• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Long time I had not read this AAR, but I just caught back. Reading through it, I remember how complex it is to judge, due to the number of front and the low lethality of combat, who has an advantage and who has not. It boils down to positionning, but how good your positionning is depends on what your opponent positionning is, so from an external viewer point of view (and often, for the player as well) it is hard to know who has an advantage !

This is compounded in WiA by the fact that there are 3 or 4 fronts, each independant, and you can win in one and lose in another, and also by the lack of frontline.

Hard to see, but in seems that in New England you commit a disproportionnate amount of force for little decisive result (except maybe if you cut your supply), but on the other hand you are doing well in the South.

I find out that committing before its opponent in the Mohawk Valley pays off tremendously - so that's good moves from you : both players start with "supply points" along a almost unique road (even though the English can bypass some of it through the lakes), the first one to take the other player supply points will force him to take an awful amount of time and force to "catch back" in the area.
It is even better for the British because taking this area is quite definitive (little rebel spawn there) and once the area is cleared, Albany is easy to take and thus the whole Canadian forces can be redeployed. Plus the Americans often deploy their most elite non-Regular forces there :)

Also, the area between New York and Petersburg is quite rich in VP and often very lightly defended. A small English force can really seize most of it, but unfortunately it seems you did not commit much there.


this is a good scenario for SP it seems. Boston was bad news, but maybe a blessing in disguise, pull that army out by sea and reinforce the south?

If the Americans take your Indian villages then they will starve when they are forced (by event) back there in the winter ... it may come as no surprise if I mention that is what Narwhal did

Think the focus on New York is a sound plan given how things have worked out so far.

I have no recollection of this, your honor :)
 
Merrick Chance' said:
Yeah, in closing out the CA into New England you've removed America's spatial advantage. So long as you concentrate in Manhattan you can starve Washington out in Connecticut; if they concentrate on the other side of the Hudson that just gives you more and mroe space to play in.

I've removed her spatial advantage...now to try to make it pay off...how hard could it be?

Narwhal said:
Long time I had not read this AAR, but I just caught back. Reading through it, I remember how complex it is to judge, due to the number of front and the low lethality of combat, who has an advantage and who has not. It boils down to positionning, but how good your positionning is depends on what your opponent positionning is, so from an external viewer point of view (and often, for the player as well) it is hard to know who has an advantage !

This is compounded in WiA by the fact that there are 3 or 4 fronts, each independant, and you can win in one and lose in another, and also by the lack of frontline.

Hard to see, but in seems that in New England you commit a disproportionnate amount of force for little decisive result (except maybe if you cut your supply), but on the other hand you are doing well in the South.

I find out that committing before its opponent in the Mohawk Valley pays off tremendously - so that's good moves from you : both players start with "supply points" along a almost unique road (even though the English can bypass some of it through the lakes), the first one to take the other player supply points will force him to take an awful amount of time and force to "catch back" in the area.
It is even better for the British because taking this area is quite definitive (little rebel spawn there) and once the area is cleared, Albany is easy to take and thus the whole Canadian forces can be redeployed. Plus the Americans often deploy their most elite non-Regular forces there

Also, the area between New York and Petersburg is quite rich in VP and often very lightly defended. A small English force can really seize most of it, but unfortunately it seems you did not commit much there.

Indeed, my forces look like they are doing well...yet I am still losing the VP race handily.

My fighting in New England was predicated on holding Boston, which was foolish, in hindsight. Whereas the south has been a very bright spot for me. All in all, I think I am doing significantly better than the British did in real life through the end of 1776...which in itself is fascinating, since I could still very easily lose the war. Here in the US, we tend to think of our revolution as a David vs Goliath type encounter...what I am experiencing here is that the stronger side by far is the colonial side. True, her forces are weaker, but they are much more resilient, and the vast distances involved and the brittleness of the British force create a whole structural advantage to the colonists.

The Mohawk and Lake Champlain areas are places I am content to try to control my initial sources of supply...so I am committing enough force to defend Oswego and the northern edge of Lake Champlain...but I am instead looking to focus on the populated parts of the country to fight.

As you say, I should have focused on New York / New Jersey / Pennsylvania earlier...ah well, the joys of being a rookie.
 
October 1776

Expecting a big battle, I press 'next turn'...

Instead, all I get is a couple of minor, by comparison, skirmishes in the south.

General Jones disperses North Carolina militia in the vicinity of Bath, on his way to conquering New Bern.

battleofbath.jpg


...while Indians loyal to the King successfully defend the village of lower Sawa...or Sawra...or something primitive like that.

battleoflowersawra.jpg


Also, more troops arrive in the north AND the south...this rebellion is toast!

northernreinforcements.jpg



southernreinforcements.jpg



In South Carolina, we move troops to try to stamp out the remaining sources of supply for the rebels desperately trying to hold on to hope of escaping King George's mercy...

southcarolina.jpg


In North Carolina, our forces move on Hillsboro and place it under siege.

northcarolinah.jpg


Lord Cornwallis is moving to recapture Norfolk, and bring the war to Virginia again.

virginian.jpg


I send a force of Hessians down to the Delaware estuary to put Philadelphia under pressure...

newjerseyn.jpg


...send supply wagons back and forth between Burgoyne and Manhattan, and send General Grey and a reinforcement column into Connecticut in case the Continental Army actually decides to attack...

hudsonu.jpg


I then offer amnesty to the former rebels in the south...

militiaamnesties.jpg


...how hard could it be?
 
Well from a readers perspective its very hard to see what else you can do. You are doing a classic counter-insurgency trick of denying safe space and easy resupply in the South, and the Carolinas look like they are under your control. I think your relative strength around New York is good (it splits the two main remaining rebel areas apart).

The worrying bit is your comment that despite this you are lagging in VPs (& I presume as strong as you will ever be in terms of troops). What are the perfidious French up to?

Interesting comment re the classic US view on the relative strengths. I'd say the conventional UK view is that the British army was badly overstretched (it had not covered itself in glory in the recently concluded 7 Years War) and that, given other commitments (& in truth more valuable potential colonies such as India), in an odd way, once it became clear the rebellion was going to be hard to defeat, there was a resigned acceptance of the outcome.
 
You will not be surprised that the classic French view is that the Continental army was battered, exhausted, and defeated day after day by the British, and that without the French support (morale & supplies, and then troops), the British would have won.

Surprisingly enough, I found the same PoV in Tuchman's "The First Salute".

SA for your situation, you better hoard VP as much as possible, when the French come they are going to stop accruing so fast. Don't forget, though, that destroying continental army / French elements brings VP.
 
Wait, the French took a historical event and made it all about themselves?

C'est Bizarre!
 
Last edited:
I suspect the game to some extent overestimates the resilience of the Continental Army, though. Washington mainly managed to hold out by avoiding serious defeats, not by having an Amazing Regenerating Militia.
 
I suspect the game to some extent overestimates the resilience of the Continental Army, though. Washington mainly managed to hold out by avoiding serious defeats, not by having an Amazing Regenerating Militia.

Bah! What are you doing bringing reasonable debate into a multi-faceted look at how nations tend to distort their own history? :p

I'd like to have some of those ARM for my current RUS game, I don't mind saying. Anyway, on to the actual AAR...

TheExecuter, it looks like you're doing very well in the South. And that first screenshot of the South will surely make loki proud: everything's going up in flames - which is even more remarkable when you consider the general swampy nature of that area: pretty hard to set alight. But you did it! ;)

I hope all your moves pay off and it's tantalizing to hope for a soonish linking up between the Southern forces in Virginia and the Hessians near Philadelphia - as long as the French don't spoil your party.

I must admit I'm a little bit concerned in the Northeast, as I don't see Washington listed with the Continental Army. Where has that wooden-teeth-wearing foeman wandered off to? And what is he bringing with him?
 
Bah! What are you doing bringing reasonable debate into a multi-faceted look at how nations tend to distort their own history? :p

of course, as is completely traditional, I'm pretty sure the Scots managed to hijack the whole thing so as to carry on one or the other of our own private civil wars ...
 
There is a fascinating book called The Cousins Wars that traces through the English Civil War, American Revolution and the American Civil War. Oddly enough it looks they are at least as related as the Franco-Prussian War, WWI and WWII.

So it looks as though the war is going in a fairly historical way as far as grand strategy goes - stalemate in the north and success in the south.

Are you going to be able to translate your successes in the south into victory points? Or is that the question waiting to be decided?
 
loki100 said:
Well from a readers perspective its very hard to see what else you can do. You are doing a classic counter-insurgency trick of denying safe space and easy resupply in the South, and the Carolinas look like they are under your control. I think your relative strength around New York is good (it splits the two main remaining rebel areas apart).

The worrying bit is your comment that despite this you are lagging in VPs (& I presume as strong as you will ever be in terms of troops). What are the perfidious French up to?

Interesting comment re the classic US view on the relative strengths. I'd say the conventional UK view is that the British army was badly overstretched (it had not covered itself in glory in the recently concluded 7 Years War) and that, given other commitments (& in truth more valuable potential colonies such as India), in an odd way, once it became clear the rebellion was going to be hard to defeat, there was a resigned acceptance of the outcome.

Indeed, the south is going very well...although the Carolina's are not quite pacified just yet...

As for New York...appearances are deceiving.

France is petrified of a potential coalition of England, Austria, and Prussia. Foreign intervention is below 30 at the moment.

That UK view seemed to be shared by everyone except King George...who, IMO, needlessly prolonged the war beyond 1780 for spite.

Narwhal said:
You will not be surprised that the classic French view is that the Continental army was battered, exhausted, and defeated day after day by the British, and that without the French support (morale & supplies, and then troops), the British would have won.

Surprisingly enough, I found the same PoV in Tuchman's "The First Salute".

SA for your situation, you better hoard VP as much as possible, when the French come they are going to stop accruing so fast. Don't forget, though, that destroying continental army / French elements brings VP.

Ah, but battle defeats meant almost nothing to the survival chances of the rebellion. What it needed to win was mere survival...something which French arms and financial support was crucial to achieving. It is indeed ironic that the French properly supported the American colonies fight against the English in this timeline, but were unable to support their own Canadian colonies resistance to English forces.

As for the VP and force situation...easier said than done, I'm afraid. I'll post a screenshot of the VPs with the next update.

Merrick Chance' said:
Wait, the French took a historical event and made it all about themselves?

C'est Bizarre!

Sounds like the French are as human as the English and Americans...

:p

Arilou said:
I suspect the game to some extent overestimates the resilience of the Continental Army, though. Washington mainly managed to hold out by avoiding serious defeats, not by having an Amazing Regenerating Militia.

I'm not so sure. The British were never able to amass a truly overwhelming force in the colonies. Their most successful campaign required the concentration of almost all of their forces in the New York area, and even then, they only achieved parity with the total number of American defenders available to defend New York...and this was with half of the entire army of Great Britain available for General Howe.

Howe abandoned any attempt at a southern strategy, or an attempt at Albany, or trying to hold Connecticut, like I am doing...and still only achieved New York, and New Jersey.

True, he used his better equipped and trained soldiers to good effect. But the simple reality is that, through the militia system, the colonies could and did often muster a considerable number of forces on short notice which were capable of restricting the British regulars to places where they could be easily supplied.

You see, the whole crux of the revolutionary war is supply. The brilliance of Washington's New Jersey campaign in 1777 was that he was able to attack isolated outposts of Hessians...because they had to spread out to forage and find bivuacs. Once the british were no longer able to maintain outposts on the Delaware, the Americans engaged in a all-winter-long foraging war and denied the British ANY supplies to live off the land. The end result? Howe pulled back to New York, and eventually was forced to attempt to invade Philadelphia from the south (by sea) because he couldn't supply an offensive through New Jersey, thus preventing him from influencing the Saratoga campaign. The brilliance of the Saratoga campaign was cutting Burgoyne off from supply and making his advance so intolerably slow that any battle knock was likely to destroy his forces capability all together. Cornwallis was defeated in the south by forcing him to abandon his supply chain by destroying his light forces at Cowpens, and then drawing his regulars over ground already foraged by the Continental army and militias. True, the militia could rarely stand in pitched battle with British regulars...but they didn't have to. Their job was to deny forage and supplies and safe areas to rest to the British Army.

Stuyvesant said:
TheExecuter, it looks like you're doing very well in the South. And that first screenshot of the South will surely make loki proud: everything's going up in flames - which is even more remarkable when you consider the general swampy nature of that area: pretty hard to set alight. But you did it!

I hope all your moves pay off and it's tantalizing to hope for a soonish linking up between the Southern forces in Virginia and the Hessians near Philadelphia - as long as the French don't spoil your party.

I must admit I'm a little bit concerned in the Northeast, as I don't see Washington listed with the Continental Army. Where has that wooden-teeth-wearing foeman wandered off to? And what is he bringing with him?

Yes, pretty interesting to wonder how everything is burning down there. Perhaps they are having a drought?

My plan is eventually to link up the forces, but it is rather an obvious plan...and lots of things need to be captured and secured first before such a link-up would be possible. That's without even mentioning the fact that the rebels will be looking to prevent this.

As for Washington...I have no idea where he has gone off to. There are large forces converging on me...and he is not in command of any of them.

:eek:

Powloon said:
Having never played WIA I have absolutely no idea how you are doing but it does make for a very good read.

Thank you!

Technically, I don't think I know how I'm doing either. The VPs say I am losing, for what that is worth.

OneWingedDevil said:
Ditto. Gameplay AARs are confusing when you don't know the game, but it's nice to try and follow along.

Thanks!

Director said:
There is a fascinating book called The Cousins Wars that traces through the English Civil War, American Revolution and the American Civil War. Oddly enough it looks they are at least as related as the Franco-Prussian War, WWI and WWII.

So it looks as though the war is going in a fairly historical way as far as grand strategy goes - stalemate in the north and success in the south.

Are you going to be able to translate your successes in the south into victory points? Or is that the question waiting to be decided?

Interesting...

Technically, I'm already gaining VPs from my southern strategy...it isn't enough to counter the VPs from the middle colonies still held by the damned rebels...
 
November 1776 - Part 1

As usual, let's begin in the south.

Haldimand makes his first attempt at Hillsboro, and does well...

battleofhillsboro.jpg


...unfortunately, William Moultrie shows up with a significant force of rebels, and pushes Haldimand away...

2ndbattleofhillsboro.jpg


In South Carolina, a force of rebel militia seize the last outpost on the Savannah river, and hole up in the swamps. The other rebel force at Thickety Fort surrenders to my cavalry. Just one more group to root out...and then we can focus on North Carolina...

<missing screenshot! Blast...>

In North Carolina, Haldimand falls back before Moultrie, and will be reinforced by regulars from the coast.

northcarolina.jpg


In Virginia, my fleet destroys the American bateaux on the Chesapeake, and then lands Cornwallis at Norfolk. The cowardly rebels retreat before him without a fight.

battleofhamptonroads.jpg


Cornwallis will look to invade Virginia, however an epidemic strikes his force...gah!

virginiau.jpg


In New Jersey, my Hessians have surrounded Philadelphia...well, sort of...and are awaiting the return of good weather, and possibly reinforcements from New York, to finish the job...

newjerseyd.jpg


Speaking of New York, we raise some loyalist militia...the beginning of winning the 'hearts and minds' of the colonists...

newyorkloyalists.jpg


How hard could it be?

An update on the Hudson situation in part 2 of this update...
 
November 1776 - Part 2

In a move reminiscent of Washington crossing the Delaware (strategically, it's very similar...), General Lincoln leads the Continental army at the weak point of my defenses...Hartford. My cannon and regulars blast the Americans crossing the river, and extract over 1,000 casualties from them, by far the largest loss of life this war has yet seen. The massive bulk of the rebel army gets across the river, and General Hugh retreats...north, into Massachusetts to link up with the rest of the river defense force. Thus cutting himself off from resupply from New York.

battleofhartford.jpg


General Grey's relief force is now separated from the force he is supposed to bolster. I considered for a long time attacking the Continental Army at Hartford...after all, I hurt it significantly, and I have decent sized forces to hit it with...but, in the end, I judged that to be too risky of a proposition. My best bet, I figured was to force the Continental Army to attack me in my trenches, or my reinforced army to the south. Any attack made will likely be into the teeth of winter as well...I hope.

hudsong.jpg


Notice also the large rebel forces gathering at Albany...none under Washington, but enough to threaten my ability to take Albany next year. This will have to be watched carefully.

As requested, here is the VP situation at the end of the year. As you can see, I am making progress, but the vast number of cities unoccupied by me still weigh heavily against my score.

victorypoints.jpg


And, last, but certainly not least, Benjamin Franklin flees to France...I hear he is hoping to convince the French to step into the conflict. I am confident we will be able to prevent this sort of insanity.

benjaminfranklino.jpg


How hard could it be?
 
well to answer your default question - "very". It seems to be becoming an issue of what you can do to the Continental Army as the key to this. And looking at that last sequence your problem is you outnumber it overall but are over matched by it at any one place. At least in the course of that last defeat you were able to chip away at a little, and unless it can rest on a depot that is the start of wearing it down.
 
You may very well have been defeated at Hartford, but casualties like that are quite a blow, especially from a much smaller force. Good luck.
 
At least in the course of that last defeat you were able to chip away at a little, and unless it can rest on a depot that is the start of wearing it down.

So, the follow-up question becomes: is there a depot in Hartford?

I hope you can have a couple more of these 'losses' against the CA and then finish the whole bunch off, but fear that won't happen immediately - they're now on the wrong side of the Connecticut river and no longer have that river crossing penalty.

I don't know how supply works in WiA, but should you move that militia in New Haven across the river to cut off the road leading to the CA, or is that irrelevant for its supply? Or, alternately, would that simply mean sending that militia unit on a suicide mission, to be smacked around by a bunch of angry rebels?

Good luck, the CA amidst your lines has ratcheted up the tension a fair bit. I hope you can take Philly soon and use those troops to stem the the tide up North.
 
I'm not familiar enough with the game mechanics to be able to comment on strategy, but I do seem to remember that the British never really had men enough to securely hold New York and Philadelphia at the same time... Much less contemplate striking up the Hudson too.

The classic strategic question is: do you concentrate on defeating the army in the field and then occupy places, or occupy places in the hope of starving the enemy army in the field of men and resources? The classic answer is the former - beat the main fleet or army and then secure the victory. It troubles me that you seem to be trying to do both at once - or have I misunderstood?
 
The classic strategic question is: do you concentrate on defeating the army in the field and then occupy places, or occupy places in the hope of starving the enemy army in the field of men and resources?

From what I can gather, the brittleness of his army really prevents him from doing either safely. Getting enough land/EP/whatever helps him raise militia-type troops to help him continue the Southern campaign might let him refocus his Regulars down there to smashing armies in the fields of the North. I imagine the rebels would be hurting a lot if he broke the Continental Army, as stacks that size are the main challenge to his better-equipped but low number of quality troops.

Of course, someone with actual experience playing the game could probably provide more insightful analysis. :)