Army of Liberty: a Fantasy Revolutionary Warfare Quest

Pinniped · Jan 21, 2025

Red Rationalist said:
So, I think this is a mistake here. If you give him most of the centre to freely march through, he can absolutely bypass the Kirschenholz by sticking to the Rotholz area. The Kirschenholz is relevant in so far as we put a firing line in the middle, allowing for ambushes on Sarnscheid.

EagerListener said:
Though I have two concerns regarding your plan, one is why send Guillory to take Rotholz Turm? The same position could be taken by the 55th and 108th, without risking taking horse artillery ready fire as Guillory does when moving from the west.

Yeah, this is also a criticism I have. Why Guillory and not the 55th? As a Defensive Genius, they are the safest option to choose for the risky job of taking the forward position.

Using Guillory for this also weakens the Western flank. I disagree that he can bypass the Kirchenholz if we have cavalry operating in those woods. If he ignores the Kirchenholz, Guillory and our pathfinders can threaten his flanks and his backline, including his cannons. The pathfinders on their own are a much smaller threat, since without cavalry support they are very vulnerable to being ridden down by his cavalry.

Red Rationalist · Jan 21, 2025

Chimeraguard said:
[X] Plan: Rotholz, Preparing A Fighting Retreat

My primary priority is that the 45th is not given a role that puts them at the frontline, because I fully expect the Maverick trait to activate then have them do something stupid like refuse to pull back when the order is given.

I appreciate the support, though it's called a firing retreat. Admittedly, not the best play on words there. Fair point about the 45th, I will see how to best keep them in a position where they can't mess up.

EagerListener said:
Ok, I think overall that this is a good idea. Though I have two concerns regarding your plan, one is why send Guillory to take Rotholz Turm? The same position could be taken by the 55th and 108th, without risking taking horse artillery ready fire as Guillory does when moving from the west. And the second is I'm a bit concern that the artillery is a bit too far back to support Rotholz Turm, particularly on the northern end, the current position is set up well for a withdrawal but I'm not sure if we only want artillery fire just west/a bit north of Rotholz, a bit further up provides pretty good coverage of Rotholz's north in case Trotha doesn't move too far south.

It's a fair concern, though there is also pathing for Guillory's Hussar to avoid the possible firing range by going NE through the wood hill tile rather the bare hill itself. Besides, I wouldn't necessarily expect horse artillery fire from Trotha this early, chances are decent he will try to set them up one some kind of hill against a potential charge.

EagerListener said:
And the second is I'm a bit concern that the artillery is a bit too far back to support Rotholz Turm, particularly on the northern end, the current position is set up well for a withdrawal but I'm not sure if we only want artillery fire just west/a bit north of Rotholz, a bit further up provides pretty good coverage of Rotholz's north in case Trotha doesn't move too far south.

Also do we know if Rotholz Turm occupies one or two tiles?

Rotholz to my knowledge only occupies one tile. The artillery is all capable of firing on the tile NE of the hill, where I would consider an ordinary charge to go through based movement range. We can pull the artillery up a tile though, this isn't an immediate concern.

Pinniped · Jan 21, 2025

Chimeraguard said:
[X] Plan: Rotholz, Preparing A Fighting Retreat

My primary priority is that the 45th is not given a role that puts them at the frontline, because I fully expect the Maverick trait to activate then have them do something stupid like refuse to pull back when the order is given.

Honestly, is the 45th really the deciding factor here? Because mine and @Red Rationalist 's plans are very different in their general approach and strengths and weaknesses, while the 45th is a minor thing. I can easily switch the 45th for the 72nd if people find sending the Maverick to the forward position too risky.

Would switching iut the 45th make you consider my plan or do you prefer the other approach for some other reasons as well?

Red Rationalist · Jan 21, 2025

Pinniped said:
Yeah, this is also a criticism I have. Why Guillory and not the 55th? As a Defensive Genius, they are the safest option to choose for the risky job of taking the forward position.

Using Guillory for this also weakens the Western flank. I disagree that he can bypass the Kirchenholz if we have cavalry operating in those woods. If he ignores the Kirchenholz, Guillory and our pathfinders can threaten his flanks and his backline, including his cannons. The pathfinders on their own are a much smaller threat, since without cavalry support they are very vulnerable to being ridden down by his cavalry.

I mean, I hate to phrase it like that but Guillory also has the most expendable troops (trained, unrolled hussars). The defensive genius is something I would prefer keep in reserve for the most dangerous part of the cavalry action and rolling their trait is advantagous, as it shows us what we are working with.

