French Arab EvenSteven- A test of the Golden Horde Doctrine

[springer]

Turn 8 (Arab turn only; French turn not saved)

Disaster is clearly on the wings!

No more seesaw battles. The battle has clearly turned against the horde, who have been smashed on both fronts. The battle has been reduced to a disorderly retreat of a broken rabble, temporarily pulling itself together to make a couple of "one hex" last stands. The horde has its back against the wall. (To analogize to another set of AARs going on: North Front is like the free people trapped in Gondor; and Central Front is getting close to a kind of Helms Deep).

The unmodified Golden Horde doctrine has failed (at least in the desert). At the rate this scenario is going, it just a matter of time before the Arab units break through the remnants of the defenses.

In desperation, the SHCEFW had already considered ways of modifying the Golden Horde Doctrine in a way that didn't violate their green principles (i.e., no factories; no oil consuming machinery) that could stave off impending defeat.

(Unfortunately, the standard ATG unit set doesn't allow the creation of all-natural Ent units, such as the one Tolkien could invoke when Helms Deep was in trouble.)

[springer]

Thanks mgaffn1!

[springer]

Here's an on-location sketch of what happened during the horde attack on the outskirts of Eden:

[springer]

SHCEFW has had an inspiration!

[springer]

Oh well, I see that Vic has just put out 2.04 and it makes my test of the Golden Horde strategy obsolete.

(Don't get me wrong, I think the modification in 2.04 is a good thing. The whole idea of a "Golden Horde Doctrine" should be difficult to implement.)

I'll finish this AAR (which was just figuring out the Golden Horde Doctrine). I hope the AAR makes it clear that even against the AI, that cavalry adds a more mobile dimension to the game. Even though the game is primarily limited to only a 7 x 6 chunk of map, that little space is full of parry, ripostes, attacks and counterattacks.

I'll redo the second AAR, which applies the lessons of the first AAR. It was originally done in ATG 2.03, but I'll redo it in 2.04. I think the most important principles learned will remain valid in 2.04

I'm considering a further variation on the "Golden Horde" theme to further test the impact of cavalry on game play in 2.04

[springer]

Starting on turn 8, the horde realized that it needed anti-tank capability. Thus, SHCEFW has authorized the use of cart-drawn bazookas for the Golden horde as long as they don't violate green warfare principles (no factories; no building of fuel consuming units).

Thus, The TO&E of the Golden Horde was upgraded with a AT Battalion. Here is the TO&E of a full-strength unit:



Though it performed adequately,the '42 organization of the Golden Horde was still flawed.

[springer]

Turn 9 (Arab move only; French move missing)

The French hold their positions and do some minor maneuvering as the army reorganizes into '42 Golden Horde Regiments.
The Arabs strengthen their position and complete a rail line that will allow them to rapidly reinforce their army and switch their mobile forces between fronts as needed.

[springer]

Turn 10 (French move)

After the first seesaw campaign for Eden, the horde with their '42 regiments launch the new offensive.

Because of the flaw in '42 Golden Horde organization (they move at HORSE speed not CAV speed), the battle takes on more of that World War I flavor that seems can particularly affect ATG (particularly early on or on those fronts were there are just too many armor and ariel forces in mid/end game. (See Henri51's AAR as a good illustration of mid-game fuel problems.)

[springer]

Turn 10 (Arab Move)

Here is the Arab counter move.
The remainder of the posts in this AAR will have little graphic commentary.

As can be seen in the posts,
the horde was able to push forward just like any cheaper, horse-borne infantry army could have done.

[springer]

Turn 11 (Arab move)

The French moves are now being skipped as they don't change the situation much.
The French gain one hex in methodical, step by step offenses. The BAZ II units are breaking up the Arab armor counteroffensives.

[springer]

Turn 12 (Arab response)

The methodical hex by hex continues (Blue arrows show the four hexes gained). The horse's are starting to develop "trench hoof"! Arab armor remains hapless in the face of the '42 Golden Horde's attached bazooka batallions.

[springer]

Turn 13 (Arab Turn)

The horde shows they have some of the old spunk as they take two hexes in some locations.
The horde pays the price for a premature attack on Verdun (oops, Eden).

A stack is wounded in the attack, and then smashed in the ensuing Arab move. (And the Arabs pay a high price for the counterattack.)

For the most part, all is well, the horde manages to hold on the its gains.

[springer]

Turn 14 (Arab Turn)

The horde continues to move forward, consolidating positions and trenches, and gaining a couple of hexes.



As can be seen at the bottom of the map, Basra has fallen. In the south, the horde remained highly mobile.
'41 Horde Regiments were used. The first bazooka units only appeared in the south once Basra fell.

[springer]

Turn 15 (French move; Arab move not saved)

The horde grinds forward on foot. Eden is vulnerable, though the Arab forces repulse yet another attack on it.

[springer]

Turn 16 (French turn- Game's end)

The grail of this quest, Verdun/Eden has finally fallen.

Now that both Eden and Basra are in horde hands, the declared victory conditions of this test of doctrine is complete. It is clear that the Arab armies are now on the ropes. In the south they have lost their oil, and it is clear that the numbers are not currently in their favor.

However, this was not a victory for the Golden Horde doctrine. However, the lessons learned are quite valuable.

[springer]

Post-mortem analysis:

The last 8 turns of the game lost the flavor of the first half. The end game felt much more like U. S. Grant's wilderness campaign and siege of Petersburg than a war of mobility.

The ATG I enjoy playing is one of mobility, not one of outright attrition. Cavalry adds the mobility, but my organizational decisions negated it.

There are three lessons learned from the AAR.

1. CAV is not HORSE. (this could have been learned by looking at the stats, which I only did after the bazookas started acting like dead weight.) This is makes sense: Moving on horseback is different than being pulled around on a cart.
2. Cavalry need protection against tanks
3. Don't create combined arm units with incompatible movement.

Once the bazookas were tied to the cavalry, the cavalry was for the most part negated in one of their primary strengths.

Tying together units with incompatible movement speeds is, to a certain extent, a waste of production. What good are fast units that can't move fast? This problem had to be addressed.

____________________________________

Based on this analysis, I reworked the Golden Horde doctrine and tested it in a second AAR. Unfortunately, that was ATG version 2.03, which is now obsolete. (The act of balancing the cavalry in the game is still a work in progress.)

Last night, I spent a couple of hours retesting the doctrine in 2.04. The AAR to follow will show the results. It was certainly a different game than this one.

(To be cont'd... In a new thread...)



Above is the SHCEFW contemplating the Golden Horde Doctrine after the AAR is over. I'm not sure they have been wholly reliable advisors. Furthermore, they act like nothing has changed since the first turn, so I may dispose of them for the next AAR.

[springer]

I forgot the totals!

Here is the sum of pixel carnage:



The horde really did a number on the armor cars. Unfortunately, the horde took quite a few losses itself. Without modification, the Golden Horde Doctrine is not a winning strategy.

[springer]

And here is the chart of destruction.

The most notable part of this the "unsustainable" kill ratio before bazookas vs. what happens after bazookas.