| 12 MAR 2010 at 12:08am |
AnguilleGlobal Moderator
Posts : 2553
Joined: 10 NOV 2004
Location: 0
Status : Offline | Euh...which game is it?
I thought that Histwar: Les Grognards was real-time?
Would you say that now it's worth to get the game (considering i play mostly, actually only, solo).
Cheers
Games i play now:
Armada 2526 Supernova, Commander: the Great War, Heroes of Annihilitated Empires, The Great Battles Collection
 
|
| 12 MAR 2010 at 5:00am |
KeunertCommander
Posts : 2364
Joined: 22 MAR 2006
Status : Offline | i am looking forward to more posts. good luck Ross.
one question: wouldn't one or two colonnes be enough by the lake? if you send the reserve with the center, wouldn't it still be possible to reinforce your lake flank if needed? i imagine taking the hill will be quite costy and everything will be needed for that task?
I can stand brute force, but brute reason is quite unbearable. There is something unfair about its use. It is hitting below the intellect. Oscar Wilde
|
| 12 MAR 2010 at 2:15pm |
rossntuCommander
Posts : 1271
Joined: 24 DEC 2008
Location: 0
Status : Offline | Good point Keunert - I think I am being a bit over cautious there at the moment - I am keen not to see him sneak through the back door if I leave it too weak, but I think I will look to move Buxhowden more central to give me more flexibility once the battle evolves. The reason that I worry more than in other games about leaving gaps, is that the 2D map makes colonmes seem closer together than they actually are on the 3D map. The maps are BIG, and it's impossible to cover every possibility, hence my overly defensive tactics. In soccer terms I'm going to keep it tight for the first 20 mins and weigh up my opponent, taking advantage of any gaps that may arise.
Anguille- Histwar can be played real time and I am going to get some 3D pics in my next post, but it can also be played PBEM. As for if you should get it, I personally would recommend it, although it's not perfectly bug free, and the interface is .... not overly friendly. JMM who created it seems to be supporting it well, and it "feels" more Napoleonic than any Total War game imho. Knowing you are happy dealing with the S+H2 /Takeda interface I would have thought you would adapt well to this game if you like the period.
|
| 12 MAR 2010 at 4:59pm |
RogsCenturion
Posts : 115
Joined: 25 OCT 2006
Status : Online | I bought it and played it for a few weeks but the problem is I don't like the basic philosophy behind the design. It is a simulation in which you must play the corps or army commander, and even at the least realistic, most gamey setting conscript) you don't control your units.
The Histwar board will tell you that the Histwar AI is the most superb and realistic and accurate Napoleonic battle AI ever and that you should be enjoying the serene heights of corps and army command untroubled by the actual doings of individual units or the thought of heresy against the 10 years of work devoted to this opus by JMM.
The problem is the AI like all AIs does weird stuff. Even if you are playing another human player your own friendly corps/divisional/regimental AIs will be doing weird stuff.
For example, I can't stand the way the lower AI routines deploy artillery, most of the time the guns stand around well within range doing nothing then they lurch forward into a ridiculously vulnerable position and get overrun. When they are in trouble, giving them orders to retire reduces them to a coma, and they get overrun. If you tell them to support other units (say infantry, to keep them back and relatively safe), they never seem to unlimber and when the units they are supporting fall back (as they will inevitably do, it is a very bloody system) they are exposed and get overrun, usually without firing a shot. Very often you see guns standing around almost within musket range limbered for long periods, before being overrun. Even allowing for the way batteries are continuously mishandled by the AI, I suspect cannister/grape is underrated in this system.
I could live with most of the other automated stuff if i could just control the guns, like Napoleon liked to do. Watching critical assets like batteries being ineffectively deployed and needlessly cut down is a bit of a game breaker.
