charlesonmission
Posts: 771
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 5:55 am
Location: USA (somewhere)

Tue Jun 30, 2015 1:12 am

No I didn't.

FightingBuckeye wrote:Did you build any industry in StLo that is now in CSA hands or was it just the regular structures?
Looking for CW2, ACW or AJE tutorials, check out my YouTube channel

veb_yw
Private
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 3:29 pm

Tue Jun 30, 2015 6:39 am

Just wanted to say I really appreciate your tutorial and AAR videos. Wish there were more beginner level help though.

User avatar
FightingBuckeye
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 280
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 7:27 am
Location: Englewood, CO

Fri Jul 03, 2015 9:00 am

Dark days for the Union indeed. One of the few positives going for you was Mobile and now that's looking like it could be a repeat of McDowell's trapped force.

User avatar
Cardinal Ape
General of the Army
Posts: 602
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2012 1:59 am

Fri Jul 03, 2015 9:06 pm

It went by quick - Did I see that army in Mobile take 75 hits on the retreat? I wonder if that was because they had a slow moving coastal artillery with them?

User avatar
FightingBuckeye
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 280
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 7:27 am
Location: Englewood, CO

Fri Jul 03, 2015 9:49 pm

That probably didn't help much. I'd have to look at evade & speed stats for that fort battery. But CSA had almost 11K cavalry to just under 3K Union troopers and that probably played a big part in the retreat hits. And I didn't get a good look at the battle report, but I think that 6th Division could possibly have broken and sparked a rout. When showing their condition after the battle, I counted 7 militia/volunteer elements in that division. This was by far the largest percentage of any of the 3 Union divisions in play and, unlike the other two divisions, the 6th did not have an elite unit to plus up its ranks.

User avatar
FightingBuckeye
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 280
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 7:27 am
Location: Englewood, CO

Fri Jul 03, 2015 9:53 pm

Their lack of speed is a big reason I typically don't include fort or coastal batteries in my field armies. I was also under the impression that those types of cannon didn't play a part in land battles?

User avatar
FightingBuckeye
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 280
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 7:27 am
Location: Englewood, CO

Sat Jul 04, 2015 2:34 am

I realized that I being really lazy when computing those numbers above, the numbers are actually much much worse. I only saw two cavalry elements for a max of 1200 Union troopers, the rest of the horse numbers are likely made up from supply units, leaders, and artillery. For the South, I saw 2 supply units in the Army stack and another one in Polk's stack. I'll assume best case scenario for the Union and say that all 3 supply units were 4 element units to give us 1800 horses that we can scratch off the CSA numbers. CSA also had 169 cannon which I'll round up to 170. The number of horse/cannon differs from 2 to 4 horses depending on the size of the cannons (assuming no siege arty in either stack). So I'll go with 3 per barrel for roughly 500 horse that weren't cavalry.

All told the battle report numbers are roughly 10,700 cavalry to 2,950 or about 3.6 CSA cavalry for every Union one. But in reality it's a max of 1,200 Union troopers to 8,200 CSA ones or 6.8 CSA troopers for every Yankee one. I did subtract another 200 CSA horse before getting the above numbers to account for any HQ units, generals, and to give an extra cushion if Kenutcky had a greater number of larger caliber guns then I accounted for. And I also gave the Union numbers the best possible number they could field when in reality the number could have been short of that due to historical attrition. Given that number disparity in actual cavalry, I don't think it's surprising at all that 72 hits were inflicted on the retreating Union force.

User avatar
Cardinal Ape
General of the Army
Posts: 602
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2012 1:59 am

Sat Jul 04, 2015 9:10 pm

I'm not 100% sure that coastal artillery participates in land battles, but I would guess that they do.

That is a big difference in cavalry. I do wish the retreat hits were shown on the battle report. It is a bit deceptive without them.

User avatar
FightingBuckeye
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 280
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 7:27 am
Location: Englewood, CO

Sun Jul 05, 2015 5:01 am

True, but at least they're listed. Although trying to figure out how many of those hits are applied to cannon vs infantry/cavalry is impossible. The bigger issue IMO is that the total numbers include noncombat units like supply units or like units. Run a battle with just 1-2 units plus a supply unit and then run the same battle without the supply unit and notice the difference in numbers. If you don't have a good idea of how many support units are in the enemy's stack you could get an inflated sense of your opponent's strength. I would like to maybe see a separated number with the number of men/horse from support units akin to how the number of cannon and horse are listed separately. Or maybe even not include them in the total number of troops involved.

User avatar
BattleVonWar
Major
Posts: 217
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 3:22 am

Sun Jul 05, 2015 10:21 am

Really you should never disband units. I think the exception may be there but rare. Most of the time you can get them to safety or just let them disband themselves when they starve? Correct me if I am wrong but I see no reason to.

