total strength?

2. Is it possible to see the existence of cav/art in a stack (your own or enemy's if scouted) without selecting said stack? From the screenshots I would say no, the cavalry icon is used as a (the) generic force icon. I'm thinking in the way of WaW - if only inf is present, use inf. icon; if armor also, use that.

_____________________________

regards,
fredrik

(in reply to Joel Billings)
Post #: 27
RE: AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Co... - 2/4/2008 8:44:15 PM   
WallysWorld


Posts: 172
Joined: 12/21/2006
From: Calgary, Alberta
Status: offline 		I second ph4n's first question. If FOW is on, why do we know exactly what units and numbers the enemy has?

(in reply to ph4n)
Post #: 28
RE: AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Co... - 2/4/2008 9:20:15 PM   
Feralkoala

 

Posts: 40
Joined: 5/10/2003
From: Troy, NY
Status: offline 		As notedin post #13 above, FOW is on--but Joel has been actively scouting with his cavalry. You will note if you read his postings that he doesn't know everything about those stacks, and that some of them have a significant amount of unspotted units.

(in reply to WallysWorld)
Post #: 29
RE: AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Co... - 2/4/2008 9:39:07 PM   
ph4n

 

Posts: 33
Joined: 4/9/2002
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Feralkoala

As notedin post #13 above, FOW is on--but Joel has been actively scouting with his cavalry. You will note if you read his postings that he doesn't know everything about those stacks, and that some of them have a significant amount of unspotted units.

Yes; but we are still talking about the "overview" screen; read a few posts up and you'll see what we mean.

_____________________________

regards,
fredrik

(in reply to Feralkoala)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Gary Grigsby's War Between the States >> AAR RJH (Union) vs Joel Billings (Confederate) - Confederate POV Page: [1] 2   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

0.641