Blackburn's Ford - Video AAR

[spelk]

I start my Video AAR of BAB, going through the Blackburn's Ford scenario on Sergeant difficulty.

http://sugarfreegamer.com/brother-again ... ar-part-1/

Took me 40 minutes to get to Turn 1, and there wasn't a shot fired... but next one, I think things will kick off!

[Gil R.]

I just watched the first one, which is great.

Something worth noting: I have just tweaked the OOB file so that in the future that supply unit will not be out-of-command when right next to your friend "Fighting Dick" Richardson. What happened is that the supply unit is directly attached to the division, which makes sense in the big Manassas scenario, but not here. So, I simply changed a '1' to a '2' in the hierarchy column and now that supply unit belongs to Richardson. (I hope that players will report any such weirdness, so that I can correct any remaining issues in the scenario files. Here I only realized the problem because you pointed out the oddity of a supply unit adjacent to a brigade commander being OOC.)

EDIT: I should add that this supply being OOC isn't a major problem -- it will move more slowly, but doesn't have far to move. So though a problem, it's not one that should be hurting anyone's ability to win as the USA (unless they are trying some crazily ambitious flanking march).

[zakblood]

crazily ambitious flanking march

that would be me then,

[:D][;)]

[spelk]

Gil, thanks for the clarification/fix on the out-of-command supply wagon.

I think I said that the white numbers when hovering over hexes to move to where the movement costs, but realised much later on that they're the movement points you'll have left if you move to that hex with the current unit. Important for leaving enough movement points to change formation.

I wanted to ask actually, is the best way to position artillery, to move them one hex at a time, and assess the line of sight and firing ranges gradually? Because I've been pushing them forward but have no idea whether a particular spot is better than another, until I get there, and usually its no!

[spelk]

ORIGINAL: zakblood

crazily ambitious flanking march

that would be me then,

[:D][;)]

zakblood, I've tried that, it doesn't end well

[Gil R.]

ORIGINAL: spelk

Gil, thanks for the clarification/fix on the out-of-command supply wagon.

I think I said that the white numbers when hovering over hexes to move to where the movement costs, but realised much later on that they're the movement points you'll have left if you move to that hex with the current unit. Important for leaving enough movement points to change formation.

I wanted to ask actually, is the best way to position artillery, to move them one hex at a time, and assess the line of sight and firing ranges gradually? Because I've been pushing them forward but have no idea whether a particular spot is better than another, until I get there, and usually its no!

Well, you should study the terrain, especially the heights and vegetation. Even if the hex you plan to move to is open, if it has "tall grass" or one of the woods hexes between it and the enemy then line-of-sight will be blocked. Remaining on a height will usually be better in part for that reason, since from a hill one can fire over must LOS-blocking vegetation. HOWEVER, even from a hill one can't fire over lots of trees, on the assumption that some trees would be tall enough to block LOS as well. So "forest" will neutralize the hilltop advantage somewhat.

In your video you did make a mistake moving that battery one hex too far, since not only did you lose LOS, but the other advantage to heights is that they let artillery fire a bit farther -- so by staying up on the hill you might have been one hex farther from the enemy, but that would not have meant that you would be much less effective at targeting the enemy.

The scenario/map are deliberately designed so that artillery cannot be brought close in for an attack, since historically they were firing from far away. So the frustration you and others might feel at being able to get the artillery only so far and to do just a little damage is quite realistic -- the fighting at Blackburn's Ford did not involve artillery set up in a position from which the enemy could be mowed down in open terrain.

[ericbabe]

Great video! Thank you.

One small note: victory hexes modify the morale breaking point during a game. If you hold a majority of victory hexes, then you get a small bonus to your army's morale collapse value.

[Gil R.]

I hope no one thinks it narcissistic of us that Eric and I both watched a 40-min. online AAR about our game.

[Gil R.]