Plus Heavy Artillery like Coastal Guns is like carrying a giant sea anchor on land forces. Even railing them is slow. Unless you put them on a ship give them up.

This isn't so bad... just have to keep your NM up so you do not lose and recruit about 10 Divisions to replace what you lost before Lee can take Washington.
For every Southern boy fourteen years old, not once but whenever he wants it, there is the instant when it's still not yet two o'clock on that July afternoon in 1863 ~~~

seathom
Colonel
Posts: 312
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2015 7:51 pm

Mon Jul 06, 2015 2:43 am

Charles, I just caught up watching your let's play (had to start from the beginning again). This is the most exciting one so far because its the first time the CSA is not being pushed around by the USA (sorry!). Thanks for showing the F10 (?) key. I was wondering what the relative strength was and was amazed that you still had 25% more army strength and 4 times more naval strength. It is a real tribute to Kentucky's ability to mobilize his forces in such a strategic way as to keep you on your heels.

Kentucky also used the CSA's one advantage (better generals) extremely well as early in the campaign he outflanked you often and then picked good fights which really helped in the VP race.

I assume you are taking a real good look at your force structure and where they are located so you can maximize your counterattack possibilities (no one wants a bunch of forces sitting around doing nothing!).

Early on, you had 45% blockade efficiency, which was near the max of 50% (I believe?). I haven't got into the game yet and can't remember the benefits to blockading, but how is that going now? You still have vastly superior naval forces, maybe you need to create a plan to use them for good river defenses and find a good, strategic target that can either help your counterattack or divert Kentucky's forces away from a front that needs recovery time (I remember you stating you don't have a real plan right now, as you've been on your heels).

I'm also glad that all is well in your private life. Wish I could say the same for me; I just had to fire my overseer when I found him taking liberties with one of my house girls! But seriously, good luck, all is definitely not lost and this can be a very long campaign.

charlesonmission
Posts: 771
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 5:55 am
Location: USA (somewhere)

Fri Jul 10, 2015 1:31 am

Yes, 75 hits (it was the fort artillery, not coastal artillery with them)

Cardinal Ape wrote:It went by quick - Did I see that army in Mobile take 75 hits on the retreat? I wonder if that was because they had a slow moving coastal artillery with them?
Looking for CW2, ACW or AJE tutorials, check out my YouTube channel

charlesonmission
Posts: 771
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 5:55 am
Location: USA (somewhere)

Fri Jul 10, 2015 1:33 am

This sounds right. I sent a very heave infantry force.

FightingBuckeye wrote:I realized that I being really lazy when computing those numbers above, the numbers are actually much much worse. I only saw two cavalry elements for a max of 1200 Union troopers, the rest of the horse numbers are likely made up from supply units, leaders, and artillery. For the South, I saw 2 supply units in the Army stack and another one in Polk's stack. I'll assume best case scenario for the Union and say that all 3 supply units were 4 element units to give us 1800 horses that we can scratch off the CSA numbers. CSA also had 169 cannon which I'll round up to 170. The number of horse/cannon differs from 2 to 4 horses depending on the size of the cannons (assuming no siege arty in either stack). So I'll go with 3 per barrel for roughly 500 horse that weren't cavalry.

All told the battle report numbers are roughly 10,700 cavalry to 2,950 or about 3.6 CSA cavalry for every Union one. But in reality it's a max of 1,200 Union troopers to 8,200 CSA ones or 6.8 CSA troopers for every Yankee one. I did subtract another 200 CSA horse before getting the above numbers to account for any HQ units, generals, and to give an extra cushion if Kenutcky had a greater number of larger caliber guns then I accounted for. And I also gave the Union numbers the best possible number they could field when in reality the number could have been short of that due to historical attrition. Given that number disparity in actual cavalry, I don't think it's surprising at all that 72 hits were inflicted on the retreating Union force.
Looking for CW2, ACW or AJE tutorials, check out my YouTube channel

charlesonmission
Posts: 771
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 5:55 am
Location: USA (somewhere)

Fri Jul 10, 2015 1:36 am

Did you look at this series?

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL0elpXyl8LDXJxQTNGdvk_zwB_ZYGv-0A

veb_yw wrote:Just wanted to say I really appreciate your tutorial and AAR videos. Wish there were more beginner level help though.
Looking for CW2, ACW or AJE tutorials, check out my YouTube channel

charlesonmission
Posts: 771
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 5:55 am
Location: USA (somewhere)

Fri Jul 10, 2015 1:37 am

Blockade is at 50% I think. The max is 100%, so there is a ways to go. Kentucky has used his forces very well. I was way too aggressive in MO and AL. No other explanation.

seathom wrote:Charles, I just caught up watching your let's play (had to start from the beginning again). This is the most exciting one so far because its the first time the CSA is not being pushed around by the USA (sorry!). Thanks for showing the F10 (?) key. I was wondering what the relative strength was and was amazed that you still had 25% more army strength and 4 times more naval strength. It is a real tribute to Kentucky's ability to mobilize his forces in such a strategic way as to keep you on your heels.

