Remove ads

Army of Liberty: a Fantasy Revolutionary Warfare Quest

Reader mode
NSchwerte said:
Cephid have tactical considerations, but I don't think they majorly impact the larger considerations.

Being able to have 1 or 2 units cross the units everywhere doesn't really help when it means that you are elite divisions are then stranded without artillery and cavalry support.

I guess they would be useful as a raiding force - move across the river, attack something and if a response comes just go back across the river.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I mean, you can shoot across a river. It's not necessarily ideal range-wise, but you could bombard the other side somewhat if the river isn't particularly wide. There is also the option of bringing gun boats along for fire support with the wider ones, though that would require some special modelling in-universe. Even without fire support, some commando forces that could flank the enemy in addition to an attack across a crossing or bridge would be helpful by themselves. Though what would work best is a corps mostly made of cephids, acting in a similar way to a marine corps.
 
[X] March for the Raoille. Daurstein was only the first step of your grand plan. Norn is wide open for the taking. You'll march north, seize the bridge over the Raoille, and...
-[X] And hold the north bank. You'll establish a position on the north bank of the river, seizing perhaps the most important strategic crossing of the front. You can make it hell for the Nornish Army to try and reclaim their beloved natural barrier. The Convention's orders were not to operate north of the Raoille, but they'll have to understand the strategic necessity of a position on the far side. 5 days. 2 Army Actions allowed.
 
[X] March for the Raoille. Daurstein was only the first step of your grand plan. Norn is wide open for the taking. You'll march north, seize the bridge over the Raoille, and...
-[X] And hold the north bank. You'll establish a position on the north bank of the river, seizing perhaps the most important strategic crossing of the front. You can make it hell for the Nornish Army to try and reclaim their beloved natural barrier. The Convention's orders were not to operate north of the Raoille, but they'll have to understand the strategic necessity of a position on the far side. 5 days. 2 Army Actions allowed.

The bit from Photomajig about the bridges/crossings leaves me uncertain again, and so I'm going to null-vote until I figure out which way I fall. I think North Bank might still have it for me, but I'm not actually as certain now as I was before that comment.

[X] March for the Raoille. Daurstein was only the first step of your grand plan. Norn is wide open for the taking. You'll march north, seize the bridge over the Raoille, and...
-[X] And hold the south bank. You'll establish a position on the south bank of the river, daring the Nornish Army to come and try it. It's a good position to hold back any potential Nornish attack, and keeps the Convention happy with you. 4-5 days. 2 Army Actions allowed.
 
Red Rationalist said:
I mean, you can shoot across a river. It's not necessarily ideal range-wise, but you could bombard the other side somewhat if the river isn't particularly wide. There is also the option of bringing gun boats along for fire support with the wider ones, though that would require some special modelling in-universe. Even without fire support, some commando forces that could flank the enemy in addition to an attack across a crossing or bridge would be helpful by themselves. Though what would work best is a corps mostly made of cephids, acting in a similar way to a marine corps.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

You can fire support over a river, but it's a major disadvantage.

In the battle we just had, Von Trotha mispositioning his infantry 1 tile forward meant his artillery was neutered, shooting across a river means you are forced to be positioned in a way where the enemy can shoot the cephids in medium range while their screens are out of range of your artillery
 
NSchwerte said:
You can fire support over a river, but it's a major disadvantage.

In the battle we just had, Von Trotha mispositioning his infantry 1 tile forward meant his artillery was neutered, shooting across a river means you are forced to be positioned in a way where the enemy can shoot the cephids in medium range while their screens are out of range of your artillery
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The way I see it, holding the bridge-head is what would matter the most, so cephids would reduce the time an army needs to travel while also having stronger forces on the other side at the start. After that you need to hold until you can bring reinforcements over the bridge. This might also be a really good scenario for horse artillery, since you can shift them forward rather rapidly and give your own troops some fire support quickly.
 