More generally, the regimental AI seems the strongest element among all the layered AIs and action seems to resolve down to a fairly dispersed series of multi-axis interactions between regiments. Despite the claims, brigade and division and corps formations/cooperation do not seem to be a much of a feature. In fact, the higher level AIs seem to approach the battle as if its WW1; they commit and withdraw regiments from the front and you can set up reserve corps to automatically feed fresh units to frontline formations, although again this is the sort of thing I would rather be doing myself.
Spacing between units seems too dispersed to me; I am not sure you could replicate MacDonald's corps square at Wagram or D'Erlon's attack at Waterloo with its packed corps-sized column, or the general tendency of foot units to close up with neighbouring units to seek flank and rear support.
In fact these battles remind me of WRG X-Edition ancients rules with their 'fireworks display' of individual units; like Barker and DBM, I think JMM should look at strengthening the aggregative/cooperative side of this system.
Most effort has gone into simulating the French army and its tactics; the behaviour of allied armies has not received the same attention and can be anachronistic. For example, 1809 Austrian line infantry will form ordre-mixte and throw out a company of skirmishers, which they did not do.
I don't like the way morale is calculated at regimental level, not battalion - all the battalions rout at once regardless of the specific situation of each. This greatly reduces flavour and detail.
You can't really deploy troops using terrain, corps or division positions that seem desirable to you are interpreted quite differently by the various subordinate AIs.
The combat bonus for villages seems overpowered; even the Guard has problems taking villages, whereas short of fortified strong points like walled farms or granaries or churches, villages could and did change hands multiple times in a large action.
The maps are not very realistic; in the Wagram one the Russbach heights and marshes are grossly exaggerated in height and size respectively, even more so when you take into account the figure scale. Redoubts and villages are generic only. I found it difficult to tell the boundaries and locations of copses, woods and forests, or notice their effects.
And you have to fiddle around with your port forwarding to play TCP/IP, the mere thought of which makes me shudder.
On the positive side, the scale and visuals of the game in 3D are impressive and evocative, although i found it was easier to use the simpler 2D maps.
I like the way cavalry behaves, although again it seems to act at regimental level only and no higher. The weight and presence of cavalry on the battlefield is deftly handled.
The action can be very exciting at the regiment vs regiment level although again you are only an observer not a participant. Particular regiments can behave heroically and hold out against all odds, or even surrender (too frequently, the designer admits; having a regiment of scouting hussars surrender to an approaching enemy infantry corps was a bit odd). The morale system has some nice distinctions, such as 'flight' as well as 'rout'. National characteristics aren't exaggerated and the game is certainly not a walkover for the French, it is very tough and bloody for everyone (especially artillerymen).
For what it is, a grand tactical simulation in which you shovel handfuls of bits at the enemy in the hope of pushing some into a gap or into the sides of his collections of bits without worrying too much about whats actually going on at the micro level, it can be quite interesting, but i find myself having to continually and frustratedly pull myself away from worrying about detailed interactions at critical points. Most of the time it comes down to numbers of bits; most actions seem to pretty much be an often lengthy exchange until finally the fellow with the last fresh units takes the ground.
It would be nice if JMM could provide an option which replicates a tabletop miniatures game, in which the player controls his bits at battalion, squadron and battery level, like TC2M and SoW-Gettysburg. I think the Madminute/Norbsoftdev approach gets the balance right for this kind of game.
[i]the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion[/i] -- United States Senate, Treaty of Tripoli, 1796.
|
| 13 MAR 2010 at 12:37am |
rossntuCommander
Posts : 1271
Joined: 24 DEC 2008
Location: 0
Status : Offline | Excellent post Rogs - you obviously have more knowledge of the period and have played more than me! JMM himself has said the AI, especially at Corps level, still needs work - at the moment the AI makes a plan and sticks with it whatever happens. This game will improve - I am convinced of that, and I think that although the AI errors you point out must be annoying, I personally would prefer to go this way - towards a more realistic simulation of being a commander with a command structure, than to stick with moving units exactly where you want them- we all know that rarely happened in the heat of battle. Out of interest, can you think of a better AI in a Napoleonic game on this scale? If you can I will have to have a look, as I love games where you just immerse yourself in the action without crazy AI happenings.
|
| 13 MAR 2010 at 1:05am |
rossntuCommander
Posts : 1271
Joined: 24 DEC 2008
Location: 0
Status : Offline | Turn 1
Ok, well first mistake made already! I get the impression that I should have actually issued orders during what I thought was the deployment phase, but seemingly was the deployment and initial orders phase. I know this as Spec has already got some French cavalry units out looking for me. Advantage Spec.
