AARs - post here all after battle comments and replay files

Which stats in particular are needed to be increased ?

Compare to Napoleon

I'd be in favour of boosting up the aggressiveness stats of the Austrians, generally.

From my own readings, from 1809 onwards, I don't think they lacked aggression particularly. Uncoordinated attacks and combined arm failings were a bigger issue. Having said that they were able to form a massive Grand battery at Espern-Essling.

The Russian army in our games are much more aggressive but, historically, they had a strong defensive doctrine IMHO

Part of the problem with the battle in the west was that it took too long to start. The vanguard division was only one brigade and some guns against 2 division. I don't know exactly how the AI makes decisions, but they seemed pretty disinterested in attacking a force more than twice their size. I marched two battalions of Young Guard up and knocked their guns out and the whole force immediately pulled back and I intercepted a message saying they were fighting a superior force and required assistance. At that time Miko was asking me for a brigade to come on the right as there was another division pushing him. I brought a brigade over but only as far as I could without leaving a large gap between us. I was certain more Austrians would be coming.

The problem for them was the long march stretched them all out. Four batteries showed up completely undefended. I scattered them away behind the big hill but couldn't run them down. Eventually the rest of the Austrians attacked and brought their scattered guns back on top of the big hill. That was when I started taking casualties. I had maybe 500 until the last hour or so of the game, then I lost another 1000. They were able to put some serious pressure on me with all their numbers, and there was a moment Miko's cavalry was blocking my center guns right as that big mass of infantry was pushing down on me. I was worried it might unravel my position but he moved them just in time. All their guns came back and deployed on the big hill and started chipping some casualties away from me. At the very end I was just getting to that point where you cause enough damage to a brigade's attack that they stop moving forward.

They just took too long. If they had me under pressure for another hour I may have had to shift back which could have been difficult. As has been discussed them all coming down in one big blob also made it easier on my guns as well. And they way they flubbed their grand battery early on also didn't help. Had a player been in their position they likely would have foregone the infantry attack and just sat them behind the reverse slope and shot me with all the guns until I had to move. Though then again, there wasn't a lot of time for them to do that either. I did feel quite stretched out though, and there was some tense moments, they just didn't have the time and they had a hard time with getting past Miko's cavalry.

1. I'm very curious of Kevin's take on it and can't wait to read explanation how his Corps did the heavy lifting again

Well, Lefebvre's Corps did not do much heavy lifting, but I think we can all agree that they were the lynchpin that held the army together. I am quite sure their presence near the Austrian objective and central to our forces was of great comfort to the army. They were succored by the knowledge that the safety of the army was in the hands of our most adroit commanders, who were at the ready to repel any breakthrough of our formations.

And as evidence of how concerned we were I even got up from my seat between the main course and pudding to poke my head outside and listen. I couldn't hear too much cannon fire but rest assured that if I had, Kevin and I would have rushed to the whole army's assistance at the drop of a napkin.

Friday's game was a case study in why you really want a good map maker and clearly-written initial orders to determine who exactly is in charge.  As much as I detest the I Corps commander and the ground upon which he walks, even I was amazed an shocked at the brazen disrespect shown to him by the IV Corps, which was CLEARLY in a subordinate command relationship.  And to make matters worse, IV Corps did not initially deploy where they were supposed to.  Shameful display of military unprofessionalism. And at the end, their clear disregard for the safety of the army -- forgetting entire brigades and ordering the wrong lunch at Quatre Bras which caused long lines and corresponding delays in troop deployments, brought down an entire British division upon them from the rear.   Egad.

What happened in that game should be taught in management schools. It reminded me the situation of many too big/badly organized companies where I had occasions to work for. Two departments have different directors, different objectives but overlap and there is nobody above these 2 directors to settle conficts. Then ego and ridiculous goals take over generally leading to huge money waste before the next restructuration 

1 - A very good day

It started very well, after the surprise to found Phil West of my position, we worked in good coordination to rout the english division prisonner on the NW of the map. D'Erlon even agreed to tell me his positions with real clear clues. Miko and Martin were heading south smoothly.

