PBEM AAR - It Ain't a Lost Cause Yet!

[Jonathan Palfrey]

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

It's only in PBEM battles (and instant-resolve, I guess) that one doesn't find out why things happened the way they did. We'll see if we can provide more information.

It's the e-mail games that I take most seriously. And I'll probably use instant-resolve even for solo games, though I can't guarantee it at this stage. If you can provide more information, that will be appreciated.

[Sheytan]

Hail,
 
 Very nice AAR. Keep it coming!!!
 
Virtute et Armis
 
Sheytan

[Grifman]

Hood was a good, even great brigade/division commander, but a poor corp commander, and an awful army commander. An obvious case of a general being appointed to a level of command he could not handle. There really ought to be a penalty to the original ratings for a general if they are promoted beyond their historical ability. Hood is a perfect example.

[Gil R.]

If I'm not mistaken, wasn't Hood the guy about whom there was a lot of debate on the forum, leading me to say we'd revisit him once the game was out? I know there was some controversial general like that, and think it was Hood. (I'm too lazy to check.) Anyway, it does seem like we can all revisit Hood's ratings in the near future...

[Mike Scholl]

Hood actually jumped from a Division Commander at Gettysburg (where he lost a limb) to an Army Commander at Atlanta. His aggression and fighting spirit seem to have remained intact..., but his sense of reality (which had led him to complain about not being allowed to swing wider around "Little Round Top") seems to have degenerated as he began throwing his Army into endless "frontal assults" in 1864.

[chris0827]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

Hood actually jumped from a Division Commander at Gettysburg (where he lost a limb) to an Army Commander at Atlanta. His aggression and fighting spirit seem to have remained intact..., but his sense of reality (which had led him to complain about not being allowed to swing wider around "Little Round Top") seems to have degenerated as he began throwing his Army into endless "frontal assults" in 1864.

Hood took over Longstreet's corps at Chickamauga when Longstreet was given command of the Confederate left wing. He was wounded in the leg and had it amputated at the hip. When he returned to duty he commanded a corps under Johnston in the Atlanta campaign. He may have become addicted to opium which he took to ease the pain from his lost leg and a badly wounded arm from Gettysburg. Everyone but Jefferson Davis knew it was a mistake to give him command of the Army of Tennessee. Lee said "We may lose Atlanta and the army too. Hood is a bold fighter. I am doubtful as to other qualities necessary." Joe Johnston was too careful but Hood was wildly aggressive and reckless. After losing Atlanta and a third of his army he took off on an idiotic invasion of Tennessee in which he lost another third of his army. Sherman didn't feel he was much of a threat and marched to the sea leaving Hood for Thomas to handle. Lincoln and Grant overestimated the threat from Hood and nearly relieved Thomas from command but the outcome was never in doubt. Thomas crushed Hood's army like an egg. It was the most complete victory of the war until Appomattox. To make matters worse his messages to Richmond lied about the condition of the army. For three weeks he claimed his losses in Tennessee had been light. Beauregard had wanted to transfer the army to the carolinas to but was shocked by what he found when he inspected the troops. One corps was down to 3078 men. What was left was sent to Mobile and South Carolina to serve under Johnston again. It's true the war was most likely lost by the time Hood took command but he threw away the most important thing the south had left. An army.

[Mike Scholl]

Yep..., lots of "fight", not much reality. Frantic frontal assults at Atlanta and Franklin which piled up casualties to no real purpose, then sitting outside Nashville stubbornly until Thomas was ready to move out and crush his army.

[chris0827]

In addition to the regular soldiers he threw away he also lost 20 brigade and division commanders either killed or wounded and more than half of the regimental commanders. He lost 12 generals at Franklin alone including the superb Pat Cleburne who was passed over for promotion in favor of Hood in this AAR.

[Tophat1815]

ORIGINAL: chris0827

In addition to the regular soldiers he threw away he also lost 20 brigade and division commanders either killed or wounded and more than half of the regimental commanders. He lost 12 generals at Franklin alone including the superb Pat Cleburne who was passed over for promotion in favor of Hood in this AAR.

Gil,
I really don't think the training ability Hood provides is worth it,this has bad omen written all over it.Roll the Bones or hire an Exorcist,issue the man a 4-leaf clover.Ahh,the heck with it,demote his butt and get Cleburne in command.

[Gil R.]

In the turn I'll be posting in the morning you'll see that Cleburne joined the 1st Corps in Cumberland River and was promoted to 2-star. I can make the additional change soon.

Because of the antivirus software zapping the save-files from jchastain I didn't take my turn until pretty late, and it's now way too late to begin posting. I'll try to have it done by mid-day.

Definitely an interesting turn.

[Paper Tiger]

OK it will be interesting to see how a winter campaign plays out.