Regarding the flank, I have the other hussars in the centre and the Hob Lancers on the right, with a ready charge in the back. I think that's sufficient to deter a charge. Besides, what do you mean by "cavalry operating in the woods"? If you want to put cavalry literally into them, I would advise against this on account of them taking double melee penalties (-40 > -20) and difficulty reatreating. Trying to charge into the woods is pretty bad idea, on account of the woods blocking sight, taking 5 movement and giving you a base -40.

Pinniped said:
Also, you are assuming my plan is less flexible than it really is. The troops sent there now is the initial force, and the cavalry is mostly there to scout. Depending on what approach Von Trptha chooses, we can reinforce the Rotholz position with more infantry if needed. My plan can actually transition into something similar to yours pretty easily. If he sets up a bombardment of the Rotholz position, that opens up the center for us to advance.

So, I think playing flexible and reacting to the enemy is good. With this being said, your plan makes this much slower. You sent out 3 infantry units onto Rotholz in total while the main line stays in the fortress. Under those conditions, you would first need to spend a full turn of movement before you can get into the medium firing range on the Rotholz approaches like my plan, time the actual artillery can't do anything useful with. They are firing at medium range, which is unlikely for Trotha to go to (just south of Rotholz would be exceptionally bold for him!). If

we want to have the option to reposition, taking a forward position while he is still in the back is vital for that. This allows us to prevent some movement in the centre, thus indirectly limiting how far his line can go forward.

Pinniped · Jan 21, 2025

Red Rationalist said:
I mean, I hate to phrase it like that but Guillory also has the most expendable troops (trained, unrolled hussar

The problem is, those are Guillory's troops and Guillory is personally leading them. Considering them expendable when we specofically asked him to come help us out is maybe not the best idea. We should not treat allied units as expendable or we will quickly run out of allies.

Red Rationalist said:
Besides, what do you mean by "cavalry operating in the woods"? If you want to put cavalry literally into them, I would advise against this on account of them taking double melee penalties (-40 > -20) and difficulty reatreating. Trying to charge into the woods is pretty bad idea, on account of the woods blocking sight, taking 5 movement and giving you a base -40.

Hmm, should have written "around" or "behind" the woods. Having the cavalry fight inside of the woods is not the best due to the -40 penalty, true. But having cavalry hidden behind the woods ready to charge out of the woods on unsusecting units is a different matter.

The woods blocking LOS is not an issue, since the pathfinders are in the woods. My basic idea was to have the cavalry and the pathfinders operating together, so that if Von Trotha sends his cavalry or infantry to charge the pathfinders to chase them pff his flank, his troops are met with Ready Charges from Guillory. If he neglects the flank, Guillory's Hussars remain hidden there, allowing us to move them up to threaten his backline.

So basically while cavalry fighting in woods is not advisable, moving cavalry through/behind woods to keep them hidden is not.

Pinniped · Jan 21, 2025

Red Rationalist said:
Under those conditions, you would first need to spend a full turn of movement before you can get into the medium firing range on the Rotholz approaches like my plan, time the actual artillery can't do anything useful with. They are firing at medium range, which is unlikely for Trotha to go to (just south of Rotholz would be exceptionally bold for him!).

This is absolutely time we will have though. Von Trotha's units are not any faster than ours, on the contrary. Him moving his units and artillery to the Rotholz front would be slow, giving us plenty of time to move up our main force if that is what we want.

Red Rationalist said:
This allows us to prevent some movement in the centre, thus indirectly limiting how far his line can go forward.

His line does not have to go forward if you give him Medium Range artillery targets. Why would he advance on your position, instead of just shooting you? There is no cover on the plain.

Red Rationalist · Jan 21, 2025

Pinniped said:
The problem is, those are Guillory's troops and Guillory is personally leading them. Considering them expendable when we specofically asked him to come help us out is maybe not the best idea. We should not treat allied units as expendable or we will quickly run out of allies.

I would consider a hussar of our own with their xp and an unrolled commander equally expendable, so this is a case of treating them normally. If we treat our allies with kid gloves and extra care, we won't get much from having from maintaing those allies. Using the better cavalry like the Lancers for taking a simple position turned out to be a mistake and it's really just taking a hill, where you most likely won't take fire.

Pinniped said:
The woods blocking LOS is not an issue, since the pathfinders are in the woods. My basic idea was to have the cavalry and the pathfinders operating together, so that if Von Trotha sends his cavalry or infantry to charge the pathfinders to chase them pff his flank, his troops are met with Ready Charges from Guillory. If he neglects the flank, Guillory's Hussars remain hidden there, allowing us to move them up to threaten his backline.

So basically while cavalry fighting in woods is not advisable, moving cavalry through/behind woods to keep them hidden is not.

