Gmoney7447
-
Posts
26 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Gmoney7447
-
-
5 hours ago, dutmistrz said:
I agree, just let know how many brigades you bring in the battle and how many men they have in average.
2nd Bull Run (played on BG difficulty), I suppose on MG it's much harder, was quite easy. Just know that 1st attacks are always north along Sudley Ford, I kept my best shooters there (Stonewall Brigade - always naming my most experienced brigade as CSA
) along with a couple of other rifle (not musket!) brigades held the ground.
2nd day was just a mop-up, flanking manuever from the right flank units did the job.
By throwing bodies into bayonets I presume that charges are being troublesome, remeber to use the M42, Palmetto or Farmer for the melee and always try to keep a reserve brigade (I use 1 brigade for 3-4 brigades as a backup) or arty near (best both) to prevail the charges without breaking the line (AI seldomly coordinates the charges properly, although got better at that after recent patches).
Always try to keep the line , use skirmirshers and terrain and it will turn out great
Unless you brought 25 500-1000 men infantry brigades to the battle, there is little for that.
I think it may be a corps composition issue indeed, the more I'm looking forward to Gmoney7447 reply
I tried to flank them from the side and it worked for a litte bit but eventually led to nothing but me rushing back to the woods to defend the objective. And I got slaughtered there too. They just have so many numbers. 58000 on the field compared to my one corp of
15,779 inf
900 artiller
1487 Calvary
it won't let my insert a picture
-
I'm having so much difficulty beating this battle without attrocious losses. Day 2 just seems impossible, I'm outnumbered 2 to 1 before the reinforcements and the union just throws their bodies into bayonets until they eventually push through. Any tips??
-
23 hours ago, The Soldier said:
Not so much a let-down as an avoidance of massive casualties for yourself. If you really do want a 3-day slugfest assaulting Union fortifications, just don't capture Cemetery Hill and you'll have one heck of a time trying to capture Culp's Hill and Little Round Top afterwards.
Whenever I did Gettysburg day 2 I took the hills with no problem I just couldn't hold them, the causality ratio had to be over 1:4 yet they just flooded me with troops and I lost the battle
-
I just gotta say how realistic this feels, I've been playing this game for a while and just started another confederacy campaign. It always makes me feel awful sending my my green corps into a mission alone, or having them have to hold a flank all by themselves in major battles, it hurts to see the lines of bodies in the grown but how oh so proud it makes me to see just as many still standing tall. It always pains me to ever have to sacrifice men for the greater good and I always play epic music during their charge or valiant stands, and then sad music to honor them. This game is amazing
-
2
-
-
3 hours ago, talonx4 said:
I am afraid your history is a bit hazy on this one. You said "Their "justification" was "states rights" which basically meant I want to own another human being that does all the work for me and receives no benefit."
Civil war started on Apr 12, 1861. The emancipation proclamation did not occur until January 1, 1863. Unfortunately for you, "their justification" was not to "own another human being".
You said "Now I do understand why they wanted to secede". While obviously you do not.
You said "I love America with all my heart". All confederate soldiers would have agreed with you. And that is why they succeeded.
While the reasons of war exceed far beyond what can be explained here, I will give you one of the most basic ones. Taxes. Increase in taxes on the south and possibly unjustly so pushed many Americans to ask the question "did we not already fight a war against taxation without representation. My father and grand father didn't fight and die in the revolutionary war so that we could be taxed into oblivion." Many on the confederacy saw themselves as the patriots who loved their country.
Keep in mind that there are always two sides to every argument, and very rarely is it ever a cut line of good vs evil.
The thing is they did have much representation, everybody received those taxes, yet it was the south who went against their brothers and constitution. Are you trying to justify them?
-
4 hours ago, Albert Sidney Johnston said:
Alright, I knew this would happen eventually. I do my best to stay out of these sorts of arguments, but I suppose I shall finally make an exception. I shall hold myself to this single post, then unfollow the thread.
Fighting an entire war just to keep slavery.... riiiiiiiiiight...
The absurdity of this propaganda comes when you understand that between seventy to eighty percent of Confederate soldiers and sailors were not slave owners! In fact, even of the minority that were slave owners, only less then three percent of the southern population could be qualified as "aristocratic", meaning the rest had five or fewer slaves, and had to work alongside them in the fields to make a living.
Not only the common soldiers, but the majority of The South's most famous generals weren't slave owners. A partial list includes General Robert E Lee the southern high commander, General Joseph Johnston the famous commander of the western theater, the energetic young "Last Cavalier" General JEB Stuart, and the hero that saved the Southern army at Sharpsburg, General A.P. Hill.
Before we go any further, let's make sure we clearly understand the full extent of Southern sacrifice. To put it into a modern context, let's compare the casualties to those of World War II. During the Second World War, The United States of America lost over three hundred thousand military personnel, a devastating tragedy to our nation.
Here's the kicker. If America lost personnel in World War II at the same rate (per capata) as The Confederate States of America did during The War of Southern Independence, there wouldn't have been three hundred thousand casualties. There would have been six million.
Six million. Mull those numbers over for a few moments.
The War of Southern Independence was no walk in the park. It was one of the bloodiest, deadliest, most terrible conflicts in American history. These soldiers were going through hell.
So Southern soldiers and sailors, the vast majority of whom didn't even own slaves, overseen on both eastern and western theaters high commanders who hated slavery, marched against a numerically superior and better equipped force, and endured four long and deadly years of hardships... all in order for a few rich men to keep their slaves? Hmmmmmmmm... To quote Patrick Henry when he refused to come to the Constitutional Convention, "I smell a rat!"
No, somehow I don't think that the men of The South would have thrown away everything they'd ever owned and loved, and march away with The Army of Northern Virginia just to defend a luxury for a handful of aristocrats. So what was the south fighting for?
