Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)

Post descriptions of your brilliant successes and unfortunate demises.

Moderator: Gil R.

User avatar
TimoN
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 1:32 pm
Location: Halikko, Finland

RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)

Post by TimoN »

...and now to that siege. Here we come back to the faster siege setting I discussed earlier.
Only one defending garrison and what a damage they caused to Lee's Foreign Legion. 3967 casualties while the Lee's brigade only had 2500 men in the beginning. Less would have been enough. It's now even clearer to me that I don't need to buy additional damage modifier (e.g. rifle pits to fort or better weapons to garrison brigades). Instead I need something to reduce the casualties for the garrisons so that they can stay longer in the siege.
I lost the Lee's Foreign Legion. It had quality of 3.0 so I will miss it, but luckily I had taken out the better legendary units and I didn't lose them. If he had had more defending brigades I would have lost more of my own brigades. Now enemy stands at less than 700 men so I will destroy it next turn and they can not destroy one of my brigades anymore. I will suffer about 800-1000 casualties though.

Image
Attachments
Image0032.jpg
Image0032.jpg (190.98 KiB) Viewed 320 times
User avatar
TimoN
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 1:32 pm
Location: Halikko, Finland

RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)

Post by TimoN »

Back to the Parkersburg:
Seems that nmleague still didn't go after East Ohio River. I quickly move Ripley's division with rail and set it as garrison into the town. I leave Early's division to defend the Parkersburg as I don't have enough RR point to move it. See the troop strengths building around me. Is he building a trap for me or is it just FOW?

Image
Attachments
Image0029.jpg
Image0029.jpg (188.84 KiB) Viewed 320 times
User avatar
TimoN
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 1:32 pm
Location: Halikko, Finland

RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)

Post by TimoN »

In Osage nmleague has brought army to threaten my 17th division. My division is still there just to gather the three brigades starting in the union territory. Last brigade just arrived so I would be ready to leave, but the winter movement rules are in effect and it is practically impossible. That must be the case with his army as well so I leave my division alone. When winter turns are over I move it to Arkansas river and bring the cavalry division here to raid the Union provinces.

Supply level of the 17th division is dangerously low but I will keep it on no support for one more turn, because I believe he is also unable to move his army and we don't see any fighting here for few more turns.

Edit: looking the picture closer I notice that I should have set the division to avoid combat

Image
Attachments
Image0027.jpg
Image0027.jpg (167.32 KiB) Viewed 320 times
User avatar
TimoN
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 1:32 pm
Location: Halikko, Finland

RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)

Post by TimoN »

Blockade runners were set in the beginning of the turn to catch:
50W 80/30
55I 80/10

I built two camps (Montgomery and Columbia) and one mint (Austin).
Georgia's governor was asking for the war college. I would have much rather spent that money on laboratory, but I had to please the governor. The problem with the Georgia's governor is that he has very high political power. It is not probably possible for him to lose in the elections so you have to live with him the whole war. If you don't please him, then he will start to oppose your war efforts and I really don't want it to happen. Thus a war college was built in the Atlanta.

I armed the 2nd Texas Sharpshooters with Richmond Muskets to help defend the Shenandoah. Shenandoah is defended with elite 8th Division and regular 10th Division which came from James River.

Finally Raiders went after supplies again.


Image
Attachments
Image0034.jpg
Image0034.jpg (102.39 KiB) Viewed 320 times
User avatar
madflava13
Posts: 1501
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Alexandria, VA

RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)

Post by madflava13 »

I'm enjoying this AAR as well... It's nice to see your thought process behind the decisions being made... Thanks!
"The Paraguayan Air Force's request for spraying subsidies was not as Paraguayan as it were..."
User avatar
TimoN
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 1:32 pm
Location: Halikko, Finland

RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)

Post by TimoN »

Late December 1861.

Siege ended in Rappahanock and I took less casualties than I expected. Fort was at 70% strength and armed with 42pdr guns. I immediatelly transferred on garrison troop from Jameson River to guard the fort.

But what's that in Fayetteville??? He managed to make a winter move in the wilderness. I took nasty casualties but I didn't lose any brigades. I'll have to see that situation more carefully.