So, base issue with that: Forests are too movement expensive to rout a charge through. One forest takes 5 movement to go through, with you paying the movement cost when you return. You would need to spend 2 actions just on go through there. If you want to keep the Hussars on the edge of the Kirschenholz, you are putting untested troops in a static position close to where the enemy pulls up with infantry. In a straightforward melee, trained hussars would probably loose. They have a flat 0 morale modifier, so yeah.

Pinniped said:
This is absolutely time we will have though. Von Trotha's units are not any faster than ours, on the contrary. Him moving his units and artillery to the Rotholz front would be slow, giving us plenty of time to move up our main force if that is what we want.

He has the first move advantage, meaning he has a turn more to set up fire. If we stay passive, he can absolutely set up artillery to hammers us in med. range as we try to move out from our main position.

Pinniped · Jan 21, 2025

Red Rationalist said:
So, base issue with that: Forests are too movement expensive to rout a charge through. One forest takes 5 movement to go through, with you paying the movement cost when you return. You would need to spend 2 actions just on go through there. If you want to keep the Hussars on the edge of the Kirschenholz, you are putting untested troops in a static position close to where the enemy pulls up with infantry. In a straightforward melee, trained hussars would probably loose. They have a flat 0 morale modifier, so yeah.

If the hussars are already in the forest, they definitely have enough Movement to charge out of them and hit the enemy.

And who said anything about a static position? Thus was about cavalry covering an infantry retreat of the pathfinders, or advancing through the woods to hit enemies on the plains beyond.

If you are worried about enemies seeing the cavalry hidden in the woods and attacking them, then that would require the enemies to both Spot the cavalry (not easy) and also deal with the sudden appearance of two units of halfling pathfinders (also not easy). The idea is for the pathfinders and the cavalry to support each other, after all.

Red Rationalist said:
If we stay passive, he can absolutely set up artillery to hammers us in med. range as we try to move out from our main position.

My plan does not suggest we stay passive, the goal is to take positions in the Rotholz. If he then sends his troops to overwhelm that position, we gain time and toom to maneuver.

Red Rationalist · Jan 21, 2025

Pinniped said:
My plan does not suggest we stay passive, the goal is to take positions in the Rotholz. If he then sends his troops to overwhelm that position, we gain time and toom to maneuver.

Well, your main position is literally static. Neither artillery or infantry moves, hence little to stop Trotha from moving as far as he can.

Pinniped said:
If the hussars are already in the forest, they definitely have enough Movement to charge out of them and hit the enemy.

Well, quick bit of math: Charging onto a tile takes at least 2 movement, but that one is fine. The issues come with the disengagement: If you aren't able to hit into the rear, you would pay 3 movement for the disengagement, 1 movement for the tile and 5 movement for the forest. That is just enough. The problem comes on the following turn, where your hussars spend their time on the forest edge. The enemy units can just run up to them and double melee. Your deployment here presses hussars into the role of infantry they are unsuited for. This changes somewhat if you hit them in the flanks, though that is somewhat deeper charge and unreliable against an infantry formation (What if an infantry behind them uses the square?)

Also a problem of preventing the enemy from moving into the forest in the first place. Once they are in there, any ranged attack on them rolls at -30.

Pinniped · Jan 21, 2025

Red Rationalist said:
Well, your main position is literally static. Neither artillery or infantry moves, hence little to stop Trotha from moving as far as he can.

The flanks are stopping him from moving. He cannot advance in the center without clearing the flanks, this is the very base of my plan. No commander in their right mind would advance without first clearing out the Rotholz.

Red Rationalist said:
Well, quick bit of math: Charging onto a tile takes at least 2 movement, but that one is fine. The issues come with the disengagement: If you aren't able to hit into the rear, you would pay 3 movement for the disengagement, 1 movement for the tile and 5 movement for the forest. That is just enough. The problem comes on the following turn, where your hussars spend their time on the forest edge. The enemy units can just run up to them and double melee.

Two points: the cavalry does not have to leave the same way they came in. Depending on enemy positioning, it may be feasible to just swing around and escape along the plains rather than returning into the forest.

And the second point is that if we see a charge like you describe, we can do the math and simply not charge. The cavalry is not at risk, we can only take charges that we feel safe about.

Also, you are still discounting the pathfinders. If they hit the enemy by surprise the same turn the cavalry does, or they Ready Fire the infantry attacking the cavalry, the trade may be in our favor.

Red Rationalist · Jan 21, 2025

Pinniped said:
The flanks are stopping him from moving. He cannot advance in the center without clearing the flanks, this is the very base of my plan. No commander in their right mind would advance without first clearing out the Rotholz.

