User avatar
Korrigan
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1982
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 12:33 pm
Location: France

[SPOILER] Here you can comment about CSA and Union Strategies

Thu May 03, 2007 10:51 pm

This thread is forbiden to the six Grand Campaign players. :turc:


You can talk and comment about each side strategy. :dada:
"Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference." Mark Twain

Image

User avatar
marecone
Posts: 1530
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 11:44 am
Location: Zagreb, Croatia

Mon May 07, 2007 11:45 am

So... No comments? I find this idea of great campaign excellent, so I guess you all are busy playing the game and don't have time to comment GC :niark: .
Godspeed
Forrest said something about killing a Yankee for each of his horses that they shot. In the last days of the war, Forrest had killed 30 of the enemy and had 30 horses shot from under him. In a brief but savage conflict, a Yankee soldier "saw glory for himself" with an opportunity to kill the famous Confederate General... Forrest killed the fellow. Making 31 Yankees personally killed, and 30 horses lost...

He remarked, "I ended the war a horse ahead."

User avatar
Lasse
Sergeant
Posts: 94
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 6:01 pm
Location: Roskilde, Denmark
Contact: WLM

Mon May 07, 2007 2:21 pm

Well it seems that the Confederts are in for a nasty surprise in the next turn when the north attacks New Orleans...

edit: not sure the waiting strategy of the CSA is the way to go. the north will be able to outproduce them quickly, and if the initiative is also given to them the CSA will be beaten to a pulp, slowly but surely, but it will be interesting to see. :)

User avatar
marecone
Posts: 1530
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 11:44 am
Location: Zagreb, Croatia

Mon May 07, 2007 3:53 pm

I agree. Rebs have to attack because later they will be outnumbered. Anyway, this turn will be very interesting. Can't wait to see what will happen with Grant :king: .
Forrest said something about killing a Yankee for each of his horses that they shot. In the last days of the war, Forrest had killed 30 of the enemy and had 30 horses shot from under him. In a brief but savage conflict, a Yankee soldier "saw glory for himself" with an opportunity to kill the famous Confederate General... Forrest killed the fellow. Making 31 Yankees personally killed, and 30 horses lost...



He remarked, "I ended the war a horse ahead."

User avatar
marecone
Posts: 1530
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 11:44 am
Location: Zagreb, Croatia

Thu May 10, 2007 11:43 am

New Orleans is lost. Big hit to rebes. Both economicaly and morale.
Things are now really heating up
Forrest said something about killing a Yankee for each of his horses that they shot. In the last days of the war, Forrest had killed 30 of the enemy and had 30 horses shot from under him. In a brief but savage conflict, a Yankee soldier "saw glory for himself" with an opportunity to kill the famous Confederate General... Forrest killed the fellow. Making 31 Yankees personally killed, and 30 horses lost...



He remarked, "I ended the war a horse ahead."

User avatar
Lasse
Sergeant
Posts: 94
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 6:01 pm
Location: Roskilde, Denmark
Contact: WLM

Thu May 10, 2007 11:56 am

yep, not having a strategic reserve to counter seaborne invasions are gonna hurt now... but looking forward to see what happens to Grant!

tc237
Colonel
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 10:37 pm
Location: Allegheny Arsenal

Thu May 10, 2007 1:48 pm

Looks like Grant has an opportunity here to really damage A.S. Johnston.
Although he doesn't want to use the attack, in this situation maybe he should.
By attacking ASJ with the entire Army, Grant will be moving towards more supply and will be consolidating his forces.
ASJ cannot be re-enforced in time by Bragg's army. Grant should destroy ASJ, then deal with Bragg.
Destroying the enemy force, not securing terrain should be his objective here.

It seems ASJ is in the more precarious situation. His intention is a good one, get Grant to fall back by threatening the supply line, but using ASJ's army as bait? hmm...

We will have to see.

User avatar
Lasse
Sergeant
Posts: 94
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 6:01 pm
Location: Roskilde, Denmark
Contact: WLM

Thu May 10, 2007 10:00 pm

Agree, one of the sides out west is going to get an a..wooping dependig who's realizing the position they are in first...

the loss of NO is going to hurt the south though, what are they going to do about it? it looks like the north are in a position to hurt the south on all three fronts if their no carefull...

User avatar
aryaman
Posts: 738
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 6:19 pm

Fri May 11, 2007 4:03 am

marecone wrote:I agree. Rebs have to attack because later they will be outnumbered. Anyway, this turn will be very interesting. Can't wait to see what will happen with Grant :king: .


I don´t agree, I think CSA forces should remain on an active defense, looking for the chance to intercept the advance of Union forces and fight defensive battles, because most players don´t have the patience to build an overwhelming force and then manouver cautiously to invade the Confederacy. In this game, for instance, CSA could have fall back in TN, waiting for the Union to extend supply lines making them more vulnerable, instead of hotly engaging all available forces in offensive manouvers, and a suitable force could have been easily assembled to repel the attack on NO, hardly a surprising movement by a Union player.

User avatar
Korrigan
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1982
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 12:33 pm
Location: France

Mon Jun 04, 2007 1:06 pm

This turn resolution has been awesome to watch with 3 major battles longing several days...

- Burnside's taking of Hardeeville is a real bad news for the CSA. Especially as artillery superiority allowed Burnside to take the city without losing too much men. He has now the supply he was lacking and no confederate forces to oppose him.

- In Virginia, Longstreet attacked Francklin but he did not managed to obtain a decisive victory.

- In the Mississipi, Grant has defeated Johnston but did not manage to get a decisive victory.


What is your opinion? Are the CSA toasted?
"Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference." Mark Twain



Image

User avatar
Pocus
Posts: 24759
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:37 am
Location: Lyon (France)

Mon Jun 04, 2007 1:43 pm

an unbiased summary of each turn would be good Korrigan, because even with the reading of all reports, I have trouble making the big picture (old age and such :) ).
Image


Hofstadter's Law: "It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's law."

User avatar
Korrigan
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1982
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 12:33 pm
Location: France

Mon Jun 04, 2007 2:52 pm

Sorry, no time for that.
"Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference." Mark Twain



Image

User avatar
Johnny Canuck
Posts: 291
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 3:33 pm
Location: Brampton, Ontario, Canada

Mon Jun 04, 2007 7:04 pm

Korrigan wrote:This turn resolution has been awesome to watch with 3 major battles longing several days...

- Burnside's taking of Hardeeville is a real bad news for the CSA. Especially as artillery superiority allowed Burnside to take the city without losing too much men. He has now the supply he was lacking and no confederate forces to oppose him.

- In Virginia, Longstreet attacked Francklin but he did not managed to obtain a decisive victory.

- In the Mississipi, Grant has defeated Johnston but did not manage to get a decisive victory.


What is your opinion? Are the CSA toasted?


I'm not sure if the CSA are doomed, but it certainly seems like they are in trouble now - nothing to oppose Burnside, & in addition to beating Johnston, it sounds like Grant is ready to attack again. It sounds like the situation at Hardeeville was a repeat of the historical defeat at Fort Donelson - they put too many troops into the garrison, which greatly impaired their ability to counter the Union forces after its fall.

In the larger picture, I think the CSA needs to develop some long-term strategic plans, particularly in terms of whether they want to prevent the Union from closing the Mississippi River. I think they also need to find a way to regain the initiative in the Western Theater - as long as Grant can move as he wants, I don't think the CSA can stop him.

User avatar
Lasse
Sergeant
Posts: 94
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 6:01 pm
Location: Roskilde, Denmark
Contact: WLM

Mon Jun 04, 2007 7:42 pm

looks bad for the CSA...

User avatar
LMUBill
Lieutenant
Posts: 141
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 5:01 am
Location: Cumberland Gap, Tennessee
Contact: Yahoo Messenger

Mon Jun 04, 2007 7:53 pm

Johnny Canuck wrote:I'm not sure if the CSA are doomed, but it certainly seems like they are in trouble now - nothing to oppose Burnside, & in addition to beating Johnston, it sounds like Grant is ready to attack again. It sounds like the situation at Hardeeville was a repeat of the historical defeat at Fort Donelson - they put too many troops into the garrison, which greatly impaired their ability to counter the Union forces after its fall.


Naah.... Burnside will stop himself. It is Burnside we are talking about here. He'll have to cross a bridge sometime. :niark:

In the larger picture, I think the CSA needs to develop some long-term strategic plans, particularly in terms of whether they want to prevent the Union from closing the Mississippi River. I think they also need to find a way to regain the initiative in the Western Theater - as long as Grant can move as he wants, I don't think the CSA can stop him.


I agree. They need to stop Grant at all costs in the west.