2 - The clash

After Miko took Quatre Bras easily as ordered and Martin found ennemy in Thyle, I ordered the last one to hold while Miko should go south to meet 1st corps coming from West, and slightly turn East. But no way, 1st corps didn't agree to go to Lasaille and take it even if it actually needed to go through it anyway. It stubbornly wanted to go directly to Thyle and march through our corps instead of taking Lasaille first. Then I received a message from Kevin saying that Lasaille was empty. What a joke ...
I then ordered Miko to let a brigade there I move east to attack Thyle through the forest in the south while my division will attack SW to support Teste.

3 - Looking for the truth

5 minutes later I received a message from Miko saying he is unable to enter Lasaille due to heavy forces. I was lost... but choose to trust my faithful division commanders. Then I turned back and let I corps deal with it own problems, sweet revenge  . Martin will only support but have already done much of the work.

When I arrived east of Lasaille, I was very surprised to found the town empty and Miko fighting North of it against a british division that were even defending the objective. Was Miko on I corps side trying to intox me ?    

The final attack on Thyle could have a 5 side attack perfectly orchestrated if I corps didn't rush in the middle asking everyone to move aside.  . I should say that most of the success in his battle (even if I don't know the outcome) is accountable to IV corps that tooks both his objectives.

I'm curious to know casualties and watch the replay if someone have it.

If I'm blunt I need to say I didn't enjoy this scenario at all. It was just too silly. I think we have stepped over a line in trying to be tough on players and to dump confusion on them and have gone beyond what is reasonable. I think its fine if two corps commanders do not co-operate but I'd rather see that developing organically from players or shared/contested objectives and not fixed from a scenario. Of course corps commanders often were at loggerheads but this was a personal thing with a background and not something manufactured.

We also I think need to have at least a reasonably accurate idea of who is where and why and what they are doing. At least if we are playing one of the better organised armies. Yesterdays chaos may have suited a Spanish 1808 army and just possibly the early war Prussians but I don't even think the 1805 Austrians and Russians were this inept.

If we do another SNAFU like this, please let me know in advance and I'll sit it out. Not my idea of relaxing fun at all.

Part of it is experimenting at a corps and army command level since we have more players. Injection of disharmony of command was one element. And it would not be the first time a corps showed up where it wasn’t supposed to. Granted some of that needs to be manufactured in this case. Rather than tell the corps commanders there was friction I chose to given them the exact same guidance (e.g. they were overall in command) to make that dialogue a bit more real

In any event, it was worth a shot to see how it played out.

Enjoy the game today!  See you all Friday

Apologies to Vince - It wasn't my day at all... I somehow missed your message about 1st Corps being West... so I was confused by every subsequent message from you. I think you told me to attack southern objective from North East to make some room for another corps.. so I though you've just mixed the directions and you meant North West... that's why I was heading there and bumped on British division with lots of cavalry... don't think it would make much difference if I went straight south as this division was to engage me anyway.
Can't remember if we crashed again but we decided not to continue to the very end as battle seemed won... so... only on the replay viewer I realised I had 4th Infantry brigade.. and it was pretty damn good one - consisting Old Guard... you can see it sitting at the starting position...
and the brigade you ordered me to direct East - I directed it West ... near the end you can see that enemy division is approaching QB from ENE and their cavalry is bouncing back, probably from the rear battalion of my brigade that formed square... It's now an open question if I would be able to stop this division from retaking QB... You did order me to move North, after you had secured Southern objective... I was in process of doing so, but without cavalry it would be difficult task... depending on how aggressive AI would have been... and if I would realise that I had another brigade "remained in reserve" north of QB...

I really didn't expect to play a "pelota vasca" match yesterday around Vitoria, with the dead heads of our Spanish counterparts acting as balls.
Funnily enough, it wasn't until the first break they shutup screaming each other confused imprecations regarding tribunals of inquisition, sending to the stake, etc.
Thank you Martin for the invitation. Paroxysmal experience, but one I'd be glad to occasionaly repeat.

The inquisitorial threat was actually meant for the French. My division was shot up and broken by that point so all I had by that point was words and pithy. I tried to convince Blake to release the secret weapon we had been developing in the colonies: el Chupacabre. He didn't listen though. Or maybe he did and we will only find out when we find some dead goats.