But how, though? How does having 3 infantry in Rotholz stop him from moving an artillery in the centre forward? Charging seems rather ill-advised, musket fire from them isn't going to do a lot. If we were to play this through, he would simply need to move artillery just south of Sarnscheid. Considering that path is 4 tiles away, moving artillery through there is feasible (2 infantry to screen 3 tiles away, artillery moving at 4).

So, to make a larger point this argument seems to revolve around: I think you're operating on the base assumption that doing one ambush/musket fire from either flank is going to stop the enemy from putting troops near the position. And while I think the ambush would erode morale, I'm sceptical about this being enough to shatter a bold enemy position. It's probably just 2 morale checks (ambush + shock), which wouldn't reliably rout.

Pinniped said:
Two points: the cavalry does not have to leave the same way they came in. Depending on enemy positioning, it may be feasible to just swing around and escape along the plains rather than returning into the forest.

And the second point is that if we see a charge like you describe, we can do the math and simply not charge. The cavalry is not at risk, we can only take charges that we feel safe about.

Ok, that is fair. I still don't think trying to charge out of Kirschholz with hussars is a good idea to be clear, the space is generally both tight, vulnerable to cavalry screens intercepting them and may very well run through artillery. But it may be worthwile to put cavalry into the outskirts and charge+ambush, I will remember that-

So in summary, your plan to stop the enemy from clearing out the Kirschholz with infantry is to charge them with hussars? Because if that is the case I would be pretty worried about that cavalry running into the royal cavalry acting as a screen.

NSchwerte · Jan 21, 2025

The outcome of the battle will depend on how well we preserve our cavalry and degrade the enemy.

Von Trotha is walking into a death trap so dangerous that it's hard for me to envision a scenario where he wins, so what matters is if our cavalry can overpower his and capture his army by taking the valley in the far north before they can flee through it, which would be a triumphant victory.

Red Rationalist · Jan 21, 2025

NSchwerte said:
The outcome of the battle will depend on how well we preserve our cavalry and degrade the enemy.

Von Trotha is walking into a death trap so dangerous that it's hard for me to envision a scenario where he wins, so what matters is if our cavalry can overpower his and capture his army by taking the valley in the far north before they can flee through it, which would be a triumphant victory.

While I still think the original position is quite strong, I will also note there has been a key change making it less of a death trap:

Photomajig said:
Artillery Units Firing into a Melee Engagement risk hitting friendly Units. Artillery Units roll Hits against any friendly Units Engaged in Melee with their target in addition to the original attack roll.

If we hit our own units from the rear, we won't have a good time in the defense. Doesn't make the position useless, but the melee is more difficult to win against Trotha if his infantry isn't exhausted.

NSchwerte · Jan 21, 2025

Red Rationalist said:
If we hit our own units from the rear, we won't have a good time in the defense. Doesn't make the position useless, but the melee is more difficult to win against Trotha if his infantry isn't exhausted

Yeah but the new rules also means that he has to spend like 10 turns securing his position to be able to charge, which guarantees that they will be exhausted.

If he just charges across the field then we can just fall on their flanks.

And with the new rules he pretty much can't take our holding infantry by storm, they all have like -70 to melee defense.

Tbh I do not understand taking up a forward position when our artillery will be slower in the retreat going up hills than their artillery will be moving forward across plains and he'll be in medium range in probably 2 turns anyway

Red Rationalist · Jan 21, 2025

NSchwerte said:
Yeah but the new rules also means that he has to spend like 10 turns securing his position to be able to charge, which guarantees that they will be exhausted.

If he just charges across the field then we can just fall on their flanks. And with the new rules he pretty much can't take our holding infantry by storm, they all have like -70 to melee defense.

Granted, a sole charge right out of the gate is quite unlikely. But once we are in the back position, we can't rely on the artillery a win button due to also damaging our units. "Needling" (taking long-ranged shots in the same position) is also less effective at dealing damage, with the math working out to just one 1d20/ 1d20 with disadvantage dealing stresss damage due to a higher bar for damaging units (50+ for a simple roll rather than 1). And both sides roll for morale rather than straight damage, so effects in melee are less predictable.

Not sure about how you get to -70, breast works only give -10 to infantry melee.

Photomajig said:
-[] (1 point) Breastworks. Walls and trenches that cover a man to the level of their breast, providing cover from incoming fire. Inflicts an additional -40 penalty to ranged attacks, -10 penalty for melee attacks and -30 for cavalry melee attacks against Units in Hex. The rear facing of breastworks is always vulnerable and attacks from there ignore these penalties (by default, this is the southern side; specify otherwise if desired).

Good, but certainly not invulnerable (-30 potentially with disprop. infantry casulties in our favour).

NSchwerte said:
Tbh I do not understand taking up a forward position when our artillery will be slower in the retreat going up hills than their artillery will be moving forward across plains.

So, my plan also involves a specific combination once we start the retreat that uses the new firing system. We fire (2 AP) from a set-up position and ready move (1 AP) on the opponents turn. The subsequent turn we set up, fire (1+2 AP), leaving us free to either fully move (3 AP) or start the cycle again on the third turn. This system of slowly closing up is critical for getting close enough to the position, though the last part of the fall back will take at least 2 actions on movement due to hills as you point out.

In short on T1 we (Fire + Ready move) from a set-up position, then on T2 we (Set-up + Fire), than we start the cycle again like on T1 (Fire + Ready Move). The big advantage of this "firing retreat" is that we move towards our original position while gaining the ambush advantage every 2 turns due to artillery repositioning. Assuming we don't need to abandon the position suddenly, we can slowly creep back to our original position with this method.

Pinniped · Jan 21, 2025

Red Rationalist said:
But how, though? How does having 3 infantry in Rotholz stop him from moving an artillery in the centre forward? Charging seems rather ill-advised, musket fire from them isn't going to do a lot. If we were to play this through, he would simply need to move artillery just south of Sarnscheid. Considering that path is 4 tiles away, moving artillery through there is feasible (2 infantry to screen 3 tiles away, artillery moving at 4).

Just South of Sarnscheid is not in Medium Range of our main position. I covered this topic extensively in the post I presented my plan in. He needs to move his artillery up close in the center to bombard our defensive position. Infantry in Rotholz could shoot him in the flank and also threaten charges. What you are describing is him voluntarily putting his army in a position where he has to defend on two fronts. Here is the same picture again, the red zone is where he must put his artillery to be in Medium Range:

View: https://imgur.com/a/oOMyCw7

Can you really imagine him putting his artillery there while we control Rotholz and Kirshenholz? I cannot, he must secure the flanks.

Honestly, I feel like you are still undervaluing shooting and consistent pressure while overvaluing charging and immediate Routs. If he does not clear Rotholz and advances, our Units in Rotholz can Shoot, Shoot, Brace to deal constant Medium range fire to his flank. Such a position is untenable for him in the long run.

You are also forgetting that if he ignores the flank, our cavalry is free to take the long way around and flanking. He also does not know how many units we have in Rotholz due to the new Spotting rules, so him ignoring the "three units there" is a bit metagamey.

Red Rationalist · Jan 21, 2025

Pinniped said:
Just South of Sarnscheid is not in Medium Range of our main position. I covered this topic extensively in the post I presented my plan in. He needs to move his artillery up close in the center to bombard our defensive position. Infantry in Rotholz could shoot him in the flank and also threaten charges. What you are describing is him voluntarily putting his army in a position where he has to defend on two fronts. Here is the same picture again, the red zone is where he must put his artillery to be in Medium Range:

Yeah, but this wasn't the point I was making. I was stating the just south of Sarnscheid is enough to suppress movement from us via medium ranged fire, not that it's enough enough to bombard us in medium range. Considering your plan sending reinforcements to Rotholz and Kirschenholz, they would be going into medium range in that case. As him, I would also be quite confident about fending off a charge from us (dwarves, intial damage from charging through artillery, higher infantry numbers in total).

Pinniped said:
Honestly, I feel like you are still undervaluing shooting and consistent pressure while overvaluing charging and immediate Routs. If he does not clear Rotholz and advances, our Units in Rotholz can Shoot, Shoot, Brace to deal constant Medium range fire to his flank. Such a position is untenable for him in the long run.

He has 10 infantry units, including nymphs. I think he can spar a couple to clear out the woods. Rotholz fire is only effective up 2 tiles away, even if we assume it's useful against the woods there. He can just not go there and still clear out the Kirschenholz.

Pinniped · Jan 21, 2025

Red Rationalist said:
So, to make a larger point this argument seems to revolve around: I think you're operating on the base assumption that doing one ambush/musket fire from either flank is going to stop the enemy from putting troops near the position. And while I think the ambush would erode morale, I'm sceptical about this being enough to shatter a bold enemy position. It's probably just 2 morale checks (ambush + shock), which wouldn't reliably rout.

No, I am operating on the assumption he will not form up his line in a position where his units can be constantly shot at by our troops from an entrenched position. Rather, he'll try to push us out of said position rather than voluntarily taking constant fire from his Eastern flank and leaving our cavalry on that flank free to go wherever they please.

Red Rationalist said:
So in summary, your plan to stop the enemy from clearing out the Kirschholz with infantry is to charge them with hussars? Because if that is the case I would be pretty worried about that cavalry running into the royal cavalry acting as a screen.

Again, flexibility. If we can see the royal cavalry and confirm they are out of range, we can charge with the hussars and not worry about screens. If the position of the royal cavalry is hidden, we must play more conservatively and just retreat with the Pathfinders, while doing damage to the enemy infantry (Fire, Move, Move) or (Fire, Fire, Move), depending on proximity to the enemy.

Red Rationalist · Jan 21, 2025

Pinniped said:
No, I am operating on the assumption he will not form up his line in a position where his units can be constantly shot at by our troops from an entrenched position. Rather, he'll try to push us out of said position rather than voluntarily taking constant fire from his Eastern flank and leaving our cavalry on that flank free to go wherever they please.

Again, flexibility. If we can see the royal cavalry and confirm they are out of range, we can charge with the hussars and not worry about screens. If the position of the royal cavalry is hidden, we must play more conservatively and just retreat with the Pathfinders, while doing damage to the enemy infantry (Fire, Move, Move) or (Fire, Fire, Move), depending on proximity to the enemy.

And I think the core pieces of your plan fall apart if he's just willing to eat up damage to clear one side first. Or if he just makes a mistake and doesn't think we have halfling skirmisher, leading to a troop position around the Kirschenholz and stumbles his way into a position where he can overwhelm you. The key issue I see here is the lack of concrete moves that prevent Rotholz from being overwhelmed in melee, since you rely on one strong unit (148th Hum) and 2 kind of questionable ones (Elves with Maverick and disadvantage). Even if you used different units for this, you are going up against superior numbers.

Pinniped · Jan 21, 2025

Red Rationalist said:
I was stating the just south of Sarnscheid is enough to suppress movement from us via medium ranged fire, not that it's enough enough to bombard us in medium range. Considering your plan sending reinforcements to Rotholz and Kirschenholz, they would be going into medium range in that case. As him, I would also be quite confident about fending off a charge from us (dwarves, intial damage from charging through artillery, higher infantry numbers in total).

If his artillery is there supressing our units, it is not helping him take Rotholz. And in any case we can hug the East part of the map outside of this Medium Range to move to Rotholz, although that would be slow. So what does that supression actually buy him? If his artillery is busy doing suppression, they are not killing our men.

Red Rationalist said:
He has 10 infantry units, including nymphs. I think he can spar a couple to clear out the woods. Rotholz fire is only effective up 2 tiles away, even if we assume it's useful against the woods there. He can just not go there and still clear out the Kirschenholz.

Aside from the Nymphs, he has Trained Human infantry with what is likely poor Morale. "A couple units" cannot clear out 3 of ours with cavalry and cavalry artillery support from an entrenched position. Attacking always requires more resources than defending, especially in rough terrain. Come on now, if "a couple" of his units can clear out three of ours from a defensible position we have already lost.

Red Rationalist said:
And I think the core pieces of your plan fall apart if he's just willing to eat up damage to clear one side first.

Ok, a couple of things. You are again assuming we just maintain our static position and do nothing while he clear out one side. If he focuses too much on one side of the field, he leaves himself vulnerable to flanking on the other. If he does not push hard enough, we can reinforce our positions and repulse him. As with your plan, the idea is also to do a fighting retreat if the going goes tough: we lose little by retreating and he loses men and Stress.

I'd like to emphasize that my plan is a T1 plan, and units that do not move T1 are not rooted in place for the rest of the battle. It is not very sensible to start going into scenarios where we lose several turns in the future if we do not counter his plans. The T1 plan is not meant to be a "plan for the entire battle" that either wins or loses.

I could also say the same for your plan: the core pieces of your plan fall apart if he simply stops, does not advance with his men and starts playing defensively while moving his own artillery into Medium range. Something that is entirely in character for him to do!

I mean really, right before this battle he did a false retreat to lure us out of our entrenched positions! What do you expect him to do on T2 when he sees us move out of our entrenched positions on T1 with your plan?

Red Rationalist said:
The key issue I see here is the lack of concrete moves that prevent Rotholz from being overwhelmed in melee, since you rely on one strong unit (148th Hum) and 2 kind of questionable ones (Elves with Maverick and disadvantage). Even if you used different units for this, you are going up against superior numbers.

Finally something we can agree on! I will replace the Maverick 45nd with the 72nd Hum, which is a Professional troop and will have a big advantage against his Trained Human infantry in melee. I would actually like to send our elite Hobs into the Eastern forest, but I cannot get the 200th there on T1. The deployment we did is kind of hampering me here. Actually, hmm...

Pinniped · Jan 21, 2025

Alright, updated version of my plan, now sending our best Units onto the Rotholz flank. These units should easily be able to beat his Trained Human infantry in melee combat, making them a good choice for sending to take the strongpoint and hold it as long as possible.

Pinging @IroniChristian since they voted for my plan, in case they do not like the changes and want to change their vote.

View: https://imgur.com/a/eKuJKk1

[X] Plan: Cover and Concealement
-[X] Cav (Go before others when possible)
-[X] Guillory's Hussars: Move to the hills NW of you, overlooking the Kirchenholz Forest.
-[X] 13th Hob Lanc: Brace
-[X] 108th Elv Hsr: 2*Move [NW, NW, NW, NE, NE| Facing NE], Ready Charge 100m, current facing
-[X] 55th Elv Hsr: 3*Move [E, NE, NE, NW, NW, NW, NW, NE, NW, NE | Facing NW]
-[X] Inf (go in order of list)
-[X] 19th Half Pfd [Rapid -> 4 base movement]: 3* Move [W, 2*NW, NE, NW, NE, NW | Facing NW]
-[X] 16th Half Pfd: 3*Move [NE, 4NW | Facing NE]
-[X] 28th Half Pfd: 3*Move [3 NW, W| Facing NE]
-[X] 200th Hob: 3*Move [NE, E, NE, NE, NE, NE | Facing NW]
-[X] 251st Hob: Move [W, | Facing NW] Brace, Ready Fire (200m)
-[X] 72nd Hum: 3 Move [NE, NE, NE, NE, NE| Facing NE]
-[X] 148th Hum: 3 Move [NE, NE, NE, NE, NE| Facing NE]
-[X] 45th Elv: 2 Mov [W, W, SW| Facing NE], Brace
-[X] 42nd Elv: 3 Mov [W, W, W, W, SW| Facing NE]
-[X] Artillery (go last if possible)
-[X] 31st Elv Art: Ready Fire [Med. Range
-[X] 10th Hum Art: Ready Fire [Med. Range
-[X] 84th Elv Art: Ready Fire [Med. Range
-[X] 5th Hob H. Art.: Move [2 NW, NE, NW | Facing NE] + Setup (Free, NW), Ready Fire [Med. Range; W,NE]
-[X] HQ: Do nothing

Red Rationalist · Jan 21, 2025

Pinniped said:
If his artillery is there supressing our units, it is not helping him take Rotholz. And in any case we can hug the East part of the map outside of this Medium Range to move to Rotholz, although that would be slow. So what does that supression actually buy him? If his artillery is busy doing suppression, they are not killing our men.

This argument is somewhat tiring, but I will note he can also use artillery separately. This in fact what I would do in his position, use the highly experienced artillery to siege Rotholz while using the lower level one to provide a ready fire on the open plain. The number of positions that can bombard Rotholz are limited and regular artillery doesn't add much against it, Assuming he will only use his artillery for one thing is probably erroneus. He might very well decide he values the possibility of supressing our movement enough to divert artillery to that.

Pinniped said:
Aside from the Nymphs, he has Trained Human infantry with what is likely poor Morale. "A couple units" cannot clear out 3 of ours with cavalry and cavalry artillery support from an entrenched position. Attacking always requires more resources than defending, especially in rough terrain. Come on now, if "a couple" of his units can clear out three of ours from a defensible position we have already lost.

He has dwarves. Dwarves at (+4?) with a higher wound treshold, which actually matters a lot in melee (taking only 2 rather than 3 casulties per hit is a big deal). Your position with three infantry is going to be thinly spread and have infantry on positions that are more vulnerable. If our halflings get into melee, they will have a bad time.

Pinniped said:
I could also say the same for your plan: the core pieces of your plan fall apart if he simply stops, does not advance with his men and starts playing defensively while moving his own artillery into Medium range. Something that is entirely in character for him to do!

If he moves into medium range on our main position, we are able to inflict disproportionate fire. We can fire for a turn if we set up a ready fire, the advancing artillery can only fire 2 turns from now. If you mean to say my plan falls apart if he bombards Rotholz extensively, I also have a plan for that: Move back and ready (move+brace), to be triggered when an infantry unit on the plains get's close enough.

Pinniped · Jan 21, 2025

Red Rationalist said:
This in fact what I would do in his position, use the highly experienced artillery to siege Rotholz while using the lower level one to provide a ready fire on the open plain. The number of positions that can bombard Rotholz are limited and regular artillery doesn't add much against it, Assuming he will only use his artillery for one thing is probably erroneus. He might very well decide he values the possibility of supressing our movement enough to divert artillery to that.

