Wars in America: A 'how-to' AAR

[loki100]

That the sortie coordinated with a relief force would lead to the besieged losing the fort and fleeing the region comes as a surprise. One might have thought they'd just be forced back in with lower morale. Is it always this way if you lose a battle involving a sortie order?

I suppose that if you have a small garrison, you don't take the risk of a sortie and just let the relief force do its work, and that the alternative for a large army in the fort is to do as you discussed earlier - leave a garrison and then drag the rest out into the region in their own attack, not a sortie coordinated with a relief army?

Not sure if it always is ... as I now know if you just want to fight a besieging force with your garrison simply put the latter into the province outside the fort. In this case, my guess is that my force merged into one (as far as the game engine goes) so when the relief force fell back it took the garrison with it - if so then that is something to watch out for. I think the AGEOD game engine is reasonably logical in its handling of this mechanic its just not intuitive but it seems that having in effect 2 spaces (fort/city etc and countryside) in the same game space forces some degree of difficulty on the game engine.

Now in this case I got precisely the outcome I wanted. After the Savannah disaster I become very unkeen to have a force under siege with no supply wagons, as it is I have the English (oddly as it may appear) exactly where I want them. Of course the normal situation would have been a 2-3 battalion garrison and a decent sized force arriving to relieve them, but I'm still not really getting my garrisons properly calibrated (& its a lot harder in WiA than RoP where garrisons beyond a notional force are pretty useless)

[Narwhal]

That the sortie coordinated with a relief force would lead to the besieged losing the fort and fleeing the region comes as a surprise. One might have thought they'd just be forced back in with lower morale. Is it always this way if you lose a battle involving a sortie order?

In most of the cases, if you lose, both forces will go back where they come from (the garrison in the structure, the relieving force out of the province). Sometimes, the garrison finishes out of the structure - it is quite rare, though. Remember that the game has no way to know if you sortie because you want to chase the enemy army, or if you sortie because you want to flee away.
In some cases (see the RoP AAR), the relieving force ends up IN the structure. Which is pretty bad. In one case (1812 War against the poor Baris) out of douzains of situations, I ended up with the relieving force IN the structure (with full supply) and the garrison outside the structure. Extremely unlikely - so probably a sort of bug.

[Sir Garnet]

Thank you for the explanation and information. I wonder if PON has the same bug/erratic result.

[morningSIDEr]

Very interesting stuff. Action packed and rather tense, very much enjoying the 'Where is Montcalm?'. The next few turns promise to be eventful too, I'm looking forward to reading them.

[lodilefty]

It's hard to diagnose "bug vs WAD" without an example save game.
We have speent many hours improving sieges, routs, etc.

See http://www.ageod.net/agewiki/Retreat_and_Routing

[lodilefty]

Also see: http://www.ageod.net/agewiki/Sieges_and_breaches

[Narwhal]

July1759 – Montcalm was completely not in Trois-Rivières




Disastrous news for the English cause. Montcalm was not in Trois-Rivières. Oh boy, no he was not. He was hiding between Frontenac and Montréal, a position I would never have thought Loki100 would risk.

And Montcalm rushed on Frontenac and met my army :



This battle is not TOO bad. Forbes and his men retreated to the North. But then Montcalm assaulted the Fort, and Forbes decided to join the battle (which is not systemic and is MORE likely the higher the strategic rating). And this was… traumatic :



My army is mostly wiped out. Here is what is left :



Remember, the expedition was 4500 men strong…
In addition to this, half of my bateaux were captured (they headed to Frontenac to build a depot).
[This event is in my opinion the most relevant explanation for the English revenge at Mers-el-Kebir, 200 years later].


This changes the strategic situation a lot, since I have no more army to take Frontenac, and the French now have a fleet to transport a force to the South.

At least, I know that Montcalm is in no position to protect Montréal. Consequently, after he had wiped out the last French forts on the Champlain (only one of which had a port), Murray will now move on Montréal :





He has no supply, but supplies are on the way.

Similarly, I can prepare a landing on Quebec… all the more since last turn my transport fleet is ready (I had underestimated the “transport capacity” I would receive this turn because I “forget” ships-of-the-line have transport capacity).



I am a bit worried, though, because it is INCREDIBLY late for an attempt on Quebec… It will take 1 or more probably 2 turns to reach the destination, and by November I will have to pack out since the winter will freeze the Saint Laurent.

Finally, I am preparing for an assault on Détroit :



And the savages are trying once again to burn Savannah :

[Stuyvesant]

Seeing the Frontenac 'incident' from your side only makes it more painful, not less. That was a massacre... But even so, you're always looking to take to the offensive. Good show of spirit, that.

[Narwhal]

August 1759 – Decisive skirmish at Fort Saint Frédérick

The siege of Montréal starts without trouble :



Unfortunately, a party of Indians murder one of my gallant officers while he was, er, getting isolated from the group :

Edit : It is "caught", not "called back" on the caption.

This happens a bit too much to be just luck. [Note only the Indians committed, the rest of the French force is inside Montréal]

But now I am sieging Montréal, I just have to wait for the supplies, right ?

Well, nope.

The Indians attack Fort Saint Frederick, where my supplies were :



Once again, they deliberately target my officers ; one is killed, the other one wounded.
But more importantly, they destroyed the supplies (which were moving, so OUTSIDE the structure) I had earmarked for the siege of Montréal.
[Edit : Not all the supply were destroyed - 6 elements fled to Fort Carillon but no way to send them in time now, even though I tried (with an escort) :]



Consequently, instead of taking Montréal, I will have to retreat quickly
Consequently, Montcalm will be able to reach Montréal and keep his army feed
Consequently, Montcalm will be able to defend Quebec and Montréal in 1760
Consequently, it will take me ages to take those.