So anyway, I have sent my own orders to put into effect the basic plan I outlined in my last post- I have sent out several cavalry units to scout areas in front of my army in order to get an idea of Spec's disposition. You can see these movements on the screenshots as thin yellow lines.
[img]http://b.imagehost.org/0368/HistWar004.jpg[/img]
Constantine has been sent forward to create a diversion - I am still getting my head around the orders, but basically what I want him to do is create enough of a problem for Spec that he is unable to divert troops to the north, where my main attack is taking place. I have ordered Bennigsen and Essen forward to deploy on line forward of their positions in an attempt to sweep the hill clear of any French resistance.
As discussed earlier, I have moved Buxhowden in behind Rosenberg, and both are given defend on line orders. Prince Eugen is also give a defend order in the South. In effect I want these units to be the hinge and Constantine, Essen and Bennigsen to be the closing door- if that makes sense!
Langeron is effectively a reserve for the south, but can also be used in the centre if it is felt that the south is not under any threat.
Looking at the positioning of his cavlry units - it would appear that Spec's main force is probably in line with the small town to the south. It will not be long before these two huge armies clash.
Below are some more screenshots of the 3D to give an idea of the terrain etc.
[img]http://b.imagehost.org/0587/HistWar001.jpg[/img]
Units of Constantine's Colonne
[img]http://b.imagehost.org/0242/HistWar002.jpg[/img]
Trefurt's infantry regiment of Bennigsen's Colonne prepare to march on the French positions - which are assumed to be directly in front of them. They are currently located on the plateau of the hill.
[img]http://b.imagehost.org/0764/HistWar003.jpg[/img]
Flietz's infantry regiment of Essen's colonne prepare to attack. They are currently located on the slope of the hill. They will have to march up the hill and across the plateau.
|
| 14 MAR 2010 at 4:22pm |
rossntuCommander
Posts : 1271
Joined: 24 DEC 2008
Location: 0
Status : Offline | Turn 2
Well, we're only two turns in and we have contact! I ought to point out that we are playing without order delay, which obviously makes things a lot quicker.
Contact was made between Fock's Swedish dragoons who were scouting the area and Tarnowski's lancers. After a brief fight the dragoons retreatd back to their lines.
[img]http://b.imagehost.org/0375/HistWar000.jpg[/img]
Tarnowski's lancers
[img]http://b.imagehost.org/0436/HistWar001.jpg[/img]
The vanquished Swedish dragoons
A number of batteries down the line have opened up on spotted French positions. My first real scare is when a unit of French dragoons commanded by Jerome Bonaparte get close to my lines and threaten some of my horse artillery. By the end of the turn my men have lost sight of the unit, but I am concerned it is still around, about to play havoc with my artillery.
[img]http://b.imagehost.org/0233/HistWar010.jpg[/img]
French dragoons
One strange event I observed was one of my elite units routing for seemingly no reason. Wrede's regiment of Constantine's colonne seemed to be ok, marching forward, when all of a sudden they routed, although within a minute they were rallying. It was odd, as they didn't seem to even come under fire, and they are supposed to be my elite troops! If they rout so easily it does not bode well for the rest of the battle.
I order Langeron's colonne into a defensive position as Prince Eugen has strayed rather too far forward, and I am keen to make sure that he does not get isolated and give the French easy access to the back door to my army. The northern colonnes are gradually moving forward for their offensive.
