Mack's Retreat

[Soosh]

2nd November

French cavalry appears about 100 km west of Vienna, while they renew their advance on Linz.

The engineers are ordered to cross the bridge at Lambach and then destroy it.

[Soosh]

Current losses and VP's

[Soosh]

3rd – 5th November

Coalition forces in and around Linz are ordered to engage any enemy units in sight, but no reports of engagements are coming in. There is an unauthorised advance on Passau, where I literally had to facepalm. Gee guys, come back to Linz, will ya?!


6th November

Previously unread
November 5, 1805
From : Jellacic (VI)

Sir, I have engaged the enemy at 38,15
I was supported by other units
The battle lasted 5 rounds
Our plan was a escalating assault
Their plan was a withdrawal
Infantry Strength : 75
Infantry Losses : 2
Cavalry Strength : 27
Cavalry Losses : 0
Artillery Strength : 6
Artillery Losses : 1
Enemy Infantry Strength : 30
Enemy Infantry Losses : 8
Enemy Cavalry Strength : 0
Enemy Cavalry Losses : 0
Enemy Artillery Strength : 6
Enemy Artillery Losses : 0
My men forced the enemy to withdraw

Yeah, that's awesome Jellacic, and I'm sure all the women will admire you when they hear the stories about your heroic adventures near Passau, but would you be so kind and move your arse back to Linz, please?

[Rasputitsa]

Thanks for another very good AAR, playing as the Coalition is more difficult than having Napoleon on your side, but can be much more interesting.

Can you show any of the unit stats to see how well they are managing with all this marching and how many stragglers are falling out.

[Soosh]

Thanks! Playing as the Coalition is definitely more challenging, especially when using 'reports only'. I really like the utter confusion it sometimes creates.

I'll continue the AAR today and will post some unit stats, as requested.

[Rasputitsa]

ORIGINAL: Soosh

Thanks! Playing as the Coalition is definitely more challenging, especially when using 'reports only'. I really like the utter confusion it sometimes creates.

I'll continue the AAR today and will post some unit stats, as requested.

I was wondering about the losses in stragglers as you retreat East, are you using forced march (I see Kutsusov is), because if the units keep moving, then the stragglers cannot re-join and a retreating army could melt away.

[Soosh]

ORIGINAL: Rasputitsa

I was wondering about the losses in stragglers as you retreat East, are you using forced march (I see Kutsusov is), because if the units keep moving, then the stragglers cannot re-join and a retreating army could melt away.

True, but the stragglers seem to rejoin when the unit is staying in a city for a while. Otherwise I wouldn't have an army any longer, because the French forced me to force march most of the time. Attached a screenshot of Kutusov's stats I've just taken, almost all of his stragglers have rejoined.

Btw I've just finished the campaign and will update the AAR this afternoon.

[Rasputitsa]

ORIGINAL: Soosh

ORIGINAL: Rasputitsa

I was wondering about the losses in stragglers as you retreat East, are you using forced march (I see Kutsusov is), because if the units keep moving, then the stragglers cannot re-join and a retreating army could melt away.

True, but the stragglers seem to rejoin when the unit is staying in a city for a while. Otherwise I wouldn't have an army any longer, because the French forced me to force march most of the time. Attached a screenshot of Kutusov's stats I've just taken, almost all of his stragglers have rejoined.

Btw I've just finished the campaign and will update the AAR this afternoon.

Thanks again, Kutusov looks good, I was wondering if the units were looking as good as the commander. I found, with the Austrians, that the commanders lost confidence faster than the individual units, sometimes the 'View units' gave a different story from the commander panel.

I am also using house rules to represent the Coalition historical performance, not using 'force march' until the commander stress reaches +10 (still using 'force march' for detached units) and not using 'To the guns' in the commander panel.

This represents the slower marching rate achieved by the Coalition forces early in the campaign, until they realised the seriousness of their position, when they successfully out-marched the French to get away.

The lack of co-ordination amongst the senior Coalition commanders means that it is difficult to achieve a concentration, senior Austrian commanders often did not 'march to the guns', but rigidly stuck to their written orders.

All of this makes the game even more of a challenge and closer to historical reality, playing as the Coalition.

It easier to keep an army in shape chasing a beaten enemy, but much more difficult to keep an army in fighting trim, during a retreat.[&o]

[Soosh]

That's some interesting house rules you got there, might try them next time I play as the Coalition. Do you normally win using those rules, or do you get crushed by the French?

[Soosh]

A bit later than planned, but here the final update

7th November

Previously unread
November 6, 1805
From : Kienmayer (I)

Sir, I have engaged the enemy at 38,15
I was supported by other units
The battle lasted 5 rounds
Our plan was a withdrawal
Their plan was a frontal assault
Infantry Strength : 20
Infantry Losses : 5
Cavalry Strength : 27
Cavalry Losses : 1
Artillery Strength : 0
Artillery Losses : 0
Enemy Infantry Strength : 53
Enemy Infantry Losses : 0
Enemy Cavalry Strength : 4
Enemy Cavalry Losses : 1
Enemy Artillery Strength : 7
Enemy Artillery Losses : 0
My men were forced to fall back


8th November

Previously unread
November 7, 1805
From : Werneck (II)

Sir, I have engaged the enemy at 42,17
I was supported by other units
The battle lasted 5 rounds
Our plan was a withdrawal
Their plan was a escalating assault
Infantry Strength : 9
Infantry Losses : 3
Cavalry Strength : 23
Cavalry Losses : 0
Artillery Strength : 1
Artillery Losses : 0
Enemy Infantry Strength : 42
Enemy Infantry Losses : 3
Enemy Cavalry Strength : 0
Enemy Cavalry Losses : 0
Enemy Artillery Strength : 10
Enemy Artillery Losses : 0
My men were forced to fall back


9th November

Previously unread
November 8, 1805
From : Kienmayer (I)

Sir, I have engaged the enemy at 43,17
I was supported by other units
The battle lasted 5 rounds
Our plan was a withdrawal
Their plan was a frontal assault
Infantry Strength : 16
Infantry Losses : 5
Cavalry Strength : 44
Cavalry Losses : 1
Artillery Strength : 2
Artillery Losses : 0
Enemy Infantry Strength : 73
Enemy Infantry Losses : 8
Enemy Cavalry Strength : 0
Enemy Cavalry Losses : 0
Enemy Artillery Strength : 10
Enemy Artillery Losses : 0
My men were forced to fall back

My men were forced to fall back… forced to fall back… fall back. Ugh, ok then, I think it's about time to leave Linz behind and make a last stand in Krems and St. Polten, located about 60-70 km west of Vienna.

Speaking of, some cavalry belonging to the French III. Corps just showed up near Krems. Great, more problems.

Anyhow, let's get those units moving. The Austrians defend Krems, the Russians St. Polten.

[Soosh]

Here some unit stats. I couldn't find any of Buxhowden's units while shuffling through the stacks, and only half of Kutusov's, so didn't include them.

[Soosh]

I think I just lost the campaign. The French took Vienna, which was defended by some reserve units (8,000 inf, 4,000 cav) and are about to take Linz and Enns. That means I can't set up my ops centre any longer, and without supplies I'm screwed. So there's no point in continuing, really.

I'd like to congratulate my opponent, Antoine Imbert, for an exciting game and want to add that this was the first time he defeated me. At least I inflicted heavy casualties on the French, both sides lost around 60,000 men.

Lessons learned: 1. Protect your capital 2. Use cavalry to scout more often 3. Protect your capital!

[Rasputitsa]

ORIGINAL: Soosh

That's some interesting house rules you got there, might try them next time I play as the Coalition. Do you normally win using those rules, or do you get crushed by the French?

The AAR running here :

tm.asp?m=4297140

is the first time that I introduced the house rules into CotD, after doing some house rules for 'Piercing Fortress Europa'. In both cases the intention is to create a more historical effect and, at the same time, overcome some of the weakness in the AI.

The effect in CotD playing as Coalition, is that you need to be more careful, because your army is more vulnerable and less able to concentrate into a battle. The AAR is not finished, but it has been a helluva fight. [:)]

[Rasputitsa]

Well, looking at the unit stats, you kept your army in quite good condition, army confidence level stayed up and casualties are even, but did you give up too much ground, too easily.

'Wars are not won by evacuations', etc.

Either way, the best the Coalition can hope for is to stay in being, holding the ground is a bonus, but the key is striking the balance, between not giving up ground too easily and not getting caught in annihilating battles.

In the AAR (different campaign), I am trying to keep an Austrian army in being, use the Danube as a shield, and threaten the French flank if they head East. Also, looking for force multipliers, like river crossings to defend, or use street fights in cities to neutralise enemy cavalry and artillery. Avoid being caught on the move and try to get units closed up early on objectives for best performance in battle.

Here is the Victory Screen after one month (30 days) of the 'Charles Original Plan - Variant 1809'- as Coalition against AI French and it has been brutal.



Significant losses and shattered units on both sides, with low army confidence now for both sides, which is the cost of holding the ground west of PASSAU. I was helped by a reckless attack over the Danube by the AI NAPOLEON himself, resulting in the near destruction of DAVOUT's corps, but any contact with the enemy hurts the Austrians, especially with these house rules, but historically that's how it was.

