Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

why forces lose battles

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Gary Grigsby's War Between the States >> why forces lose battles Page: [1]
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
why forces lose battles - 12/30/2011 9:20:36 PM   

Posts: 522
Joined: 4/7/2004
Status: offline
Forces lose battles because of a combination (1) they didn't have enough committed, undamaged survivors (for victory calculation), and (2) they didn't damage enough of the enemy (to make them unavailable for victory determination).

The former is addressed by the leadership/commitment rules and victory determination rules. The reason the CSA is typically so successful throughout the game is that in the battles they chose to fight they have sufficient quality leadership (infantry rating 3 or 4 of corps and army commanders) that all or almost all of their troops fight !! The USA can achieve this too, but typically not until fall '62 and later. Let's face it, the USA is swimming in infantry capability 2 generals.

Not doing enough damage is the other problem. Obviously of first important is getting one's troop committed (per above). This is why Lil Mac at 2-2-3 is generally better to have than Halleck at 2-3-2 or McDowell at 2-2-2. Remember, they can't shoot if they're not in the battle.

Once the troops are committed, the important thing is how effectively they shoot!! Read the modifiers in the rule book. With CSC, each unit has a division commander, a corps commander and possibly and AC adding to both the commitment and attack/defense ratings.

An important assessment tool available to both players through the replay button is the individual die rolls of the firing (attacking/defending) unit. When your die roll is consistently modified to -6, you should figure out why. You'll seldom get hits with
a -6 modifier, so you need to notice, identify and fix the problem.

This game system is not so much unfathomable as complex.

Have fun !!


"L'audace, l'audace, toujours l'audace."
Post #: 1
RE: why forces lose battles - 12/31/2011 1:51:26 AM   

Posts: 334
Joined: 11/17/2007
From: High Point, North Carolina
Status: offline
Treefrog, I really appreciate the musings and explanations on WBTS you've posted in recent days. It's very timely for me since I just finsihed reading the manual after buying the game last week and now I'm ready for the trainng videos.

As you say, the game is complex, but I'm looking forward to starting a game soon.


USS Terry (DD-513) — Battle of the Atlantic, Solomon and Marianas Islands campaigns and the Battle of Iwo Jima

(in reply to Treefrog)
Post #: 2
RE: why forces lose battles - 12/31/2011 9:15:21 PM   

Posts: 424
Joined: 7/25/2004
Status: offline
Treefrog is one of the reasons this is a good game :-) I'd search on his other posts for insights.

(in reply to radar)
Post #: 3
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Gary Grigsby's War Between the States >> why forces lose battles Page: [1]
Jump to:

New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI