Printable View
I bought about year ago C. von Clausewitz's 'On War' ...
Since then I have tried to use his work in building the late periods army and using it in battles .. so far I haven't found the best way to use his work ..
I can build up the army the way he suggests but in the battles I tend to lose too many men ..
So I want to know .. can I really use his work in TW or not??
Also .. if I can use it then how to use it the best possible way??
I'm not sure how many people at the Citadel know of the book you are talking about. Do you want this to be moved to the Monastery instead?
Well .. if I could get some responses by people who know even a little bit about that book then why not :yes:
Just was curious can I use it in M2TW or not..:book:
Perhaps in ETW .. but that is another thing...
Most of this classic book is still pertinent in modern war. The only part I have a personal differing on is his perception of a strategic reserve. A reserve for all intents and purposes is available in most every battle I set up and it always becomes useful. Even in modern-war history we find that a reserve of any nature is nearly ALWAYS kept for contingency reasons, even if at the outset no such contingency exists.
Keep in mind of course the era the book was written in, which was the 1800s.
At that time of history mass casualties were the norm. Armies would simply line up, get within musket range and blast the beejeezers out of their opponent. Cavalry had passed its heyday as well, except for fabled light cav which were still used.
You might try a gunpowder heavy faction like Portugal,Turks,Milan etc so that you can field similar units perhaps this would assist you.
I fear Im one of the few who have read and re-read this book... my suggestion to all is to seek it out and apply its instruction.
I dont think you should use it for more than the most basic tactical principles.
Anything about specific units and its not just a question of different(wrong) era but also about the limits of the Total War engine.
CBR
I read it ten years ago or so, dont remember much of it, but he wrote in and for quite another time and battlefiled than what the game portrays.
I know that he wrote it in the 19th century but I was curious that can I use some of his work in late period M2TW ..
But just like CBR said .. TW engine sets it's limits and I can use it only for basic things :embarassed:
U might want to try out Sun Tze: Art of War.
There are the normal translated version.
There are also the versions for battling in office politics and business and etc.
That explains the how powerful is the Sun Tze: Art of War doctrine.
Hardly any military writer's works have much direct application to M2TW single player, because so much of it has to do with screwing with the mind of the opposing leaders and the men's morale. The stupid computer would not be surprised or disconcerted by one of Stonewall Jackson's forced marches and would just ignore one of Rommels thrusts. Stategic feints are almost worhless. The most satisfying part of olde-time face-to-face wargaming is seeing your opponent crumble and give up in situations before the battle is really over.
It seems to me that while flanking is important in M2TW enfilading fire is not - nor are gaps in your line very important.
Enfilade is important when using cannons, they are more likely to over/undershoot than shoot wide in my experience. Plus of course, you can take out almost a whole line of troops with a single cannonball if you get it just right.
I must say, I have never understood why exactly gaps in the line are important anyway, other than as a means to roll up the rest of the line by flanking. In this sense they work just fine in M2TW (although I suppose the AI doesn't exploit them as it should.) Perhaps I am missing something?
I thought Clauswitz wrote about strategic rather than tactical victory? this is certainly helpful in my Byzantine BC Campaign, in which i am focused on containment and encirclement of the enemy Turkish Sultanate (now landlocked), on healthy trade relationships, sea trade, networks of allies in zones i do not wish to conquer (Georgia in the Transcaucasus).
tactical reserves are about battlefield deployment, but strategic reserves concerns dispositions of yr. generals , management of economy and recruitment pools.