George Washington Bolton of the Twelfth Louisiana Volunteer Infantry CSA, sent this encouragement in a letter to his family back home:
"You seem to be in low spirits and fearful we will not gain our independence. So long as there is an arm to raise in defense of Southern liberties, there is still hope. We must prove ourselves worthy of establishing an independent Government."
Ah. Here I believe we have hit the nail on the head. This is just one of hundreds of letters home in which soldiers of The Confederacy explain exactly what it is they're fighting for. And despite what absurd victor's propaganda has told you, it wasn't some evil vendetta against blacks.
They fought for the very same principles their forefathers had championed over the green fields of Lexington and the far away highlands of Scotland - the right of self-government.
While I agree that most confederate soldiers didn't have slaves (in above post) they were fighting against their government, their constitution. The same constitution that men gave their lives for. The same one that exist today that we all know and love. I am not saying the confederate troops didn't sacrifice anything and I do think we should teach our youth about the conflict, but never praise them, praise their spirit but not their cause.
-
10 minutes ago, Major Grigg said:
This brings up a good point. If you were alive then, which side would you go with? It's something I've thought about before.
Something to remember is that the Union was still a new thing in some ways. A lot of people's parents grew up before the US gained its independence, so they may have viewed the country differently than we do.
I'm all in for a smaller federal government, so I can see why the South felt threatened by a group of people they had absolutely nothing in common with. Our fathers and grandfathers brought South Carolina into this Union, why can't we take it out? I can see the logic.
However, I would like to think that I would side with good of the country as a whole.
I would definitely fight for the Union. I love America with all my heart and in my opinion I think the south had no (actual) justification for trying to secede. Their "justification" was "states rights" which basically meant I want to own another human being that does all the work for me and receives no benefit. Now I do understand why they wanted to secede, it's how they profited, and I do know most confederate soldiers didn't own slaves, but I just could not support succession.
-
1
-
-
I'm all for remembering our history but what I don't like is many southerners praising the CSA or thinking their actions were justified. Monuments are meant for praising someone. We should teach the civil war in the classroom not praise men who went against their own country, fought their own brothers for not a single good reason. But yes happy Fourth
-
1
-
-
52 minutes ago, Albert Sidney Johnston said:
South Seminary Ridge? Interesting.
I tried Gettysburg three times. The two times, I tried a strategy much like you described. The problem was that the Union would always hunker down in the heavy woods of Oak Ridge, and were almost impossible to dislodge. By the time I did, the day was almost over, and I had no time to take Cemetery Ridge.
On the third time, I tried a new strategy: I took Oak Ridge first, and blew away advancing Union soldiers from the heavy woods. Then, I sent a division to the southwest to take McPherson's ridge, which was lightly defended. From there, I advanced south from Oak Ridge, and attacked the Union defenders at Seminary Ridge, using the division I had sent to McPherson's ridge to flank them hard. Inflicting heavy casualties, I sent them packing across the creek into Gettysburg itself. With my reinforcements from the northeast, I swept down and hit their right flank, while still pressing hard from the north and west. I took Cemetery Ridge with time to spare, and only a handful of casualties.
This has been the most effective strategy for me, but every game is different.
I tried this but even after sprinting my units to exhaustion I never have the time to take cemetery hill
-
I know I need to finish Gettysburg as the CSA on day one due to my army being outnumbered vastly but I can't seem to even get past the first skirmishers with taking heavy losses. Any tips?
-
The results
-
Any tips going into Chancellorsville as the CSA? Btw I only have around 35K troops but they're all elites. I can trust every one of them to do any task I give them.
-
I just finished my usual workout routine and I thought to myself how in shape were the men on both sides of the civil war? I don't know much about the civil war to be honest just the basics
-
7 minutes ago, i64man said:
I was in the Army for a little bit of time (22 years) and what I have been doing is naming the units for Bdes I was assigned through my career like the 173rd Inf, 325th Regiment, etc.
Alright thanks for the idea. And for your service.
-
I'm playing as the CSA and from Texas so I've just been naming my brigades after cities in Texas and the south but that's boring so do any of y'all have any cool names or name ideas I could use?
-
49 minutes ago, The Soldier said:
No, the price of Veterans is determined by the experience of the unit (both based on the veterancy level as well as the XP to the next)
Ok thank you, I probably should've guessed this ?
-
I was wondering, when you have a brigade with 2 stars and buy veterans for it is it the same price as buying veterans for a 1 star? I'm assuming not but would like clarification.
-
I'm going into the same battle with barely 35 thousand men ?
-
A revolutionary war maybe? The brits will obviously have more supplies but the Americans have greater morale? And if you mess up as America you get less French support?
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, CSX4451 said:
Like to see a video of how that battle played out!!!! You better come command my troops at the Washington battle.
Thanks man. I'm lucky the AI is dumb. I just send my skirmishers in front of my lines and 3 units just charge and they got shot to hell every time. It was great ?
-
5 hours ago, A. P. Hill said:
Based on your screenshot, I'd have to say ...
It doesn't appear that you messed up.
Carry on.
But I have such a little army and from what I hear it's gonna be impossible for me in the future
-
5 hours ago, Major Grigg said:
Wow. Inflicting almost 80% casualties is cool!
Is it even worth it to continue the campaign?
-
Results of Fredericksburg
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Col_Kelly said:
Yes, three times yes. What difficulty are you on ?
The medium difficulty. I wen into Antietam with 60K but I thought the victory would be worth the losses. I now see they weren't
) along with a couple of other rifle (not musket!) brigades held the ground.
2nd Battle of Bull Run
in General Discussions
Posted · Edited by Gmoney7447
Misspell
I won the battle with 5300 losses to their 17000. Thank you all for the help