Image
Attachments
Image0000.jpg
Image0000.jpg (131.63 KiB) Viewed 320 times
User avatar
TimoN
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 1:32 pm
Location: Halikko, Finland

RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)

Post by TimoN »

Raiders made successfull mission with cutting the supply lines. I can rely on these guys, maybe I should buy one or two more. What do you think?

Hospital in Lynchburg makes my life easier if disease strucks in the Virginia. So far no diseases for my troops. Hopefully nmleague has suffered from it.

Lee and Jackon continue to train troops under their command. Blockade runners really make nice addition to my poor economy. Those weapons will be soon turned to Minie rifles.

Something is happening in the Grafton. How is he making these winter movements?

Image
Attachments
Image0001.jpg
Image0001.jpg (148 KiB) Viewed 320 times
User avatar
TimoN
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 1:32 pm
Location: Halikko, Finland

RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)

Post by TimoN »

Lets see the situation near the Fayetteville. My troops were beaten there and driven to Ozarks. During the battle they only dropped some improvised weapons so I didn't lose any important weapons. However supply situation is critical so I set them for high supply. I dear not to try to move troops as I fear that it would eat all the remaining supply and I don't want that to happen.

I position my raiders from Mississippi River to here to cut his supplies. Cavalry division is heading to Hatchie but I doubt it will make there. Jackson takes the command of the Corps container so no more training for the cavalry brigades.

Image
Attachments
Image0005.jpg
Image0005.jpg (173.83 KiB) Viewed 320 times
User avatar
TimoN
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 1:32 pm
Location: Halikko, Finland

RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)

Post by TimoN »

Grafton was occupied by whole enemy army. I think he used rail movement to get there so that's why no harm from winter.
Just incase I withdraw Early's army to East Ohio River. Together they are stronger.

Too bad that Lee's army is bogged into Rappahanock. Now it would be excellent attempt to move into Cumberland and challenge McClellan's army.

Image
Attachments
Image0004.jpg
Image0004.jpg (197.1 KiB) Viewed 320 times
User avatar
TimoN
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 1:32 pm
Location: Halikko, Finland

RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)

Post by TimoN »

And here's the economic situation. Income dropped a little bit after I raised some supply levels in the west. Also I finally started to invest in diplomacy, mildly though.

Runners are after:
55I 80/20
65W 60/40

Two laboratories were started in Wilmington and Norfolk. No universities there so they will just add +3/each to logistics research.
Also I started mine in Augusta and RR station in Selma. During winter it has become very clear to me that I need more RR capability.

That's all for this turn. Raiders didn't reach their target so I couldn't choose operation for them.

Image
Attachments
Image0006.jpg
Image0006.jpg (127.12 KiB) Viewed 320 times
User avatar
TimoN
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 1:32 pm
Location: Halikko, Finland

RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)

Post by TimoN »

Early January 1862

Battle was avoided four times in Ozarks. Second time in the row he managed to do movement in the winter and almost caught my troops offguard. Well played by nmleague. Luckily I remembered to set the troops to avoid combat last turn.

Few camps finished and new reinforcements are flowing into my brigades.



Image
Attachments
Image0001.jpg
Image0001.jpg (125.47 KiB) Viewed 320 times
User avatar
TimoN
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 1:32 pm
Location: Halikko, Finland

RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)

Post by TimoN »

Second half of the event report shows that the small investment into diplomacy started to pay off immediatelly.

One of his governors supports engineering research. Lucky him. One of mine only supports impressment. There were nothing valuable to use impressment so that was useless.

Kentucky sides with the Union as expected.

Image
Attachments
Image0002.jpg
Image0002.jpg (140.39 KiB) Viewed 320 times
User avatar
TimoN
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 1:32 pm
Location: Halikko, Finland

RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)

Post by TimoN »

Situation in the Arkansas is very critical. Nmleague has driven me into very bad position, gotta give credit for doing that. Now my 17th Division is completely out of supply and is located at the same province with the enemy troops. I don't know why my troops didn't receive any supplies last turn. Maybe the supply routes are too long or his troops blocked the supplies? Anyway I'm forced to use "forced march" and try to reach White River province. I have no idea what will be the consecuenses if I use "forced march" when the troops are totally out of supplies. I presume I will lose atleast few brigades because of desertions.

Good thing is that Union troops must be on low supplies as well. I sent raiders after them to catch more of their supplies.