We can see several French regiments, although so far most have been spotted near the town to the south, and my prediction that they would be in line with that location seems to have been correct. There are also two regiments of infantry to the north that have been spotted. It is clear that the French are in the area and the hill will not be taken without much blood being spilt.
End of turn locations:
[img]http://b.imagehost.org/0631/HistWar012.jpg[/img]
[img]http://b.imagehost.org/0973/HistWar006.jpg[/img]
Gripenberg's horse artillery firing
[img]http://b.imagehost.org/0904/HistWar007.jpg[/img]
Semeka's dragoons set off on a scouting mission
|
| 14 MAR 2010 at 5:27pm |
rossntuCommander
Posts : 1271
Joined: 24 DEC 2008
Location: 0
Status : Offline | Turn 3
This time French cavalry units are routing, which nice to see. I think my artillery are doing most of the damage. One of the routed units is the cavalry regiment I lost track of last turn. I am glad to see it is not wandering around behind my lines.
The French position is much clearer now- they are strong everywhere, but especially on my right, where Poniatowski's Corp is backed up by Ney and Grouchy. The French have a lot of men in that position, and with Lefebvre's corp able to support if needed, my original plan will have to be revised, as attacking such numbers woud be folly. At the moment I do have the hill, and I need to use that to my advantage. I aim to take as much of the hill as possible and set up defensive positions there so that the French will have to come to me. I also order Constantine and Rosenberg to defend in the centre. I need the hill though, and Essen and Bennigsen need to be quicker to take the initiative.
[image]http://b.imagehost.org/0197/HistWar001.jpg[/image]
French units from Poniatowski's Corp wait for the coming storm
[image]http://b.imagehost.org/0321/HistWar004.jpg[/image]
Here are the positions after the turn: French positions- Poniatowski's Corp are on my right, with Victor in the centre and Bonapate (Jerome not Naopoleon) is on my left.
|
| 15 MAR 2010 at 1:40am |
AnguilleGlobal Moderator
Posts : 2553
Joined: 10 NOV 2004
Location: 0
Status : Offline | Thanks...i'll check it again.
I was put off by the first feedback when the game was released. As you said, i don't mind if the interface is not the most ergonomic but can't stand poor AI or too many bugs.
Cheers
Games i play now:
Armada 2526 Supernova, Commander: the Great War, Heroes of Annihilitated Empires, The Great Battles Collection
|
| 15 MAR 2010 at 4:37am |
*Lava*Colonel
Posts : 3567
Joined: 27 OCT 2003
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By Rogs
I bought it and played it for a few weeks but the problem is I don't like the basic philosophy behind the design. It is a simulation in which you must play the corps or army commander, and even at the least realistic, most gamey setting conscript) you don't control your units.
Well... actually, that is not true at all.
While it is a Command simulation (it has to be with the number of units involved... this is not N:TW), you have lots of control over your units.
Individually... you can reassign them to different Corps in the set-up phase. Prior to battle, not only can you move about the different Corps to different areas, but you can also "detach" and "attach" units from one Corps to another. So if you want a "Grand Battery" there is nothing stopping you. You can even detach a couple cavalry squadrons from other Corps and have them "support" the battery, so they don't get overrun by enemy cavalry. You can also have them scout or attack, or unlimber. You can do pretty much what-ever you want with individual units.
The AI provides the individual with a "let's move everyone over here" basic movement style, but the player can can control those units, if he so chooses. And that includes taking advantage of terrain.
I think you need to spend a bit more time learning the actual mechanics of the game. There is a lot more to it than I believe you understand and I think you are painting the game with too wide a brush because of it.
