Not knowing what lies beyond the ridgeline to either flank or perhaps behind the cavalry vedettes, couldn't option 2 to have resulted in coming under attack while ployed? But maybe I'm just too cautious here. It all depends on additional information of the whereabouts of friendly forces etc.
That's a good observation. An attack was a possibility, which is why the option of not advancing needed to be an option. The whereabouts of friendly forces would not be known by that commander as the "fog of war" in our play of the scenario means information on your own forces are as limited as information on the enemy. The risk of being attacked it there, for sure. And 2 is the answer the player came up with - there are many ways to give orders in a situation. Thanks for commenting!
Good point but my two cents is that the high ground would give your flanks some security and that you would need to secure the high ground at it's edge to deny that defensive terrain to the potentially superior enemy, you could also argue that once contact had been made with the cavalry they could disengage to screen those flanks. Above all if you're crossing a river as the spear tip my feeling would be you need to push to a strongpoint and hold it and rely on the troops coming up behind you lest you get pushed back into the river and then face the prospect of fighting back across the bridge!
the hard thing is to limit the options to just 3 and with little information as there are so many other options like pushing to 2 but also deploying vanguard infantry to support your cavalry and leaving a company in position one as a rearguard/blocking force/fall back position all whilst assessing the situation and attempting to co-ordinate with friendly units. so many variables but thats the hard part about games is one person cant do what takes literally dozens and hundreds of staff to do for hours and days straight. games still fun though haha
You are completely correct. There are so many variables that go into such a situation that its not possible to represent them all. By bounding the problem to three courses of action it helps focus the thinking. These are like chess problems - no perfect answer, just a framework to help apply the logic. Ultimately, you make your own calls in the game!
My issue with this scenario is while you stated Blue wasn't in contact with friendly brigades you didn't say one friendly brigades was so nearby. If I'd known that then risking option 2 would have had a lot more appeal. Instead I chose option 1. If alone Blue needs to get into battle formation to deal with a possibly nearby and stronger enemy force.
How capable are my company commanders? I don’t know this exact battle, but both the USA and CSA were experienced at this point with detaching skirmishers and having them act independently. If it was option, I’d detach skirmishers and have them screen my movements at 2 while the main force forms up behind them. As long as I don’t see cavalry retreating from the engagement I should be safe if the cavalry ran into a larger force due to the amount of firepower cab units had at this point in the war.
Hey, feel free to join us at the IKS and share a couple of your ideas and experience some of these games live then! We'd love to have your contributions!
Not knowing what lies beyond the ridgeline to either flank or perhaps behind the cavalry vedettes, couldn't option 2 to have resulted in coming under attack while ployed? But maybe I'm just too cautious here. It all depends on additional information of the whereabouts of friendly forces etc.
That's a good observation. An attack was a possibility, which is why the option of not advancing needed to be an option. The whereabouts of friendly forces would not be known by that commander as the "fog of war" in our play of the scenario means information on your own forces are as limited as information on the enemy. The risk of being attacked it there, for sure. And 2 is the answer the player came up with - there are many ways to give orders in a situation. Thanks for commenting!
Good point but my two cents is that the high ground would give your flanks some security and that you would need to secure the high ground at it's edge to deny that defensive terrain to the potentially superior enemy, you could also argue that once contact had been made with the cavalry they could disengage to screen those flanks. Above all if you're crossing a river as the spear tip my feeling would be you need to push to a strongpoint and hold it and rely on the troops coming up behind you lest you get pushed back into the river and then face the prospect of fighting back across the bridge!
@@SprikSprakValid points indeed.
Really interesting video - thank you!
Our pleasure.
the hard thing is to limit the options to just 3 and with little information as there are so many other options like pushing to 2 but also deploying vanguard infantry to support your cavalry and leaving a company in position one as a rearguard/blocking force/fall back position all whilst assessing the situation and attempting to co-ordinate with friendly units. so many variables but thats the hard part about games is one person cant do what takes literally dozens and hundreds of staff to do for hours and days straight. games still fun though haha
You are completely correct. There are so many variables that go into such a situation that its not possible to represent them all. By bounding the problem to three courses of action it helps focus the thinking. These are like chess problems - no perfect answer, just a framework to help apply the logic. Ultimately, you make your own calls in the game!
My issue with this scenario is while you stated Blue wasn't in contact with friendly brigades you didn't say one friendly brigades was so nearby. If I'd known that then risking option 2 would have had a lot more appeal. Instead I chose option 1. If alone Blue needs to get into battle formation to deal with a possibly nearby and stronger enemy force.
How capable are my company commanders?
I don’t know this exact battle, but both the USA and CSA were experienced at this point with detaching skirmishers and having them act independently. If it was option, I’d detach skirmishers and have them screen my movements at 2 while the main force forms up behind them. As long as I don’t see cavalry retreating from the engagement I should be safe if the cavalry ran into a larger force due to the amount of firepower cab units had at this point in the war.
I disagree. There are many other options that could have been taken here.. Better tactics even. One must think outside the box.
Give us a couple of ideas. We're learning from each other. Thanks for watching!
Hey, feel free to join us at the IKS and share a couple of your ideas and experience some of these games live then! We'd love to have your contributions!