Tutorial - Facing Confusion (Finally Resolved - Thanks to Crono900)

[Didz]

I'm trying to follow the tutorial religiously this time rather than going bullheaded for Winchester. But I'm confused about unit facing and how to control it. I'm ordering them to advance towards Winchester in a single line of deployment, but unless I'm seeing things they are all deploying facing the wrong way towards the rear and the infantry units have deployed their skirmishers towards the rear instead of as a screen. And yet all the HQ's are deployed behind the line.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3349909782
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3349909532
What am I doing wrong?

[crono900]

When you right-click to move. hold the click and drag it to the direction you wish the unit to face before letting go. There should be some markers showing the direction that everyone will be facing.

Holding CTRL while moving will set way points so you can set a custom route for your units, and in small movements with units it is possible to have them side pedal into position and keep the same facing. (just an extra tip)

[Didz]

Originally posted by crono900:

When you right-click to move. hold the click and drag it to the direction you wish the unit to face before letting go. There should be some markers showing the direction that everyone will be facing.

That's what I thought I did.

All the arrows seemed to be facing forwards, and even now the HQ's seem to be behind the battle line. It's just that all the battalions are looking backwards.

I'm definitely going to have to master this before I run into the enemy, or it will be a complete disaster.

Holding CTRL while moving will set way points so you can set a custom route for your units, and in small movements with units it is possible to have them side pedal into position and keep the same facing. (just an extra tip)

That is useful to know I'll have to try that next time I try the game.

[Didz]

The good news is that everyone is finally facing the right way. I discovered that when moving the army there is actually a tiny little arrow right in the middle of the entire battle line which determines which way the army is facing once it gets where it is going. Very hard to see, but thats what matters when determining facing.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3350313551
BTW: Quite impressed that the two brigade in the foreground here chose to offset their position in order to line the fence along the edge of the cornfield for cover. Sensible decision.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3350318492
After a massive reshuffle of units to change the facing of the entire army we are finally ready to advance and the skirmishers are out. The cavalry have scouts out looking for the enemy.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3350319501
Looks like I have another problem as I've just noticed that the Tutorial is stuck and not moving on because it has forgotten that I captured Kernstown yesterday.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3350322184
I'm a bit reluctant to send the entire army back to Kernstown having finally got them to within sight of the enemy. But at the same time there is little point in continuing without the Tutorial.

Could I just detach a cavalry patrol to go back and secure the town again.

[Didz]

Well I tried sending my cavalry scouts back to recapture Kernstown, but for reasons that remain a mystery to me they refused to go.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3350353022
So, i sent Elzey's Skirmish detachment instead, and they are gradually capturing the town although its taking a long time. Presumably, because there are not many of them.

It's Day 3 now and I'm just waiting for the Tutorial to tell me what to do next.

[crono900]

Sorry for the late response. Cavalry Scouts are designed to not move away from their unit. So there is nothing wrong with the scouts

As for the continuing the tutorial, I sounds like you are grasping the basics so you could probably do a Spring or Summer '61 campaign.

[Didz]

I'm learning a lot simply by trial and error, but I did want to try and complete the tutorial just to make sure I wasn't missing anything.

I'm curious about the cavalry scouts though. It seems odd that they cannot move away from their parent unit, as I would have thought that scouting more or less demanded that ability, Whereas skirmishers certainly shouldn't move far from their parent battalions as their role was to screen them.

Seems a but back to front to me.

[crono900]

I think the thought on the scouts is that while cavalry is mounted they are suppose to be more vulnerable. So having the scouts out front give the rest of the cavalry a chance to dismount and prepare before they are attacked.

[Didz]

And yet I'm sure one of the unofficial tutorial videos offering tips to new players distinctly suggested using cavalry scouts to determine the location of the enemy early in a battle.

Which from what little I know of the ACW sounds much more like the role that cavalry had in this war, with JEB Stuarts raids and the like. Certainly in the Napoleonic period light cavalry were used to both screen and scout the main army.

[crono900]

The devs said it was design to be that way. I agree it'd be nice to use them as actual long distance scouts, but it is not to be. You could just use the cavalry unit themselves to search for the enemy, as they are much faster than infantry, then having the scouts out front, so that if the unit comes across an enemy the scouts can help cover for you while you pull the main cavalry back before they suffer massive losses.