Gunboat appears in the Tennesee-Mississippi River and I try to move my Cavalry division with forced march to Yazoo.

Image
Attachments
Image0008.jpg
Image0008.jpg (175.02 KiB) Viewed 320 times
User avatar
TimoN
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 1:32 pm
Location: Halikko, Finland

RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)

Post by TimoN »

In east situation has not changed. Early didn't reach East Ohio River so I use forced march again. Next thing I notice that there's no troops at Columbia guarding the Ohio's capital!!! Why I didn't notice that before! I immediatelly send Ripley's division with forced march to capture the capital. Wish me luck!

Runners were set:
55W 60/20
65W 60/40
Hospital was started at Richmond and three brigades received Minie rifles and few attributes.
At the end of turn my raiders got an option to destroy supplies 15S 50/24.

Image
Attachments
Image0009.jpg
Image0009.jpg (182.51 KiB) Viewed 320 times
User avatar
TimoN
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 1:32 pm
Location: Halikko, Finland

RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)

Post by TimoN »

Late January 1862

Seems that my troops didn't move out of Ozarks and nmleague managed to engage them in combat. Losses were quite small, but one of my brigades surrendered [:(]

Raiders did destroy their supplies so they must be really low now. Too bad that my cavalry is not there yet.

Image
Attachments
Image0002.jpg
Image0002.jpg (136.07 KiB) Viewed 320 times
User avatar
TimoN
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 1:32 pm
Location: Halikko, Finland

RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)

Post by TimoN »

Europeans sent very welcome shipment of engineering technology. My tech advancement has been really low.

The really bad news is that I lost the other blockader runner. That's my first ever in playing FOF. Luckily my new runner is ready this turn.

Image
Attachments
Image0003.jpg
Image0003.jpg (157 KiB) Viewed 320 times
User avatar
TimoN
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 1:32 pm
Location: Halikko, Finland

RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)

Post by TimoN »

Situation in Arkansas...

My troops retreated to White River just where I wanted them! That's really good news! Now they have replenished their supplies and got some reinforcement men. I retreat the division to Arkansas River and try to bring my cavalry division to support it.

Union gunboat still sits in the Tennessee-Mississippi River. Finally I realize the reason for that. It blocks all income from that province. I have no means to drive it off there. I can't even make any improvements to my forts.


Image
Attachments
Image0005.jpg
Image0005.jpg (176.28 KiB) Viewed 320 times
User avatar
TimoN
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 1:32 pm
Location: Halikko, Finland

RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)

Post by TimoN »

Reaching for Ohio again.

Last turn my troops didn't move anywhere near the Ohio River. I'll try the same manuevers again.

Image
Attachments
Image0004.jpg
Image0004.jpg (192.87 KiB) Viewed 320 times
User avatar
TimoN
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 1:32 pm
Location: Halikko, Finland

RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)

Post by TimoN »

Here's the national income screen. Notice that my infantry upkeep is high as I turned my troops to receive supplies. Next turn troops can move again and I have planned several movements which require plenty of supplies. Nmleague has had the initiative so far, but I hope to regain it during the spring.

During the winter I really noticed the lack of RR points so I decided to build two RR stations more. These will be located in Chattanooga and Nashville. Mint was built in Baton Rouge.

Raiders are again after Union troops supplies in Ozarks (12S 66/12).

Runners were set:
65I 80/10
35M 80/10
Both had high chance of success and low risk. I lost the old runner with 20% risk so I really have been lucky with the 40% risks I have been taking.

Image
Attachments
Image0007.jpg
Image0007.jpg (127.71 KiB) Viewed 320 times
User avatar
TimoN
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 1:32 pm
Location: Halikko, Finland

RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)

Post by TimoN »

Early February 1862

Finally the winter movement restrictions are over. It's time to start the real war. No more "All Quiet On The Western Front".

Some important buildings became ready, especially that lab is needed. Did I took a screenshot of my research... lets hope so.

Beauregard became available. I think I have to give him some sort of post where he can operate. That's one name I remember from Bull Run game made by Mad Minute Games. It would be a wet dream to combine these two magnificent games. Strategical level a'la FOF and tactical realtime combats with Bull Run/Manassas engine.

Image
Attachments
Image0001.jpg
Image0001.jpg (140.64 KiB) Viewed 320 times
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”