Road Marching

[Willard]

Willard wrote:

In MP play, because there is no fatigue or speed malus, players rarely use the road network because it is just as fast, for example, to march up and over LRT as it is to take the existing road around it.

In that case you should put the penalties back on the maps.

In MP play, because there is no fatigue or speed malus, players rarely use the road network because it is just as fast, for example, to march up and over LRT as it is to take the existing road around it. That simply doesn't make much sense.

You are absolutely correct, that makes no sense at all. But if that is what you observe then that is a GCM problem, not an NSD issue. With the stock maps, if you take the trip you describe, up and over LRT and through DD to the PO the trip will be slower and more tiring than if it was done via the road.

I'm not sure what Willard is talking about. GCM maps have faster road speeds and it takes longer to cross fences, though the fatigue penalty for crossing fences is lowered. There are no fences on LRT, but on the GCM Devil's Den map, it's faster to use the roads. Road marching is much more prevalent in GCM games on GCM maps. I started this thread talking about the differences between stock maps (Pipe Creek) and GCM maps concerning road speeds.

That is exactly what I am talking about. I messed up when I was typing and I meant SP not MP. It doesn't make sense that we have to mod the game to have it make sense to use roads.

[Willard]

Willard wrote:
You are absolutely correct, that makes no sense at all. But if that is what you observe then that is a GCM problem, not an NSD issue. With the stock maps, if you take the trip you describe, up and over LRT and through DD to the PO the trip will be slower and more tiring than if it was done via the road.

MTG - I messed up in my post, please see my edit. I have to respectfully disagree as the road bonuses in GCM are far superior than the penalties in SP/stock. When we tried to play SP/stock rules several versions ago, there was no disadvantage with cross-country marching.

[Marching Thru Georgia]

My comments are correct for either Sp or MP. If you move cross country your troops will tire while on the roads they do not. Tired troops move slower than rested troops over all terrain and along roads. The only flaws in the movement part of the game that I have found are that; 1. marching uphill seems to have no effect on fatigue, 2. artillery can cross all terrain. But those are minor points.

With regard to the Pipe Creek maps, they have large swathes of open ground. That carries no penalties for movement. However in real life, crossing open ground, even long stretches of it, is not particularly tiring.

[Garnier]

Tired troops move slower than rested troops over all terrain and along roads.

This is not true in stock. Attached is a save file from right before the test, and two screenshots of it in progress. I had two equal units march the same distance, one of them was exhausted and the other rested. They both started at the same time and arrived at the same time, and stayed side-by-side the entire march.

The test is repeatable in 1.4, using that savegame, with no mods. I don't expect to convince MTG, just everyone else.

[Saddletank]

Other discussions aside, the question seems to be "Do we need roads to be faster than cross country movement?"

My view is, no we don't, because cross country movement brings with it it's own set of penalties and players are faced (in the unmodified game) with a simple choice of going across country and risking tiring their troops and having them slowed by obstacles or marching them along roads which may take longer due to their less direct nature but which will get them to the battle fresh.

Remember that the infantry frequently didn't march on the road surface at all, but in the fields immediately to either flank. I've just read the account in Stephen Sears book on Gettysburg that relates Wadsworths division of Reynolds corps marching towards Gettysburg up the Emmitsburg Road on 1st July. Parties of engineers went on ahead to dismantle the rail fences to allow the infantry to use the fields immediately adjacent to the roads while the artillery, couriers and other transport used the road itself.

So 'marching by road' may not actually imply 'walking on a superior surface', it merely means what I said in my first post which is 'marching using a visible and useful marker line - a set of waypoints through villages and farms and over creeks and through woods that helps to make a march simpler and communication between army elements easier'.

In the game, all units walk along the centre of the road and often artillery is jumbled up with infantry. I actually have no issue with this, despite the messy visuals because in my mind's eye, I see the infantry marching at the sides or in the fields adjacent and the guns on the centre of the road.

GCM guys - you will discover that the Pipe Creek Maps have numerous, dozens and dozens of road errors. MTG has spent weeks fixing these and his Couriers and Maps mod presents a much better .bmp file for these three maps. Maybe using these updated .bmp files will help as the road network will become more 'column direction friendly'.

[KG_Soldier]

I don't think MTG's couriers and maps mod is compatible with the GCM mod.

And it's not a big deal, since road marching is so slow on that map, most players won't use them anyway.

[Saddletank]

No, I meant Garnier could pull the greyscale bitmaps out of MTGs mod and use those with the GCM. That would fix all the broken road problems.

[Willard]

Other discussions aside, the question seems to be "Do we need roads to be faster than cross country movement?"

My view is, no we don't, because cross country movement brings with it it's own set of penalties and players are faced (in the unmodified game) with a simple choice of going across country and risking tiring their troops and having them slowed by obstacles or marching them along roads which may take longer due to their less direct nature but which will get them to the battle fresh.

Did you not look at anything posted by Garnier? There is no penalty in an unmodded game. That is the point we are trying to make. Sure your troops may be tired but in the unmodded game that doesn't impact anything except the fact they can't doubletime. If the troops arrive at the same point at the same time using the same route with no fatigue malus there is a problem.

That aside, your assessment of the impact of road infrastructure on the movement of large numbers of troops simple doesn't withstand any critical historical analysis (FYI, the expansion and management of the Roman Empire hinged upon the efficient Roman road network). Sure, troops tactically deploying in short distances may or may not use a road network to get from point A to point B. No one here is debating this issue. More importantly, your own historical example proves the point we are trying to make: absent the efforts made by the commanders to dismantle fences, the movement cross-country was inefficient compared to using the road network. In that specific example, the commanders had to allocate additional resources to prepare the route for the incoming troops TO MAKE IT FASTER, LESS FATIGUING AND MORE EFFICIENT FOR THEM TO PASS.

What we are questioning is the movement of troops over distances between that tactical deployment and operation deployment distance.

Per MTG's post:

My comments are correct for either Sp or MP. If you move cross country your troops will tire while on the roads they do not. Tired troops move slower than rested troops over all terrain and along roads. The only flaws in the movement part of the game that I have found are that; 1. marching uphill seems to have no effect on fatigue, 2. artillery can cross all terrain. But those are minor points.

This is simply not true and that is what we are pointing out. As for the impact on marching uphill have no effect on fatigue and artillery crossing all terrain, those are not minor points. The rebel attack on Day 2 would have really benefited had Longstreet's men not been gassed moving through their attack. Heck I can imagine Longstreet telling Hood: "General don't worry, there is no uphill fatigue malus so go straight on up that big hill." The fact that artillery can cross all terrain is problematic. The reason more Union guns were not on LRT was because the ground made it virtually impossible to get them up there and deploy. They did eventually manage to get a battery up there with some extreme effort.

Look, none of us criticizing and I want to make this point because it appears that people are becoming unnecessarily defensive. We are raising these issues because we believe they are important points and because we all have a vested interest in seeing SOW succeed and grow.

As for the issue about the Pipe Creek maps, the point isn't whether MTG or Garnier can/can't mod them. The point is we paid for the maps and they don't work like they should. If they were released for free there really is no grounds to complain (don't look a gift horse in the mouth). But we shouldn't have to mod maps that we pay for to get them to work and there is a similar problem with the Antietam maps as well.

I generally don't like to complain as I have received much enjoyment from this series. That being said, I have been a loyal customer and purchased CWBR, TC2M, SOW-G, SOW-PC and SOW-A. I want to see the series continue to thrive and flourish but I also don't want my loyalty taken for granted.

[william1993]

Why are you arguing over roads. It's a game. I say, use/don't use the roads based on your situation and when it'd be useful to you. It's just roads. The game is still good, regardless of whether roads are historical or ahistorical.

[NY Cavalry]

William,

This is what grown ups do. They argue about insignificant things usually taking simple statements and turning the whole discussion into an argument. Then we challenge each other to duels where one person is usually killed.