[X] March for the Raoille. Daurstein was only the first step of your grand plan. Norn is wide open for the taking. You'll march north, seize the bridge over the Raoille, and...
-[X] And hold the south bank. You'll establish a position on the south bank of the river, daring the Nornish Army to come and try it. It's a good position to hold back any potential Nornish attack, and keeps the Convention happy with you. 4-5 days. 2 Army Actions allowed.
 
Welp, we got about 7 hours left to vote and it seems like the South and North bank votes are tied.

Adhoc vote count started by Restestsest on Feb 27, 2025 at 1:31 AM, finished with 175 posts and 41 votes.
Click to expand...
 
[X] March for the Raoille. Daurstein was only the first step of your grand plan. Norn is wide open for the taking. You'll march north, seize the bridge over the Raoille, and...
-[X] And hold the south bank. You'll establish a position on the south bank of the river, daring the Nornish Army to come and try it. It's a good position to hold back any potential Nornish attack, and keeps the Convention happy with you. 4-5 days. 2 Army Actions allowed.
 
@Photomajig Relveant question we haven't asked so far: Is there some kind of small town or village near the bridge we are marching to? It would make sense for there to be one, since it's a place at the crossroads with access to a major river, so there is probably a decent bit of trade passing through especially with the goods sent from or to the Markwald.

If there is, it would make holding either side of the river easier against attacks, since an army would have cover against artillery fire. One could probably turn this into a half-decent fortified position with some effort.
 
Last edited:
So, with the updated information we have on the river: I think Norn is in much tougher position than some of us expected, since there are only 2 feasible natural crossing, plus a couple to small for an army to cross without a secured beachhead. The room for clever moves is much more limited, as Norn only really has 2 options: Take the bridge by constantly wearing us down, or pin us down long enough for another army to cross. Given the defensive advantage the battlefield brings, I am reasonably confident about leaving the 6th as an auxiliary force while we take care of attempted crossings. If we don't screw up, this is grueling and slow battle that will involve heavy losses due to the defensive advantage with our battles.

In terms of army expansion: I am actually somewhat considering getting one unit of siege artillery for now. It would be expensive influence-wise (leaving us with only 50 influence), but also immensely useful for destroying enemy pontoon bridges and their own fortifications. We are going to have several pitched defensive battles somewhat comparable to defending a fortified position, so now might actually be the right moment to invest in siege artillery. We will need to get one regiment of it eventually, so yeah. Even a fairly fresh regiment could destroy a bridge in 3 or 4 hits (160 hits to destroy a bridge tile) and human artillery learns fast. This would vastly increase the risk of any crossing as there is a risk we could demolish the bridge, leaving the assault forces stranded on our side. And it could soften enemy terrain for eventual counterattack, as we are able to negate the dug in troops. Also, this would massively complicate any attempts to build pontoon bridges, who are probably fairly fragile. Definitively something to consider, if we expect to win a couple more battles.

Aside from that, I also think we can put expanding our infantry corps off for a bit since I expect our frontlines to be really small. If we are planning to expand, an increase in our artillery corps is probably the most useful, since we are defending an area of limited size rather than full battlefield with open flanks to our sides. Though there is also the option of getting another infantry regiment if we burn through a bit of influence (55 for 1100 regular infantry troops in the old economy, so an regular elf regiment plus some reserves). Which isn't a bad investment, it's just mostly an issue of time. WIth a drill regime and us using influence for reinforcing for now, we could get up to a quite respectable 7 drill this way in the coming weeks (harsh drill + recruitment T1, harsh drill + founding T2; 4+4 -1 = 7). Being on par with a nornish provincial army would have it's advantages, especially if we aim deny them other crossing by moving alongside them. The resulting losses could be compensated for by using influence, which would work out fine with winning battles (+100 = 2 thousand regular troops, more than enough for army expansion). We wouldn't gain new influence for specializing our army further, but in return our army would be fast while marching (expetional by Arnése standards anyways) and able to expand more easily if we catch a break.
 
