I’ve just had two very interesting and enlightening back-to-back battles playing Great Britain against the Maratha Confederacy in Bengal, India. The first fight taught me that I’m not yet ready to break out of Bengal and invade the rest of India, though I’m going to need to capture Hindustan in order to win the game. The second battle reminded me of the value of fortifications and ratified my decision to construct them when I had the time and the money.
A little context first… The year is 1723. I’ve been in Bengal since about 1712. In the past, the MC has become so big and powerful on VH/VH that the idea of invading India in 1740 for the purpose of capturing Hindustan becomes untenable. Also, the last time I tried to play a short Great Britain game on VH/VH, the MC got so big so fast that by 1735 the MC had invaded Anatolia, at which point the game froze no matter how many times I reloaded it. This time around, I’m trying to contain the MC early in the game.
To this end, I changed my usual approach to limit my early game field armies to a single force that I sent to the Caribbean at the start of the game. I spent the rest of my money on Indiamen and fleets. The MC overran the Mughals at breakneck speed this game, capturing almost the entirety of India by 1709. At this point, my one field force had just captured Trinidad & Tobago. I loaded my guys up and sent them to Bengal. I arrived at the last region owned by the Mughals barely in advance of the MC. I captured Bengal, and the MC promptly declared war. After handing them a number of defeats at sea and a few close defeats on land, the MC made peace and resumed trade. I knew they would come for Bengal again, so I kept my force in Bengal at nearly full strength. In 1721, the MC declared war again.
In the opening round of the war, the MC moved a 20-regiment army to Cuttack. Another force with about 12 units appeared in northern Bengal. Another dozen units not yet consolidated appeared behind the first group in Hindustan. The first Anglo-Confederate War taught me that the MC infantry are tougher than mine and that I could not withstand a combined assault by all of the forces arrayed against me in the field. The enemy’s big army was within striking distance of Calcutta. The second force was two turns away from attacking, while the unconsolidated units were three turns out. I put everything into a single roll of the dice and attacked the MC army outside Cuttack with everything I had in Calcutta.
I won the Battle of Cuttack, but only because the enemy did not hit me with everything he had all at once. I elected not to go after him on the battlefield, knowing that if I waited he would come to me. This he did—so quickly, in fact, that about five regiments of Bargir infantry were left behind the main group. I wiped out his cavalry with my field guns, which was enormously helpful. However, the inferiority of my infantry (mostly EICI) versus his Bargir infantry was really driven home. In face-to-face exchanges of fire, I would take down 2-4 of his guys, while a volley from his infantry would take out 10-12 of mine. Fortunately, the battle was fought in front of my field guns. I was able to fire canister laterally, such that the blast raked down the lines of enemy infantry and killed 20 at a blow. Even so, four of my infantry regiments routed. All the rest lost at least 50% of their strength. Melee combat, which I use to settle the fight, didn’t work in this fight. The MC showed incredible staying power and superior hand-to-hand ability. This was a very unwelcome surprise. Worse, my cavalry (mostly EICC) proved virtually toothless. I put four regiments of cavalry into the flanks and rear of one fairly ordinary regiment of Bargir (1 chevron) while the Indians were engaged in hand-to-hand combat with one of my infantry regiments to the front. Nothing. The Bargir shrugged off my best cavalry charge and kept fighting. In the end, I won because the enemy’s general drifted into range of my field guns and because my field guns were so very effective with canister. I killed about 950 of the enemy in the fight; my four batteries of guns accounted for about 350. My single battery of howitzers performed disappointingly firing explosive shells. I won, though. The exchange rate was the worst I’ve had in a major battle in I don’t know how long: 1.5 to 1. I seldom get anything less favorable than 3 to 1. Bad omen.
Having won the battle, I razed every structure in the region and ran back to Calcutta. I combined damaged regiments and ended up with two full-strength EICI regiments and a lot of other damaged units, which I paid to bring back to full strength. I levied two fresh EICI regiments and one fresh EICC regiment that turn and waited for the enemy to hit me in Calcutta on his turn.
Interestingly, the enemy didn’t come straight for Calcutta. I got the chance to intercept him on the way past. I presume he was headed for the Port of Calcutta, which would have caused me great harm if captured by the enemy. I elected to intercept, even though my army was in poor shape with more than half of its units still absorbing replacements. To my surprise, the fight occurred at my fortifications.