Great game. [:)]

[Soosh]

I did use the same strategy in a previous game as the Coalition and got a marginal victory. But that was in v3.04 and with normal fog of war. And I rather give up ground and preserve my army than defending some small town to the last man. It could have worked if the French wouldn't have taken Vienna, but they did. I should've sent Buxhowden to Vienna and left him there, that was by far my biggest mistake.

But to be honest I don't really care if I win or lose, for me it's all about the experience (always a good excuse when you lose [:D]). I like to immerse myself into the game and roleplay a bit. That's why I prematurely ended the game. I could have continued and, say, assaulted the French over and over again until my army was gone, but would that have been realistic? And what would have an Austrian CIC done in the same situation? The problem about playing wargames is that a lot of players don't seem to care much about casualties or the state of their forces, and do things their historical counterpart would have never done.

Anyhow, while browsing through the forum I found this and wondering when it might be released. This engine needs more games based on it.

[Rasputitsa]

ORIGINAL: Soosh

I did use the same strategy in a previous game as the Coalition and got a marginal victory. But that was in v3.04 and with normal fog of war. And I rather give up ground and preserve my army than defending some small town to the last man. It could have worked if the French wouldn't have taken Vienna, but they did. I should've sent Buxhowden to Vienna and left him there, that was by far my biggest mistake.

But to be honest I don't really care if I win or lose, for me it's all about the experience (always a good excuse when you lose [:D]). I like to immerse myself into the game and roleplay a bit. That's why I prematurely ended the game. I could have continued and, say, assaulted the French over and over again until my army was gone, but would that have been realistic? And what would have an Austrian CIC done in the same situation? The problem about playing wargames is that a lot of players don't seem to care much about casualties or the state of their forces, and do things their historical counterpart would have never done.

Anyhow, while browsing through the forum I found this and wondering when it might be released. This engine needs more games based on it.

I don't propose fighting to the last man over any objective, but a balance of fighting whenever there is an advantage and giving ground only when necessary. The fighting to the last man happens when you get caught with no escape, which the AI was able to do to some of my units.

I have introduced the house rules to provide more reality and challenge, to get more into the historical role, which CotD does so well.

Playing the game is for the experience, but we all like to win. Playing as French is pretty much a sure bet, but as the Coalition it is much more problematic.

I had missed that comment by Frank, but he does maintain a low profile, then suddenly pops up with game update and maybe, hopefully, a new game. I think these AARs help generate interest in the game and provide information which might assist in further development.

Your experience playing PBEM, if is was so, will be of interest, maybe you could do a summary of how it worked for you. I have only been doing AARs on play against the AI, but there is a lot of interest in PBEM.[:)]

[Soosh]

ORIGINAL: Rasputitsa

Your experience playing PBEM

Oh no, it wasn't PBEM. I was playing against, well, Antoine Imbert. [:D] Sorry about the confusion.

[Rasputitsa]

ORIGINAL: Soosh

ORIGINAL: Rasputitsa

Your experience playing PBEM

Oh no, it wasn't PBEM. I was playing against, well, Antoine Imbert. [:D] Sorry about the confusion.

Ooops, sorry misunderstood. [8|]

[loki100]

thanks for doing this AAR. I do find CoTD such an under-stated gem. Only giving orders to say 6-8 units (assuming no detached divisions) and still seeing so much variation in how the game plays out even vs the AI.

I've tried the Mack retreat strategy twice. First time, and you mentioned this possibility, the French got to the crossroads between Ulm and Augsburg first. While I cleared that block, the time lost was fatal.

So second time, did a lot more thinking about how to block the Danube crossings and got 3 corps back to Augsburg pretty intact. As they arrived started the second stage of the retreat back to Linz etc. Found that Napoleon must have looked at my block on the bridges just east of Ulm and decided to cross further along. So there he is, sat across my line of retreat. May get one corps out via Munich?

Or not, fascinating to work out what to do etc.

[Soosh]

Thanks for reading!
Sending Werneck's strong II. corps to Gunzburg to block the river crossing (with Neubourg as retreat point) is quite helpful in getting the rest of Mack's army to Augsburg.

ORIGINAL: loki100

Only giving orders to say 6-8 units (assuming no detached divisions) and still seeing so much variation in how the game plays out even vs the AI.

Personally I've never really been into those monster games where you have to push gazillions of counters across a map, I prefer operational and grand strategy games on corps or, depending on the size of the theatre, divisional level. And the AI can be a challenge, so yeah, I am more than pleased with CotD. [:)]

Only drawback is that it may take a new player some time to get used to the system, especially the ones who are used to control everything.