| American Civil War Game Club (ACWGC) http://www.wargame.ch/board/acwgc/ |
|
| Change the course of history? http://www.wargame.ch/board/acwgc/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=21605 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | RDavis [ Thu May 21, 2020 7:11 am ] |
| Post subject: | Change the course of history? |
Has anyone ever won a major battle that was historically lost by the side you played? |
|
| Author: | Blake [ Thu May 21, 2020 7:17 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Change the course of history? |
It is safe to say, sir, that had I lived in 1861 - 1865 that, based upon these games, I would have been the greatest general of the war. Especially against General A/I. But knowing what we do about the battles from our eye in the sky into the sandbox below it really makes it almost too easy at times. |
|
| Author: | Larry Mills [ Thu May 21, 2020 8:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Change the course of history? |
General, That is a very interesting question. I have won at least two battles the South lost historically. The question probably should be did you have an army left when it was over. In both instances I would say the victories were Pyrrhic in the extreme. I remember casualties far in excess of 50%. In all honesty I repeated history and didn't really change it. Only the North could afford to take 50% casualties and call it a victory. |
|
| Author: | krmiller_usa [ Fri May 22, 2020 8:38 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Change the course of history? |
If you have studied the Civil War you will find in many of the larger battles the Union had casualty rates that were in the 20% range. One of the costliest major battles for them was Stone's River where both sides suffered over 30% casualties. Although there were several battles where the Union suffered much larger numbers of casualties than the Confederacy, especially in the last year when they were attacking entrenchments at no major battle did either side approach 50% casualties of total forces engaged although many individual units would often exceed that level. In answer to the original question, yes I have won many battles that the Union lost, especially the earlier eastern front battles. I don't consider it means anything as we have way more intelligence both about what the other side has available and and where it is. You are not subject to the incompetence of subordinates, and unless you are involved in an MP game you have complete control of every unit. As an aside I ran an umpired MP game of a modified Stone's River battle years ago using rules to try and reduce the players control. The rebels managed a major victory with both sides reaching 50% casualties. A few years later I ran another such game with a completely made up what if scenario and once again both sides reached 50% casualties. My opinion is the game engine cannot mirror the loss of junior officers that led the troops forward. Once the regimental and company officers went down troops that had been heavily engaged previously would go to ground and not advance or retreat when engaged. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|