Infantry is best in a defensive position to stop the enemies advance and engineering roll. (IRL with smoothbores it took about 3-4 time the manpower to dislodge an infantry unit in cover unless they ran out of ammo, as they had to start firing at 150-200 yards max in order to hit and have the force to stop the approaching enemy. With rifling, it became almost impossible to advance on a unit in cover as they could start firing at the enemy at 300-500 yards with greater accuracy and stopping power, provided they had the ammo.)

Cavalry is best for scouting, flanking the enemy, and fighting while dismounted as they tend to have a higher RoF. (Though for scouting, if you look at the map you can see where the enemy's entry points are and where the objective locations are, then guess what routes the enemy may use and then zoom in to see if you can spot any dust clouds, that will give the enemies route away.)

Foot Artillery is good for defensive positions while using heavier and more powerful cannons, though not good for repositioning fast.

Horse Artillery is good for more offensive maneuvers as they use lighter cannons and can quickly reposition if the enemy gets close or to get to an advantageous location to start firing on the enemy, before the rest of your men get show up. This allows for your infantry/cavalry men to fight an enemy with less moral as they have been under fire from the cannons for a longer period of time.

[Didz]

yes! I watched another video guide last night specifically on cavalry,
https://youtu.be/SkaR5efeoro?si=X334ppr7ANYBoI47
And this guy is using a whole detached brigade of cavalry to scout for the enemy.

Amazingly wasteful of resources, after all, what can be seen with two eyes hardly needs a thousand eyes committed to spotting it. Also I find it incongruous that I can't send a cavalry scout to look whats beyond the next hill, but apparently I can send a skirmisher detachment?

That just seems broken to me.

Anyway, it is what it is, and hopefully today Ezley's Skirmishers will finish recapturing Kernstown so that I can continue with the Tutorial.

I know weapons are important in this war and I've played the Confederacy often enough in American Civil War: From Sumter to Appomattox to know that the acquisition of decent rifled muskets and carbines is vital to victory.

Smoothbore muskets were only really effective at ranges of 50 yards or less and when fired en-mass. So without rifled weapons a unit was at a distinct disadvantage against an enemy that was better equipped.

Likewise, the advent of repeating rifles and pistols greatly increased the firepower of those units armed with them, whilst the introduction of rifled canon and exploding shells completely changed the way canon were used in this war.

Even ammunition in this war was more deadly and the minnie ball invented in 1846 made a big difference to the performance of the rifled musket if it was available.

[crono900]

Originally posted by Didz:

Smoothbore muskets were only really effective at ranges of 50 yards or less and when fired en-mass. So without rifled weapons a unit was at a distinct disadvantage against an enemy that was better equipped.

Likewise, the advent of repeating rifles and pistols greatly increased the firepower of those units armed with them, whilst the introduction of rifled canon and exploding shells completely changed the way canon were used in this war.

Even ammunition in this war was more deadly and the minnie ball invented in 1846 made a big difference to the performance of the rifled musket if it was available.

Not to disagree, but to clarify and FYI, The smoothbore muskets effectiveness was around 100-300 yards when fired in mass (upwards of 1000-3000 men) at one target the size of a barn not in cover. The reason for getting close to within 30-50 yards before firing was that the musket became accurate enough to startle those in cover and then instead of standing there and reloading, they would charge to scare the defenders out of cover and cause them to flee, hence gaining ground and opening up flank shots if available. In an open field, when 2 forces met they would hold off firing as long as they could in order to get closer and try to lure the opposing force into firing their muskets first, as it took time to reload, leaving the one side helpless for close to a minute (more often during the previous conflicts) and the side still with their shot could fire back at those who fired first, as men were taught to load their muskets standing up (they could reload on their knees or laying down but it took much longer) making them easy targets, then a simple charge could scare them away. The Civil War tactics quickly became a trench warfare which (IMO) prepared America for WWI tactics.