Okay, the fortifications didn’t come with Calcutta. I built them around 1715. I never build fortifications. I don’t like the attritional nature of fighting in fortifications. Though I often start a battle from a defensive position, I hold with the German belief that only aggressive maneuver can defeat the enemy decisively. However, I knew I would be at a numerical disadvantage in India for a long time to come. I anticipated that I might have to send a powerful army into Hindustan and defend my rear (Calcutta) with a smaller force. This smaller force would need the defensive combat power afforded by walls. This battle would prove that walls can be more useful than my previous experience has shown.
The walls completely neutralized the gunnery superiority of the enemy’s Bargir infantry. In this battle, his infantry was taking down 2-3 of my guys per volley, while I was mowing down 10-12 of his. I smashed a couple of enemy regiments with musketry alone. When his infantry tried to scale the walls, I put a regiment of line infantry in front with bayonets fixed and put two more units on either side. This was incredibly effective. Several times, the enemy got some troops onto the walls, where they were met and dispatched. It was like I was fighting a different enemy. I’m sure other folks have had this experience, but this was new for me. I attack walled cities occasionally, but I very seldom defend them. This battle was a rout: 190 to 900. Wow. Who knew?
A few lessons have come out of these two encounters in the early 1720’s.
•My infantry cannot yet go toe-to-toe with the enemy’s infantry on a one-to-one basis in the field.
•My EIC cavalry sucks. Like the unit description says, they’re okay for running down routing enemy units. However, they lack shock effect.
•Howitzers firing explosive shells are poor anti-personnel weapons. I’d have been better off keeping the battery of demi-cannon I retired to make room for the battery of howitzers.
Taken together, these lessons mean that I am not ready for a strategic offensive against the MC. I need to researchsocket bayonet, fire by rank, wedge formation, and carcass shot. I need to be able to recruit lancer cavalry locally, and I need to bring native musket auxiliary and mounted tribal auxiliary from North America. Having completed military syllabus this turn, I started construction of a drill school at Calcutta. This will enable me to recruit cavalry with the desired shock value. I’ve brought in a single NMA already, but I’ll need more. MTA will be especially useful in India, as the MC still use some melee infantry units.
From a research standpoint, I’ve just reached the point at which I can develop the needed technologies. I have research facilities at Cambridge, Manchester, and Trois-Rivieres. I just captured New England from France, and I have started construction of a school at Hartford. The Iroquois have held New York for about 15 years; they have built a meeting house at Saratoga, which will be used for researching military technology as soon as I have captured the region. Two turns. Then we'll see how the Third Anglo-Confederate War turns out.
The musket is for fixing and softening the enemy. The bayonet is for destroying him.
A little context first… The year is 1723. I’ve been in Bengal since about 1712. In the past, the MC has become so big and powerful on VH/VH that the idea of invading India in 1740 for the purpose of capturing Hindustan becomes untenable. Also, the last time I tried to play a short Great Britain game on VH/VH, the MC got so big so fast that by 1735 the MC had invaded Anatolia, at which point the game froze no matter how many times I reloaded it. This time around, I’m trying to contain the MC early in the game.
To this end, I changed my usual approach to limit my early game field armies to a single force that I sent to the Caribbean at the start of the game. I spent the rest of my money on Indiamen and fleets. The MC overran the Mughals at breakneck speed this game, capturing almost the entirety of India by 1709. At this point, my one field force had just captured Trinidad & Tobago. I loaded my guys up and sent them to Bengal. I arrived at the last region owned by the Mughals barely in advance of the MC. I captured Bengal, and the MC promptly declared war. After handing them a number of defeats at sea and a few close defeats on land, the MC made peace and resumed trade. I knew they would come for Bengal again, so I kept my force in Bengal at nearly full strength. In 1721, the MC declared war again.
In the opening round of the war, the MC moved a 20-regiment army to Cuttack. Another force with about 12 units appeared in northern Bengal. Another dozen units not yet consolidated appeared behind the first group in Hindustan. The first Anglo-Confederate War taught me that the MC infantry are tougher than mine and that I could not withstand a combined assault by all of the forces arrayed against me in the field. The enemy’s big army was within striking distance of Calcutta. The second force was two turns away from attacking, while the unconsolidated units were three turns out. I put everything into a single roll of the dice and attacked the MC army outside Cuttack with everything I had in Calcutta.
