why forces lose battles

From the legendary team at 2 by 3 Games comes a new grand strategy masterpiece: Gary Grigsby’s War Between the States. Taking gamers back to the American Civil War, this innovative grand strategy game allows players to experience the trials and tribulations of the role of commander-in-chief for either side. Historically accurate, detailed and finely balanced for realistic gameplay, War Between the States is also easy to play and does not take months to finish.

Moderators: Joel Billings, PyleDriver

Post Reply
User avatar
Treefrog
Posts: 702
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2004 3:11 am

why forces lose battles

Post by Treefrog »

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."
User avatar
radar
Posts: 337
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 7:58 pm
Location: Dayton, Ohio

RE: why forces lose battles

Post by radar »

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
User avatar
lparkh
Posts: 426
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2004 5:38 pm

RE: why forces lose battles

Post by lparkh »

Treefrog is one of the reasons this is a good game :-) I'd search on his other posts for insights.
DTX111
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2019 7:25 pm

RE: why forces lose battles

Post by DTX111 »

I agree. If Treefrog is still reading this forum in 2019, I thank him greatly. I had had the game on my shelf for a while (it had been on another PC that died). His posts were invaluable in getting me started with the game. I was very happy it works on Windows 10 without problems.
User avatar
Treefrog
Posts: 702
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2004 3:11 am

RE: why forces lose battles

Post by Treefrog »

you are all too kind.

i fear the best explanations of the game have long disappeared from the forum pages

are there archives someplace?
"L'audace, l'audace, toujours l'audace."
Post Reply

Return to “Gary Grigsby's War Between the States”