The difference in smoothbore vs rifled cannons have been describe by an artillery enthusiast as, "A smoothbore cannon can hit the barn at 1000 yards, while the rifled cannon can hit the barn door." The issue with the rifled cannons is that they took longer to load since their ammo was designed with small ridges that had to fit in the grooves of the barrel since they were made of harder material than the lead ammo in rifled small arms. The nice thing about smoothbores cannons was you could load them with just about anything and they'd be effective so long as you had the gunpowder and it would not damage the cannon.

The Minie` ball definitely made a difference in the types of wound caused and increased the ease of using rifled muskets as it was smaller going in than coming out. Not to say it was less effective, but were the Musket ball would often break the bone and cause internal wounds as they'd get lodged inside the body if they broke skin, the Minie` ball was more of a bullet and would penetrate clean through. Those hit by a Minie` ball would often not realize it until their adrenaline calmed down or they'd die outright, though you had a higher chance of seeing the surgeon than dying outright from small arms.

The thought that the Minie` ball, was the most effective killer of the war is because most of the records we have on casualties describing the cause of death are those that come from the surgeons after the battles in the field hospitals and what they treated and saw. The artillery on the other hand would more than often kill outright thus not many hit by artillery made it to the field hospitals to be treated and recorded (this is why some say that the artillery was not as effective as it was in previous conflicts).

Sorry for the small rant, I did not mean to. I like sharing and debating knowledge I've gained by researching the American Civil War and hope you've found this interesting and knowledgeable.

[Didz]

Well I can't imagine why a smoothbore musket would suddenly become more accurate in 1861 than it was in 1815.

Fifty years may have passed but a smooth tube and a rattling ball still obeys the same laws of physics. But I have noticed this discrepancy between European and American history in the past.

Certainly the French were very keen to encourage their enemies to open fire at ranges closer to 200 yards if they could, simply because at that range the effect on they're opponents morale was far more damaging that the impact of their shot. Most of which would fly wild and miss completely. The result being that the enemy now had empty muskets and were still facing a mass of bayonets heading straight for them.

There was also an accepted drop in effectiveness of all fire after the first volley anyway due to the tendency for large numbers of smoothbore muskets to misfire if not loaded carefully and the general incidence of errors by men trying to reload under pressure and stress.

And this of course was against a target which was in close order shoulder to shoulder and several ranks deep, whereas most ACW formations were much looser and shallower making the men that much harder to hit even by accident.

Based on the French tests the advantage of the minnie ball when used in a rifled musket was quite simply that when fired the ball expanded automatically to engage the rifling, thus avoiding the earlier issue with weapons like the Baker Rifle that the rifleman was required to force the cartridge and shot down the barrel past the rifling in order to make it engaged when fired. The 95th were even issued with mallets to help then tamp the shot down because it was so difficult. Though most were discarded as soon as possible on campaign and riflemen simply ignored the rifling completely if they could get away with it to save time. A disciplinary offence if they were caught.

The minnie ball avoided the problem allowing a rifled musket to be loaded as fast as smoothbore and yet still benefit from the rifling when fired.

[Didz]

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3350831892

Well I'm stumped now.

I've detached Stuarts Cavalry Brigade and sent them back to recapture Kernstown. Which they have done and I have the dispatch confirming that Kernstown is once more captured.

But the Tutorial is still telling me to go back and capture Kernstown and won't move on to the next step in the Tutorial.

I guess I must have broke it.

[crono900]

Most issue you may run into with the game can easily be fixed with a save and reload. Not sure if that is what it is or not. Also try to avoid the 10-20 times faster or anything above that, as I can cause some issues.

[crono900]

Originally posted by Didz:

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3350831892

Well I'm stumped now.

I've detached Stuarts Cavalry Brigade and sent them back to recapture Kernstown. Which they have done and I have the dispatch confirming that Kernstown is once more captured.

But the Tutorial is still telling me to go back and capture Kernstown and won't move on to the next step in the Tutorial.

I guess I must have broke it.

So I'm quickly running the Tutorial.
At the step you are on it wants you to highlight the 'movement options', so they can explain move to signal button. It might be easier to go to options and set the 'movement panel' slider to 'long'

EDIT: So, I got passed the tutorial part and they says to finish the battle.