Thanks to everyone for participating - I know, maybe it wasn't too much fun for Austrian side but probably a bit more than for Spanish side in previous one. I'm now persuaded that this scenario is tilted towards French side too much... I roughly assess Austrian chance to win at about 15% - The puzzles need to fall into right place, right decisions must be made and in the right time, plus executed by decent commanders... mistakes are likely to happen and in this scenario French players are likely to exploit them... and it's too simple for French - just race east and use cavalry to delay Austrian main Corps...
Thanks to Grog for pointing out about non-existing 3rd battery that is listed in Ulm's division OOB... this battery is actually in another division, I just forgot to delete it from OOB of Ulm...

I would agree from the games we played of that scenario it does seem a little French favored. I think it's certainly possible for the Austrians to win, they just need to make all of the right decisions, make almost no mistakes, and have everything go perfectly. There were a few things that could have made our recent game closer. If Thunder hadn't lost his cavalry in the beginning we may have been able to push the advantage of us having mixed divisions over the French relying on one player. Maybe we could have won in a local area while Kevin was off fighting in a different side of the battle. I think I probably could have pushed up that road before Martin put his guns on it and possibly denied him the position that was the final nail in our coffin, though it'd have been a very close-run thing judging from the replay. Different strategies could of course present different results but it's hard to say from a distance how they would have worked.

I think the French just have a slight edge in several areas that add up. They have better and more cavalry that is unified. They are faster on the march. They can get to the escape area before the Austrians (with exception to the one Austrian division that is farther North: he may be able to beat them there. Fortunately none of their advantages are particularly huge so it does come quite close. Maybe if Austrians in the west had a little more cavalry, even if it was still less than the French, then that would open up a risky option of trying to engage the French cavalry in a fight. This would possibly allow the French cavalry to be weakened, pushed away, or otherwise be occupied while the rest of the army moves. Another option might be a bigger zone that the Austrians have to get to? This would prevent the French from being able to stuff 3 divisions in the zone and completely exclude entrance and it would allow the Austrians to try and be a little bit more surprising on where they're going to go.

It is a unique scenario though and even if its not exactly balanced it provides a nice variety of tasks and goals for a game. Certainly worth tweaking or coming up with a Mk II version.

Not all the Austrian divisions have cavalry do they? I would give a 2-regt brigade of light cav to those that don't. I also think Ehey's idea of adding a 3rd exit road to widen the area the Austrians can go for would open the game up. With these changes I'd be happy to try it again.

Not all the Austrian divisions have cavalry do they? I would give a 2-regt brigade of light cav to those that don't. I also think Ehey's idea of adding a 3rd exit road to widen the area the Austrians can go for would open the game up. With these changes I'd be happy to try it again.

Yes, the 6 regiments on Austrian side are split between 2 out of 3 divisions in the West and division in the East.
There are several ways of balancing this.. probably the easiest would be to scrap the heavy brigade from French side... reducing it to only 4 regiments vs 6 that are dispersed on Austrian side... but you saw how Vince cavalry distracted our move... - I think we were lucky there that Austrian CinC decided to send Kottulinsky that far East... so I could go around it and occupy the hill... although again Vince cavalry stopped my move north and infantry attack fixed me in place, so your timely appearing on my right "closed the door"...
you can see from replay that initial Kevin's action caused massive distraction to Austrian plan (and possibly Thunder's morale)... Grog's division could have been at least 20 minutes earlier north-east of Vince's division and that could result in much more bloody encounter as you would need to put serious effort to stop him... bare in mind - French had 3 infantry division and a cavalry division... while Austrian had 4 full Infantry divisions form which 3 had added cavalry brigades.. so if somehow Austrian could get this infantry numbers advantage to use, French would have much harder task...

In our first run of this scenario I did tell both sides that exit roads should be actually exit area stretching from the river all the way down to the southern edge of the map... I forgot to do it this time... in our first try this didn't matter as we were attacking from north anyway... but this time it could mean that Grog's division could be considered as rescued

I'll do similar scenario to this but maybe on another map and with different force split - maybe instead of lone division there should be two Austrian Corpses?

I'm still wondering why my red devils, fresh as roses and well supported, surrendered to those reactionary white knights after outflanking them, yesterday...
2:17:21 @ Ehey's streaming time zone.
I told Montbrun the origin of their jackets had always been rather suspicious to me since Peninsula, anyway.
British Masonic lodges spread everywhere from Sicily bottom up.