Ray (alias Lava)
|
| 15 MAR 2010 at 10:32am |
ess1Centurion
Posts : 4
Joined: 8 FEB 2010
Status : Offline | ross_ntu, Many thanks for taking the time and trouble. An excellent idea.
|
| 15 MAR 2010 at 2:11pm |
rossntuCommander
Posts : 1271
Joined: 24 DEC 2008
Location: 0
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By *Lava*
Originally Posted By Rogs
I bought it and played it for a few weeks but the problem is I don't like the basic philosophy behind the design. It is a simulation in which you must play the corps or army commander, and even at the least realistic, most gamey setting conscript) you don't control your units.
Well... actually, that is not true at all.
While it is a Command simulation (it has to be with the number of units involved... this is not N:TW), you have lots of control over your units.
Individually... you can reassign them to different Corps in the set-up phase. Prior to battle, not only can you move about the different Corps to different areas, but you can also "detach" and "attach" units from one Corps to another. So if you want a "Grand Battery" there is nothing stopping you. You can even detach a couple cavalry squadrons from other Corps and have them "support" the battery, so they don't get overrun by enemy cavalry. You can also have them scout or attack, or unlimber. You can do pretty much what-ever you want with individual units.
The AI provides the individual with a "let's move everyone over here" basic movement style, but the player can can control those units, if he so chooses. And that includes taking advantage of terrain.
I think you need to spend a bit more time learning the actual mechanics of the game. There is a lot more to it than I believe you understand and I think you are painting the game with too wide a brush because of it.
Ray (alias Lava)
In fairness Lava - I think what he means is it's not as easy to tell a specific regiment what blade of grass to stand on, as you can in the HPS games for example. Personally I love the commander control idea as to me it is realism- irl generals did stupid things- it might sound strange but I hope there is never an AI so good that they don't make historically plausible mistakes. So far, apart from my elite Swedish regiment routing because they saw some cow manure on the field in front of them, everything seems "right", although I say that with a reminder of the caveat I made at the beginning that I am far from a Napoleonic expert.
On a different note, I must say that the PBEM system is very easy, although it is potentially confusing that every so often you load the game and it tells you to send the file back, without you even having seen the battlefield. This is working as designed but it could be a bit more obvious. Overall though it has been a simple process and with order delay of this could be over quite quickly!
|
| 15 MAR 2010 at 2:12pm |
rossntuCommander
Posts : 1271
Joined: 24 DEC 2008
Location: 0
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By ess1
ross_ntu, Many thanks for taking the time and trouble. An excellent idea.
Thanks Ess - nice of you to say so. It's the first time I've done an AAR so it's good to know people are reading it!
|
| 15 MAR 2010 at 2:26pm |
Cougar_DKCenturion
Posts : 592
Joined: 14 APR 2008
Location: DK
Status : Offline | Its a great AAR Ross. Looking forward to more []
-Men do not quit playing because they grow old. They grow old because they quit playing. -- Oliver Wendell Holmes
|
| 15 MAR 2010 at 2:56pm |
rossntuCommander
Posts : 1271
Joined: 24 DEC 2008
Location: 0
Status : Offline | Thanks a lot Cougar! I am waiting for the next file as I just got a "no turn" so had to send the file straight back without giving any orders.
Funny though, I don't play a lot of PBEM but expecially doing the AAR, I am starting to get a idea of how McClellan must have felt. I have this large army, but I am hesitant to commit s am worried that I will get massacred by the formidable French army, containing generals I've actually heard of! [] I bet their elite troops don't rout at the fact they are out in the fresh air.
At the moment I have a quandry - basically an attack on the right is futile- he has significantly more troops than me on that side of the field (iirc Ney himself has 20,000), and an attack on the left would mean attacking the village - potentially a very costly affair. Maybe I will look at a full blown attack in the centre, committing Constantine, Micradovitch and Rosenberg, in an attempt to draw his forces into the centre from the left, before attempting to flank with Bennigsen and Essen. That would only leave Prince Eugen, Buxhowden and Langeron in reserve. If the attack was unsuccessful we could be left in a very precarious position, but having said that, not committing enough troops could mean significant losses.