This simple battle made the war last at least 2 more years !

By the way :



The rest is less interesting :

Détroit falls :



Quite a lot of losses in the battle, though, but not I can free “Roger’s rangers” for a more deserving front.



Surprisingly, I had the time to land on Quebec, but the defenses are too strong for assault (I hoped Loki100 would have moved some to protect Montréal) :



And the survivors of Fort Frontenac splited up and are retreating :



Finally, in the South, the situation is getting serious :



I am sending a fleet to help, and my “useless” officer Lytelton will lead the garrison of Savannah. My fleet is quite small, so I am not quite sure I can win (cautious posture, and will go to a port if it does not meet the French). Another fleet from the North is detached, but it won’t arrive before a couple months.

[Narwhal]

[From your August 1759 post]


A bit of a wierd battle. Obviously a column arrives in St Frederick just as I attack, so I get badly beaten - but if you note Narwhal lost some elements in retreat. So my guess is he must have had relatively cautious orders and broke off despite the victory.

As you can see, what you consider "badly beaten" is in fact is clear-cut victory for you in my opinion. Didn't you captured some supply wagons ?
The only column was a supply wagons column

[loki100]

As you can see, what you consider "badly beaten" is in fact is clear-cut victory for you in my opinion. Didn't you captured some supply wagons ?
The only column was a supply wagons column

No, thats why I was confused when you said it had been pretty successful for me, as you can see I lost a lot of couriers and indians in retreating. I wonder if thats why the wagons weren't actually captured as I fell back after the battle? In which case ... they may still be there, waiting for someone to discover them (pretty spooky early version of Fargo if you ask me)

sorry about all your officers ... they are just incredibly careless, you'd think by now they'd have learnt their lessons too.

[Narwhal]

I am going to check if they have no retreated to say Fort Ticoderoga and I missed them (likely), or if they have been destroyed in retreat AFTER being captured by the Indians, in which case, possibly, they are destroyed but do not appear in your log (very unlikely - this bug does probably not exist).

In any case, I won't be able to supply my army in Montréal, and this is critical. Makes this battle a strategic victory for you, but a tactital defeat.

[loki100]

I am going to check if they have no retreated to say Fort Ticoderoga and I missed them (likely), or if they have been destroyed in retreat AFTER being captured by the Indians, in which case, possibly, they are destroyed but do not appear in your log (very unlikely - this bug does probably not exist).

In any case, I won't be able to supply my army in Montréal, and this is critical. Makes this battle a strategic victory for you, but a tactital defeat.

yep ... to be fair the whole idea was to muck up your communication lines (I wanted Fort St Frederic to interdict your retreat route back from Mont Royal) so in that sense it paid off. Also explains your obsession in 1760 with stealing my food

[Narwhal]

yep ... to be fair the whole idea was to muck up your communication lines (I wanted Fort St Frederic to interdict your retreat route back from Mont Royal) so in that sense it paid off. Also explains your obsession in 1760 with stealing my food

Oh boy. That was outstanding. One of the coup I was the proudest of the game. Without that, I don't think I would have had a decisive victory, only a victory by points !

[ANO1453]

Nice victories loki!

[Narwhal]

No, thats why I was confused when you said it had been pretty successful for me, as you can see I lost a lot of couriers and indians in retreating. I wonder if thats why the wagons weren't actually captured as I fell back after the battle? In which case ... they may still be there, waiting for someone to discover them (pretty spooky early version of Fargo if you ask me)

sorry about all your officers ... they are just incredibly careless, you'd think by now they'd have learnt their lessons too.

OK, found them - the supply wagons. They had fled to Carillon where I merged them with some units to be sent back to Saint Frederick. For some reason I could not see them when I did my AAR. AAR edited.

[Narwhal]

September 1759 – France threatening on the Ontario

The French are on the offensive. After their crushing victory at Frontenac and suspecting I have poor defense on the other side of the Ontario, the French try to use their boats (including MY boats) to their advantage :



Their first landing on Depot Niagara is a failure, though :



Still, their second group of Bateaux is more threatening, even though I am confident my garrison can stop them.

In Montréal, I have to leave the siege, as my supply situation is dire :



Montcalm has been seen moving North to Montréal, but even though I believe I could stop him there won’t be a battle : my supply situation is much too short as I have only one turn left. I will send my force South to Saint Frederick and join up with the supply wagons to “hold” until there.

I am still sieging Québec, but no progress…



Finally, in the South, Savannah has SURRENDERED !



As you can see, I started the previous turn to move my fleet toward Savannah, and they should land next turn. I believe I am stronger than their force, but not enough to assault. On the other hand, I cannot blockade as long as the enemy fleet is there.

Also - Lyttelton was wounded while surrendering.... Suspicious.

My fleet wisely refused to battle and are now refitting in Charleston :

[loki100]

ah thats how you slipped past me on the way from Augusta to Savannah ... you hid in the river whille I marched up the road - did wonder how you'd managed to slip around my force

I'd suggest that 'Humph' Lyttleton (only some one who is English and listened to Radio 4 will get that reference) may have tried to shoot himself out of shame ... & missed?

[Stuyvesant]

Nice back-and-forth in the AAR (duelling AARs, perhaps?). Looks like loki100 scored a big victory with Montcalm, but that Narwhal simply has too many forces and is too aggressive to let it bother him for long.

[Narwhal]

Nice back-and-forth in the AAR (duelling AARs, perhaps?). Looks like loki100 scored a big victory with Montcalm, but that Narwhal simply has too many forces and is too aggressive to let it bother him for long.

Not so much. Due to the fact that I thought I had to keep large defenses on the Ontario, and the fact that Loki100 preserved almost 100% of his main armies, we final campaign in Canada will be at circa a 1:1 ratio (or maybe 1:1,2 in my favor).