Kentucky also used the CSA's one advantage (better generals) extremely well as early in the campaign he outflanked you often and then picked good fights which really helped in the VP race.

I assume you are taking a real good look at your force structure and where they are located so you can maximize your counterattack possibilities (no one wants a bunch of forces sitting around doing nothing!).

Early on, you had 45% blockade efficiency, which was near the max of 50% (I believe?). I haven't got into the game yet and can't remember the benefits to blockading, but how is that going now? You still have vastly superior naval forces, maybe you need to create a plan to use them for good river defenses and find a good, strategic target that can either help your counterattack or divert Kentucky's forces away from a front that needs recovery time (I remember you stating you don't have a real plan right now, as you've been on your heels).

I'm also glad that all is well in your private life. Wish I could say the same for me; I just had to fire my overseer when I found him taking liberties with one of my house girls! But seriously, good luck, all is definitely not lost and this can be a very long campaign.
Looking for CW2, ACW or AJE tutorials, check out my YouTube channel

veb_yw
Private
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 3:29 pm

Sat Jul 11, 2015 12:54 am

charlesonmission wrote:Did you look at this series?

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL0elpXyl8LDXJxQTNGdvk_zwB_ZYGv-0A


I did, thanks! :)

User avatar
BattleVonWar
Major
Posts: 217
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 3:22 am

Sat Jul 11, 2015 2:10 pm

I love that Bowling Green sneak defense the CSA can pull off. You don't see them coming. Of course if Longstreet is missing from anywhere else, you must assume that is a prime region. All those delicious Kentucky Brigades you can put in arms along with 20 Pound Cannons.

I am glad you recruited some "Infantry," this will give a decided advantage since the CSA has limited recruitment capability. I found that the CSA can more easily build Arty Divisions than she can build Infantry divisions(plus replacements) Time to wear at her NM%... I'd also hit Charleston(since obviously he's off in Kentucky/Missouri/Middle Earth and obviously not in the Carolinas. That Real Estate is juicy!!! And easy pickens... You might consider Norfolk also since that will eat up CSA rail that is getting used in Tennessee/Alabama/Missippi/Florida/Etc... Stretch CSA Rail capacity to the Max, put as many large Corp as many places away forcing him to expand like a rubberband in 5 or 6 different directions. You stop this flexible tactical redeployment he keeps using. Might be time to abandon Alabama(it's value is low aside it's Port unless you are going all the way)
For every Southern boy fourteen years old, not once but whenever he wants it, there is the instant when it's still not yet two o'clock on that July afternoon in 1863 ~~~

User avatar
FightingBuckeye
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 280
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 7:27 am
Location: Englewood, CO

Mon Jul 20, 2015 5:39 pm

Charles, you're facing an admirable foe who has made good use of his interior lines, good leaders, and initiative in order to put you off balance and deal some heavy blows. But some of the damage has been self-inflicted such as moving forces deep into Mizzou with winter weather approaching and no nearby source of supply. And it's happened again in NM. War isn't just about battles and marshaling forces, but logistics plays a huge part of it. Especially when playing with historical attrition settings.

BattleVonWar wrote:I love that Bowling Green sneak defense the CSA can pull off. You don't see them coming.


You definitely have to be cautious about moving into any territory the enemy can rail to before you get there. Doubly so when your own force would be crossing a river and/or the region is good defensive terrain. Bowling Green's a natural choke point due to the terrain, road networks, and rail in Kentucky. A couple of hard knocks have taught me to respect how quickly the CSA can rail a division or two up to Bowling Green and how deadly that force could be for any Union force trying to take it. I think I remember you catching one or two of my forces at Bowling Green . .. ouch.

charlesonmission
Posts: 771
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 5:55 am
Location: USA (somewhere)

Mon Jul 20, 2015 10:41 pm

I thought, incorrectly, that there may only be a few elements in NM. I was wrong. :) Yeah.... at this point, I think I'm going to focus on building some really large forces till the NM gets back to about 100.

FightingBuckeye wrote:Charles, you're facing an admirable foe who has made good use of his interior lines, good leaders, and initiative in order to put you off balance and deal some heavy blows. But some of the damage has been self-inflicted such as moving forces deep into Mizzou with winter weather approaching and no nearby source of supply. And it's happened again in NM. War isn't just about battles and marshaling forces, but logistics plays a huge part of it. Especially when playing with historical attrition settings.