Choices, choices....
|
| 15 MAR 2010 at 5:26pm |
ArizonaTankCenturion
Posts : 582
Joined: 25 APR 2005
Status : Offline | Great AAR, keep it coming
"No, No, mix them all up. I'm tired of state's rights."
Union General George Thomas' reply to his chaplain, when asked if the dead from the Chatanooga campaign should be buried by state as had been done at Gettysburg.
|
| 15 MAR 2010 at 6:16pm |
rossntuCommander
Posts : 1271
Joined: 24 DEC 2008
Location: 0
Status : Offline | Turn 4
Having looked at the situation in the 3D view (something I should have got a screenshot of now I think about it- doh!) the movements of Bennigsen and Essen have put them in a decent postion with a great view of any potential French attack. They really are on top of quite a big hill, and any attack by the French will be pretty costly. Bennigsen has been slow to move but he has reached a position that he can defend. Essen has been quicker, and has actually caught Bennigsen up. He will continue to defend the hill with Bennigsen.
Skirmishing between rival cavalry units continues apace, with a number of my cavalry regiments routing this turn, most noticeably a few that had reached the bottom of the hill and were engaged with infantry and cavalry units. The French look to be moving quickly in an attempt to take the higher ground. No thanks to Bennigsen, the Coalition forces on the hill should be able to deploy and cause the French some real problems if they get lulled into thinking there is still a chance of them gaining the summit.
Elsewhere, cavalry move between the lines and threaten infantry and artillery alike. In the following screenshot von Kaulbar's regiment have formed square to defend against Picquet's dragoons.
[image]http://b.imagehost.org/0577/HistWar001.jpg[/image]
Prince Eugen seems to have lost the plot and seems to be attempting to run his own personal battle in the South, sending his troops out to various positions that are totally different to what I actually told him to do! He may well receive a court marshall if he keeps this up.
Constantine's has moved forward, and will now move into defensive positions until it is clear what the overall picture is. As I posted above, my thought is to use Rosenberg and Constantine to attack Spec's centre, drawing troops away from the north, and allowing an attack by Bennigsen and Essen, although given Bennigsen's retisence to move anywhere fast he is probably not one to rely on should be need a quick flank attack.
Below Mumb's light infantry of Constantine's colonne advance.
[image]http://b.imagehost.org/0069/HistWar002.jpg[/image]
And Constantine watches his colonne's movements
[image]http://b.imagehost.org/0675/HistWar003.jpg[/image]
I will wait until Constantine and Rosenberg have reached their positions before deciding on my next move, as I want to see more of the French deployment before over or under committing. It is important that any attack is well co-ordinated, and for that we need to begin the attacking manoevures closer to the enemy.
Here are the final positions of the turn- the next two will be critical in determining my next move. Will Spec attack the hill with his superior numbers? Will Bennigsen prove himself to be better at defending than marching? Will the attack on the centre prove to be worthwhile, or will it prove to be not worth the risk given that success of such a scheme would necessitate leaving my lovely hill, and also relying on Bennigsen to get somewhere quickly?
I can only wait and see how this game of cat and mouse develops.
[image]http://b.imagehost.org/0102/HistWar000.jpg[/image]
By the way- just to clarify, the unit icons covered with red are routing, and the ones with what looks like an explosion on them are under attack.
|
| 17 MAR 2010 at 4:55am |
SolInvictus202Centurion
Posts : 95
Joined: 24 FEB 2010
Status : Online | Really great AAR...
only one small question on your tactics: it seems to me that your LOPs in the back are quite unprotected...and since I've been playing the game for some time now...I only wanted to advise you that you might wanna keep a reserve there the next time...because once your LOPs are taken, by only one renegade cavalry regiment...you're entire army is going to rout - due to the morale loss the units have once only one LOP is lost - if both are taken - well let's just say, you'll see'em runnin'...believe me - I had to experience it myself...