I actually completely agree with you here, this is also what I would do in his position! But would you like doing that? You are delaying your attack, using your most experienced artillery in terrain not suited for it and will have to send infantry into the meat grinder anyway. Note that due to the spotting changes, he cannot see our units unless his infantry is already close enough for us to hurt them in turn. Also, if we start a melee brawl there his artillery cannot fire without hitting his own units as well.

Red Rationalist said:
He has dwarves.

Huh, he does. I could have sworn he had more Human infantry. But the dwarves are trained as well, and them routing would be devastating. We will have to deal with them anyway, I would much rather do that without his full artillery in play. We also have horse artillery and cavalry on the east flank to deal wigh his infantry.

Red Rationalist said:
Your position with three infantry is going to be thinly spread and have infantry on positions that are more vulnerable. If our halflings get into melee, they will have a bad time.

The halflings on the Western flank are not intended to go into melee, the Eastern flank is where melee will potentially happen.

Red Rationalist said:
If he moves into medium range on our main position, we are able to inflict disproportionate fire.

My point is that what if he does not move into Medium range? Instead, he stops, finds safe places to put his cannons within Medium Range of your infantry screen and shoots without exposing his own infantry. Or what if he decides enough long-range fire on your troops out of cover will eventually do the trick?

I genuinly think one mistake you are making is discounting long range fire entirely. While it is not optimal, long range fire from his seven batteries puts the decision on us: do we retreat or expose ourselves by pushing up to Medium Range? Since he has more artillery, long range fire does favor him and time is always on his side.

NSchwerte · Jan 21, 2025

[X] Plan: Cover and Concealement

I can't offer full critique, but I like it for not moving out the artillery and focusing on the flanks.

If von Trotha moves 5 infantry to counter 3 of our infantry, we also always have the option to then charge his main line ourselves when he has sent away half of them

Red Rationalist · Jan 21, 2025

Pinniped said:
My point is that what if he does not move into Medium range? Instead, he stops, finds safe places to put his cannons within Medium Range of your infantry screen and shoots without exposing his own infantry. Or what if he decides enough long-range fire on your troops out of cover will eventually do the trick?

I genuinly think one mistake you are making is discounting long range fire entirely. While it is not optimal, long range fire from his seven barteries puts the decision on us: do we retreat or expose ourselves by pushing up to Medium Range?

This is pretty fair question, since my plan is formed around the base assumption of Trotha moving forward. It is one I addressed before in our last major discussion before the voting actually started, so to rehash the point: I think him trying to rely on long-ranged fire to break us is unlikely for a couple of reasons: Much of the potential morale damage from long-ranged fire is derrived from triggering an ambush. Our units have much tougher base morale modifers on par with his dwarves, meaning they are less likely to rout. His core units are permanently crippled if they ever rout. Slow attrition from long-ranged fire consumes a lot of munitions, which is sub-optimal if you expect future operations for a while (likely, considering his is the only army on the entire front). So I don't think he's willing to engage in a such a move for the strong operational drawbacks it causes.

Ok, but how would I actually do to win the battle? I would retreat to our main position, which is functionally immune against long-ranged fire. If he doesn't give us the battle we desire, we don't give him his.

Pinniped said:
The halflings on the Western flank are not intended to go into melee, the Eastern flank is where melee will potentially happen.

Right, you do not intend for them to get in a melee. What happens if they do? Due to Trotha being less risk averse against them or just making a blundering move. Your plan for securing the central plain relies on fire from them (which I would not consider significant enough to rout, hence little in the way of security). I have outlined countermove against your main plans (put some artillery onto the Sarnscheid to surpress our movement, take a forward position around the stronghold). You have called the first plausible. So, what happens if they do this and half your plan for gaining an advantage against the melee falls apart?

You have no counterplay against him moving there on T2, Rotholz isn't even set up yet.

Pinniped said:
Huh, he does. I could have sworn he had more Human infantry. But the dwarves are trained as well, and them routing would be devastating. We will have to deal with them anyway, I would much rather do that without his full artillery in play. We also have horse artillery and cavalry on the east flank to deal wigh his infantry.

In this case, you are proposing a march through enemy medium artillery fire to reinforce a position of skirmishers, which are there to deal damage so we have the upper hand during melee. I think this idea is backwards, exposing our force to significant damage rather than damaging his. If we forgo the initiative here, there is a decent risk we can flat out never move our own infantry onto the central plain for fear of risk.

Army of Liberty: a Fantasy Revolutionary Warfare Quest

Spinning in eternity

Spinning in eternity

Spinning in eternity

Spinning in eternity

Spinning in eternity

Spinning in eternity

Spinning in eternity

Spinning in eternity

Spinning in eternity

Spinning in eternity

Spinning in eternity