MP Scenario1: The Attack on Iuka

Mr. Digby wrote:I wanted to mention that after checking our mission and orders, the town of Iuka actually does not figure at all in the CSA brief. (...) All in all this was a brilliant game, well organised and quite subtle in that, if both sides did only as they were ordered, there would not be that much fighting and both sides could claim victory.

Yes, this is intentional. The idea for the Iuka scenario was having two sides with their own goals - and you don't know exactly what the intention of your enemy is. So it is the corps commanders decision if and where to start a major battle. Unlike "Team A must attack location X" and "Team B must defend location X".

Mr. Digby wrote:That exciting finale to the game was what Kriegspiels are all about, confusion and fog of war.

I like scenarios where you don't know before how strong the enemy is, but especially in HITS mode it can get very difficult to assess the strength of your enemy.
I think especially the US players were a bit cautious, so it became only a skirmish and not a battle. Sometimes I wondered "Why the hell don't we take cemetery hill now, it looks only slightly defended...". I liked the manouvering on the US side though, it felt like the corps was moving as a disciplined formation. And I think it wasn't unlikely for federal generals to advance very cautiously.

Mr. Digby wrote:The game could benefit from an adjustment or two - either the supply wagons need to start further south so there's a more real chance of them being captured or the Feds need to have their orders adjusted to make their task more urgent, so that their forces get towards the critical map locations sooner, or possibly have the western side of the map emphasized more as the likely retreat route of Sterling Price's army. Us Rebs had our coats off sitting in the sun drinking mint juleps most of the game...

I also think the US starting positions could be a bit closer to the north. The supply wagons are already as far away as possible.
I am thinking of rearranging the CSA OOB, so it is only 1 division with inf brigades, artillery and cavalry. No need for a corps commander then.

Outlook
I will design my next scenarios to work already with 6 players. Iuka needs at least 8 which can get difficult.
I am a bit unsure about cavalry. I like it very much to see them in-game but I hear others who think they aren't playable in SOW. One solution might be to add them only as single squadrons to an infantry brigade.

I'd like to command cavalry more. I am sure there's a technique to using them and I want to find out what it is. Last night Steve seemed to do very well as Armstrong and I think cavalry has a certain "threat presence" that outweighs its actual ability. A unit of mounted horsemen could do you a good deal of harm very quickly if you don't move to counter it and the fact the horses are blown is kept concealed which is a good feature of the game.

Yes, an excellent game, and many thanks to Stefan for the work went into it.

I was in a somewhat unusual position. Although I was in the Union side, I had seen both side's briefings, so was honour-bound not to alert my team-mates to the existence of the escaping Confederate supply train. I hope they will forgive me in the fullness of time

As the Union rearguard, I can testify to the trouble that Armstrong's cavalry caused. Well done Steve (I think). Although they lacked the strength to do serious damage, they did cause me some concern on more than one occasion. I almost lost my guns to them at one point, as the battery had been in action continuously from early on, was exhausted, and lagged as we manouvred around the enemy flank. When the enemy cavalry appeared, I had to bring up infantry to drive them off, but not before a couple of the crews routed. A small vignette of the action, and I doubt that anyone other than Steve & I were aware of the tussle, but great fun.

Looking forward to the next one.......

Martin

Thanks again to Stefan for an excellent scenario, and to all the players for an excellent game.

I have been replaying it in my head since, thinking what I / we should have done better - surely a sign of a really engaging battle. I wish I had realised there were real supplies in Iuka, and that they could be moved out!

Mr. Digby wrote:The game could benefit from an adjustment or two - either the supply wagons need to start further south so there's a more real chance of them being captured or the Feds need to have their orders adjusted to make their task more urgent

Thinking about this some more (in preparation for any congressional hearings on the conduct of the war!) I wonder if amending the USA briefing might make it clearer that there is real stuff to be captured:
Occupy the city of Iuka and capture supplies >> Occupy the city of Iuka and capture any Confederate supply wagons you find there.

Having said that, my plan was to get to Cemetery Hill asap and my orders to my division commanders were to get there before engaging the enemy, if at all possible. We did that OK, though it probably should haveeen much quicker, as Stefan said.

Once at Cemetery Hill, I was happy to sit and 'protect' Iuka so we could occupy it before the end of the game - I had wrongly assumed (I know ...) that putting troops in Iuka would equate to capturing virtual supplies. After about 90 minutes I thought we'd accomplished half our objectives, while suffering half the casualties we inflicted on the enemy, so had done pretty well.

Mr. Digby wrote:I would definitely like to play this scenario again from the Federal side, even if both sides are aware of the others orders; that might just make it a lot more exciting.

Me too, still from the Federal side.

I look forward hugely to further instalments & to campaign battles.

Jeff

I played as the confederate cavalry command during this game. I really enjoyed it as it was my 1st hits/courier
battle against a live opponent, much more fun than vs the AI.
That being said it was also my 1st use of cavalry since playing through the scenarios almost 2 years ago.
Cavalry by courier was a bear to get the hang of and it almost cost me early when I was trying to distract the
yankee south flank, when I lined up 3 of my 4 regiments on fence lines and started plinking at the Yank Infantry. Well they didnt like it much and fixed bayonets to run me off while also charging 1 of my regiments with cav. I almost wasnt able to disengage as my guys didnt want to mount up and get away especially as determined as the Yanks were to stick it to me. Most likely my inexperience with couriers and cav led to some early frustration and compounded my errors. The cav did manage to disengage and broke off contact to regroup and continue to harass the yankee flank. The small engagement later when I caught some batteries lagging behind was fun and once again the Yanks came at me hard with Infantry and forced me to back away. At around this time I got orders to move to the opposite flank to help guard the withdrawl from Iuka.
When I got there it was just in time to help cover the withdrawl but I got conflicting orders and almost let the guns get routed but was able to get some horses back to cover the final withdrawl.
I personally could have really benefitted from a better understanding of how the cav functions in courier mode.
Great scenario, I really like how there were 2 different sets of victory conditions that werent just mirror images of each other.
Im looking forward to more games like this in the future