Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)
Moderator: Gil R.
Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)
This is an AAR of standard November 1861 campaing between me and nmleague. I will be playing the CSA side, which indoubtly will be victorious.
We used advanced settings with few modifications.
Difficulty level: Captain (this really hurts economy)
CSA emancipation: off (not 100% sure)
Hidden stats: off
Random stats: off
More generals: on
Faster sieges: on
Faster sieges are new to me so I made plans according to that. You'll see the difference soon.
We used advanced settings with few modifications.
Difficulty level: Captain (this really hurts economy)
CSA emancipation: off (not 100% sure)
Hidden stats: off
Random stats: off
More generals: on
Faster sieges: on
Faster sieges are new to me so I made plans according to that. You'll see the difference soon.
RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)
...btw, nmleague you are not supposed to read this [:-]
RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)
From nation income screen you'll see how much penalty we are taking with the higher difficulty level. I wish that Union suffers more from that penalty as I rely more on blockade runners to finance my economy.
I took a high risk and didn't invest anything to diplomacy. I need all possible money income to my building plan. More about that later.

I took a high risk and didn't invest anything to diplomacy. I need all possible money income to my building plan. More about that later.

- Attachments
-
- Image0012.jpg (125.07 KiB) Viewed 352 times
RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)
First thing that Gil R. has taught to us in his AAR is that at the beginning of the turn blockade runners are set first. That's a good principle and I intend to keep it that way.
There seems to be good catches for horses available. The first runner goes after 40 horses with 80% chance and 20% danger (here after I will use markings 40H 80/20, H=horse, M=money, L=labor, etc.). Other runner goes after 30H 80/40. High risk but too good chance to bypass it.

There seems to be good catches for horses available. The first runner goes after 40 horses with 80% chance and 20% danger (here after I will use markings 40H 80/20, H=horse, M=money, L=labor, etc.). Other runner goes after 30H 80/40. High risk but too good chance to bypass it.

- Attachments
-
- Image0005.jpg (117.71 KiB) Viewed 352 times
RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)
My building plan is to provide basic level of income and support research especially in area of logistics.
My money income is at the moment pretty good as all my military groups are set to no support or low support. However later on I have to raise more troops and use them on higher support levels so I need gold for that purpose. I plan to build mints whenever I have possibility for that. Right now I don't have the possibility.
Labor and horse incomes are in acceptable levels and I don't plan to expand them if not necessary. I migh take few Union cities for that purpose [:D]
Iron income worries me a bit so I expand it immediatelly. There are three locations in CSA where Iron Works double the income of the mines: Richmond(VA), Augusta(GA) and Columbus(GA). Richmond is producing a lot of horses and I can't lose that horse production. Columbus can't support more buildings and I can't afford to build mansion or plantation. Augusta has room for three buildings but it's producing horse instead of iron. However this is the only place so I decide to start mine production here. It takes 6 turns to finish. When it is finish I will change the production to iron and I will lose three horse production and make governor of Georgia more angry. He's already staunch adversary (-55) and will probably make every trick possible to harm my war efforts. I will build two more mines here when I can afford.

My money income is at the moment pretty good as all my military groups are set to no support or low support. However later on I have to raise more troops and use them on higher support levels so I need gold for that purpose. I plan to build mints whenever I have possibility for that. Right now I don't have the possibility.
Labor and horse incomes are in acceptable levels and I don't plan to expand them if not necessary. I migh take few Union cities for that purpose [:D]
Iron income worries me a bit so I expand it immediatelly. There are three locations in CSA where Iron Works double the income of the mines: Richmond(VA), Augusta(GA) and Columbus(GA). Richmond is producing a lot of horses and I can't lose that horse production. Columbus can't support more buildings and I can't afford to build mansion or plantation. Augusta has room for three buildings but it's producing horse instead of iron. However this is the only place so I decide to start mine production here. It takes 6 turns to finish. When it is finish I will change the production to iron and I will lose three horse production and make governor of Georgia more angry. He's already staunch adversary (-55) and will probably make every trick possible to harm my war efforts. I will build two more mines here when I can afford.