I looked a bit under the game engine's hood...
From what I could understand, if they were receiving a leader bonus, they should have never surrended.
This is a mandatory precondition.
My brigadier seems fairly close I'd say. Though I cannot be sure they were within his influence radius, honestly.
Kevin, is there any place in AI DLL where you send some very special commands by chance?
I don't think vanilla's did. eComSurrender should just end the battle?
Thank you anyway. For yesterday too.

Code:

void CUnit::rout(void) // but the same goes for getAway, retreat, etc.
{
 unit->mainTarget = -1;
 unit->routTicks = 1080;
 
 if (!unit->enemyList.empty()) {
 bool bBlocked = false;
 CFixedPoint64_28 angle;
 unit->checkBlockedSafeSpotAngleWithinDistance(CUtil::YToU(15_yds), angle, bBlocked);
 if (bBlocked) {
 unit->surrend(nullptr);
 return;
 }
 else {
 // ... TODO ...
 }
 }
 
 // ... TODO ...
}

const CFixedPoint64_28 &CUnit::checkBlockedSafeSpotAngleWithinDistance/*sub_51CAA0*/(const CFixedPoint64_28 &dist, CFixedPoint64_28 &outAngle, bool &outBlocked)
{
 CFixedPoint64_28 theta{ 0.f };
 
 if (!bCampaign) {
 if (unit->sub_51CEF0()) {
 outBlocked = true;
 outAngle = theta;
 return outAngle;
 }
 }
 
 // ... TODO ...
 // loop similar to sub_51CEF0
 // but outBlocked will never be set here anyway

 return outAngle;
}

bool CUnit::sub_51CEF0(void)
{
 if (unit->unitBonus > 0 || unit->leaderBonus > 0)
 return false;
 
 std::vector<CFixedPoint64_28> theArr;
 for (const auto &kv : unit->enemyList) {
 if (kv.dist <= 100_yds && kv.unit->canFight()) {
 const auto theta = unit->sprites[0].currPos.getAngleDiff(kv.unit->sprites[0].currPos.loc, true);
 if (!theArr.empty() && theta <= theArr.back()) {
 for (auto i = 0; i != theArr.size(); ++i) {
 if (theta <= theArr[i]) {
 theArr.sub_51F6B0(i, theta); // assign?
 break;
 }
 }
 }
 else {
 theArr.sub_51F2C0(theta); // push_back?
 }
 }
 }

 if (theArr.empty()) {
 theArr.sub_51F2C0(CFixedPoint64_28(0.f)); // push_back?
 }

 auto theta = 360.f - theArr.back() + theArr.front();
 for (auto i = 1; i != theArr.size(); ++i) {
 const auto theta2 = theArr[i] - theArr[i - 1];
 if (theta2 > theta) {
 theta = theta2;
 }
 }

 return theta < CFixedPoint64_28(100);
}

EDIT: found more code that could trigger a unit's surrender.
UpdateAI has a method for routed units (and another for fallback/retreat) that is called when routTimer becomes less or equal to 0 ticks.
If the routed unit isn't receiving unit or leader bonuses, then for each enemy unit in the list within 40 yards that is active, infantry or cavalry type, not in state routed/fallback/retreat, morale >= 3, men >= 2, the first one satisfying these conditions triggers a sound, from the second it calls CUnit::Surrender (argument is the enemy unit, not NULL like above).

The method for units falling back or retreating is similar but with a 100yds range, another geometrical test involving the polygon/hull around the attacker's sprites vs cracking unit's flag pos, and finally a 1-100 random number check (comparison thresholds are taken from a constant table sampled by eGameMoralePts and eGameMoraleBonus's attributes levels... they can have values like 50, 75 or 100).

Discovered right now that in order to get the support bonus from a nearby friendly unit, both of them must be able to fight (not the case of my routed cavalry).
Otherwise the LOS code resets the value to 0 and then just skip any additional update.
Makes sense but still doesn't explain why their leader's bonus wasn't greater than 0 at that point...

Kevin, is there any place in AI DLL where you send some very special commands by chance?

No, I am innocent. It is the game engine at work. Unless those Austrians had low morale and were very disorganized, attacking them with such a small force will always end badly. Attacking the flank or rear of an enemy gives a large morale bonus, but not large enough to offset the difference in size. As Ehey always says, "size matters."

Mike and I proved an effective team once again if I dare to say so myself. I was eager to get across the river at first when there was no enemy there but his wise council suggested letting the Austrians play their hand first. It worked out quite well and we were able to identify the Austrians as concentrating on the western objective. Things settled into a bloody infantry affair that I couldn't keep track of. I had several over-sized cavalry regiments to deal with. An extremely brilliant placement of my smaller battery (mostly 4lbs with some 6lbs) I was able to keep the enemy cavalry on the west away while Mike took Austerlitz with Phil's support. The enemy infantry at Austerlitz were wiped out, leaving a clear field to strike those juicy artillery pieces. Unfortunately they were defended by a few extra thicc Austrian horsemen. Seeing as I had no option and time was ticking ever on ward I engaged their massive regiments with my full force. They were soundly defeated.

After that big battle I had to rest my cavalry, which was an effective time to do so because the western divisions had started moving towards us and Mike needed some time to move his men up. Then we found the enemy heavy cavalry which we had seen earlier. They were of course at least 4000 men to a regiment and there were TWO regiments of them, with some light support in the background as well as infantry in squares. I sent in some lights to try and get the heavies to chase them back. I expected the lights to take a few casualties as they ran away and then I would charge them with my own heavies in the flank/rear. I fumbled the orders to get the heavies out and they were delayed. The bait light units did eventually get away from the enemy heavies, but were broken and completely disorganized. Fortunately they were well trained enough to regroup in the back. Eventually my heavies got into the enemy's and it was enough to destroy one and force the other to retreat.

Then even more enemy lights showed up. I rested my forced again as the tides of battle were slipping out of the enemy's favor so we could catch our breath. I returned the regrouped brigade to active duty. Their status bars were totally full. Full moral, full organization. Things didn't go very well for them when they got into it though. They surrendered really quickly. I wonder if that status bar wasn't reading correctly. I quite enjoyed managing cavalry under the new system as I had to either cycle units more responsibly, or rest units responsibly and planning that around the battle was quite fun. But now more then before knowing the status of your men, or at least an approximation, is more important. I recall Kevin saying once the organization bar isn't really very accurate. Is there a way we can get the information to the player accurately? Would it be possible the AI brigade commander send a message saying 'Sir my men are tired and disorganized and we'd like to sit down please." or something?

I like not having an accurate description of how a unit is doing, I think its realistic. For cavalry commanders managing your assets is now even more important and resting brigades after they've had a bit of action is all you can really do.

When I captured Hradisch my main French brigade was completely shot so even though it was my biggest I left it there as garrison because using it again would be asking too much. By the time we attacked the western objective I only had my Saxon brigade left and they must have been eating paella and calamari because they'd turned into Spaniards. I really needed a garde brigade to smash through those last few enemy units stopping me getting to the objective.

I do know that the status bars are not accurate or completely reliable. The full bar on either one after they've been a bit bashed about is not the same as a full bar when they are fresh.

The Organization status bar always shows the correct value. The Morale bar only shows that a unit has 100% of the maximum value it can have at any point. So if it is 2 points from routing, it can still read 100% if it has been fully rallied. It's a bug that has existed since SOWGB.

The Morale bar being inaccurate certainly explains it then. They were actually fully organized, they just had low moral.

I'm with Diggers re the morale bar.  If it is a bug, I think it's a historically accurate one, and wouldn't wish to see it modded-away.

I mainly play GB (and mods thereof).  As Kevin implies, units become increasingly brittle as the battle develops.  But you don't know how brittle.  I get a real buzz when a line unexpectedly starts to crack, even if it's mine.  Knowing everything, means that's less likely to happen, as you can carefully manage things in a way that doesn't seem right to me.

Organization or fatigue seems much more easy for a commander to assess.  Are the individual platoons & companies in their correct position or have they become mixed-up in combat?  Are all the men armed or have some lost or damaged theirs?  Are all of the command positions filled or are some now vacant?  What is their physical condition?  All of these can be observed and managed.

Looking into men's souls is surely much more problematic?

Martin J