Additional note after mathing it out: We also got decently lucky in terms of causulties. We recovered 503 of our 1045 causulties, around 48%. Somewhere north 7% of the causulties recovered we expected based on who bled. If we purely gain influence by winning the battle and mostly rely on buying regular soldiers with the old prices, battle replacements would cost us 25 influence, with a net-gain of 75. This assumes the infantry bears the brunt of the losses, which is probably a safe-ish assumption in a defensive battle centered on holding an area.

Supply is going to run out in roughly 5 weeks, which would necessitate spending actions on foraging or buying logistical support. Or overrun somebodies head quarters, if we could manage that. To be honest, there are a lot of open questions about the pace of battle, mainly how often the enemy will actually atttempt an engagement. I think an initial attempt to overrun our positions is likely, since Norn's generals seem to have overestimated our aggression and underestimated our cohesion during the battle (a bunch of starving peasents"). The key question is how many engagement we would see with our defensive posture, with the key question being if Norn is going to attempt to just punch through. A battle every week or so would drain munitions on both sides while taking a very high blood toll, though Norn might expect to eventually wear us down due to superior discipline. If so our supply and reinforcement situation is manageable just by spending influence.

In any case, I would also recommend writing a letter to Monteliviet and her 3rd army, asking her what her orders are should the Silver Duchy capitulate. Knowing if the 3rd are expected to reinforce us by marching via peregrina is going to be a critical question in planning our next moves.
 
Remove ads
Vote closed New
  • Voting
    • Scheduled vote count started by Photomajig on Feb 25, 2025 at 11:52 AM, finished with 180 posts and 42 votes.
    Click to expand...
     
  • New
  • Voting
    • Aargh! I guess it'll be okay, but I'm pretty sure we've just significantly reduced the pressure to the enemy and given them all the time in the world to raise troops and push us at their leisure. Which could theoretically buy time for us to put things together, but I really am less convinced that one extra Infantry will magically make our troops able to stand up in a line... both because that's not how it works, but also because I legit don't think that it was a problem of composition, as opposed to of simple numbers, that we faced at the latest battle.

    ...besides the fact that the majority of the new army we also have under our command is absolutely going to be unseasoned Infantry.
     
    I can picture the scene. A prolonged argument in the command tent between two camps of aides and officers. There seems to be no end to it. Then suddenly Durand stands at the head of the table and everyone is hushed, waiting for her words of purified strategic wisdom. She speaks:

    "I do not like large bodies of water and they do not seem to like me. I will not have my army crossing over a river just to cross back over in a week's time. That's two more crossings than I'd prefer."

    Thus it is settled.
     
    If we do get a longer lull, im kinda happy, thats what i wanted from digging in at Daurstein anyway.

    I think that the 6th army having time to shape up is more valuable than the Army of the Center having the time to shape up.


    Considering the Army Action, one of them will be harsh drill for sure, the other one is the question.

    I think it should be either raising a cavalry unit, cause cavalry is essential and we definitely dont want to be inferior or a Siege Artillery for the bridge destruction potential.

    The AoC normally would only have 2 Cavalry units, but i feel like thats very small and they had a monstrous amount of artillery. With von Trotha being called out as disregarding cavalry i expect that other nornish armies will have more of them, which means we are either equal or inferior currently. I would be more confident in 4 cavalry just cause i think having free cavalry to act is stronger than having free infantry to act.
     
    NSchwerte said:
    If we do get a longer lull, im kinda happy, thats what i wanted from digging in at Daurstein anyway.

    I think that the 6th army having time to shape up is more valuable than the Army of the Center having the time to shape up.


    Considering the Army Action, one of them will be harsh drill for sure, the other one is the question.

    I think it should be either raising a cavalry unit, cause cavalry is essential and we definitely dont want to be inferior or a Siege Artillery for the bridge destruction potential.

