"Retreating across a major River" Topic
10 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please use the Complaint button (!) to report problems on the forums.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the ACW Discussion Message Board
Areas of InterestAmerican Civil War
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Showcase Article
Featured Profile Article
Featured Book Review
|
Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
| gamer1 | 17 Sep 2025 5:15 a.m. PST |
In my strategic level game, trying to decide how hard it would be to retreat a large army across a major river like the Mississippi after losing a battle. I can envision it being impossible or possible considering the confusion and luck that often accrued throughout the war.
Obviously it would be easier for the north and would be easier if in "friendly waters". I imagine if the army was able to gain control of enough boats of various types and size and did not run into enemy gun boats it could be possible with an effective rear guard. I am sure one of many unknown factors would be how many additional casualties the army would suffer in the process over a few days or even a few weeks if the enemy allowed.
To my knowledge the only historical example that comes close is IF Grant had lost Shiloh and had to retreat into or across the river.
So my question is, as a gamer would you expect it to be possible and if so, find it reasonable that it would be very risky with the possibility the army would suffer just as many loses as they did in the major battle they lost that caused the retreat??? I am also trying to keep in mind what would add fun and unpredictable interest to the game by giving players as many "realistic" choices as possible.
As I have it right now, it is possible BUT is very risky and has the potential to be just as bad for the army as losing a battle, the random die roll representing all the things that could go right or wrong. Thoughts??? Thanks, happy gaming!!! |
35thOVI  | 17 Sep 2025 6:10 a.m. PST |
You might use Lee's retreat after Gettysburg and the Potomac or Morgan's trying to recross the Ohio at Buffington Island as examples. I think Balls Bluff had a river as well. I'm sure other examples during the war will serve as examples of possibilities. Good luck Obviously many things to determine, rain, previous bridges being available, including pontoons, fords, the competence of those pursuing… etc. |
| Frederick | 17 Sep 2025 8:31 a.m. PST |
Depends on a bunch of things like how many bridges/fords there are, how bad the defeat was and what shape the pursing army is in – Meade was criticized for not pursing Lee more briskly after Gettysburg but in fairness he did comment that his army was not that crisp having fought the ANV to a halt over three grueling days Ball's Bluff was a disaster – Union troops trickled over the Potomac river due to too few boats, then when the Confederates counter-attacked in force were unable to get back over the Potomac – especially when some of the few boats available capsized – as I recall, about 150 Confederate casualties to about 1,000 Union, with about half the Union being captured |
| Grelber | 17 Sep 2025 8:50 a.m. PST |
Generals tried to avoid having to find this out, doing their best to have boats or a bridge or something to facilitate crossing if it came to that.
I would think there was a certain amount of prioritizing involved, too. What can we hope to get across in whatever time we have.
When Crittenden had to cross the Cumberland after his defeat at Mill Springs, he opted to use the steamboat and other vessels available to get all his men across in one night (a January night, so longer than a summer night). This entailed leaving the artillery, horses, wagons, and supplies behind for Thomas to capture the next morning. Once the men were across, Crittenden burned the boats to prevent pursuit. While the men got across, a great many of them opted to go home afterwards, so there wasn't much of an army left in a few days. In this case, the two armies were relatively small, about 4,000 men each.
Crittenden did have fortifications on the north side of the Cumberland, providing his men some degree of safety. Grelber |
| Bill N | 17 Sep 2025 9:23 a.m. PST |
It wasn't the result of losing a battle, but Stuart trying to cross the Chickahominy before Federal pursuers caught up to him provides a good example of how challenging it could be. I suspect when possible either the force fighting with its back to a river would prefer that the river be fordable (as was the case for Lee at Antietam) or that the river could be covered by artillery on the far bank (as was the case for Burnside at Fredericksburg). |
| DisasterWargamer | 17 Sep 2025 10:16 a.m. PST |
The TN campaign with the Battle of Franklin has some interesting elements from the rear guard action to taking Union wagons and men across a bridge just to the North of town before and during Confederate advance The retreat from the Confederates from Lookout Mountain might also have a few things to look at – while not a river – the retreating troops had to go through the Ringgold Mountain Pass |
| DisasterWargamer | 17 Sep 2025 11:20 a.m. PST |
Neglected to add – that in the same TN campaign – after Nashville – Hood had to lead his forces back across the TN river. |
| gamer1 | 17 Sep 2025 12:32 p.m. PST |
Thanks as always for all the helpful input. I agree with what has been said, alot of factors would apply. As I mentioned doing a strategic level game about the whole war I don't want any one thing to bog down the flow of the game to much. This info seems to reinforce my thoughts that I need to keep it a simple, quick set of rolls with just a few modifiers.
Seems like some of the biggest questions would be which side is doing it since the Union is more likely to have ships available, if it is friendly or hostile waters and as some have mentioned how aggressive or cautious the perusing general would be. I think it should remain risky, even under the best situation with a chance of the army suffering loses and thus give players an incentive not to do it unless there is a really good reason to. Happy gaming all! |
 KimRYoung | 17 Sep 2025 12:50 p.m. PST |
Look at Grant's Overland Campaign in 1864 to see what is possible. The biggest accomplishment the Union achieved was the crossing of the James River: "While Lee remained unaware of Grant's intentions, Union army engineers constructed the longest pontoon bridge of the war. It stretched 2,200 feet (670 m) over deep water, crossing the James from Weyanoke to Windmill Point at Flowerdew Hundred. Work started at 4 p.m. on June 15 and was completed seven hours later. Although most of Grant's infantry crossed the river by boats, the IX Corps, one division of VI Corps, the animals and supply wagons, and a part of the artillery crossed on the bridge on June 15 and 16. By the morning of June 17, more than 100,000 men, 5,000 wagons and ambulances, 56,000 horses and mules, and 2,800 head of cattle had crossed the river without alerting the Confederates. Before the entire army had crossed, Smith's XVIII Corps, followed by Hancock's II Corps, became engaged in the next campaign, Richmond–Petersburg (the siege of Petersburg), with attacks on Petersburg on June 15". Quite a major feat! Kim |
| robert piepenbrink | 17 Sep 2025 2:43 p.m. PST |
You could boil it down to a single die roll, but the number needed for success should depend largely on time, bridges and fordabiity. At a strategic level, you can almost always cross a river--given you have a week, and your crossing is unopposed. I'd use a D20 or a percentile, I think. |
|
adds artillery to his soft-plastic Union forces.