You definitely have to be cautious about moving into any territory the enemy can rail to before you get there. Doubly so when your own force would be crossing a river and/or the region is good defensive terrain. Bowling Green's a natural choke point due to the terrain, road networks, and rail in Kentucky. A couple of hard knocks have taught me to respect how quickly the CSA can rail a division or two up to Bowling Green and how deadly that force could be for any Union force trying to take it. I think I remember you catching one or two of my forces at Bowling Green . .. ouch.
Looking for CW2, ACW or AJE tutorials, check out my YouTube channel

User avatar
Cardinal Ape
General of the Army
Posts: 602
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2012 1:59 am

Wed Jul 22, 2015 9:43 pm

So it is now the Army of the Popetomac....

Seems like you managed to do a decent job of stabilizing. Looks to be a game that could go to '65.

It is much more entertaining watching you try to come from behind as the Union rather than watching you steamroll your opponent.

I could see Forrest if it weren't for all those damn trees in the way... He does move like lightning.

Could ya show us the objective page in one of your next updates, please?

User avatar
BattleVonWar
Major
Posts: 217
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 3:22 am

Thu Jul 23, 2015 12:26 am

It will be a close match, 1865! The Union has her job cut out for her. I wonder if the Timberclads the CSA stole she didn't riverine Forest out of the action? I am not too sure if that is possible but it seems like it might be.

Cardinal Ape wrote:So it is now the Army of the Popetomac....

Seems like you managed to do a decent job of stabilizing. Looks to be a game that could go to '65.

It is much more entertaining watching you try to come from behind as the Union rather than watching you steamroll your opponent.

I could see Forrest if it weren't for all those damn trees in the way... He does move like lightning.

Could ya show us the objective page in one of your next updates, please?
For every Southern boy fourteen years old, not once but whenever he wants it, there is the instant when it's still not yet two o'clock on that July afternoon in 1863 ~~~

User avatar
FightingBuckeye
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 280
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 7:27 am
Location: Englewood, CO

Thu Jul 23, 2015 12:59 am

Cardinal Ape wrote:I could see Forrest if it weren't for all those damn trees in the way... He does move like lightning.


I alternately curse or laud him depending on which side I'm playing. I'd bet rattlesnakes are envious of the speed of his strike and in the danger he poses to the unwary.

Charles, you don't seem to be a big fan of cavalry. I haven't noticed plethora of them in your builds or in your divisions when you select them individually. I've also seen a lack of them in multiple battles across different theaters. As a former intel guy, that hurts me knowing you're overlooking a key component to theater intelligence.

charlesonmission
Posts: 771
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 5:55 am
Location: USA (somewhere)

Mon Aug 17, 2015 11:09 pm

The game is running again on a more normal schedule (moving in real life really slew it down). We've now entered 1863.
Looking for CW2, ACW or AJE tutorials, check out my YouTube channel

charlesonmission
Posts: 771
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 5:55 am
Location: USA (somewhere)

Sun Aug 23, 2015 12:20 pm

The Union has its first big wins in the game, but DC is very threatened.
Looking for CW2, ACW or AJE tutorials, check out my YouTube channel

pob303
Private
Posts: 29
Joined: Sat May 24, 2014 5:19 pm
Location: England

Sun Aug 23, 2015 3:18 pm

This AAR has been both thoroughly entertaining and educational Charles. Thank you!

Has anybody been able to share some insight on how Longstreet's force appears able to cross a blockaded river at will?

charlesonmission
Posts: 771
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 5:55 am
Location: USA (somewhere)

Sun Aug 23, 2015 3:22 pm

I've been wondering the same thing. In the next video, a corps did it via river movement. I think it might be that blocking river movement is only 90% effective?

pob303 wrote:This AAR has been both thoroughly entertaining and educational Charles. Thank you!

Has anybody been able to share some insight on how Longstreet's force appears able to cross a blockaded river at will?
Looking for CW2, ACW or AJE tutorials, check out my YouTube channel

User avatar
havi
Colonel
Posts: 319
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 10:31 am
Location: Lappeenranta

Sun Aug 23, 2015 4:54 pm

look closer how your fleets are positioned! u leave always one spot unblocked on the river!

charlesonmission
Posts: 771
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 5:55 am
Location: USA (somewhere)

Sun Aug 23, 2015 5:03 pm

I just confirmed, all 3 are blocked there with at least 4 ships (not transports) in defensive position.

havi wrote:look closer how your fleets are positioned! u leave always one spot unblocked on the river!
Looking for CW2, ACW or AJE tutorials, check out my YouTube channel

User avatar
havi
Colonel
Posts: 319
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 10:31 am
Location: Lappeenranta

Sun Aug 23, 2015 7:29 pm

it looked different in your videos u left the region with the railroad unblocked!

User avatar
havi
Colonel
Posts: 319
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 10:31 am
Location: Lappeenranta

Sun Aug 23, 2015 7:31 pm

and check on the river region how many riverboats/ships u need to block that place!

Return to “CW2 AARs”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest