Forced Marching

[Ted1066]

Sooo, I see Forced Marching talked about in the rules, but I have yet to figure out how to get a corps to force march. Has this not been implemented yet? Or am I just missing something? Anyone else figure out how to do this?

Ted

[Alex777]

After it has used its regular movement allowance, double-click on the corps. This is yet another interface thing not referred to in the Manual.

[carnifex]

double-click on it's force march destination

[AusGamer]

I don't like not being able to use depot supply after force marching. It does'nt make any sense to me. Especially when invasion supply can be used.

[lavisj]

ORIGINAL: AusGamer

I don't like not being able to use depot supply after force marching. It does'nt make any sense to me. Especially when invasion supply can be used.

Well, actually it makes perfect sens. Force marching on the strategic sens, means that you are marching faster than your supply can follow. Armies of the time (and still now) have to bring supplies from their depots. Depots are nothing more than large stockpile of supplies, but they still have to be delivered to the troops by cartsm wagons, boats.... whatever. If your armie outmarches those, the troops have to rely on the land... foraging. The EiA system tries to provide a static mechanics for the dynaic process of supply.

I hope it makes more sens now.

[JavaJoe]

ORIGINAL: AusGamer

I don't like not being able to use depot supply after force marching. It does'nt make any sense to me. Especially when invasion supply can be used.

Force marching your troops will cause more attrition than marching them normally and securing their needs. Force March only when absolutely necessary. Never in Winter.

A lot of foraging losses are desertion, injuries, sickness and not just death.

[AusGamer]

Yeh guys I know what forced marching is and what it's for but troops are'nt always marching away from their depots and when supply lines are getting shorter not being able to use depot supply makes no sense.
 
Also there's a game mechanism to reflect outmarching supply. Depots only have a supply range of 3 areas so it's easy for the French to outmarch their supply chain. Throw in forced marching and they can get way ahead. But they should'nt have to forage if there is food available from a local depot.

[Murat]

Sure they should. They were SUPPOSED to be in area X but their commander moved them to area Y. All the supllies went to X, teamsters waited that millisecond they are famous for waiting for and then rushed back to the deopt to continue their card game after reallocating some of the supplies to their tents ("No sir, we left them where you told us too in the hands of a Lieutenant who said his unit was moving up but the jerk kept our copy of the paperwork and gave us this letter to his mom by accident, we can go back and try and find him in those 100,000 troops if you want. By the way sir, my mom sent me this bottle of Scotch for you since I told her what a great guy you were.") . [:D]

[AusGamer]

Your kidding right? We're talking about Corps sized formations with a continuous relay of wagons or whatever moving supplies and materiel between the depots and the army (represented in the game by the supply chain). And you're trying to tell me that an army marching back along that supply route can't use the supplies coming forward to them? For example I'm pretty sure the Grande Armee would have been force marching out of Russia and I'm pretty sure they would have used the their supply lines.....if they had'nt been cut by the Russians.

[Cyrano]

Ain't no good guys, ain't no bad guys, BUT:

I strongly recommend "Swords Around A Throne" if you haven't read it. This rule simulates something VERY real. FWIW, the GA was down to little but forage by the time what was left of it got out of Russia. Problem was the weather -- and the Cossacks -- didn't give them much of a chance.

Best,

Jim

[AusGamer]

I have'nt read it but I should, I notice it get's recommended every time I see a discussion on the 1812 campaign.
 
And I agree there should be an extra penalty if a Corps force marches and forages (and I'm not entirely sure the French should be able to use depot supply at all, but they can....so). Given that that's the way the game works I think the devastating retreat is simulated by the Russians cutting the French supply chain with cossacks and forcing them to make forage rolls. In Russia. In winter. After forced marching.
 
In the game the French would be able to use depot supply whilst marching out of Russia so long as their supply lines are not cut but the second they force march they have to make forage rolls. It's wrong. They're marching along the supply route and getting closer to the supplies, materiel and recruits. OK I accept there would be attrition....desertion etc it's just that in the game if you pay for supply from a depot there's no chance of any effect from this. I see this as recruits being forwarded and replacing the losses as they happen....so why would'nt I find it a little strange that just because you force march you have to forage even if in range of a depot. Not to mention that forced marchers can still use invasion supply.
 
It's just my opinion....hope I have'nt ruffled anyone's feathers.

[chuckj118]

In the case of force marching toward your supplies any losses represent the aforementioned deserters, fatique losses, and stragglers.  The dang game is complicated enough guys...can't we have one system cover both types of losses?  LoL. 

[zaquex]

well its not AH EiA so its a computer game so basicly you could and it could be quite transparant.... like you still have a chance of losses based on certain factors even if you pay for supply.

It all comes down to the philosphical question if this is a a computerized version of the EiA boardgame and therefore should be true to the original or if its a development of it and even more if added realism/logic is worth the work in this particular case.

Personally I think there is more important things to develop and improve at this moment like improved AI, IP multiplaying, more screen resolutions, zoomable maps, more intuitive/improved GUI better documentation in and out of game all of would improve the game value for the average player more.

[AusGamer]

But that was kinda one of my points, maybe not well made. There's always deserters, fatigue losses, stragglers whatever in any of the armies at this time but if you pay for supply they don't disappear. I consider that the game is auto replacing them by drawing recruits through the depots. It's only when you make a forage roll that replacements either don't turn up from the depot or losses from attrition are greater than replacements received. Now if you force march you have to forage even if in theory you could still be using depot supply and receiving replacements through them. Sure I accept that losses from deserters, fatigue, stragglers would be higher when forced marching but if you are drawing regular supply through a depot then losses from the effects of the forced march should be considerabely less than a full forage roll.

[jamo262]

ORIGINAL: lavisj

ORIGINAL: AusGamer

I don't like not being able to use depot supply after force marching. It does'nt make any sense to me. Especially when invasion supply can be used.

Well, actually it makes perfect sens. Force marching on the strategic sens, means that you are marching faster than your supply can follow. Armies of the time (and still now) have to bring supplies from their depots. Depots are nothing more than large stockpile of supplies, but they still have to be delivered to the troops by cartsm wagons, boats.... whatever. If your armie outmarches those, the troops have to rely on the land... foraging. The EiA system tries to provide a static mechanics for the dynaic process of supply.

I hope it makes more sens now.

I have considered the issue of supply/foraging and losses in this game.

The basic system is fine but perhaps in a few instances some chrome could be added.

What Ausgamer is perhaps referring to in his post above is forced marching within ones own territory like the first phase of the 1805 Ulm maneuver. This is a legitimate call and a piece of chrome could be added (many years down the track for this game will surely never die)that a corps forced marching within its territory that starts and ends its move on a friendly depot may pay for supply (extra costs)

Another supply problem that has been raised is that cavalry get off too lightly for foraging losses, especially in winter and in Spain.
A suggestion was made to me that perhaps for foraging losses above one (or two?) factors- one factor should be cavalry.

Related to this is the report that the invasion of Russia goes to easy. If the French sit on Moscow and don't move they average only two factor losses per corp per Winter turn. Not decisive. Perhaps this is remedied with winter movement restrictions.

[zaquex]

Related to this is the report that the invasion of Russia goes to easy. If the French sit on Moscow and don't move they average only two factor losses per corp per Winter turn. Not decisive. Perhaps this is remedied with winter movement restrictions.

I beleive that the foraging system regarding cavalry is reasonable as it is currently.

From a game perspective they still have two (or in the case of french corps one) extra movement point to forage for (moving around looking for food).

From a historic view its also not unreasonable as most cav was more highly trained, better payd, and probably also prioritized when it come to hand out the supplies the army still had.

Also from a game balance perspective, changing the amount of foraging casualties taken in cav would also risk changing the balance between the different powers in the game, they are very expensive and especially spain and prussia would have even more problems raising cav for there corps than they have now (unless GB is generous ofc)

[alexvand]

All of these responses have been about realism. But what about the affect on the game?
 
If you can force march and recieve depot supply when would you not force march? (Provided you've been smart enough to place depots correctly.)
 
You may as well just bump everyone's movement points and drop the force marching rules then in order to make the game simpler. If depot supply is available when force marching all the force marching rules become almost pointless for the prepared player.
 
Keep in mind that this is an abstract game. The force marching rules work well as is. It gives you a choice. Do I move slowly and preserve my force or do I hurry and take losses? If I get stuck deep in Russia and I need to hurry back to Paris I will end up taking lots of foraging losses. Was I smart enough to have militia in every single corp so that when I do take foraging losses it will be militia? Is that extra movement point needed now or not? All of these are good choices that enhance game play.
 
Don't break what works fine.

[Ted1066]

Sweet. Thanks for the response. I'll check that out next time I'm playing (which should be approx. 4.25 hours from now [:)]).

On the issue of supply, now I'm going from memory regarding the rules, but I thought you could ONLY use depot supply when force marching. I don't have the EiA rules handy to verify this, but I thought that was the case. As far as the other arguments go, there's no reason why the depot corps couldn't be notified to be in the right place even if a corps is force marching - we're talking about 30 days here and these guys aren't panzers [:'(]

[dauphan129]

I think Alex hit the nail on the head. It is part of the game mechanics. Realism is not a factor here.

If you need a reason then Force Marching causes more desertion as those that 'Can't hack it' take up with the local camp followers and disappear into the country side.

If your going to Force March alot then make sure you pad your counters with Militia. Then put Militia on your Depots in supply chain so you can refill the counters to make up for losses. Then you can justify the additional Man Power cost rationally as the additional cost to move your army so fast. Plus maybe it will keep those pesky cossacks out of your Brandy[:)]