Oh, FYI, I know I wrote something about this somewhere in the forum yesterday, but should make sure you (= Spelk) know: my suspicion that I'd made a data-file error in this scenario is regrettably correct, and as a result when the USA reinforcements show up later on the division commander will be missing, and there might be another issue with your command structure. I've already fixed this -- a very easy fix taking all of two minutes -- but that won't be available until 1.05. The scenario is still perfectly playable, as is the other Blackburn's Ford scenario, but c&c will be a bit more of an issue.

The annoying thing is that this was discovered -- by Erik Rutins himself -- late in pre-release testing, but the symptoms he was describing were masked by another issue, so I misdiagnosed and left it untreated.

[spelk]

Gil, I am honoured to have the devs of the game peruse over me playing the game... and then put up with me babbling all sorts of nonsense about my imaginations over your rules

Thank you for the comments above, I hope I can do this play through justice and come away with the win. I've played the scenario about 5 times now, but most of those where on Lt. Col difficulty, and I was positively spanked. My only win was on Sergeant difficulty - hence the same settings on this videoed playthrough. But my main intention is not to necessarily win, and prove my worth, but to showcase the game, its mechanics, and the thrill of the battle underpinned by the decision process I go through to help newcomers to the title see the depths of play and interesting choices available.

As a limey, I can't really bring a massive amount of history to the proceedings because most of my study of the ACW has been down to playing various games, rather than any serious effort, or schooling. I do get very attached to units on the battlefield as they "do my bidding" and sometimes display heroics worthy of admiration. I guess this is where the "magic" of such a game comes from, being able to project your imagination of the conflict and the people involved onto mere chits/counters on a map, with numbers, arrows and smoke denoting the battle.

Kudos to you and Eric for pulling together such a compelling game.

[spelk]

ORIGINAL: Gil R.
Oh, FYI, I know I wrote something about this somewhere in the forum yesterday, but should make sure you (= Spelk) know: my suspicion that I'd made a data-file error in this scenario is regrettably correct, and as a result when the USA reinforcements show up later on the division commander will be missing, and there might be another issue with your command structure. I've already fixed this -- a very easy fix taking all of two minutes -- but that won't be available until 1.05. The scenario is still perfectly playable, as is the other Blackburn's Ford scenario, but c&c will be a bit more of an issue.

I think I noticed this in my previous playthroughs, but I don't think it will be much of an issue during this run-through, I'll be too busy trying to keep my regiments from routing to notice the odd OOB omission. I still consider myself a bit of a novice to the game, so I doubt it will affect my overall strategy in any subtle way.. my main thrust will be a line of attack pushing slowly forward, with hopefully some arty coverage (probably move the initial battery back one hex to get more coverage).

Something I have to keep in mind, is that there is a frontage penalty of some sort (50%?) for regiments over 350-400 strength/men? So splitting up the larger units is worth doing.

[spelk]

Second part is now up! It's another 40 minutes again, but at least theres some action this time!

http://sugarfreegamer.com/brother-against-brother-video-aar-part-2/

[nicwb]

Thanks Spelk,

I enjoyed that and found it helpful as it helped me with a few of the game features I hadn't picked up on yet.

I agree with you about the zoom out during the combat resolution phase. it's good to see the developers turned it into an option rather than a set feature so quickly.

[spelk]

ORIGINAL: nicwb
Thanks Spelk,
I enjoyed that and found it helpful as it helped me with a few of the game features I hadn't picked up on yet.

Thanks for the kind words nicwb, I hope what I was spouting on about was correct and not just an assumption I'd made.

Hopefully get another vid done this week some time.

[Gil R.]

I watched the second one last night. Glad you got your artillery going!

[nicwb]

Your welcome Spelk.

I always think the best way to display a game is either to play it or watch a decent AAR.

[zakblood]

thanks, looks good and plays great[:D][;)]

[oldspec4]

ORIGINAL: zakblood

thanks, looks good and plays great[:D][;)]

+1..a very helpful AAR on a great game.

[AlessandroD]

Very good AAR, thanks [:)]