AGEOD Forums

I think that the French troops numbers could use some looking into.

In my recent game against greenalien I was playing the French and the ammount of forces I had was simply amazing.

By september 1759 I have managed to accumulate 15.000 troupes de la marine, 8.000 regulars and 5.500 militias (and that's without garrisons and artilery/supplies) and that is after the 32.000 combat losses that i have sustained during the 4 years of warfare. With the almost 12,000 indians/couriers I have probably more forces in America than my opponent (and his combat loses are supposed to be 29.000).

I achieved such numbers mainly thanks to capturing Albany very early (indian allies and depot) and Chevalier the Levis who spent the first 3 years in Montreal non-stop training the Militias into TDLM and i was swarming with militia getting bout 6-8 units every year.

I think that either the ammount of militia that the french recieve in this scenario should be reduced or de Levis should lose the training officer skill.

Sounds like fertile ground for a modder

I played as the British against Anzagar, and I had huge forces, but my problem was that they were all militia and thus slow, not really powerful, and going home every winter. Most importantly, the militia could not have been commanded by British generals, so all my stacks had either huge penalties or insufficient strength to really take on the French. When Anzagar managed to take Albany, there was no way to recover it, because there was insufficient supply in the region.

Subsequently, the French won practically every battle.

I've tried to take Fort Duquesne several times, but each time the expedition resulted in a disaster. The French managed to raze a fort that was half-way between Duquesne and English colonies (I never really got the chance to properly defend it, no units), so whenever I tried to move against Fort Duquesne the army just melted away. I didn't have time to build a new fort either, because I needed the supply for forces trying to get rid of French near Albany.

Train all the militia to colonial regulars, they don't go home then.

I assume you played the "Colonial" variant.

Use a Colonial leader in stack with British leader to alleviate the command penalty.

Also, there are Dual Command British leaders that also command the Provos and Militia without penalty.

This campaign is, to me, the most interesting: France can be mostly defensive, with raiders-raiders-raiders.

British have multitude of weak Colonials, leadership issues, and either difficult Amphibious ops or long treks to capture objectives.

The replacements are designed to be scarce, as the "main War" was in Europe (aka Rise of Prussia )

I believe I did a bunch of mistakes which cost me the campaign, ironically I found ways to circumvent the enemy mass around Albany when it was too late and the scenario was near the end. I believe the leadership issues were the main hurdle to success. Still, I believe the campaign can be very much even if one plays his cards right.

Its a good scenerio indeed. I played 2 times against the ai to practice. As gb side there is very much volunteers and regional militia. I trained them in Boston with Washington.I got good enough army.

Later the real soldiers came form Britain. Some light and line inf and elite. Ai has two big armies like 12000 each. One of them is stationed in Montreal under Marquis de Montcolm the other one is Louisborough fortress in the east.

Later in the game I had much greater army size then french. But nearly 7/10 of (line inf) army was composed of trained regional colonial soldiers. But as in events or via options there was more line replacements for gb. not enough for colonial line inf. it can be logical maybe..

But it is really hard to get Loisborough fortress, French had 12000 men,with ambitious landing I lost 3/4 of the army and general by attacking losing like 13 NM.

I think it is balanced scenerio. But one should be carefull about planning.