Do small brigades benefit from the skirmisher effect?

[JohnReynolds]

The reason I ask is that I had two 2-star brigades of 2500 men each with nearly 100 firearms rating fighting two 3-star rebel brigades with about 650 men each. All four brigades were in deep forest. Instead of getting 4 to 1 casualties I was barely getting 2 to 1. Even when it got down to 4600 men to 600 men it didn't seem to get any better. And I had 3 brigades of cannon firing into one of their brigades! Long range but it still should have done something. Did someone go back in time and give them Kevlar vests?

[Wandering1]

What you're experiencing is the effects of deep forest; they give ridiculous amounts of protection, that's not negated by close proximity.

What you really should be doing with your overwhelming manpower in this case is either charging them or just walk up and melee them; as long as you knock them out of the trees by routing them through melee, you can find ways of making sure they don't come back in.

[Hitorishizuka]

The cannon will eventually push them out, even 100% forest cover only does so much to protect against grapeshot. Long range cannon fire doesn't do anything and as you saw infantry fire is relatively ineffective.

If there was nothing else in the area, just sending cavalry into them would have worked also.

I wouldn't send the infantry brigade in to melee because the AI gets melee ratings for free while your brigades probably don't have above 25.

[Andre Bolkonsky]

13 minutes ago, Hitorishizuka said:

The cannon will eventually push them out, even 100% forest cover only does so much to protect against grapeshot. Long range cannon fire doesn't do anything and as you saw infantry fire is relatively ineffective.

If there was nothing else in the area, just sending cavalry into them would have worked also.

I wouldn't send the infantry brigade in to melee because the AI gets melee ratings for free while your brigades probably don't have above 25.

I've noticed a sharp advantage to the AI's melee, I agree standing back and using superior firepower is better than wading in with cold steel. 

Usually, plenty of exceptions to that general rule. 

[JohnReynolds]

Well, I became frustrated (every reb unit was a 3 star and they were all in woods or fortified) so I turned all my divisions over to the AI and let it fight the battle (Antietam, Easy Union Campaign mode). Its strategy was to march up the center of the map charging anything that got in its way. My troops won with each corps taking between 30% and 40% casualties.

I then restarted and kept my units in the woods, out of range. I brought my cannon forward and killed about 300 rebs. Then I let time run out and took a draw. For 60 men lost I got 1 career point, 1 rep point, and bunches of money and recruits. Nearly all my officers were promoted for just marching their units a few hundred meters.

I play the historical battles on normal and don't have a problem. But the campaign mode is just too weird. I will miss the small battles but it just isn't fun or anywhere near realistic.

[Sir Texas Sir]

52 minutes ago, JohnReynolds said:

I play the historical battles on normal and don't have a problem. But the campaign mode is just too weird. I will miss the small battles but it just isn't fun or anywhere near realistic.

I been playing on easy for the first run and it seems I hit a wall.  On the Conf side I just took way to many lost and couldn't get troops to replace them.   Than on the Union side I'm loosing troops but all ways have enough to replace, it's the officers and money I keep runing out.  Just about every fight I get most my officers wounded or killed.  I can't stay back and let the cannons beat down as there is a timer I have to finish by and I had it run down to fast several times before I even get to the goal and start a fight.    If Confs are entrenched I'm sure to loose half my min even though I bring almost twice the cannons they have and use them to either kill other cannons of troops, but right now I'm doing Battery Fort side mission with three iron sides and 3 units of 24 cannons and we aren't putting  dent in the fort cannons or men.   I got now 1 hour left on the clock (out of two that all ready past and I have over 40% causality and only about 1 Confed killed for ever 2 of mine.  They are all level three troops and hallf the size of mine.  Most mine are level 1 and 2 (left the level 3's in main Corp).   It seems they are curb stomping me even when it's 500 to 2000 troops.  Even if I try to get close to melee them I get routed and they run half way across the map.  Leaving other units now out number and they get routed and run off.   For easy level I'm having hell of a time.  Just wanted to do every thing slow and easy to learn the game and the different battles and it seems to me this is more like a normal or hard level with how the AI act. I know at one point the Conf should have more vets than me in some battles, but it seems every unit is a 3 and they are 500-800 and they kill half my 2000 man units easly.   The only time they don't is Cav charge but I tend to loose most those by battle ends.

 

Just getting a bit frustrated at this point.  I got to Fredricksberg on Conf side and just stop playing so I tried union and not about to do the same if the AI scales like this on easy mode.

[Jamesk2]

54 minutes ago, Sir Texas Sir said:

I been playing on easy for the first run and it seems I hit a wall.  On the Conf side I just took way to many lost and couldn't get troops to replace them.   Than on the Union side I'm loosing troops but all ways have enough to replace, it's the officers and money I keep runing out.  Just about every fight I get most my officers wounded or killed. 

 

1 hour ago, JohnReynolds said:

Well, I became frustrated (every reb unit was a 3 star and they were all in woods or fortified) so I turned all my divisions over to the AI and let it fight the battle (Antietam, Easy Union Campaign mode). Its strategy was to march up the center of the map charging anything that got in its way. My troops won with each corps taking between 30% and 40% casualties.

I then restarted and kept my units in the woods, out of range. I brought my cannon forward and killed about 300 rebs. Then I let time run out and took a draw. For 60 men lost I got 1 career point, 1 rep point, and bunches of money and recruits. Nearly all my officers were promoted for just marching their units a few hundred meters.

I play the historical battles on normal and don't have a problem. But the campaign mode is just too weird. I will miss the small battles but it just isn't fun or anywhere near realistic.

I don't want to be rude but seriously if you guys are having problems even on Easy than you should take a long look at how you're playing the game. Go watch some YouTubers that play well (Koro from the forum is a good choice, although he may not be as optimal as can be).

[Don't Escrow Taxes]

Agreed, I would look at Koro's Youtube channel called Strategic Gaming, and especially pay attention to how he dresses his lines during battle, and how he has a plan at the start to minimize casualties while achieving the objective. 

[Koro]

52 minutes ago, Jamesk2 said:

 

I don't want to be rude but seriously if you guys are having problems even on Easy than you should take a long look at how you're playing the game. Go watch some YouTubers that play well (Koro from the forum is a good choice, although he may not be as optimal as can be).

My channel is here, either way

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqVM9uRxrMdB72ViZTrpOYw

[Wandering1]

31 minutes ago, Koro said:

My channel is here, either way

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqVM9uRxrMdB72ViZTrpOYw

No pressure.

[JohnReynolds]

I have won all my battles except for Antietam which I intentionally made a draw. I have watched a lot of video's and do understand flanking and preventing flanking. I tend to micro-manage my troops. I do things like having a unit fall back a short distance when charged so that units to the left and right can destroy the charging unit before it ever gets to my lines. I have over $300,000, an army of over 75000 and 45000 recruits that I haven't put into service and stock piles of weapons in my armory and most of my brigades are led by generals. The "problems" I am having is that I don't want to throw away a third of my army to destroy enemy troops that are only going come back in the next battle more experienced than ever. The problem is spending time in camp strategy to get the best army you can only to have the game tell you can only put 8 units on the field or jack up the enemy to negate your efforts. It is a very nice game but the campaign aspect of it needs more work or realism, in my opinion.

[GeneralPITA]

16 minutes ago, JohnReynolds said:

I have won all my battles except for Antietam which I intentionally made a draw. I have watched a lot of video's and do understand flanking and preventing flanking. I tend to micro-manage my troops. I do things like having a unit fall back a short distance when charged so that units to the left and right can destroy the charging unit before it ever gets to my lines. I have over $300,000, an army of over 75000 and 45000 recruits that I haven't put into service and stock piles of weapons in my armory and most of my brigades are led by generals. The "problems" I am having is that I don't want to throw away a third of my army to destroy enemy troops that are only going come back in the next battle more experienced than ever. The problem is spending time in camp strategy to get the best army you can only to have the game tell you can only put 8 units on the field or jack up the enemy to negate your efforts. It is a very nice game but the campaign aspect of it needs more work or realism, in my opinion.

Side missions need a cap for AI scaling, that's true. 

What difficulty are you playing? Sounds like you're on easy mode. Try hard mode, you won't have $300k and 45k recruits on standby. 

FYI just because you beat the enemy to a pulp in the last mission does not mean the AI will be more experienced in the next mission. Scaling mostly has to do with weapon types and your army size. 

Calling for a draw at Antietam isn't a bad idea, especially on legendary.

[Wandering1]

Well. There are a few finer points to the scaling, but those finer points matter less in the overall picture; unless you plan out exactly what brigade compositions you are going to have by knowing exactly what brigade compositions the enemy will field (because number of brigades will not change with difficulty, just how many troops/guns are in those brigades), considering the finer points at this juncture would be too much information.

[JohnReynolds]

Well, things got side-tracked.  All I really wanted to know was whether smaller brigades were harder to hit than large brigades to which there doesn't appear to be a definitive answer. And yes, I was playing on easy because I wanted to see what was the best way to build an army. I won Antietam from both sides playing on normal in historical mode and will probably stick to historical mode from now on.

[Wandering1]

To directly answer the question then, brigade size, by itself, has no relation to how hard they are to hit. As a consequence of larger brigade size, there can be less cover due to the brigade being spread out over differing terrain (half in trees, half outside, for example) and it will average. 

[MikeK]

It may be forgotten that what matters in the first instance in a firefight is not the number of men in a regiment or brigade but the number who can deliver fire effectively. In the attrition of a firefight, The smaller adversary may be worn away and his lines fatigued by lack of relief by from other regiments switched into the line.