SIM Game Ultimate General: Civil War Review

Something I think is quite neat as an "emergent outcome" in this game is that the Marye's Heights assault can actually be quite easy for the Federals -if they adopt Guibert's ordre mixte, the Mixed Order.
Form a thin single line along the front of Fredericksburg facing Marye's Heights and then stack as many brigades as you want right behind one another at the southern extent of the map in that section. Advance them all, with the troops in the big stack set to hold fire and all ordered to just move straight ahead (with their destination point on the other side of the Confederate position).
The linear formation engages the Confederates holding Marye's Heights and doesn't make any progress, but it prevents them firing on the flanks of the big battering ram of men. The big battering ram of men slams into the Confederates in that position - it does take pretty heavy casualties, but it also breaks through the Confederate defensive crust and gets Union troops established behind the Confederate front line.

This is exactly how the Mixed Order is supposed to work, using the line to engage the whole of the enemy line and then the column to smash through and gain tactical space. You can then take the rest of the Confederate defensive positions in the flank, thus forcing them out of their entrenchments and into an open fight.

I said above that it was an emergent outcome, and I say that because I'm not sure whether or not it was intentional.
My tactic on that map involves a long sweep with my full force to the left of the CS line, where I basically do the same tactic. Using Cav to swoop behind to get rear flank fire, getting the extreme left of the Rebel line to break and then pour troops through, rolling up the whole Rebel Army as you go.
 
My tactic on that map involves a long sweep with my full force to the left of the CS line, where I basically do the same tactic. Using Cav to swoop behind to get rear flank fire, getting the extreme left of the Rebel line to break and then pour troops through, rolling up the whole Rebel Army as you go.
The interesting thing about that is that one can argue whether it's a tactic that would be achievable in reality (because of the position of the canal). The area between the ditch and the Hazel Run however would be a feasible staging area for the column part of the mixed-order assault (albeit imperfect).

Same sort of thing can be done at Cold Harbor in game, and in fact it's not far off what happened at the Mule Shoe - use the column to approach to melee range without firing.
 
Yeah, I was going to ask about the Rappahannock Canal...
For any who have played the Fredericksburg scenario, does lighting a fire under Franklin's butt (i.e. full scale attack on Jackson's wing) work?
Yes, largely by employing the same fundamental tactic: use a light screen on your left (the open ground) and ram an assault column larger than the contemporary population of Charleston into Jackson's left. That gets your men into the trees, and once you are it's basically a slow roll up the flank.

This is a common thing, actually; French-Napoleonic columnar mass tactics actually work quite well, but they weren't part of the tactical toolkit of the 1860s US. It's just that they're one of the comparatively few period tactics the game engine can successfully simulate without some form of mods.
 
Yeah, I was going to ask about the Rappahannock Canal...
For any who have played the Fredericksburg scenario, does lighting a fire under Franklin's butt (i.e. full scale attack on Jackson's wing) work?
I have found it to be bloody, but my numbers tell. It is a tough slog through those trees. Be ready for the Rebel cavalry to come from the woods on the Confederate right and attack with force through there, similar to Marye's Heights, you can get in behind them and force them to defend multiple fronts and get them in a crossfire.
 
It's actually a pretty general rule in this game (and in common with period reality, in fact) that if you can pack together a dense enough block of troops and keep them moving you can overcome just about any linear defensive position unless it's got a wide belt of swamp in front of it... or everything has to go over a bridge or something.
This is the precise reason why the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars saw the linear formations of Europe so roughly handled by the not-very-well-trained but enthusiastic French Revolutionary armies using columnar tactics.

This also works to deal with, say, the Richmond defences. This can actually lead to a very entertaining sequence if you've got all the objectives and zapped all the Confederate units on the first go in each map, because it keeps cutting between the maps for thirty seconds while telling you the battles are getting bloodier and bloodier but you can win - you must win - despite the great casualties.

AT THE FORTS!

TO THE TRENCHES!

TO THE DEATH!

Meanwhile nothing has happened since the clock said 11 AM and by now your soldiers are taking bits of Fort Jackson as souvenirs.
 
Last edited:
I've finally beaten Antietam on MG for the Union on about the 10th attempt. I did it by being very careful and not very aggressive.

If you're too aggressive as the Union player, it rapidly goes to pieces as rebel units charge your line and shatter it. This time I adopted an "active defence" policy. Initially I placed 1st Corps in the woodline north of the Miller Cornfield (as usual) and was lucky that the rebels charged with two brigades, broke though and I was thus able to isolate and completely destroy them. I then simply absorbed the rebel pressure as he sent streams of brigades (upto Hood's Bde) into the field and I exposed them to heavy firepower concentrations. Whilst chasing down one of these brigades I occupied the heights west of the Dunker Church, which cause the rebels apoplexy and they kept trying to charge two brigades with their cavalry, and a broke them every time.

When the next phase started, I placed 12th Corps left of 1st, and started to right wheel them into the woods to flank the Miller Cornfield. I formed the 2nd Corps in the large triangular woods to the east and left them there for a while. The rebels got the big reinforcement release (Walker, McLaws and Anderson), and I had to absorb that pressure, which involved deploying the 2nd Corps on the left of 12th Corps and saw a huge amount of broken fighting at the join, which I had to put the 6th Corps into. I had to pass Morell's division over the middle bridge to demonstrate against sunken road and relieve pressure, and Anderson's division promptly counterattacked and almost drove me back over the bridge, stopped only by my arty.

In the next phase, I lined 9th Corps up to demonstrate against the bridge. This revealed the defenders allowing me to bombard them. I pushed Morell's and Sykes' divisions of 5th Corps forward a bit into contact, and pushed the cavalry and Humphrey's division (which is present in the scenario), to flank the defenders of the Burnside Bridge. The defenders turned to face Humphreys and I launched a Corps level bayonet charge on the bridge and overran the defenders. I then managed just to get the 9th Corps lined up on the slope and connected to 5th Corps when DR Jones' division attempted to counterattack.

I was then able to use 1st and 12th Corps to secure the Dunker Church, making two Corps level bayonet charges against the remaining defenders. I then turned the Sunken Road from the west, and launched a series of Corps level bayonet charges to dislodge the position. I tried to seize Sharpsburg from the north using 1st Corps, put unsupported rebel arty shot the corps to pieces. As DR Jones' and AP Hill's divisions exhausted themselves charging 9th Corps's defensive line and counterattacking 2nd Corps at the Sunken Road, I was able to push the 9th Corps forward and occupy Sharpsburg, the last VP.

The Federals lost about 40,000 of their 60,000 infantry, and the rebels about 30,000 of their 40,000. A day bloodier than many.

Has anyone else played the historical scenario at MG?
 
Last edited:
That’s some body count... just what does it take to break morale in this game?
Generally speaking, a unit can be routed by fire from the rear (or lots of casualties in a short space of time) but it will always be able to regroup unless it either surrenders (hits 0 morale, I believe - usually while in contact with a melee-ing enemy unit) or shatters (usually at 25% of starting manpower).

So 75% casualties are what it takes to render a unit unable to return to the fight. This is kind of outrageously high compared to historical.
 
Except my cavalry which breaks as soon as the enemy just breathes in its direction. Or did they fix this lately (haven´t played in a while)?
Cavalry suffers morale loss very easily, though I believe it still doesn't get taken out of the battle until it hits ~25% strength. But you're right that it's extraordinarily vulnerable; I don't mind cavalry being fragile in ranged combat or when attacking enemy infantry head on, because that's about right for Civil War cavalry, but I've had 500+ man cavalry units lose in a melee battle in the open with ~200 skirmishers (which is silly) or with single artillery batteries (which would be outright hilarious).


I think my general view on the game is that there are some things it handles very well (compared to other games) and some things it handles poorly.
Among the things it handles well, one of them is that it gives you a good sense of how long it takes to move and realign troops (that is, how it takes ages to get your troops into a flanking position) and another is that you can sometimes end up in situations where you really feel the value of giving or reserving fire.
Among the the things it handles poorly, on the other hand, are morale and casualties. Just about every single battle is an absolute bloodbath because if a unit goes in on the attack it can end up taking upwards of a hundred casualties in a single volley, and then go away for half an hour, regroup and come back again.

It seems to me that it would be better to use a system more like this, within the existing mechanics:

  • Morale damage from taking fire is about the same (at least for infantry) but taking enough morale damage cancels out a bayonet charge. (This still leaves units able to fire.)
  • If an attacker gets within a certain distance and is still conducting a bayonet charge, the defender suffers a large morale penalty.
These would simulate how actual crossed bayonets were relatively rare, because either the attacker would slow down and stop for a firefight or the defender would retreat.

  • Units regenerate morale faster the higher their morale and condition are.
  • If a unit's morale comes close to bottoming out, it takes hours for the morale to climb back up again.

The intent here is that on a given day a single unit can fight quite a lot if it's well taken care of, but if it's shattered it's functionally not able to fight again until relieved.

  • Casualties inflicted are lower across the board.
 
I'm disappointed the developers moved on with many historical battles not in the game and some of the battles in the game pretty much in name only.

A scenario editor could have at least partly solved that, giving us additional historical battles by dedicated fans and some interesting What If scenarios. I don't think I've heard of one in the works though.

Nevertheless, I enjoy the game. I was just replaying the historical version of Chickamauga since I've been reading about the battle. I've played that battle several times on both sides, but never gotten to the third day with Longstreet's assault - always either win outright or get a draw. That would have been a good inclusion as a scenario.
Well...
If as the rebels you don't attack at all you can then go to the 3rd day. And if as the Union you only defend the Lafayette Road you go to the 3rd day.
 
So Ultimate Admiral is now out, and rather nicely it explicitly describes what happens to an overloaded unit as "shattering". Still outrageously courageous men though.
 
Back
Top