arsan wrote:Hi!
The numbers (90/90) are the power (pwr) of that enemy unit.
So its the current strenght of that units (division in this case). Just compare it with your own divisions pwr and you will know more or less how powerful they are.
The * means the number of stars of the general.
So in your example, Johnston (3 stars) commands a stack formed by two divisions: K Smith (1 star leader) division and Jackson (2 star leader) divisions and a lone brigade.
Both divisions are pretty understrength (aroudn 90 pwr, when a normal full strength division at top cohesion can be between 400 and 600 pwr aprox.
What you cannot know if that these enemy divisions have lots of tired men with little cohesion or less men but fit for combat.
Regards
Injun wrote:I quess I will have to get use to using the power ratings of the game. So the above stack of Johnston has a combined power of 226. So to take him on in caombat I need the combine power of 456 to have any real sucess.
The power number if provided, will tell you if the division(s) are either understrength (not full 18 elements) or tired (low cohesion--tired from marching or fighting). You get to decide based on past events/context. As has been stated a full strength division is in the 480-600 power range. Less than that, they are depleted and require reinforcements or rest.
Another intelligence nuance that can be glossed over (that drastically affects frontages, which are the key to winning tactical battles): the type of command in an opposting stack. A three star is not necessarily an Army commander. He could be a corps or an independent command. But the tooltip will often tell you. This has GREAT impact on determining your upcoming turn tactics. If your opponent has not made Grant an army commander, he can't pass down those awesome add on stats to his subordinates and hence they could be vulnerable in woods and clear terrain. If he is, he could show up marching to the sound of the guns and take them away replacing his (good) stats for possibly higher ones. Interesting possiblities!
For me, the key to winning battles is how many artillery units I can get into contact, at far range, WITH FIRST FIRE. Corps artillery helps there.Leadership and unit initiative help too. And number of divisions helps me determine enemy infantry and artillery capabilities. My intel involves divisons, size of division, terrain, frontages, enemy composition and initiative capabilities of the units and commanders. But I would be hijacking this thread to take it further. AACW provides a fascinating world of intelligence benefit as to enemy capabilities!
mikee64 wrote:I usually take the power number and multiply by 15 to get a troop estimate. As stated above this is not exact and you do need to get used to using the power numbers. It sounds like Banks does something similar to estimate enemy strength in his AARs, but he tends to lean towards a slightly higher estimate than I use (probably a smart thing to do).
On a slightly unrelated note, something I didn't learn until recently:
In the picture the unit listed after each Division is always the first unit added to that Division, for example EK Smith's Division added the 1st VA Cavalry as its first element. This can sometimes be important if you have elite Brigades inside a Division and don't want your opponent to know it (yet). For this reason I usually add my cav first; think of it as additional screening duties.
enf91 wrote:Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. Notice: the first unit of Jackson's division is Jackson himself. So something is definitely weird there.
Return to “AACW Strategy discussions”
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests