historix69
Emperor
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2008
- Messages
- 1,402
In my current game (marathon, New England), a colonial population of 240 is confronted with a REF of 273 Regulars + 54 Dragoons + 116 Artillery + 76 Man'o'War (= 443 land units). Since only Regulars + Dragoons count as Population, this is a Population of 240 against an army of 327 Population ... The colonial land has 234 Tiles (according to demographics), so the REF could control every single tile with almost 2 land units.
The population of the 13 states of New England around 1775 was about 2-2.5 million people. If we assume that the 240 Colonist are equivalent to 2.4 million in history, the REF would have had around 3.27 million, a size which is hardly to achieve in the end of 18th century were Englands population was around 9 million people.
The British troops as a traditional SeaPower were rather small around 1775 ... around 50.000 men ... and only a part of them was used in New England, since New England was only a minor part of British Empire with other colonies in Canada, Caribbean, India, etc. which also needed protection. British troops in New England were inforced by 20-30.000 mercenaries (hessians) and also by loyal militias. At the end of war there were around 60.000 troops stationed in North America, including Canada and Caribbean. -> The ratio of British troops to New England Population was 60 : 2.400 or 1:40. (In the game above it is 4:3).
"About 250,000 men served as regulars or as militiamen for the Revolutionary cause in the eight years of the war, but there were never more than 90,000 total men under arms at one time. Armies were small by European standards of the era; the greatest number of men that Washington personally commanded in the field at any one time was fewer than 17,000." (Wikipedia)
Warfare was influenced by many points :
- Due to the enormous landsize and coastline, the British could only take control of some cities but never could control the complete land. Also the British navy, the strongest and biggest in the world at that time, was not able to control the coastline to efficiently reduce smuggling.
- The British Troops had disadvantages in the american wilderness ... (implemented in the game.)
- Military Operations of the British usually were slowed down by american resistance ...
- The British were dependent from supplies from Europe which could only be delivered on the seaway ... so most of their troops were stuck in the port cities and could not freely engage in the war.
- The Americans were dependent from military supplies (gunpowder, etc.) from Europe. Supplies were financed by France and others and were delivered on the seaway via Caribbean colonies (smugglers) or later by the French Fleet ...
- During the war, both sides used privateers to capture the other side's merchant fleet ... hundreds of ships were captured per year.
- When the French (and other european countries) entered the war, they could threat the British all over the globe forcing the British to split their naval forces.
- The concentration and combination of French Expeditionary Forces and Fleet with Washingtons Army was able to locally outnumber the British, cut them off from supplies and force them to surrender (Cornwallis in Yorktown, 1781).
- Building new units and keeping military units in the field was expensive :
"The British spent about £80 million and ended with a national debt of £250 million, which it easily financed at about £9.5 million a year in interest. The French spent 1.3 billion livres (about £56 million). Their total national debt was £187 million, which they could not easily finance; over half the French national revenue went to debt service in the 1780s. The debt crisis became a major enabling factor of the French Revolution as the government was unable to raise taxes without public approval. The United States spent $37 million at the national level plus $114 million by the states. This was mostly covered by loans from France and the Netherlands, loans from Americans, and issuance of more and more paper money (which became "not worth a continental.")" (Wikipedia)
- etc.
(e.g. see Wikipedia for more information)
After reading a little bit about American WoI, the final battle in Civ4Col seems to be totally unhistoric ...
- At the beginning of WoI in history, many New England ports were controlled by the British or Loyalists. The British had troops stationed there and could move troops via the fleet between ports. They did not have to land near cities. In Civ4Col instead the REF is landing in waves of 20 or more units spread out on the Beaches as the allies landed in Normandy in 1944. Most players are prepared and just wipe out the REF on the Beach Head.
- In Civ4Col, the British land units are almost defenceless if attacked, and can be destroyed like in an arcade game ... To win the war in Civ4Col, all REF-troops in the New World (or the fleet) have to be destroyed ... in history, the casualties of the 8 years of war were rather small and most soldiers died due to desease and not in battle. At Yorktown, the British lost 7-8.000 soldiers who surrendered to 17.000 French and American troops, but the soldiers were not wiped out. Victory was more strategically. Killing all REF-Troops in the game is just unrealistic (and boring since there are too many) ... There should be a way to beat the homeland by strategy rather than by military destruction ... controlling key-points, achieving military balance, gaining allies (France, Spain, Dutch) ...
- In history the British units were able to hold most of the occupied cities ... In unfortunate situations (Boston 1776 when Rebels placed artillery in the hills) they knew when it is better to retreat than getting slaughtered ... moving the troops and preserving their strength.
- Big problem is the civ combat system which does not allow armies to fight as a whole but reduces every combat to a single unit against single unit combat where the defeated unit is destroyed. Battles in history were rarely fought by single units one after the other. Winning a battle meant to use armies in a way to gain strategic advantages over the enemy by concentrating forces and by controlling strategic positions. Defending armies would rather retreat if possible (rearguard action) or surrender (if retreat was not possible) than fight to the end and be wiped out.
- In the game I described above, in spite of killing many regulars, after a few turns the REF had landed 32 MoW or more. They landed at 2 regions parallel and established around 100 units. While rebell forces had to wait for heal, REF was flooding the battlefield with human waves like the Russians did in 1944/5 when conquering eastern Europe. There are around 2-300 REF-units in europe left ... still enough to control every tile of New England.
- In history, the British did not spread out too much. Due to their supply-dependencies they had to focus on the port cities which they garrisoned with massive troops (New York City, Yorktown, Charleston, Savannah, ...) while the rebels controlled the inland.
- Also due to landsize and population, the American Rebells probably were never outnumbered by REF by 6:1 or 4:1 ... also the land was just too big to be completely controled by the British ... At the end of the war the numbers seemed to be kind of balanced (90.000 milita against 40-60.000 REF) without the americans having to kill millions of british troops ...
(The outnumbering in Civ4Col reminds me of early computer games where lacks of the AI were compensated by giving the AI 2-4 times more troops than the human player to assure a challenging battle.)
The population of the 13 states of New England around 1775 was about 2-2.5 million people. If we assume that the 240 Colonist are equivalent to 2.4 million in history, the REF would have had around 3.27 million, a size which is hardly to achieve in the end of 18th century were Englands population was around 9 million people.
The British troops as a traditional SeaPower were rather small around 1775 ... around 50.000 men ... and only a part of them was used in New England, since New England was only a minor part of British Empire with other colonies in Canada, Caribbean, India, etc. which also needed protection. British troops in New England were inforced by 20-30.000 mercenaries (hessians) and also by loyal militias. At the end of war there were around 60.000 troops stationed in North America, including Canada and Caribbean. -> The ratio of British troops to New England Population was 60 : 2.400 or 1:40. (In the game above it is 4:3).
"About 250,000 men served as regulars or as militiamen for the Revolutionary cause in the eight years of the war, but there were never more than 90,000 total men under arms at one time. Armies were small by European standards of the era; the greatest number of men that Washington personally commanded in the field at any one time was fewer than 17,000." (Wikipedia)
Warfare was influenced by many points :
- Due to the enormous landsize and coastline, the British could only take control of some cities but never could control the complete land. Also the British navy, the strongest and biggest in the world at that time, was not able to control the coastline to efficiently reduce smuggling.
- The British Troops had disadvantages in the american wilderness ... (implemented in the game.)
- Military Operations of the British usually were slowed down by american resistance ...
- The British were dependent from supplies from Europe which could only be delivered on the seaway ... so most of their troops were stuck in the port cities and could not freely engage in the war.
- The Americans were dependent from military supplies (gunpowder, etc.) from Europe. Supplies were financed by France and others and were delivered on the seaway via Caribbean colonies (smugglers) or later by the French Fleet ...
- During the war, both sides used privateers to capture the other side's merchant fleet ... hundreds of ships were captured per year.
- When the French (and other european countries) entered the war, they could threat the British all over the globe forcing the British to split their naval forces.
- The concentration and combination of French Expeditionary Forces and Fleet with Washingtons Army was able to locally outnumber the British, cut them off from supplies and force them to surrender (Cornwallis in Yorktown, 1781).
- Building new units and keeping military units in the field was expensive :
"The British spent about £80 million and ended with a national debt of £250 million, which it easily financed at about £9.5 million a year in interest. The French spent 1.3 billion livres (about £56 million). Their total national debt was £187 million, which they could not easily finance; over half the French national revenue went to debt service in the 1780s. The debt crisis became a major enabling factor of the French Revolution as the government was unable to raise taxes without public approval. The United States spent $37 million at the national level plus $114 million by the states. This was mostly covered by loans from France and the Netherlands, loans from Americans, and issuance of more and more paper money (which became "not worth a continental.")" (Wikipedia)
- etc.
(e.g. see Wikipedia for more information)
After reading a little bit about American WoI, the final battle in Civ4Col seems to be totally unhistoric ...
- At the beginning of WoI in history, many New England ports were controlled by the British or Loyalists. The British had troops stationed there and could move troops via the fleet between ports. They did not have to land near cities. In Civ4Col instead the REF is landing in waves of 20 or more units spread out on the Beaches as the allies landed in Normandy in 1944. Most players are prepared and just wipe out the REF on the Beach Head.
- In Civ4Col, the British land units are almost defenceless if attacked, and can be destroyed like in an arcade game ... To win the war in Civ4Col, all REF-troops in the New World (or the fleet) have to be destroyed ... in history, the casualties of the 8 years of war were rather small and most soldiers died due to desease and not in battle. At Yorktown, the British lost 7-8.000 soldiers who surrendered to 17.000 French and American troops, but the soldiers were not wiped out. Victory was more strategically. Killing all REF-Troops in the game is just unrealistic (and boring since there are too many) ... There should be a way to beat the homeland by strategy rather than by military destruction ... controlling key-points, achieving military balance, gaining allies (France, Spain, Dutch) ...
- In history the British units were able to hold most of the occupied cities ... In unfortunate situations (Boston 1776 when Rebels placed artillery in the hills) they knew when it is better to retreat than getting slaughtered ... moving the troops and preserving their strength.
- Big problem is the civ combat system which does not allow armies to fight as a whole but reduces every combat to a single unit against single unit combat where the defeated unit is destroyed. Battles in history were rarely fought by single units one after the other. Winning a battle meant to use armies in a way to gain strategic advantages over the enemy by concentrating forces and by controlling strategic positions. Defending armies would rather retreat if possible (rearguard action) or surrender (if retreat was not possible) than fight to the end and be wiped out.
- In the game I described above, in spite of killing many regulars, after a few turns the REF had landed 32 MoW or more. They landed at 2 regions parallel and established around 100 units. While rebell forces had to wait for heal, REF was flooding the battlefield with human waves like the Russians did in 1944/5 when conquering eastern Europe. There are around 2-300 REF-units in europe left ... still enough to control every tile of New England.
- In history, the British did not spread out too much. Due to their supply-dependencies they had to focus on the port cities which they garrisoned with massive troops (New York City, Yorktown, Charleston, Savannah, ...) while the rebels controlled the inland.
- Also due to landsize and population, the American Rebells probably were never outnumbered by REF by 6:1 or 4:1 ... also the land was just too big to be completely controled by the British ... At the end of the war the numbers seemed to be kind of balanced (90.000 milita against 40-60.000 REF) without the americans having to kill millions of british troops ...
(The outnumbering in Civ4Col reminds me of early computer games where lacks of the AI were compensated by giving the AI 2-4 times more troops than the human player to assure a challenging battle.)
