Chad Marlett
United States
Plymouth
Michigan
-
I really like Battle Above the Clouds, but, I think I am coming to the conclusion that the Chickamauga campaign is not winnable by the Union. The Union did lose, of course, so I guess that is historically okay, but it doesn't make for a good game, esp. one that is 10+ sessions.
In the game I played, I admit my plan was not so great, this being the first campaign of GCACW I have played. Such as it was:
Thomas' Corp: Attack the Confeds dug in at the tip of Lookout Mtn. and force the way to Chattanooga.
McCook's Corp: Cross Stevens Gap over Lookout Mtn. and move on Lafayette, supported by the cavalry and the Lightning Brigade.
Crittenden's Corp: Follow McCook across Lookout Mtn. and flank the Confeds dug in at Lookout Mtn. (basically assist Thomas). This meant a long march back to the Tennessee bridges.
Unlike the real Bragg, my opponent didn't panic and transferred very little from the off-map areas. With Forrest in command, Burnside was outnumbered and outclassed. He also didn't abandon Chattanooga.
The fully fortified Confeds on Lookout Mtn. (3X defense) were basically untouchable, so Thomas accomplished nothing. McCook was defeated by a dug-in Wheeler at Dug Gap, just short of Lafayette. By the time Crittenden made it across Lookout Mtn., Buckner had arrived and blocked any progress to Chattanooga.
All this for 11MP losses for the Union, only balanced by 4MP of losses for the South. The lone victory hex captured was Trenton. I am only half-way through the campaign, but Confed reinforcements have arrived and the Union has no advantage to press further, and much to lose. I did have a run of pretty bad luck in combat and turns ending early, but I also missed the rule that out-of-supply units are disorganized on the next day. If I had known this rule, McCook would have had to move much slower.
What I would do differently:
- Keep the Corps together; I rushed forward with some of the units and this really served no purpose since these individuals could do nothing by themselves, and the following units were slower do to not being with the commander. A side bar of this is that while the turn ending on double 1s seems unlikely, there are a lot impulses and IT WILL HAPPEN AT THE WORST TIME. Leader activations and wagon train chains, while not always optimal, get your units moved in less impulses.
- Keep the Cavalry together; I sent off individual cav units to hunt the Confed cavalry and wagon trains. While this went okay at first, a few bad die rolls resulted in them being disorganized and fully fatigued. A wagon train (1 defense) can easily mess up a 2MP cavalry unit on defense!. When this happened, my cavalry was cut down. You need to keep the cavalry stacked together to avoid reprisals.
- Don't use the Lightning Brigade lightly; a bad die roll can really hurt this important unit. Remember that it can be activated by both infantry and cavalry leaders!
- Thomas Corp needs to cross over Lookout Mtn., leaving Crittenden to screen the Confeds dug in the tip.
- McCook should stay with Thomas; getting to Lafayette is too easy for the Confeds to reinforce and the supply line is too tortuous.
- Don't go for an all-in attack on Forrest with Burnside on the first strategic turn; this is just points for the Confeds. Split up the cavalry and infantry and try to move through two mountain paths so that at least one of hexes can be attacked without Forrest.
So, I did mess up all those things. But here is why I think the Union can't win, even with optimal play:
- off map, the Union has 29MP facing 37MP Confeds (and Forrest). this is a non-starter until the Confeds transfer troops out. With how off-map combat works, the Confeds can transfer alot of troops out without giving the Union a good attack. I can't see this side theater succeeding or keeping good Confed units from moving the map.
- on map, the Union has 103MP facing 62MP. This seems okay, but the Confeds will generally get more reinforcements (esp. if they get Virgina troops instead of Mississippi troops). They will also get troops from off-map. Finally, they will typically be dug-in (2X to 3X strength) because they don't have to attack to win the campaign.
- the Union divisions are typically smaller than the Confeds (and of course slower). This leads to the Union needing to do assaults with multiple divisions to get good odds. This is slow, so the Confeds will get there first and dig in. There is always a chance that the assault will go poorly with one division going in too...
- the Union units typically do not have enough of an artillery advantage to avoid getting a -1 in combat, eliminating any bonuses you might get for a better leader or a manpower advantage.
- The supply situation is worse than it might appear at first. Union supplies can only be railed as far as Bridgeport. The only way across Lookout Mtn. until you clear the tip is Stevens Gap; this is huge trip and DeKalb county blocks strategic movement through a crucial part of the trip. The Union has a real problem here because out-of-supply units become disorganized, which makes attacking impossible with the the considerations above. It is also difficult to get the right mix of regiments and divisions to avoid wasting points. The Confeds are almost always very near their supply line and had no real issues with supply that I saw.
- Insubordination, so important in the actual campaign, has real little effect in the game campaign because the South doesn't attack - they just race to good terrain and dig in, waiting for a hapless Union attack.
So what do you get? A bunch of opportunities to make attacks with a plus or minus 1. In the long run, this will lead to a ton of losses with not much to show for it (unless you are really good at rolling a six when your opponent rolls a 1).
Anyone else see a diffent outcome?
-
Steve M
United States
Lubbock
Texas
-
Thanks for the post, I wish Ed Beach and the hardcore GCACW play testers (e.g. Justin Rice) would frequent BGG more, they seem to stick to CSW. You could get some seriously interesting thoughts over there.
-
Chad Marlett
United States
Plymouth
Michigan
-
I did peruse CSW, but unfortunately all of the GCACW games are in one folder.
-
Rob Doane
United States
Millersville
Maryland
-
Chad,
Go ahead and post in the GCACW folder on Consim. You will definitely get some feedback there. I didn't play the campaign enough in playtesting to know much about it, but I'm sure some of the others will help.
-
Raynald Foret
France
Paris
-
The short answer is yes, the north can win (well, I did, against a veteran of the GCACW).
Some advices :
1/ Practice GCACW a lot more (moving by corps is really a basic, you can't really appreciate the balance of a GCACW campaign so early in the learning curve in my opinion, no offense intended) ;
2/ Try with 1 or 2 corps north of Chattanooga (with all the initial supply with them) and see if the Lookout is still a problem or if the South doesn't have to work hard to protect his supply line (hint -> Forrest will help here) ;
3/ Manoeuver, manoeuver, manoeuver ;
4/ But don't wait for the perfect attack (especially with the north, although in BAC it's easier than in the East). 11 vs 4 losses looks very bloodless to me ;).
By the way, off map it's not 29 north against 37 south but 29 north against 27 south. And the north will gain more reinforcements off map. If he doesn't transfert anything on map, the South should easily stalemate the North off map, but the chances are that he will need some of these troops on map ...
-
Steve M
United States
Lubbock
Texas
-
I have been playing a scenario 8 campaign as well, I'm not doing terribly well as the Union. To me, the order of the day in the north is that you have more corps, especially at first, and you can cut rail supply pretty easily. I made the huge mistake of not exhausting the heck out of my troops and getting units on Dalton and other eastern rail cities when there was an opportunity. As it is now I seem to be performing a Gen. Grant by continually flanking farther and farther east, leaving his main forces pinned at the river. It might have succeeded, too, if I'd moved more quickly.
-
Iain K
United States
Arvada
Colorado
-
Successful GCACW campaigns are not about battles, they are about maneuver, often so you do not have to fight battles . If you must, then successful maneuver gets you a devastating +4 flanking bonus.
You might find reading about Rosencrans' campaign to Chatanooga and Sherman's subsequent campaign to Atlanta interesting to read about.
If you're worried about assaulting dug in defenders, you're not "doing it right" and are dooming your forces.
-
|
|
Posted Sat Oct 29, 2011 3:38 am
