nwg

I will admit to being the "odd one out" here, as I never thought it important, but as you three do I will try to join any further 2v2 battles in whatever order the host wants.

The host is always on the left, so the next person on that side has to go to their right.....you would think that the first person to join on the other side would be on the left, the next one to their right......is that what we did first time ?.....if so, why did we re-start a second time......I'm confused.com

hehe.

I am confused too, the order we arranged before the game should have worked out correct with me and M facing off, I'm not sure what went wrong
I personally feel that the two players who's wiki game the battle is about should be facing each other, i think that just feels correct, but i am more than happy too along with the majority view on this.
So OK Gunner feels its not important, what do you guys feel

I also think its important to face your wiki opponent, but it seems difficult to actually achieve.

One reason I think its important is that most of us will have a look at the battlefield before the day of the battle. The army style used might be modified a little bit dependent on the terrain you expect to be placed upon ... this -is- important in my view, however.....

The placement order seems to be anticlockwise from the host with the host starting left. So you would think that in last nights game if I joined last, as I did in the first example, I would be facing Dougie and I think I was - but, and this is probably going to be important to remember for folks who are not hosting....I was on the opposite side of the field that I expected to be...the reason? I had done my battlefield reconnaissance versus AI as the 'host' of course.

The host is always left, if I want to face him, in a 2v2 this will mean I start to the right of the field with my partner to my left.

We'll get there in the end. I'll do some experimentation this evening then post something somewhere about this with some pics (NWG? CB Site? NTW2.wiki?)

Regards, M.

Nice battle report over at the wiki M.
I think you hit the nail on the head here regarding the decisive roll played by the arty in this battle. my deployment of the grand battery was specifically to aid Gunner in his flanking manoeuvre on our right, and it could not have worked out much better than it did, taking care off 1 12p of M's and then 2 of GP's getting a combined total of 650+ kills not bad with no cannister work. On top of that we also had Guns 12p's in a great position taking out masses of infantry, the Swedish gunners certainly earned there corn in this battle
Ironic that your plan to hold down the Swedish forces on your right, was the same as my plans for this side of the field. although as the battle went on i would have liked to have been more aggressive, but GP's very nasty heavy cav were threatining my left flank.
I watched the replay off the battle your side, you guys were going at each other hammer and tongs it was great stuff.
Gunners probably thinking, JESUS !! DJ you don't ask much of your generals do you

I tell you Sir, I was taken aback by Moopere's deployment, I was sure he would be further back but he seems to like the ditch defence.....myself, I prefer to make them fight though the ditch, firing down on them while they cross the muddy ground.

Artillery in CB has to be one of the best points, it can (if you let it) get to you big time, but, it is also possible to use only one unit....of course you take a big risk that you MUST at all cost protect i,t because to lose a 1700 florin unit is nasty.

I must admit i was not that surprised by M's initial deployment, which was another reason for my arty position, i expected to be able to fire on M's own guns from the off. although like you with a ditch involved i would much rather fire down onto my opponents forces in this situation, but with the grand battery blasting away at them it was probably not desirable here.




Yes mate this becomes more and more critical when you take the field with a low number of florins.

Yeah, heh, it was pretty frantic eh? Sheesh, I was shell shocked after that.

M.

Indeed, this was the plan. You will all have noticed I'm sure that musket balls in NTW2 actually travel further down hill...you have to laugh but there it is.

Anyway, the plan was to start in the ditch and tempt you to come in there after me, then withdraw to the rising side and shoot down into your troops. As it turned out there were two things which caused this plan to be delayed. 1) I didn't want to expose my infantry to DJ's grand battery sooner then need be and 2) I was mostly being faced by light infantry which does relatively little damage at long range, probably less than the much feared battery fire.

The loss of my position battery was sorely felt. I didn't pay enough attention to its deployment. It was actually sitting just ever so slightly behind the peak of the hill but not enough to protect it. A few feet further to the rear and it would still have had a clear line of fire but been almost immune to counter battery rounds. Because of the woods blocking my line of sight, I didn't actually realise that DJ had that mass battery there until my own gunners were down to less then 50% strength (arrghh!!!).

As I said in another thread, I should have asked GP to 'look after' that mass battery at this point - no easy task I realise and not one with a guaranteed outcome, but it would have been worth trying. That was my own oversight though, no slight on GP - the right flank Corps did all that was asked of it.

Regards, M.

Its quite interesting this. Its quite hard to tell where the balance might be, or even -if- there is a balance. People who face Russia now take more artillery then in other games, I've noticed the trend. Its a sort of mini arms race. Yet, there is definitely a line that gets crossed at some point where you take too much artillery and as a result don't have enough infantry.

I've noticed in recent games that the infantry numbers are coming off the 3900-4100 that we were reaching in some earlier games and seems be settling around 3500-3700. I feel 'naked' if I only take 3100-3300.

There is no real right answer here of course, its a rock, paper, scissors game and therefore infinitely variable in combination.

Cheers,
M.

Ha Ha M,
I see its time for you to make a decision again regarding your general for our up and coming battle.
Rather you than me i must say, not a easy choice at all

Sorry for the delay guys. Busy busy busy here, working 7 days a week right now.

Ok, as I've previously indicated, I'm pretty keen on seeing the maximum different players get an opportunity in these types of battles and intend to 'round robin' any candidates who make themselves available. As I chose GP for my last team mate I'll be happy this time around if Gunner24 accepts a position in the Russian field command.

As DJ is attacking me I imagine he will host the battle. That being the case he will start to the left of the attacker zone with GP to his right. I will start on the right of the defender zone with Gunner to my left.

Best regards, M.

OK guys thats all sorted
M, what order do we need to join the game
For me its this
DJ
Gunner24
Grospaul
M.
iM SURE THATS WHAT WE DID LAST TIME

It is what we did last time - but my understanding was in error. I fully expected to start at the left of the defenders deployment zone, however, if I want to face you, and you host, I cannot start on the left of the defenders deployment zone...I -must- start on the right (arrgh!!).

So, my apologies, it was entirely my own fault that we didn't face the opponent that we had planned in our last 2v2 game.

The game join order you specify above is correct. Interestingly the only important thing is the order that Gunner and I join in. it won't matter at all when GP joins in this case as he will always be to your right (as the team mate of the host).

God only knows what happens in a 3v3 haha

Cheers,
M

So I have to join before M, that's all we need to remember and it should work.

Do you fancy a bet on it