- Attachments
-
- Image0009.jpg (140.14 KiB) Viewed 352 times
RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)
In research area Logistics are the most important upgrades. Napoleon had something smart to say here but I can't just remember it now. I need Invalid corps and the railroad upgrades as soon as possible to support my victory plans. I intend to get them by building 4 laboratories for logistics research. Most obvious places for these would be the towns were University add +1 research point. There are two towns with university: Raleigh which is full and Milledgeville where's room for one building. I now build one laboratory to Milledgeville and later I have to think if I build mansion/plantation to Raleigh or Milledgeville. Or I just build the laboratories to somewhere else if I can't afford the mansions or plantations.


- Attachments
-
- Image0008.jpg (137.62 KiB) Viewed 352 times
RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)
Faster sieges are new to me and I had to think my strategy over again. What it does is that damage is doubled for besieger and for defender. That means one defending brigade will definately destroy one besieging brigade at the start of the siege. Also defending brigade will take lot of casualties in the first turn and if there's just one brigade defending the fort will collapse in one or two turns. That's something I don't want so I plan to have atleast two defenders in each fort. That means everytime that a siege starts, I will probably destroy two union brigades and all casualties I receive are split between two brigades. Next turn my both brigades can still deal a great deal of damage to remaining besiegers. I have to also think more ways to reduce more casualties in my forts. Damage dealed to besieger is definately enough (you'll see later).
I take actions to strengthen my main forts. In Tennessee-Mississippi River I abandoned two forts (size I and II) and concentrated my strength on two Fort IIIs.
Edit: I disbanded the abandoned forts as you can see from the pic. Both remaining forts have three bgds each.

I take actions to strengthen my main forts. In Tennessee-Mississippi River I abandoned two forts (size I and II) and concentrated my strength on two Fort IIIs.
Edit: I disbanded the abandoned forts as you can see from the pic. Both remaining forts have three bgds each.

- Attachments
-
- Image0006.jpg (171.74 KiB) Viewed 352 times
RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)
In Fredericksburg I abandoned one fort.


- Attachments
-
- Image0007.jpg (162.91 KiB) Viewed 352 times
RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)
From Kentucky I withdrew all my troops. One fort in the Kentucky was also abandoned and garrison was relocated into Cumberland River fort.
Three brigades in the east part of Kentucky joined the 11th Division in Kenawha. This division has logistics rating of "Good" which makes it ideal for my operations in this area. Divisions with logistical rating of good or better suffer much less march attrition.

Three brigades in the east part of Kentucky joined the 11th Division in Kenawha. This division has logistics rating of "Good" which makes it ideal for my operations in this area. Divisions with logistical rating of good or better suffer much less march attrition.

- Attachments
-
- Image0010.jpg (182.41 KiB) Viewed 352 times
RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)
From AVN is stripped it's best corps container and sent it into the west to use in upcoming operations. Also four divisions were removed from the AVN. One division was used to contain best legendary brigades I had. One division was used to contain four cavalry brigades. This cavalry division was sent to west to raid the wilderness provinces. Cavarly bridades suffer no march attrition so they are ideal for marching in the wilderness. Two empty division containers were sent with the corps container. These divisions will be later manned with garrison troops from south and mustered troops.
Rest of the AVN was sent to Rappahanock to siege the Union fort there. From previous experience I know that this fort has good cannons defending it and if I can capture it intact I can better defend my capital. Also Rappahanock doesn't provide any income as long it has enemy fort in its territory.

Rest of the AVN was sent to Rappahanock to siege the Union fort there. From previous experience I know that this fort has good cannons defending it and if I can capture it intact I can better defend my capital. Also Rappahanock doesn't provide any income as long it has enemy fort in its territory.

- Attachments
-
- Image0011.jpg (174.34 KiB) Viewed 352 times
RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)
The best corps container of AVN was the Vally District corps. It was sent here to Cumberland river. Two divisions from Kentucky were moved by trail to same location. All troops inside the corps container are set to no support.
The division in Chattanooga is set to low priority so that it can receive reinforcements. All its brigades are at 1500 men strength and I want to strengthen them before sending them to battle.

