American tactics, anyone?

[Gibbon]

ORIGINAL: MarkShot
My initial thoughts on stealthy units is:

- Use them in wilderness-mountains/woods where there are no structures. They should effectively become invisible. Units in regions with structures are always visible no matter how stealthy they are.

- Use them to ambush the enemy trying to move up reinforcements.

- Use them on the periphery of your control to see what the enemy is up to.

[Gibbon]

ORIGINAL: MarkShot
I just started playing the 1775 GC from the British side; I am little past a year into the struggle. An interesting change from the American side:

- No territorial control of the high value areas.
- Largely blind due to lack of popular support; really need to use your irregulars and cav scouts to sea (also the fleet is good recon too).
- Fewer leaders and half the time, they are in no mood to follow orders.
- Ah, G_d bless his Majesty's Fleet. It makes up for some of the above in terms of mobility and fire support.

It will be interesting to see how the conflict progresses. One thing as the Americans which was tiresome was the constant disbanding of militia at the end of year making your forces evaporate and then having to round up your armies again. Perhaps, in command of the British, there will be much less of that.

[Gibbon]

More tips, by [FS]Feltan:

Just finished first campaignas the Americans, 1775 all the way through.

1. Game ran well

2. I won rather easily by points (over 1700 more points than the Brits). In the end, the Brits held Quebec, Ft. Detroit and Norfolk -- the latter they grabbed on the last couple turns of the game when my militia there disbanded in Jan of 1783.

3. The French intervention turns the tide...no doubt about it. The "big" battle of the game was the French fleet catching some unescorted British transports and destroying what was the largest British Army on the continent. I landed the French in the vicinity of Danbury, and marched them to New York and captured that back from the Brits, then the French marched up the Hudson and finally captured Montreal. The hike to Quebec turned out to be a bit too much, and I was never able to effect a decent seige of that fortress.

4. Washington and the main Continental army never left New England. They kept the New York-to-Boston axis open and clobbered several smaller British incursions.

5. Hint: in the early part of the game as the American do yourself a favor....burn every Indian villiage you can!

6. The AI played generally well, but I noted one thing that probably needs to be looked at: the Brit AI never took forces to winter quarters until the snow was already waist deep. I saw a couple of British stacks disappear -- and I assume it was due to weather. You learn really quick that in about September/October, you better be in or close to some sort of structure.

7. Why can troops that are in a fort still entrench? Is there any value to doing so?

8. Hint: it is a game of posts and pitched battle. Do not underestimate the value of a single militia regiment entrenched within a city. The AI will almost always lay seige, and you can slow down/stop a much larger force if you play your cards smart. Also, as noted above, the Brit AI will continue to seige while the snows start -- and I am quite sure that I killed many many more Brits on the outskirts of cities due to weather than they killed by laying seige.

9. Hint: as the American simply retreat when the British advance into an area, and attack when they abandon (or reduce forces) in an area. Do not go head-to-head with large British stacks: 1) there is no need to, and 2) you will lose. Be willing to lose any city for a period of time.

I am going to download the patch and give it a try as the Brits now.

Regards,
Feltan

[Gibbon]

And here is my last source (note that it was under v1.06 and that the AI has kept improving):

ORIGINAL: Dinsdale

Run. Run. Keep running.

At least until 78.

I've been able to win on hard, but I suspect that's about to change with 1.06.

The key to the game is getting French and Spanish help as quickly as possible. That means that you need to try and maintain 1 or more strategic cities in each Region. If the British have an entire region, it's 15% less chance of French intervention. Letting the British get 2 regions may be irreversibly fatal.

I leave the Deep South to it's fate. Only options are to siege outlying positions and try and prevent the British from having every city. Even with Cornwallis and a few reinforcements, they don't have enough men to adequately garrison everywhere. Provided you don't get caught by Tarleton or other roving bands, you can usually win a city back, and force the British to find another regular unit to garrison it with (that all takes them time, and you'll be somewhere else doing the same.

Having said that, my current game saw Cornwallis land in New York. The Deep South is entirely mine, and the north is a death trap, so your mileage may vary.

The South Central tend to be quiet in my games until late. There are too many cities for the British to do anything about you, and they tend to not have enough troops to take more than a couple anyway, provided you keep Howe and the Germans up north.

Middle States
I used to work near Morristown and visited the Contintental site several times. Until playing though, I often wondered what the hell Washington was doing out there The British tend to march through, so I find Easton to be a perfect depot site and place to keep the army intact. From there you can hit detachments trying to take Wyoming, retake Phillie+Manhattan, and run back to Easton. You can tie 2 British armies up in this region if you're lucky.

North New England and Canada
For me, the key to every campaign in the game is Albany. If you can hold Albany then the British have logistical problems, can't ever unite Burgoyne with the Germans or Howe/Clinton, and can't move out of New England. That keeps South Central safe, and allows Washington to maneuver the Middle States.

Albany is well protected, if you hold Dayton, then the British can't use it for supply. Holding (and retaking whenever empty) Battlebro and Pittsfield will prevent the New England force from being able to walk in. With it's depot and horrendously short campaign season, Albany should never fall.

After Albany, I try and hold Norwich. It's a nightmare for the British to take, and when they move their army north, you can send some raids south into Southern New England:

I don't know if there's a rule, but it seems that Boston triggers many more colonial militias and Continentals to form. If the British army is off hunting you in the Middle States, and stalled in the North, then a capable force can retake Boston, Newport and Hartford. The British tend to react angrily to these moves, so be prepared to run, and don't disperse. Better to abandon every city but Boston than garrison and allow the Brits to siege you one by one.

Provided you avoid battle, don't get unlucky and run into 20,000 Germans, and prevent the Brits from holding a region, by 78 or 79 you'll be strong enough to start threatening them and fighting pitched battles. When the French arrive, it's fairly straightforward to maneuver and fight, or better still, trap the British in sieges. You still need to be careful as British quality will still see off all but much larger American armies.

Other things I do:

Depots:
When you are going on the offensive, then it's faster than lugging supply wagons around with every army. A select few can supply the whole of New England and Virginia.

Leaders:
After the yearly disbands, send plenty of 1 star leaders off to likely recruiting centres. A regiment suffers a 50% penalty without an officer, and they tend to arrive in clumps. Campaigning season is short, and you need to concentrate those forces as quickly as possible.

Washington:
GW is a skirmisher, but if his forces outnumber a British army, he'll fight it even if the quality differential results in the complete destruction of your army. Don't group too many units under his command, and he'll instead look to retreat from every battle, typically with no loss. I lost a game very early when GW stood and fought. Our "victory" destroyed the entire army and barely scratched the Brits.

Indians:
They can be a pain in the ass, and sometimes supplement small British regulars. Although it's a brutal tactic, I try and exterminate them from the outset. Morgan's rifles, or Marblehead are good independent leaders and their 1 unit is generally enough to assault any Indian village. After you burn it to the ground, they don't come back next year.

West Point/Manhattan
I don't like tying up precious artillery in a fort, so I don't tend to make one. I've been able to defend the Hudson with hit and run sieges after the Brits move on. But, this might be impacted by 1.06. If the British are more efficient at rolling up 1 unit defended towns, then it may be necessary to fortify and hold with a garrison. WP is harder to take logistically, though Manhattan is surrounded by empty areas and is also a challenge. It will be interesting to see how these areas are handled with the new patch

Charisma
One of the goals is to gain more units each year. That can be accelerated by not suffering disbandments, charasmatic leaders can help keep the army together, thus grow faster with the next season's recruitment. Washington and Arnold are good for the large armies, but don't neglect small detachments. Try to get all your charasmatic leaders employed somewhere. Keeping an extra 2-3 regiments per year may not seem like much, but by '80 it makes your force overwhelming.

Leaders
Pulaski should go wherever the cavalry is, Kosciusko whereever you want to siege (or hold.) Sad irony, that two of the most congested stretches of road on earth are named after these fellows

Use other leaders where their attributes help. After playing the British for a while, it's nice to have decent leaders, and they can make a small but significant contribution. Fast Mover is very useful, especially for ferrying troops or supplies between armies. It only takes 1 fast mover to get the bonus, so lump them with larger forces when needed.

Command Limit
More than anything else, once I started to pay attention to command limit I had success. Everything from speed of movement to combat is affected. I'd rather have fewer troops than exceed the command limit. With American leaders there should be no excuse to let any group exceed command for too long. Much more a problem with the British, as it forces people like Burgoyne and his slow moving subordinate on you for the entire game!

[Gibbon]

ORIGINAL: Ardie

Woah! Excellent post, Dinsdale!!

I agree with you on most points. I tend to form the regional departments and assign leaders, regiments and supply by priorities/needs. So far New England and Georgia & Carolinas are the most urgent ones.

One of my strategies is to take out Norfolk, VA as quickly as possible in order to deny British landing there.

Yes, Albany is the key for the survival in New England. Losing Albany hurts more than losing NYC. I tend to take Ticonderoga to trigger the Canadian regimental uppgrade and to protect Knox's guns but I dare not to venture further north.

I've mostly tried to keep Charleston, SC garrisoned but if Cornwallis tries open southern front I'm thinking about abandoning it and hold Camden/ Charlotte instead. This should be easier if the tories in Norfolk are eliminated.

A good point on Washy. I have seemed to handle him well as I try to "grow" a solid experienced core group of regular regiments with him. Too bad that I seem to get unlucky and lose several regulars come January even with Charismatic leaders commanding them. Usually the 1st Dragoons.

I usually leave the Indians alone, they otherwise provide really good scouts for the enemy. The Brits could really use them.

Still some very good tips, Thanks!

[Gibbon]

ORIGINAL: Dinsdale
That's the beauty of the 75 campaign, each theatre has an affect on the next, and within each theatre, each town affects the next. There's a series of old boardgames, with a smaller scale, which plays very similarly: Avalon Hill's Struggle Of Nations, and the 1814 and 1815 campaigns. There might even be one for Italy 1796. All about maneuver and threats, rather than a series of battles.

-----

Quote:
One of my strategies is to take out Norfolk, VA as quickly as possible in order to deny British landing there.

I never seem to have enough units to hold Norfolk, though I imagine games are shaped by the towns you hold: thus where reinfocements and the new intake of regiments appear.


Quote:
Yes, Albany is the key for the survival in New England. Losing Albany hurts more than losing NYC. I tend to take Ticonderoga to trigger the Canadian regimental uppgrade and to protect Knox's guns but I dare not to venture further north.


Agree. One thing I forgot to write, was not to invade Canada. It's not worth the losses, and it's impossible to face Burgoyne when he arrives and hold anything.


Quote:
I've mostly tried to keep Charleston, SC garrisoned but if Cornwallis tries open southern front I'm thinking about abandoning it and hold Camden/ Charlotte instead. This should be easier if the tories in Norfolk are eliminated.

The bastard usually lands at Charleston when I play. Though the last one, he never made it to the South. Charleston seems like a great place to hold as 2-3 regiments show up there each year, instead of having them scattered all over the place.


Quote:
Still some very good tips, Thanks!
You're welcome! But, after playing a little 1.06 over the weekend, I think many of them are now invalid.

I had my ass handed to me on hard. The British assaulted and destroyed a significant force in Albany, took Stanwick and Dayton Forts, and crushed Washington in New Jersey. They managed to combine Burgoyne with the New England force and march south. Fortunately I crushed Cornwallis, otherwise almost the entire British army would have been flooding south into Virginia, and I had just enough men to keep Clinton and the Germans distracted.

At one point, the northern "front" was Washington, and a bunch of refugees in the wilderness outside Wilkes-Barre. Eventually the French, and moving reinforcements up from the South each year helped retake parts of the North, but the game ended in a virtual points tie.

I've never really assaulted forts before, but watching the British make mincemeat of them all, and ordering a successful assault on the West Indies, I'm wondering if Jagger is correct in http://www.ageod.com/forums/showthread.php?t=682 that forts may be a little underpowered. I did fortify West Point, it held against a 4 regiment attack, and Pittsburgh held off a similar sized force, but any large army was able to take a fort without much in the way of losses.

Perhaps there needs to be a cap on the number of regiments which can take part in any assault. But on the other hand, during the Peninsular War, Almeida, Ciudad Rodrigo, Badajoz and San Sebastian all fell very quickly, and would probably be considered level 2 or level 3 forts in the game context. I would prefer the assaulting force to at least take more losses though.

Another thing I noticed was a much more aggresive British AI towards any armies they located. They would break off sieges and ignore towns if they had a crack at hitting any significant formation.

I played about 18 months on 1.05, but I think that starting the game on 1.06 would have resulted in a British win. It's a breath of fresh air to face an AI which plays such a strong game.

[Gibbon]

ORIGINAL: Jhdeersmayer
Yea I noticed the 1.06 AI seems to bring a wave of death down upon my poor Rebels. Though I hold Boston for a few years after the French retook it, it proceeded to capture everything in NE and then proceeded towards Phily and hammered everything there after I updated to 1.06. There was no stopping it. The AI eventually formed a Death Star stack and I stayed away. Best I could do was double back and take some NE back which I did. The AI then gave up on heading further south and now chasing me around in NE again.

Staying in one region longer than one turn is a kiss of death as the AI heads right at you it seems. Especially if you are in a strategic city. Forgot holding out in a fort. Run like hell. I already had Washy's army get slaughtered once because I stayed in one place too long.

Seems you have to just get out of the way and then hit it where it is not. There are lots of lone Brit units around and you can even catch some artillery/supply on occasion.

You have to watch as sometime the Death Star will jump five regions and pounce on you and Washy. Goes to my Washy stack like flies on ....

But all this is allowing my other army to retake the south in 1782. Capturing endless supply (need a way to destroy it please!) Spanish got totally wiped out though as I got a little cocky with them and that damn AI took New Orleans and all of Florida back. The AI is irritating in a good way!

ORIGINAL: Ardie
Ok. I do call the AI now as "evil bitch", the mean-spirited, crony mother-in-law of all bad karma

The forts are meant to be as a strongpoint and/or to significantly slow the enemy down. So far as I just installed 1.06 I've had no fort sieges but the AI (forever cursed she must be) takes towns in 2 turns. I have to change my strategy again!!

ORIGINAL: Blackbellamy

Quote:
Agree. One thing I forgot to write, was not to invade Canada. It's not worth the losses, and it's impossible to face Burgoyne when he arrives and hold anything.

Who wants to hold anything ? Burn it all to the ground and get the hell out.

First thing I do any 75 campaign - send Arnold and all Albany reinforcements straight to Montreal, storm the place, burn down the Depot, exterminate the Indian village, destroy every fort in the nearby regions, then march back south to Albany, throw a big party for the loyal and erstwhile commander, then send him down South so his charismatic ass can rally the militia. Meanwhile, a smaller force takes Oswego, heads down to Ft. Niagra to show the lobsterbacks what time it is, then marches back to Albany for the grand reunion, burning down anything that can be burned in between.

[Gibbon]

All of these posts and discussions have been paste-and-copy from the AGEOD forum (http://www.ageod.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=9). I hope AGEOD won't mind, I thought they were quite appropriate.

They were written by respected members of the community, I tried to credit everyone.

I hope this helps. It could be a nice idea to compile them in a kinf of BoA tactical handbook.

[decaro]

Thank you! I've made GW's army too powerful and he's losing troops and leaders I can't replace. Smaller, more mobile units must be the answer, but somehow you still have to hold or retake enough strategic cities to make it count. Challenging, to say the least.

That said, has anyone played against an enhanced -- more time to think -- AI and won as the Colonials?

After all, the game is called Birth of America, but everytime I play the Colonials, the title becomes still-born!

[MarkShot]

Got to be careful with the Internet ... it looks like anything you ever write will forever be available and eventual found by someone!

Oh well, with that realization in front of me ... I don't think I am going to announce my intentions to run for President this year.

[MarkShot]

One thing which should be pointed out here to readers ... is that those extracted tips posts were made at various points in the past with my comments being some of the oldest. In the meantime, that evil wizard, Pocus, has continuously been tweaking the AI both officially when it is on his task list to do so and often when it is not ... it's that AI which he affectionately refers to as "she" and sees in his dreams every night. Well, my point is that what might have been a killer vulnerability in the AI's play six months ago, may now prove to be a fatal trap for the player and prove to be his undoing. Beware Pocus' creation, she is as sneaky and evil as her creator. She lives to seduce and torment ... and then, to do it all again. Beware!

[Pocus]

ORIGINAL: freeboy

Hi Pocus, any idea why my game loads an shows a 1.11, I thought it would be 1.10?

Wrong label, same code. We will post the 1.10f (as it is stable) as the 1.11 patch to all websites wanting it

[Pocus]

ORIGINAL: Gibbon

All of these posts and discussions have been paste-and-copy from the AGEOD forum (http://www.ageod.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=9). I hope AGEOD won't mind, I thought they were quite appropriate.

They were written by respected members of the community, I tried to credit everyone.

I hope this helps. It could be a nice idea to compile them in a kinf of BoA tactical handbook.

Thanks much for the quotes Gibbon.

[Pocus]

I think you are going 'slightly' too far Mark, the AI is still a poor thing in being for me. If only she* knew half what Arjuna did with the COTA serie, I would be more than happy. But thanks anyways for the kind words, it is very encouraging and I will try to improve it much more for the next games...

*: true I like to nickame her 'Athena', the AGE project is supposed to stand for Adaptive Game Engine, but Athena Game Engine  is ok too [:D]

[decaro]

Got to be careful with the Internet ... it looks like anything you ever write will forever be available and eventual found by someone!
 
Markshot, since this was in reply to me, what exactly are you referring to?

[decaro]

Got to be careful with the Internet ... it looks like anything you ever write will forever be available and eventual found by someone!

Marshot, as this was in reply to me, what exactly are you referring to?
But as you were a BoA beta tester, did you ever win as the Colonials vs. Brit (enhanced) AI in scenario #8? Do you know anyone on your team that did?

[MarkShot]

Joe,

It was just a generic reply by clicking the reply button. I always just click on reply to the last post, since I display threads linear.

My point was that anything you every say and do will be available forever once it lands on the Internet, since Gibbon extracted some extensive posts by me (see above) from the AGEOD forums. In no way was I insulting or saying anything negative about you (or Gibbon, for that matter) ... just some musing.

---

Regarding my record with BoA, I have to confess that I have not had as much time as I would have liked to play the game especially the later patches. The best place to get some feedback on perceptions from the Beta Team would be over at the AGEOD forums ... I don't believe the majority of the team reads the threads over here.

I hope that helps.

---

Pocus,

You have to remember that Dave O'Connor and Paul Scobbel have been working on the AA engine for well over ten years. So, it is somewhat problematic comparing engine performance and accomplishments. However, as a toddler, it looks like AGE is going to be a child prodigy!

[MarkShot]

To illustrate further my point from above. In that GC game as the Colonials, I had managed to first pin and then destroy about 50% of the British ground strength in the Colonies in New York fairly early on. Of course, given that the British unlike the colonials have less of a renewable source of strength than the Colonials that was a devastating blow.

Anyway, shortly after highlighting that glorious victory in the Beta forum, both PhilT and Pocus were like ... "no, the colonials should not have been able to achieve such a victory". They set about tweaking AI, mechanics, and possibly force ratios so that I could not pull off such a thing again. So, BOA has been continuously evolving. Granted the AI does not learn, but Pocus does, and he keeps releasing patches.

Me, I am very used to this from five years testing with Panther Games. Whenever I win, it is automatically assumed that something is broken and they begin fixing things. Sometimes, I feel like the Rodney Dangerfield of beta testers; "I get no respect".

[freeboy]

we love you/ " feel the love" hehe

[von Beanie]

After playing about 10 to 12 games, I was finally able to beat the AI British on the "hard" level in the 1775 campaign. I think the most important key is to avoid major battles until after the French arrive. Instead, keep hitting the smaller British garrisons and then run away. Also take and garrison Detroit so that you can't lose suddenly. Against the AI, an invasion of Canada in 1776 can work, and if you can take Quebec before the winter, the AI will then try to besiege it and freeze to death in the inevitable blizzards. Trying to beat the AI on the "hard" level has been one of the most fun and challenging adventures in computer gaming I've had since Civ3 and Civ4 set on a hard level.