    The AoC normally would only have 2 Cavalry units, but i feel like thats very small and they had a monstrous amount of artillery. With von Trotha being called out as disregarding cavalry i expect that other nornish armies will have more of them, which means we are either equal or inferior currently. I would be more confident in 4 cavalry just cause i think having free cavalry to act is stronger than having free infantry to act.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    The one downside of raising a cavalry unit or any unit is that this decreases Drill by 1. So we have to weigh the advantage of one extra unit with the advantage of Drill 6. I feel like if we really are taking a purely defensive stance, the Siege Artillery sending a bunch of enemies into the river to drown is the funnier/grislier option.
     
    Based on previous influence costs, the main drawback of a siege artillery would be missing out on recon (50 influence left, requiring us to spend all of our influence before a battle). It's a risky move, though I think there was some mention of us being able to donate surplus field artillery for influence. In the long-term, a unit of siege artillery presents a necessary investment, as it allows us to actually take fortified positions. If we want to go on the offense, we will thank the stars that we are able to do so. One can bypass fortifications, but this by no means ideal and forces us to take longer routes, while binding forces to a siege. And even within the individual battle, the ability to knock a certain strong point out prior to advancing could be rather helpful.

    The real value of the siege artillery right now is in having the ultimate "taking our ball and going home" option, meaning we can just decide we have enough of the enemy and demolish the bridge between battles. This would make a conventional attack across the bridge even riskier, as we might decide to demolish the bridge and trap their forces on our side, which is a recipe for a loosing a lot of their forces. With a bit of clever manevouring, we could basically use this to cut off any reinforcements to the other side, meaning the force trying to take a bridgehead is now trapped and surrended by us. And if their attack is ever going too well, we can enforce a pause by spending munitions, forcing the poor sods to try and repair a bridge while our battery and halflings use them for target practice. The loss of movement options would also effect us, but we are not tasked with going on the offense for the forseeable future. The present strategic threat of us just disabling their line of movement and severely hampering their logistics (supply wagons don't like water, and neither does gun powder), meaning an offensive on the other side would become even tougher due to the river crossing crippling their logistics until the bridge is repaired.

    The trump card is pricy, but it also opens up some decent options up. We can delay a lot here, but using it also means forgoing any offensive operations for now.
     
    EagerListener said:
    @Photomajig, maybe a omake point could be spent to prevent the reduction in drill that occurs when a unit is added to the army?
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    Hmm, trading omake points for higher stats feels off, but in a weird way trading omake points for mitigations of stat loss in specific circumstances feels slightly less terrible as long as it's kept on check or carefully limited or something. But I'm also not the QM, just someone thinking about my own potential Omake points, so.
     
    If we form a unit of Siege Artillery, do we want to make the unit completely fresh (presumably with Humans), or would we rather put Marie de Lamartine in charge? Humans would level up faster, but Marie can make the unit carry extra munitions, and Siege Artillery consumes double munitions when it fires.
     
    NSchwerte said:
    If we do get a longer lull, im kinda happy, thats what i wanted from digging in at Daurstein anyway.

    I think that the 6th army having time to shape up is more valuable than the Army of the Center having the time to shape up.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    It's not the AoC I'm worried about. It's potential Bruttian and/or Silver Realm reinforcements on top of the Nornish reinforcements.

    Way back it was foreshadowed that the king wasn't in contact with just Norn, but also Bruttia.
     
    Last edited:
    Chimeraguard said:
    If we form a unit of Siege Artillery, do we want to make the unit completely fresh (presumably with Humans), or would we rather put Marie de Lamartine in charge? Humans would level up faster, but Marie can make the unit carry extra munitions, and Siege Artillery consumes double munitions when it fires.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    I would recommend getting a fresh human commander. The faster they level up, the more reliable we can destroy a key target. Any XP rank could shave a turn or so off the time to destroy a key target. Plus, logistician doesn't really matter during the shorter battles we have for now, so yeah.
     
    Reader mode
    You must login or register to reply here.
    Remove ads
    Back
    Top