The division in Chattanooga is set to low priority so that it can receive reinforcements. All its brigades are at 1500 men strength and I want to strengthen them before sending them to battle.

- Attachments
-
- Image-0013.jpg (183.59 KiB) Viewed 352 times
RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)
Two forts south of New Orleans are abandoned and sent to New Orleans. Later I will sent them by rail to man those empty divisions.


- Attachments
-
- Image0015.jpg (142.76 KiB) Viewed 352 times
RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)
Just before ending the turn we see the situation in Virginia. Ripley's division moves to Grafton to challenge the Union troops there. One of the brigades received Minie rifles before the move.
Early's division stands still and waits those brigades from Kentucky. Jackson was sent to west along with the Cavalry division. Jackson will be leading the corps I sent there, but now he is moving with the cavalry and training them with the special abilities. Did I mention that cavalry brigades are great as they don't suffer from march attrition?
Wise is defending the Shenandoah with the Elite divion which has all the best legendary brigades from AVN. I didn't want to leave them to AVN because there's a high risk that they would have been destroying in besieging process.
Raiders and Partisans were sent to Central Mississippi River. Raiders had orders to destroy supplies and partisans had orders to cause economic damage worth 32 at 80%/23%.

Early's division stands still and waits those brigades from Kentucky. Jackson was sent to west along with the Cavalry division. Jackson will be leading the corps I sent there, but now he is moving with the cavalry and training them with the special abilities. Did I mention that cavalry brigades are great as they don't suffer from march attrition?
Wise is defending the Shenandoah with the Elite divion which has all the best legendary brigades from AVN. I didn't want to leave them to AVN because there's a high risk that they would have been destroying in besieging process.
Raiders and Partisans were sent to Central Mississippi River. Raiders had orders to destroy supplies and partisans had orders to cause economic damage worth 32 at 80%/23%.

- Attachments
-
- Image0016.jpg (184.59 KiB) Viewed 352 times
RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)
Late November 1861 turn starts with quite expected results.
Four of the forts I ordered to disband were disbanded.
No surprise that Lee was my first choice for 4 stars general.
I made three Impressment attempts and only one failed.
Raiders and partisans were successful but partisans were destroyed in the process. That 32 money out of nmleague's pocket is a decent compensation for that anyway.
Nmleague already got one of his governors to support money production so that's a minor setback. One of my governors supports Impressment, just after I had done that in his state
One of his governors request laboratory... I could live with that because I definately need labs.
Jackson trains one of the cavalry brigades as it was planned and my blockade runners brought full loads of horses. The other successfully avoided 40% danger.

Four of the forts I ordered to disband were disbanded.
No surprise that Lee was my first choice for 4 stars general.
I made three Impressment attempts and only one failed.
Raiders and partisans were successful but partisans were destroyed in the process. That 32 money out of nmleague's pocket is a decent compensation for that anyway.
Nmleague already got one of his governors to support money production so that's a minor setback. One of my governors supports Impressment, just after I had done that in his state

Jackson trains one of the cavalry brigades as it was planned and my blockade runners brought full loads of horses. The other successfully avoided 40% danger.

- Attachments
-
- start.jpg (106.62 KiB) Viewed 352 times
RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)
My blockade runners are offered very good opportunities. Both would be welcome, money is needed for my building program and those weapons would be used on Minie rifles. Risks are also in reasonable levels.


- Attachments
-
- Image0003.jpg (95.23 KiB) Viewed 352 times
RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)
As you noticed from Event viewer, no battle was started at Grafton and Parkersburg was captured by the enemy. Real strange thing is that nmleague didn't capture East Ohio River. That town is completely without defenses. I could move in there, but I am sure that he has similar plans as well. I don't want to split my forces, so I move into Parkersburg with force. First Ripley's division moves from Grafton to Parkersburg with order to avoid battle. Early with 11th division has greater iniatitive and stronger troops so I order him to move in with support move (s button) and with orders to engage.
From James river I brought extra division to support Wise as I noticed enemy concentration at Cumberland. First move is done by railroad which uses all my 5 rr points and the last with standard move.
Hopefully we get a battle in next turn.

From James river I brought extra division to support Wise as I noticed enemy concentration at Cumberland. First move is done by railroad which uses all my 5 rr points and the last with standard move.
Hopefully we get a battle in next turn.

- Attachments
-
- Image0020.jpg (174.7 KiB) Viewed 352 times
RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)
Building orders I gave this turn:
-Mint in Baton Rouge
-Hospital in Lynchburg (I am really afraid of disease here)
-Blockade Runner in Norfolk (these are my best source of income)
I have only raiders left as partisans were destroyed. For raiders I order them to destroy supplies. The chance to success is low, but gains would be good and danger is low.
Jackson is promoted to 4 stars at the end.

-Mint in Baton Rouge
-Hospital in Lynchburg (I am really afraid of disease here)
-Blockade Runner in Norfolk (these are my best source of income)
I have only raiders left as partisans were destroyed. For raiders I order them to destroy supplies. The chance to success is low, but gains would be good and danger is low.
Jackson is promoted to 4 stars at the end.

- Attachments
-
- Image0021.jpg (99.16 KiB) Viewed 352 times
RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)
Early December 1861
Winter move rules are in effect now. Hopefully all my troops are located right. I don't have much RR points to move my groups during winter.
Lets see the event report:
Wow, that siege started with high casualties. I curious to see, which of my brigades took the beating. I think he had a garrison of 3000 men in the fort. There should be around 700 left. If 3000 men did 3900 casualties, then the remaining 700 will do around 800-1000 casualties.
In Parkersburg we got a battle initiated and we won with clear margin. One enemy brigade surrendered, lets see if they dropped some goodies for us.

Winter move rules are in effect now. Hopefully all my troops are located right. I don't have much RR points to move my groups during winter.
Lets see the event report:
Wow, that siege started with high casualties. I curious to see, which of my brigades took the beating. I think he had a garrison of 3000 men in the fort. There should be around 700 left. If 3000 men did 3900 casualties, then the remaining 700 will do around 800-1000 casualties.
In Parkersburg we got a battle initiated and we won with clear margin. One enemy brigade surrendered, lets see if they dropped some goodies for us.

- Attachments
-
- Image0023.jpg (127.83 KiB) Viewed 352 times
RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)
Raiders didn't let me down. He's troops are suffering from lack of supplies by now [:D]
I haven't yet invested anything to diplomacy, but looks like he's doing it big time. So far I have lost only one level of support from England and he has gained atleast one level with each nation. I soon have to add some money to diplomacy, but not this turn yet.
His governors are supporting his war effort quite nicely. Already supporting money and iron production and tactical research. My governors only support impressment and muster, which I don't need at the moment. To best of all Georgia's governor wants war college. Why he didn't ask for lab as the union governor asked? Maybe I have to give that war college to him, anyway it won't be wasted as training upgrades are good as well.
Jackson teaches another ability to one of the Cavalry brigades. Runners brought money but didn't catch the weapons shipment. 60 money makes me really happy though.

I haven't yet invested anything to diplomacy, but looks like he's doing it big time. So far I have lost only one level of support from England and he has gained atleast one level with each nation. I soon have to add some money to diplomacy, but not this turn yet.
His governors are supporting his war effort quite nicely. Already supporting money and iron production and tactical research. My governors only support impressment and muster, which I don't need at the moment. To best of all Georgia's governor wants war college. Why he didn't ask for lab as the union governor asked? Maybe I have to give that war college to him, anyway it won't be wasted as training upgrades are good as well.
Jackson teaches another ability to one of the Cavalry brigades. Runners brought money but didn't catch the weapons shipment. 60 money makes me really happy though.

- Attachments
-
- Image0024.jpg (147.28 KiB) Viewed 352 times
RE: Bound for Glory: TimoN(CSA) vs. nmleague(Union)
Lets see the battle at Parkersburg... no goodies for my troops, only lousy muskets that do not give quick combat bonus. Couple of Springfields or Minies would have been really nice addition to my troops. Too bad that any of the brigades didn't improve their quality after the battle. Anyway a victory is a victory. All credits for my troops for winning that battle [&o]


- Attachments
-
- Image0025.jpg (100.18 KiB) Viewed 352 times