Looking for Jubilation T Cornpone

[Straight Arrow]

Looking for advise from a master of retreat or a Jubilation T Cornpone.

Often, as the CSA, I buy only infantry and artillery replacements and forgo purchasing any for cavalry.

It appears that this may have led to my forces taking heavy losses when retreating after battles.

Is this actually the case? Or, does the percentage of cavalry in a defeated force have nothing to do with retreat loses?

[Cardinal Ape]

Nope. The only thing that can reduce damage while retreating is to have a general with the 'screener' trait present. This trait will reduce damage taken by 50%.

Jubilation T Cornpone, what a name and a musical... Nice reference.

[Gray Fox]

http://www.ageod.net/agewiki/Retreat_and_Routing

http://www.ageod.net/agewiki/Pursuit

"... a damage reduction will be impacted if some retreating elements are screeners."

Cavalry elements are screeners. The bottom line is that screeners reduce damage from pursuit.

Add up all the retreating elements (infantry, cavalry and support).
Double the number of cavalry elements present.
Divide this cavalry number by the total number of retreating elements.
This is the percentage of the pursuit damage reduced by the cavalry, up to 50%.

So a retreating Division with 18 elements might have 5 cavalry elements.
5 Cavalry doubled are 10.
10 divided by 18 is approximately 55%.
The pursuit damage gets reduced by the max of 50%.

P.S. I do recall Julie Newmar in Li'l Abner.

[Straight Arrow]

Thanks gents, that's a great link. Any idea what type of units are Disrupters, have the disrupter attribute, and increase damages in pursuit by 50%?

And which types of units are Screeners, have the Screener attribute, and will reduce damages by a maximum of 50%?

[Gray Fox]

I believe that CW2 does not have a disruptor attribute. Cavalry seem to be discribed as screeners several places although this is not listed anywhere in their stats sheets. However, that fits their RW purpose. It's how J.E.B. Stewart redeemed himself with his cavalry in the retreat from Gettysburg.

[Cardinal Ape]

I don't think any cavalry units in CW2 count as 'screeners' (nor disrupters.) That's where I was coming from when I said only a general with the screener trait will work.

In other ageod games, cavalry capable of screening maneuvers has the attribute listed in the model file:
Attributes = *screener*|*charge*

I can't find any cavalry in CW2 with that attribute. Maybe Gray Fox is right that ALL cavalry units in CW2 act as if they had the screener attribute, but I am doubtful that is the case. In other ageod games there tends to be a large distinction between light and heavy cavalry, with light cav mainly being screeners and heavy cav being disrupters. Granted, other games have units like elephants and Numidian horse archers, or armored lancers and Cossacks to distinguish between, but CW2 doesn't even have a single type of heavy cavalry.

Either way, one could try to test it by changing the cavalry model files to include the 'screener' attribute and see if it makes any difference.

[Gray Fox]

All true Cardinal Ape.

From the above link:

Withdrawal Attempt Modifiers
A force that decides to withdraw must pass a Withdrawal check. The Withdrawal check is modified by:
the existence of an ‘Evade Fight’ Special Order,
the relative size of the opposing forces,
a commanding officer’s Strategic Rating,
the presence of cavalry (both friendly and enemy),
a successful ‘Ambush’ Special Order,
a Leader with a ‘Skirmisher’ Special Ability.

Thus withdrawal attempts are affected by "the presence of cavalry". This doesn't mention anything about attributes.

"(1)Fast elements will do much more damages than slow elements when pursuing."

This would imply that cavalry would do more damage in pursuit. No such statement exists for screeners, however, this is how its done in RL. Slow units can't hope to screen a retreat and then break contact with faster units. I was of the possibly mistaken opinion, that all cavalry were both pursuers and screeners. They didn't need an attribute for the obvious. If this is not the case, then that would be a gaming flaw, IMHO.

P.S.
Everything that I can find on CW cavalry tactics boils down to five roles:

Reconnaissance and counter-reconnaissance screening
Defensive, delaying actions
Pursuit and harassment of defeated enemy forces
Offensive actions
Long-distance raiding against enemy lines of communications, supply depots, railroads, etc.

Recon and counter recon "screening" refers to patrolling around the army to deter enemy patrols. Defensive, delaying actions would essentially be screening as it pertains to the game mechanic under discussion. Cavalrymen would dismount and act as infantry while the actual infantry, artillery and support units moved as quickly as possible along roads in column. Pursuing enemy forces would be ambushed by the dismounted cavalry. Th enemy were forced to deploy from column into slower lines for battle. The cavalry would then mount and escape to set up the next ambush. This continued until the army got away or the pursuers stumbled into a trap. This was still the tactical doctrine of the period. So if it is not happening, then like the Aide-de-camp rule not functioning, something is wrong.