AGEOD Forums

I lost an entire corp in one turn. I was attacking a corp sized force inside Ft. Monroe. My corp was fully supplied on normal/normal orders (orange/orange), and I attacked by land from the Chickahominy river region. The first round was a draw, we fought again another day, then another day, and so on seven times in 15 days. My force started to lose badly but would not retreat to another region. At least 30 infantry regiments were destroyed completely because they were still attacking with no cohesion.

I think what happened is this: I sent a fleet of ironclads back and forth seven times through Hampton Roads with bombardment orders. I think each time the fleet bombarded it compelled the land forces to attack.

Well, I think it is a water connection there. Meaning you were crossing to get to him inside the fort. This will give you significant penalties to combat as well as to your ability to retreat.

If he had a naval force move into the area, he could have prevented you from retreating if the times worked in his favor. Alternatively, there could have been a bug where your own fleet prevented your retreat.

At any rate, don't attack a full corps that is inside a fort. It is a bad idea.

I controlled the land on the peninsula, so I had a retreat space available. I don't thing the opponent had any navy. It was probably my fleet bombardment forcing a land battle to happen.

At any rate, don't attack a full corps that is inside a fort. It is a bad idea.

Good point. I would not have done it except that the game was nearly over. I was Union, I controlled almost all the objectives, the only significant enemy force left was in Ft. Monroe.

What I expected to happen was one day of fighting to end in stalemate, then a siege where my artillery reduces the fort and the enemy slowly runs out of supply.

Yes, you posted this same exact post over an hour ago. Soloswolf and Major Dilemma took the time to give you detailed answers over there. I suggest you return to your original post and read the answers provided. Double posting is generally frowned on for just this reason.

Like I said, I think it's an island. Or at the very least some kind of water crossing to get there. That can cause lot's o' trouble. And I am not sure why your bombarding would do that...

deleted

Gray_Lensman wrote:LOL, attacking a Corps in a Fort across a water crossing and then posting a thread titled "Bad Battle"... Forgive me, but I can't help but be amused at a post such as this.......Holy Fredericksburg, BatMan!



Patient to Doctor: "Hey Doc, it hurt's really bad whenever I smack my head with this hammer.

Doctor to Patient: "Then, don't do that."

That's what I like about you, GL. Always receptive to, and supportive of, the posts of relatively naive customers who come here looking for guidance from those who know so much about the game they figure they know more about it than the designers themselves, and are always willing to deliver sarcasm from on high.

pasternakski wrote:That's what I like about you, GL. Always receptive to, and supportive of, the posts of relatively naive customers who come here looking for guidance from those who know so much about the game they figure they know more about it than the designers themselves, and are always willing to deliver sarcasm from on high.

Wow Mangudai...I think pasternakski just called you "relatively naive"

Let me make sure I understand what you're real question was. Sounded to me like you were asking why they kept attacking and you were wondering if the fleet passing by was causing this. I tend to doubt this is the case as I have not seen it in other such situations, but I could be wrong.

Other "less naive" players than myself will have to answer. I actually would like to understand why they kept attacking instead of switching to a passive mode after losing battles. Sounds like from other comments there was a water link which makes retreat very difficult, but it doesn't mean they have to keep attacking. Or does it?

Mangudai, was this with the latest patch? There have been significant improvements in the battle engine lately, and I think this kind was a lot more common before.

Perhaps you can even share your savegame with us, so we can look a bit closer at this?

I know that a "sustained attack" posture against an ENEMY that has nowhere to retreat might be somewhat of a cause. Otherwise perhaps your opponent had enough of a patrol rating to hold you in the region??

I think an advantage in cavalry or other highly rated patrol units might help keep certain stacks from retreating...although I'm not sure.

I would certainly note...as have others thus far...that attacking an entire Corps within a fort...at 1 to 1 odds is ill-advised. . Sorry...I just had to stick that in there for posterity's sake.

Hi All,
Mangudai had the right idea but in the wrong sequence.
Moving a fleet to blocade the fort to Hampton Roads, wait until supply crunch sets in...then the assault. Taking on the weakened force unable to withdraw and gaining NM/VP galore, but if you wait too long then the enemy melts and the NM/VP possible to gain melt with them.
I am uncertain about the Chickahominy river region, but if its not the pennisula region attached to Ft. Monroe then your forces were attacking amphibiously and therefore attacked until they could successfully land.
Re. the fleet moving and forcing the Corps to engage. This should not be the case. The fleet actions do not dictate when the landing/offensive force actually attack. In this case it appears your forces were acting like an amphib force and since they could not establish their landing, attacked until destroyed.

The wild card has to be the fleet action. I have attacked that specific fort many times with the new patch and my forces always retreat easily if they don't succeed. In fact I have mentioned that they retreat too easily. So it would seem to me with only the factors mentioned to go by. It has something to do with the fleet. (note, I was attacking with CSA. but that shouldn't make a diff.) What general were you using? That could affect the first few rounds.

I won't go into the don't attack a large fort with a corp as defenders thing as that has been mentioned.

Nial

That's what I thought. Usually one can retreat by land from Ft Monroe. Also, I thought it was possible to remain in the same region with aggressive posture if the defenders are inside and have defensive posture.

It was Hooker's corp with 4 divisions and perfect cohesion. I did have a lot of siege artillery in the stack so maybe that slowed me down enough to prevent retreat.

Also for everyone critical of my strategy. I won the first 3 days of combat. Then there were 3 more days of combat and I started losing badly. Further, the attack was supposed to involve 2 corp with 8 divisions but Sedgwick gave the wrong orders and didn't join the battle.

I'm working on posting the turn files...

The turn files are hosted here.

http://www.filehosting.org/file/details/9042/IV%20a%20new%20hope.rar

The battle in question happened mid June 1863.

As I looked this over I noticed another funny thing. The after battle reports only show the loss of about half my infantry regiments involved. But on the next turn zero of my infantry regiments had survived.