Call to Arms

[Raindem]

March 1778

Nothing to report this month. Both sides maneuvering into position for the upcoming campaign season.

Note on scenario length: The nominal length of the scenario is 129 Turns, which takes it to December 1785. This is well past the historical end of the war (September 1783). King George and others in the government wanted to keep on fighting. But the loss at Yorktown put the conflict out of reach in the minds of most, and a treaty was eventually signed. In the scenario, the extended length allows for a "Yorktown" type battle never occurring, and both sides believing they still can win. However, starting in January 1782, sudden death victory conditions go into effect. If either side gains a 25 VP advantage, the scenario stops and that side is awarded victory. If neither side can achieve this, then the scenario runs its full length and will most likely result in a draw.

[Raindem]

April 1778

Ugh. Take a look at the map from the February report. All those militia that swept into eastern Massachusetts through the gap in the middle were eliminated. For all I know Ian drew me in on purpose. Best I can figure, about 9 or 10 battalions were lost. This is a severe blow to our offensive plans this year. The Merrimack crossing, by itself, is not going to achieve anything. We needed to apply pressure from the front as well. The loss of those militia removed about 10% of the force that was to take part. I still plan to go forward with it, but the prospects for success just dimmed.

[StuccoFresco]

Well that's a bold move by the Redcoats. Did it attack from the sides of the "gap" and closed it behind the militias?

[sapper32]

I was content to rest and gain supply and reinforcements.,I closed the gap between the two my two armies at Boston and providence with a veiw to destroying the militias however on my next turn most of the militias were gone apart from a few around Newport which I destroyed, I assumed the militias had ended there enlistment period and withdrew from the map ?

[Raindem]

All the militia that charged through the gap were new recruits. They just disintegrated under the British advance. It was a tactical blunder on my part and Ian took advantage of it. During subsequent Winters, when the British pulled back, we learned to hold our positions.

[Raindem]

May 1778

Charleston has been captured by a surprise British assault from the sea. Well, it wasn’t a total surprise. They have had a large fleet parked offshore for several months. And I had stengthened it as much as I could with what we had on hand. But they still took it without too much effort. I’d like to launch my New England campaign early as a distraction, but will resist that temptation. I still need a couple more months to prepare. Besides, the main prize has already been captured. There’s not much more down there to distract him from.

[Raindem]

June 1778

The British surrounded and eliminated the continentals left behind during the retreat from Charleston. Gates is not going to make a stand at Ft. Watson. The British are able to simply run over anything I put in their path. The prudent move is to retreat all the way back to Hillsboro. If they follow me that far then Lee and his Virginia Continentals can come down and lend a hand.

The Redcoats have also resumed their attacks at Boston, bouncing my right wing all the way back to the Connecticut border. I would have liked another month to gather up supplies, but decided it was time to act. I sent Washington across the Merrimack with half of his army while the other half applied pressure on the Concord-Lexington corridor from the west. Washington encountered a mixed bag of British and Hessian forces guarding the norther n approaches to Boston. While not insurmountable, it certainly was not the open road to Boston I had naively hoped for. The crossing itself was successful, but all the troops could accomplish was to pivot southwest and assist with the capture of Lexington.

[Raindem]

July 1778

My New England campaign has failed. All of the gains made the previous month at such a heavy cost have been lost. The British counterattacked in force and drove Washington back across the river. All that is left of the largest force ever to be fielded by the Americans is 3 dragoon and 3 continental btns. In the screen shot from the previous month, practically everything you see east of Lexington was destroyed.

Meanwhile, in the southern colonies, Gates has arrived at Hillsboro with the remnants of his army (picking up stragglers along the way). The Georgia contingent is bottled up in Augusta by the 42nd Highland, Anhault-Zerbst Hessian, and none other than Tarleton’s Legion of the 3rd Loyalist Bde. The defenders of Augusta were hoping for some help from the SC Continentals, but they decided to join Gates in Hillsboro. The only one that came to their aide was a group of SC partisans, who surprised the Hessians from behind but could not relieve the pressure on Augusta.

[StuccoFresco]

Jesus, that's a debacle.

[Raindem]

August 1778

The Loyalists captured Augusta after a small but particularly fierce battle. If my troops in New England fought that hard I would have won the war by now!

Washington is on his way back to Philadelphia. The Boston gambit was a failure. My only consolation is that in the long run I’ll be able to make up the losses better than my opponent. If I can’t outfight the enemy, then I’ll outlast them.

[Raindem]

September 1778

By now it is redundant to report that casualties were heavy again at Boston. But I’m sensing a change. More and more Hessian units are in the front lines, and they are much easier to engage than the British regulars. In this grueling battle of attrition we are holding our own. But… if I had it to do over I don’t think I would have challenged the British here. They would have had to keep a sizable army at Boston with or without the presence of the Continentals. By engaging in open field clashes so close to their supply base I was merely playing in to the British strengths.

Tarleton finished off the last of the Georgia Continentals trying to retreat from Augusta. With that, the first phase of the southern campaign draws to a close. It was a decisive victory for the King's soldiers. Charleston, Savannah, and Augusta all fell at small cost to the Redcoats. New Bern, Wilmington, and St. Augustine were already under Tory control, as they had been since the beginning of the war. Factor in Mobile and Pensacola on the Gulf coast, and you can see that the enemy are complete masters of the coastline in the southern colonies.

[Raindem]

October 1778

An October surprise from the Redcoats. A small force entered Chesapeake Bay and captured Norfolk. Lee led the VA Continentals in a fierce counterattack and succeeded in dislodging the invaders before they could gain a foothold. Norfolk was the only Loyalist stronghold in Virginia at the start of the war and we certainly didn’t want to give it back. There are more British troops waiting offshore but it is unknown if they will still attempt a landing.

This is actually a significant milestone. It's the first time Patriot forces have successfully beaten back a British invasion. I hope it portends a shift in the balance of power.

[Raindem]

November 1778

The British abandoned their assault on Norfolk. So the middle colonies remain solidly under Patriot control. In New England the story remains the same. In the south things have quieted down. And in the far north it is positively blissful.

And I forgot to mention in the previous report, but France has finally declared war on Britain. The American Revolution is now a World War involving America, Britain, Prussia, France, Spain, and Netherlands (the Dutch contribute a squadron to the French fleet). Not to mention the numerous indigenous nations of the North American continent. It's not reflected in the scenario, but historically, fighting started flaring up between Britain and her new block of enemies in places like Gibraltar and India. There was a very real threat of a cross-channel invasion from France. The ones who started this whole thing, the Americans, seemed to be the least of Britain's worries at this point.

[Raindem]

December 1779

A few emails back, Ian and I were discussing one of the attributes of this scenario that may turn some players off to it. And that is: no matter what you do, you can’t seem to get the upper hand over the other player. The British can bounce me around all over the coast, but as soon as they venture too far inland they are overwhelmed by militia. For me, it’s even worse. To conduct any kind of offensive operation I have to save up units and supplies for several months. Move them into position. Wait a couple more months to recover supply again, and then attack. My attacks succeed for one, maybe two turns. Then the British come out and destroy everything I was attacking with. I run away. And the cycle repeats.

I think this tedium is quite historical for the conflict being simulated. Letters between various British commanders and London showed a fatigue setting in by 1780. Redcoats kept killing Patriots but there were always more gathering up over the next hill. Parliament was becoming concerned with the cost. And the British public were just getting tired of it all. One might draw some parallels with the U.S. experience in Vietnam, but I’ll leave that for another discussion.

I know Ian will see this through, win or lose. But I imagine many players would get bored by this point and move on to FITE or something. This scenario isn’t for everyone.

[StuccoFresco]

That's an interesting take of the conflict. And I agree this can be boring if everything you do gets nowhere after a while.

[sapper32]

One of the reasons I enjoy this scenario so much is the problems you face as, the British you can't just land at New York and march out into the interior and crush the rebellion as there is no supply you would get quickly cut of and suffer a humiliating defeat as the British did at Saratoga, I think the best strategy I can offer is a coastal strategy capture and hold as many coastal cities as you can then try and force the Americans into holding a major VP city that they can't afford to lose and inflict a crushing defeat on them and get the -20 victory level which stops the EEV so no French intervention, This game I've tried a northern strategy which hasn't really worked out for me I keep breaking out of Providence and Boston but can't seem to keep the momentum as supply and readiness drops, My British ate clearly to spread out and I guess I need to concentrate somewhere and gain a victory ?

[cathar1244]

It sounds like it recreates the limitations of the combatants well.

A useful playtest might be to run a game in which the American player deliberately runs the colonials into the ground and see if the British player can then handily win, or if he gets bogged down in fights with colonial militia and wilderness. If the latter case is true, that might indicate a need for tuning.

I was curious about the map. It looks like it shows Florida under British control -- I had thought it was still Spanish Florida at that point, but may easily be mistaken.

Cheers

ORIGINAL: Raindem

December 1779

A few emails back, Ian and I were discussing one of the attributes of this scenario that may turn some players off to it. And that is: no matter what you do, you can’t seem to get the upper hand over the other player. The British can bounce me around all over the coast, but as soon as they venture too far inland they are overwhelmed by militia. For me, it’s even worse. To conduct any kind of offensive operation I have to save up units and supplies for several months. Move them into position. Wait a couple more months to recover supply again, and then attack. My attacks succeed for one, maybe two turns. Then the British come out and destroy everything I was attacking with. I run away. And the cycle repeats.

I think this tedium is quite historical for the conflict being simulated. Letters between various British commanders and London showed a fatigue setting in by 1780. Redcoats kept killing Patriots but there were always more gathering up over the next hill. Parliament was becoming concerned with the cost. And the British public were just getting tired of it all. One might draw some parallels with the U.S. experience in Vietnam, but I’ll leave that for another discussion.

I know Ian will see this through, win or lose. But I imagine many players would get bored by this point and move on to FITE or something. This scenario isn’t for everyone.

[Raindem]

cathar1244

It sounds like it recreates the limitations of the combatants well.

A useful playtest might be to run a game in which the American player deliberately runs the colonials into the ground and see if the British player can then handily win, or if he gets bogged down in fights with colonial militia and wilderness. If the latter case is true, that might indicate a need for tuning.

That's basically what happened in our first playtest when the scenario was released a few years ago. I didn't "deliberately" run the colonials into the ground, but I hadn't learned how to modulate their aggressiveness. And yes, the British easily won.

I was curious about the map. It looks like it shows Florida under British control -- I had thought it was still Spanish Florida at that point, but may easily be mistaken.

It was handed over to Britain at the conclusion of the 7 Years War (1763).

[cathar1244]

It was handed over to Britain at the conclusion of the 7 Years War (1763).

Thanks!

Cheers

[Raindem]

January 1779

Game note: Ian and I have discovered a bug with the scenario. The way that TOAW 4 resolves naval combat is producing some pretty crazy results in ship vs ship engagements (like 8 American Frigates being able to sink 20 British SOLs before succumbing to the weight of shot). In addition, I’ve come to discover that in T4, a stationary naval force will always fire on a moving force, even if that force is vastly superior.

I have identified the scenario settings that need to be adjusted in order for ship vs ship combat to play out correctly in T4. I will be updating the scenario and posting it soon. In the meantime, Ian and I have decided to continue our game. We will incorporate a House Rule to avoid surface engagements. At the end of each player’s turn, they must return their fleet to its home base (Halifax for the British, West Indies for the Americans). This should not affect the game's outcome. The only time a naval engagement had a significant impact during the Revolutionary War was during the Yorktown siege. And I doubt Ian will allow a quarter of his army to get bottled up like that in the first place.

Anyway, back to the AAR …

Here are the year start situation maps. I decided to leave off the commander names so you can see more of the map. I’ll also show the full map, not just east of the Appalachians. I think it does a good job of showing just how small the battlefields were compared to the vastness of the continent.