I won the Battle of Cuttack, but only because the enemy did not hit me with everything he had all at once. I elected not to go after him on the battlefield, knowing that if I waited he would come to me. This he did—so quickly, in fact, that about five regiments of Bargir infantry were left behind the main group. I wiped out his cavalry with my field guns, which was enormously helpful. However, the inferiority of my infantry (mostly EICI) versus his Bargir infantry was really driven home. In face-to-face exchanges of fire, I would take down 2-4 of his guys, while a volley from his infantry would take out 10-12 of mine. Fortunately, the battle was fought in front of my field guns. I was able to fire canister laterally, such that the blast raked down the lines of enemy infantry and killed 20 at a blow. Even so, four of my infantry regiments routed. All the rest lost at least 50% of their strength. Melee combat, which I use to settle the fight, didn’t work in this fight. The MC showed incredible staying power and superior hand-to-hand ability. This was a very unwelcome surprise. Worse, my cavalry (mostly EICC) proved virtually toothless. I put four regiments of cavalry into the flanks and rear of one fairly ordinary regiment of Bargir (1 chevron) while the Indians were engaged in hand-to-hand combat with one of my infantry regiments to the front. Nothing. The Bargir shrugged off my best cavalry charge and kept fighting. In the end, I won because the enemy’s general drifted into range of my field guns and because my field guns were so very effective with canister. I killed about 950 of the enemy in the fight; my four batteries of guns accounted for about 350. My single battery of howitzers performed disappointingly firing explosive shells. I won, though. The exchange rate was the worst I’ve had in a major battle in I don’t know how long: 1.5 to 1. I seldom get anything less favorable than 3 to 1. Bad omen.
Having won the battle, I razed every structure in the region and ran back to Calcutta. I combined damaged regiments and ended up with two full-strength EICI regiments and a lot of other damaged units, which I paid to bring back to full strength. I levied two fresh EICI regiments and one fresh EICC regiment that turn and waited for the enemy to hit me in Calcutta on his turn.
Interestingly, the enemy didn’t come straight for Calcutta. I got the chance to intercept him on the way past. I presume he was headed for the Port of Calcutta, which would have caused me great harm if captured by the enemy. I elected to intercept, even though my army was in poor shape with more than half of its units still absorbing replacements. To my surprise, the fight occurred at my fortifications.
Okay, the fortifications didn’t come with Calcutta. I built them around 1715. I never build fortifications. I don’t like the attritional nature of fighting in fortifications. Though I often start a battle from a defensive position, I hold with the German belief that only aggressive maneuver can defeat the enemy decisively. However, I knew I would be at a numerical disadvantage in India for a long time to come. I anticipated that I might have to send a powerful army into Hindustan and defend my rear (Calcutta) with a smaller force. This smaller force would need the defensive combat power afforded by walls. This battle would prove that walls can be more useful than my previous experience has shown.
The walls completely neutralized the gunnery superiority of the enemy’s Bargir infantry. In this battle, his infantry was taking down 2-3 of my guys per volley, while I was mowing down 10-12 of his. I smashed a couple of enemy regiments with musketry alone. When his infantry tried to scale the walls, I put a regiment of line infantry in front with bayonets fixed and put two more units on either side. This was incredibly effective. Several times, the enemy got some troops onto the walls, where they were met and dispatched. It was like I was fighting a different enemy. I’m sure other folks have had this experience, but this was new for me. I attack walled cities occasionally, but I very seldom defend them. This battle was a rout: 190 to 900. Wow. Who knew?
A few lessons have come out of these two encounters in the early 1720’s.
•My infantry cannot yet go toe-to-toe with the enemy’s infantry on a one-to-one basis in the field.
•My EIC cavalry sucks. Like the unit description says, they’re okay for running down routing enemy units. However, they lack shock effect.
•Howitzers firing explosive shells are poor anti-personnel weapons. I’d have been better off keeping the battery of demi-cannon I retired to make room for the battery of howitzers.
Taken together, these lessons mean that I am not ready for a strategic offensive against the MC. I need to research
From a research standpoint, I’ve just reached the point at which I can develop the needed technologies. I have research facilities at Cambridge, Manchester, and Trois-Rivieres. I just captured New England from France, and I have started construction of a school at Hartford. The Iroquois have held New York for about 15 years; they have built a meeting house at Saratoga, which will be used for researching military technology as soon as I have captured the region. Two turns. Then we'll see how the Third Anglo-Confederate War turns out.
The musket is for fixing and softening the enemy. The bayonet is for destroying him.