User avatar
Korrigan
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1982
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 12:33 pm
Location: France

Mon Jun 04, 2007 10:11 pm

I think the CSA needs a strategy. Obviously the North has a plan and they are keeping to it... I bet his name is Anaconda(c)...
I'm much less clear about which kind of strategy the South is following (except the courageous "No coastal defense whatsoever" gambit...).
"Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference." Mark Twain



Image

User avatar
Lasse
Sergeant
Posts: 94
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 6:01 pm
Location: Roskilde, Denmark
Contact: WLM

Mon Jun 04, 2007 10:18 pm

well they said at the beginning that they would take a reactive approach. wait and see what the union would do and then form their strategy according - many of us thought that they would be beaten if they did not take the initiative and it seems that that was what happend.

still think they should try to harras the supplylines of the north forcing them to commit troops to their rear (but I don't know as I'm still waiting for the hardcopy to buy the game, so it's easy for me to play smart)

User avatar
aryaman
Posts: 738
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 6:19 pm

Wed Jun 06, 2007 9:29 am

I think CSA made a big mistake by moving main armies into close contact with the enemy. They should have gone for an in depth defense, with an strategic reserve to counter Union landings.

User avatar
sval06
Captain
Posts: 191
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 7:46 pm

Wed Jun 06, 2007 1:57 pm

aryaman wrote:I think CSA made a big mistake by moving main armies into close contact with the enemy. They should have gone for an in depth defense, with an strategic reserve to counter Union landings.


I agree

I played the CSA on a PBEM, and the key (so far) is to keep powerfull corps in the rear near railroads to move quickly where required.
Doing so, we are more mobile than the USA units, so we can strike and retreat (and occupy cities with small brigades...). The USA has to withdraw to rebuild depleted brigades. One victory can offer 4-5 cool turns on a given area.

The result is: I still have the Mississipi (fort 10, also Cairo to prevent an invasion by Illinois) and TN. I conquered Harper's ferry and I still have the south of MO ... It is the front line since 1 year approximatively.

User avatar
Korrigan
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1982
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 12:33 pm
Location: France

Fri Jun 08, 2007 9:19 am

Yes, fore sure.

Just look at how the North is puzzled by the incertainty about Van Dorn and you realize how a reserve force could be handy for the South. For first, the Federals would be more carefull, not knowing where the South could strike back...
"Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference." Mark Twain



Image

User avatar
Korrigan
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1982
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 12:33 pm
Location: France

Thu Jun 14, 2007 7:17 am

New turn has been processed.

Johnston has won an undecisive battle in Corinth against McClernand.
Foote is wrecking havok in the CSA Mississipi fleet.

Let's wait for the AARs...
"Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference." Mark Twain



Image

User avatar
Spharv2
Posts: 1540
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 5:39 am
Location: Tallahassee, FL

Non-Player Comments for the US Eastern AAR (Spoilers for the other players)

Mon Jul 09, 2007 10:29 pm

I'm opening up this thread so all one or two of you who take the time to read my AAR (Such as it is) can comment directly on it. Want more detail? More shots? Just think it sucks and I need to jump out a window? Feel free to let me know. Just remember not to say anything relating to other AARs or strategies or whatnot so I don't get in trouble. :niark:

User avatar
Korrigan
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1982
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 12:33 pm
Location: France

Tue Jul 17, 2007 2:32 pm

Union has taken an almost undefended Corinth.
CSA has taken Harper's Ferry

Who will break the first?!
"Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference." Mark Twain



Image

User avatar
Pocus
Posts: 24759
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:37 am
Location: Lyon (France)

Wed Jul 18, 2007 8:24 am

interesting developments indeed
Image


Hofstadter's Law: "It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's law."

User avatar
Spharv2
Posts: 1540
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 5:39 am
Location: Tallahassee, FL

Thu Oct 18, 2007 1:56 am

So, anyone have anything to say? Force compositions? Better maps and plans? Anything?
Official Queen's Ambassador to the South
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

User avatar
Jabberwock
Posts: 2204
Joined: Thu May 31, 2007 12:12 am
Location: Weymouth, MA
Contact: ICQ

Thu Oct 18, 2007 6:03 am

It is a fascinating project. Your AAR is great, well explained and illustrated. So are the other player's. The best part for me is seeing all the different takes on each situation and the FOW that exists in the different viewpoints.
[color="DimGray"] You deserve to be spanked[/color]

Image

User avatar
Pocus
Posts: 24759
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:37 am
Location: Lyon (France)

Thu Oct 18, 2007 7:10 am

I don't comment but as Jabberwock says, the whole things is completely fascinating for me. When I see how all of you think, it seems so right that I'm very happy with the end result of this AACW project, retrospectively :)


(Now I don't doubt there is room for tons of improvements, but this is the normal life of any projects I think)
Image


Hofstadter's Law: "It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's law."

Return to “Grand Campaign I (archive)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest