AAR of Balance

[battlevonwar]

(my experience is 2 PBEM Games, 1 AI, several Hotseat games...my opponent seems of similar skill)

It's June 1862:

The Union(me) has decided that holding off and forcing my opponent to garrison everywhere is the best for the Coasts as last year I failed in taking a port with 1 marine. There are however 3 marines waiting for that purpose in the future!

Far West and Missouri: Stale and exchanges of gunfire and attrition...

Kentucky and Tennessee:

Grant on the March, Shiloh soon to be realized and in Kentucky the Confederates make a noble stand but are repulsed and now are being forced back into their Tennessee Fortresses. Donelson and Island 10 both destroyed and we're poised for Memphis and Nashville. I see nothing that can stop our forces aside late reinforcements due to some upgrades and logistical issues as well as weather.

Virginia:

The Union here has dominated but not without losses, initially we faced losing Alexandria and a small CSA Offensive which was repulsed by General Garibaldi and then a counter-offensive was launched with haste into the interior toward the Key Objective Fredericksburg. Secondary objective being Harpers Ferry. Instead of a quick and costly attack a slow and steady one has been initiated. Inching down the Virginia Lengths of Rivers and low supply Forests. We now bring in Heavy Artillery and Corps which will be coming in large numbers soon. We assume by Summer of 1863, Richmond shall be ours or at least surrounded. Barring a Miracle...or Mars LOL


We make over 1500 MPP per turn, we have invested well in IT and maxed every land Tech for fighting. Corp, Leadership, Naval, Infantry Tactics were also vital on the list and those objectives met. France pushed out so far with counter chits...

We were at a parity of 60/40 Loss Ratio which is tightening as we're now on the offensive at the CSA is on the defense. Losses are expected but Freedom shall be given and no quarter to the Rebel Scum!

[battlevonwar]

Since I have Inf 2/Skirmisher 2/even Scout 1 and it's obvious that it's a matter of time before I'm in Richmond... My opponent rightfully surrenders. Like my game 1863 is about how far a CSA can last if he's halfway competent.

[battlevonwar]

There aren't a lot of forces behind is frontline. It will take me a moment but I will grind through them and I have a tremendously strong build coming too so.

[battlevonwar]

This player did exceptionally well too, has nearly garrisoned every port on the map with multiple units(the South can't afford to lose that production ) and well that's just forces I don't have to fight, meaning -7 units on the frontlines which is really dangerous for him, it was more like 10-12 before. With my Tech advantages and Production/Industrial Advantages plus a Level 9 General(in Virginia) level 8 in Tennessee I have superior leadership to the South as well.

He can't afford the Corp/Leadership/Scout/Skirmisher/IT/Production Techs required to keep up! Nor, numbers... I am looking and I have Corp Level 2 and he's still on 1...

A South has to have Military Victories, hard to do, hard to find a place to achieve it. I don't think they can beat even a Mediocre Union Player like myself ever.

P.S. A Glaring issue one can see is there is no place the Union really has to protect, cause she has no threats with the terrain and situation as is. She has no fear of an amphibious landing, it's not practical. Once you stalemate The West, Missouri you have your choice. Tennessee, Coast or Virginia. None of which the South can dictate to only react to. I chose 2 ... Tennessee and Virginia and won both at the same time in early 1862! Balance is not in this game in the Grand Campaign not with two guys that have play Strategic Command titles for 19 years. It may be not so far off but not yet!

[Beriand]

A Glaring issue one can see is there is no place the Union really has to protect, cause she has no threats with the terrain and situation as is. She has no fear of an amphibious landing, it's not practical.

Not true actually, 1 level of amph tech is cheap and then CSA boats can go into deep seas, when you have no Union ships and vision. If Union does completely no defence moves, it is very easy for South to land at some Newark or Providence and score a terrible hit. I would recommend 3-4 units in those FS ports And/or some ships blocking lanes. They are worth absurd amount of FS, and some opponents may try landing. Small garrisosns are not an issue, anyway, who cares about a couple of brigades after early game.

[battlevonwar]

Indeed it would be a wise move ... I had considered it for the South. I suppose why it would be good to capture every port on the Eastern Seaboard and destroy every ship in the Confederate Navy. Plus post raiders in front of every port so you can see if that's his intentions? (that or just keep 3 or 4 river boats around your Ports like I did all game? ) Of course you can afford a reactionary force as the North of 1 Corp, 2 Division and an HQ too so it will be a short lived invasion?

A Glaring issue one can see is there is no place the Union really has to protect, cause she has no threats with the terrain and situation as is. She has no fear of an amphibious landing, it's not practical.

Not true actually, 1 level of amph tech is cheap and then CSA boats can go into deep seas, when you have no Union ships and vision. If Union does completely no defence moves, it is very easy for South to land at some Newark or Providence and score a terrible hit. I would recommend 3-4 units in those FS ports And/or some ships blocking lanes. They are worth absurd amount of FS, and some opponents may try landing. Small garrisosns are not an issue, anyway, who cares about a couple of brigades after early game.

[OldCrowBalthazor]

Holding off till the Union gets 3 to 1 odds overall probably will do the trick. Nice AAR and very telling.
Gives me pause as I ponder my CSA strategies......Hmmmm....

[Beriand]

Indeed it would be a wise move ... I had considered it for the South. I suppose why it would be good to capture every port on the Eastern Seaboard and destroy every ship in the Confederate Navy. Plus post raiders in front of every port so you can see if that's his intentions? (that or just keep 3 or 4 river boats around your Ports like I did all game? ) Of course you can afford a reactionary force as the North of 1 Corp, 2 Division and an HQ too so it will be a short lived invasion?

Sadly marines can load on ships on any coast, so even all ports is not enough (not doable quick and easily enough anyway). Garrisoning FS Union coastal towns is just much simpler and more cost-efficient.

Of course you can afford a reactionary force as the North of 1 Corp, 2 Division and an HQ too so it will be a short lived invasion?

Yes yes, this is by no means a real Normandy-like threat, just terrorist attack on FS objective. Even 1 turn of CSA occupation is -5k FS for Union and +8k for Confederacy, absolutely terrible.

[battlevonwar]

I am just wonder if the juice is really worth the squeeze. Amphibious Tech + Marine or + Brigade or 2 = 400 or 500 MPPs? It better work or else! That's the issue a bit with the South that she better succeed and yes that would be a massive hit. I think that taking Washington City might make for a more interesting game which is rarely possible against a Human. At least the threat is there early along with pushing toward Baltimore or breaking through the Shenandoah. The Supply though and the ability to do this is of epic scale and when you fail you lose cause you lose a lot of units out of supply. (don't think that left hook is even possible against a semi-competent Union Player, you run so low you can't reinforce and your units morale/effectiveness goes to nill)

Also not to forget that with 3-4 Rivercraft 2 or 3 Ships of the Line you can effectively make the CSA Moving North without a scouting force a tragic situation. If just 1 amphibious transport touches one of those it's game over for them. You could easily post up say 6-7 Gunboats for the same cost to the South and blockade any chance he will make such a move. Unless he uses his entire Navy and after all this is done I'm sailing down the James to pound Richmond and take Norfolk-Coast of Carolinas to cut of the CSA as she has no defense left.

(My opponent in the above game kept me out of Norfolk only cause he had a Ironclad there, I'd rather just ignore it than fight it and take Richmond an easier way, but I'd of gladly taken via the coast too plus the CSA has to post 2 or 3 units to keep Norfolk and that again saps his frontline)

Indeed it would be a wise move ... I had considered it for the South. I suppose why it would be good to capture every port on the Eastern Seaboard and destroy every ship in the Confederate Navy. Plus post raiders in front of every port so you can see if that's his intentions? (that or just keep 3 or 4 river boats around your Ports like I did all game? ) Of course you can afford a reactionary force as the North of 1 Corp, 2 Division and an HQ too so it will be a short lived invasion?

Sadly marines can load on ships on any coast, so even all ports is not enough (not doable quick and easily enough anyway). Garrisoning FS Union coastal towns is just much simpler and more cost-efficient.

Of course you can afford a reactionary force as the North of 1 Corp, 2 Division and an HQ too so it will be a short lived invasion?

Yes yes, this is by no means a real Normandy-like threat, just terrorist attack on FS objective. Even 1 turn of CSA occupation is -5k FS for Union and +8k for Confederacy, absolutely terrible.

[eightroomofelixir]

Wait, Garibaldi is an 8-rating general?

I don't know how much diplo damage Garibaldi will cause for the Union - but if he has a rating of 8, then the advantages of having him as a Union general in the Eastern Theater would far exceed the diplomatic disadvantages.

(In the screenshot he has a rating of 9 but I assume that's because of C&C research)

[BiteNibbleChomp]

Wait, Garibaldi is an 8-rating general?

Garibaldi has a base rating of 7. This gets increased with Leadership tech.

- BNC

[eightroomofelixir]

Garibaldi has a base rating of 7. This gets increased with Leadership tech.
- BNC

Thank you for the correction. Still, this particular event choice seems to bring a considerable advantage to the Union in the East. One of the early major issues the Union needs to face is the lack of good generals, while this choice solved it once and for all, unless the accompanying diplomatic damage is serious enough.

[Beriand]

Thank you for the correction. Still, this particular event choice seems to bring a considerable advantage to the Union in the East. One of the early major issues the Union needs to face is the lack of good generals, while this choice solved it once and for all, unless the accompanying diplomatic damage is serious enough.

Yes, this is very correct What is worse, if he is made commanding general, he arrives with 3 experience dots. As these one are now rightfully hard to get on generals, it makes Garibaldi demi-god much better than Jackson, Grant and others. In this case bit of alt-history got out of control and became one of the main offenders to the balance

[Platoonist]

Yes, this is very correct What is worse, if he is made commanding general, he arrives with 3 experience dots. As these one are now rightfully hard to get on generals, it makes Garibaldi demi-god much better than Jackson, Grant and others. In this case bit of alt-history got out of control and became one of the main offenders to the balance

And if that is not a sweet deal enough for the Union, as they say in the old commercials: And there's much, much, more! If Garibaldi is made the commanding general he also arrives with elite two brigades which can be reinforced to 13 strength points. Plus, Italy starts sending 55 MPPs a turn. I'm increasingly of the mind that that this event needs to be toned down a bit.

Garibaldi CO.jpg (251.17 KiB) Viewed 2313 times

[OldCrowBalthazor]

Yeah having Garibaldi in for MP is sounding like Alt-history gone too far. It seemed to become the default choice in MP Beta over time from what I gathered.

I tested it in SP and the diplomatic consequences and immediate Emancipation Proclamation didn't seem to out weigh the long term positive bonuses against the AI.

Fortunately in my MP tests, my opponents didn't pick this Italian god of a general.

[battlevonwar]

He is definitely an offender in an earlier demise of the Confederacy. Fafnir utilized even better than I did(between his knowledge how to abuse a land force with a naval force and that I really had no chance)... With those 13 strength Divisions(they act like little Super Divisions that you can place magically where-ever you like and good luck dealing with them early tech) the Italian Income that was mentioned and the CSA really has to squeeze to also go into leadership tech. Remember Garibaldi also has 3 XP Ribbons on him(so yeah, I think that makes him a level 12 General not sure what an XP Ribbons gives a General precisely?) That's like Napoleon reincarnated in the North in 1862! Good luck fighting him..

(((LETS assume my opponent has level 1 inf Tech, I got level 2 Inf Tech, Level 2 Skirmisher, Level 1 Scout... I assume I have superior Inf Tactics and he obviously has Corp tech, probably = or better than mine. I got around to that late as I was focused on having the best Infantry in the field everywhere I could have with everything and forgo too much Cavalry for the Union. IF he had everything I had and I had no Garibaldi could I of pushed through to Richmond in literally 1 thrust without much stress, probably not. But only way to know this is to play a guy who responds. Fafnir found another way to Richmond on me, just sail around into the James, destroy all the Forts take Norfolk use Ft. Monroe and devour the Carolinas and he got the same results a little later. In retrospect I'd of protected Norfolk better in that game and kept a small Navy which can't be resupplied without more Ports in the James unfortunately for the CSA. So a Port further up stream would REALLY change things, as that would be a blockading factor for Gamey naval invasions of the James which plus gamey bombardments that act like little cannons and the Unions gets dozens of those))

Yeah having Garibaldi in for MP is sounding like Alt-history gone too far. It seemed to become the default choice in MP Beta over time from what I gathered.

I tested it in SP and the diplomatic consequences and immediate Emancipation Proclamation didn't seem to out weigh the long term positive bonuses against the AI.

Fortunately in my MP tests, my opponents didn't pick this Italian god of a general.

[devoncop]

I agree the geography of the James makes Richmond pretty indefensible. I tried to take out Ft Monroe and was getting level 1 Corps and Divns decimated by Union gunboats from the river and the Atlantic which is frankly ludicrous.

I have two games going at the moment, one as the Rebs and one as the Union where both my oponents who are relative novices at the SC system but also have good knowlege of the true ACW strategies are playing a historically plausible game. It is an absolute blast to play them and the games are pretty well balanced up tobthe end of 62 where we are now.

I have played and been crushed by very experienced and skillful opponents however who used several "tactics" borne of long familiarity with the SC system and of this game specifically that I consider to be pretty crazy.

I know which opponents I will be seking out in future but it is a shame the game facilitates such exploits.