SolInvictus
"parcere subiectis et debellare superbos" - Vergil
|
| 17 MAR 2010 at 5:03am |
undercovergeekCommander
Posts : 1314
Joined: 24 OCT 2006
Status : Offline | is the concensus of opinion now this game has turned the corner and its THE strategy game for the period?
|
| 17 MAR 2010 at 4:41pm |
rossntuCommander
Posts : 1271
Joined: 24 DEC 2008
Location: 0
Status : Offline | I don't think it has changed massively since release - but release was a lot better than the original demo from what I hear. There are glitches but it's a good game and is well supported, and they are far from game breakers.
|
| 17 MAR 2010 at 4:56pm |
rossntuCommander
Posts : 1271
Joined: 24 DEC 2008
Location: 0
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By SolInvictus202
Really great AAR...
only one small question on your tactics: it seems to me that your LOPs in the back are quite unprotected...and since I've been playing the game for some time now...I only wanted to advise you that you might wanna keep a reserve there the next time...because once your LOPs are taken, by only one renegade cavalry regiment...you're entire army is going to rout - due to the morale loss the units have once only one LOP is lost - if both are taken - well let's just say, you'll see'em runnin'...believe me - I had to experience it myself...
Well Sol Invictus- welcome to the forums. Thanks to for making me feel totally stupid with your first post - and exposing my lack of manual reading []. Okay I give up -what does LOP stand for - I guess it's line of something, but can't think what "P" stands for and know I'm going to kick myself! In all honesty I wasn't aware that it was an issue -and so if they're undefended it's because I didn't realise they were actually represented in game (I'm assuming it's the supply line effectively you're talking about). Thanks for the tip- I guess I will try and re-adapt my strategy to try to defend my back areas a bit better.
|
| 17 MAR 2010 at 6:17pm |
SolInvictus202Centurion
Posts : 95
Joined: 24 FEB 2010
Status : Online | Hey ross_ntu!
on the other forum you might know me under the name "CvC" []
I never had the intention to make you look stupid in any way...if it came out wrong...I APOLOGIZE....
LOP stands for "Lines of OPerations"...as you correctly assessed...the supply lines...the exact numbers for the morale loss are in the manual..of if you purchased the "Napoleon-edition" you will get a special "card" on that issue
I really hope that your strategy works out...thanks again for the AAR!
another small hint from an old (young in age [] ) grognard, who has spent countless hours in testing the game and playing just for the fun - all 3 ways the game offers:....keep your reserves further away from the enemy....as to keep them from the impact of morale loss by fleeing friendly units...and to be able to react to any enemy movement... (no being "wise" intended - none whatsover [] )
the only painful thing about this game is...that you only find out some basic rules by loosing terribly....
even if you have spend many years on reading books on the Napoleonic era...or being a student of military history like myself....I found it difficult in the beginning to control my army the way I wanted....
Once you have adopted though...you'll get a feeling on when to commit your reserves....when scouting is (if at all) a necessity and how to outthink your enemy...
Sol Invictus (no need to worship me yet [] )
PS: I'm not native English, but Austrian...so please forgive me for any future mistakes
SolInvictus
"parcere subiectis et debellare superbos" - Vergil
|
| 17 MAR 2010 at 7:00pm |
HookCenturion
Posts : 69
Joined: 8 JAN 2010
Status : Online | Ross_ntu, you're doing fine.
Poor SolInvictus has discovered that lessons you learn the hard way stay with you the longest. Whether it's "I hope you have some reserves back there because I'm sending a corps around your flank" or "You started that battle with only one line of operation, there's no way you can go on the attack. Your troops have a 10% morale malus while your opponent has a 30% morale bonus."
"What's that cavalry regiment doing in my rear areas?" "Getting drunk on the rum stored in your baggage train." By the time he got back there in force, there was a whole corps getting drunk. No wonder there was a morale difference.
Hook
|
| 17 MAR 2010 at 7:50pm |
KidCommander
Posts : 1202
Joined: 18 JAN 2006
Location: US, FL
Status : Offline | What game is this?
|