[Joram]

ORIGINAL: Jonathan Palfrey

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

My 1st Corps was defeated in Bowling Green, even though I'm almost certain that it outnumbered the enemy force and was clearly superior to it, and the USA suffered most of the casualties. I'd love to know what the heck happened...

So would I, if that happened to me. Does the game give no information at all, beyond the bare statement of who won and what the casualties were?

When the casualty figures suggest a resounding win but the claimed result is a defeat, it looks like a defect in the game. I would send in a bug report unless the game provided some convincing explanation of the result.

I realize that battles were sometimes won by the side with the greater casualties. But was there ever a battle in which the winning side suffered more than three times the casualties of the loser? It's conceivable if the losing side was entrenched but heavily outnumbered; but that doesn't seem to have been the case here.

First, thanks for continuing the AAR, it's very good. Second, may I suggest some kind of "battle-log" that contains approximately what happened so a player could inspect it if he wishes. I think it would at a minimum show the firing unit, the target unit and any modifiers (flanking, morale, leadership, etc...).

[Jonathan Palfrey]

ORIGINAL: Joram
May I suggest some kind of "battle-log" that contains approximately what happened so a player could inspect it if he wishes. I think it would at a minimum show the firing unit, the target unit and any modifiers (flanking, morale, leadership, etc...).

Are instant battles really resolved by shuffling invisible units around behind the scenes and having them fire at each other? It seems very complicated to me and not guaranteed to produce sensible results. I would have expected some kind of formula (including a random element) into which you put in the various input parameters and out pop the results.

An advantage of the formula method is that it's probably easier to tweak if the results are not coming out quite right.

[Gil R.]

Who's to say that a simple formula is most accurate?

Anyway, the game is programmed, and there's no need to completely redo this aspect. If there's something wrong with the results they can be tweaked just the way a formula could have been.


Okay, about to start posting. Let's move future discussions of Hood to the generals' ratings sub-forum, so that they don't get overlooked.

[Gil R.]

Twenty-ninth Turn

This turn was a great one for the South -- Jackson was freed after a major battle that sank the North into greater despair, and another naval battle off the coast of Florida further whittled away one of the Union's two fleets.

First, the Event Report, which shows Tallahassee standing strong. The almost complete lack of casualties in the garrison indicates to me that the Union force must be out of supplies, or just about out.

And Jackson managed to hold together...

[Gil R.]

...long enough for the 4th Corps to beat back the Union army, which this time didn't put up nearly the fight it did last time. My strategy of waiting a harrowing turn while Jackson was in danger of falling paid off, since I was able to bulk up this force with reinforcements.

USA National Will is now down even further, which is excellent news. If it stays down this low come April, when population gets refreshed, the North won't be able to replace its population levels 100%, which will impair their efforts for the coming year. But a lot can happen in four months...

Also, there are the results of the naval battle. My 20-inch Dahlgren blew a few more Union ships out of the water. (My hope is not that the damage was spread out among a few groups of ships, since their strength can be repaired, but that at least one whole group -- e.g., 1st Ships, or 2nd Ships, etc. -- got destroyed and therefore is eliminated.)

[Gil R.]

Disease struck Hill's division in Tuscumbia, but only two units lost Disposition (which Hill's leadership will quickly restore), and the losses can be replaced by setting the division on higher supply in order to ensure reinforcements are directed there. And since this division is not about to see battle this coming turn there's no long-term harm done.

Frankly, I'm amazed that the Army of Northern Virginia has gone so long without being hit again by disease. Disease hits a single brigade randomly and then spreads to other brigades in that province, and the ANV has the largest concentration. At least the two Hospitals in Lynchburg will protect it somewhat when disease does hit.

And diplomacy is paying off, but I don't have 60 Money for buying Lorenzs now that I'm back at two levels of diplomacy with the Other Europeans.

[Gil R.]

Some details from the Battle of Jackson. If you remember, when the 4th Corps was defeated a few turns ago it lost some weapons, and now seems to have gained some back.

[Gil R.]

Over in Virginia, winter movement restrictions again kept the small 2nd Division in Abingdon from going to Grafton, so I try again this turn. Otherwise, all quiet on the eastern front.

[Gil R.]

Having realized that no matter how badly off the corps besieging Tallahassee might be, it's not going away, I finally decide to send in a force to attack it. So, I take the other division that's been waiting in Abingdon (Virginia), the 8th Division, and send it by rail to Okefenokee. My guess is that even though I have enough railroad points to move it all the way it will take two turns to go there -- but once there, it should easily demolish the corps, since it will be fully supplied and in better shape. I set its priority high enough to steer some reinforcements to it and buy one brigade some Richmond Muskets.

In two turns it should be delivering the coup de grace, unless the Union is able to pull off a Dunkirk.