http://www.hpssims.com/Pages/products/A ... punic.html

Check it out! A new game series from HPS. Punic Wars!

MajGen Al 'Ambushed' Amos
3rd "Amos' Ambushers" Bde, Cavalry Division, XX Corps, AoC
The Union Forever! Huzzah!

Interesting, uses a plot and simutaneous move system.

LG. Kennon Whitehead
Chatham Grays
III Corps, AoM (CSA)

A few years ago there was a series of Anchients from a company called I Magic. How does this compare? They were pretty good games with nice graphics and a half decent A.I.

Colonel Tony Best
Army of Georgia

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by KWhitehead</i>
<br />Interesting, uses a plot and simutaneous move system.

LG. Kennon Whitehead
Chatham Grays
III Corps, AoM (CSA)
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Hopefully it can be carried over to the ACW games. The simultaneous plot and move system was used in the old "World at War" series 10 years ago and that is still head and shoulders above anything else that's out there today.

Gen. Doug Burke
XX/AoC/USA

It's very good, but it takes time to get used to. You don't get to call the shots once the turn plays out. Your archers may not shoot at the target you want them to, but they will shoot at the closest threat to them. Units may decide to leave or charge on thier own. It's very tricky to play, and command control is essential. Simple plans with reserves do best.

MajGen Al 'Ambushed' Amos
3rd "Amos' Ambushers" Bde, Cavalry Division, XX Corps, AoC
The Union Forever! Huzzah!

Al,

This sounds like a good excuse for another 'sister club' -- "Ancient Battles" [:)] ! (Or is there one already?)


Your humble servant,
Gen 'Dee Dubya' Mallory


David W. Mallory
ACW - General, 3/2/I/AotM (Club President & Cabinet Member)
CCC - Lieutenant, Georgia Volunteers, Southern Regional Department, Colonial American Army

There will be another club, we're waiting a bit to allow interest to grow. Dean Beacham has come up with some great ideas for it.

MajGen Al 'Ambushed' Amos
3rd "Amos' Ambushers" Bde, Cavalry Division, XX Corps, AoC
The Union Forever! Huzzah!

What is the "simultaneous plot and move" system which you referred to? How does it differ from either TS or HPS systems? Thanks for your explanation.
Jim Gleason LG 4-2-I AOP

Hi Jim,

Going to post this answer on my forum I set up, to try to direct traffic over there (and keep the ACW forum on topic).

http://www.hist-sdc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=22

LGen. Hamilton
II Corps
ANV, CSA

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Jim Gleason</i>
<br />What is the "simultaneous plot and move" system which you referred to? How does it differ from either TS or HPS systems? Thanks for your explanation.
Jim Gleason LG 4-2-I AOP
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Tried to log into Rich's site and my login wouldn't work. Anyway, I do think this reply is no less topical then Rich Walkers recent post as to ways to improve the ACW games we play and this post should probaly be there but then Jim might not see it.

Anyway, to answer Jim's question, I don't know how it works in the Punic Wars game but a simultaneous plot and move system in the ACW would work like this:

The first player gives orders to all of his units. A movement path is plotted if the order is "move" but other orders could be melee (if you were adjacent to an enemy), fire, change formation, resupply, rally, retreat, hold, hold at all costs, entrench, etc.. When that is done, the first player sends his turn to his opponent. He doesn't really see any battle results or replay on turn 1. The opponent, before seeing any replay then gives all of his orders to all of his units and then fires up the whole turn 1, seeing all the action and results.

The opponent then plots all of his orders for turn 2 and send the file back to the first player. The first player then sees the replay of turn 1 and then gives all of his orders for turn 2 and runs turn 2 seeing all of the results. He then gives his orders for turn 3 and returns the file to his opponent and it repeats from there.

The neat thing was in the "simultaneous" part, a number of things could happen, most without analitical predictability. Factors of leadership presence, leadership experience, unit morale, fatigue, unit experience and disruption status compared to that of the opposing unit are accounted for. For example, if a defender gave a "retreat" order and an attacker gave a "melee" order, whether the defender has retreated first or is hit before retreating is dependant on the above factors. Obviously if the defenders have been given a "hold at all costs" order then it may be a lot harder to be overrun then if they have been given a "retreat" order".

Sure, the player doesn't get to micromanage every single shot but in playing the overall commander is that realistic anyway?

A system like the above would in fact be very similiar ro the "Johnny Reb" ACW minitures system for those familiar with that system.

Gen. Doug Burke
XX/AoC/USA

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Doug Burke</i>
[br
Tried to log into Rich's site and my login wouldn't work. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I had problems, also. I droppped Rich H. a note and all is well.

Rich has a great AAR vs the AI![:p][:p][:p]

<b><font color="gold">Ernie Sands
General, Commanding, Army of Ohio

ACWGC Cabinet member
</b></font id="gold">

Gentlemen,

Simultaneous plot and move for Civil War games would be a giant step, but a smaller step in that direction (and maybe one much easier to code) would be a <i>non-simultaneous </i>plot and move system.

The way I'd see this working is we would move, fire, and melee our units just as we do now, except that the actions we take would not be the <i>actual </i>moves but simply recording the <i>orders</i>. This would be the 'plot' phase, and the A/I would record these. When we go to the 'move' phase the orders would be carried out in the sequence we had plotted them -- as much as possible -- as if we were simply watching the 'replay' of our own turn.

Hidden enemy units would remain hidden until the execution ('move') phase. Friendly units that ran into hidden enemy units would stop and fire (possibly -- based on quality, disruption, etc.).

A melee could be ordered and more units 'ordered' to follow through the breach, but nothing would guarantee the melee would succeed. If it did not, the move orders for any units ordered through that hex would end when they ran into something (for instance, the attacking unit that failed the melee might be sitting right in the way).

This would eliminate the 'blitzkreig' tactics so disliked by many. ZOC eliminations would still be possible, but much more difficut to achieve.

An entire line of infantry could be ordered to march side-by-side through an area of forest. If some of them entered the ZOC of hidden enemy units they would stop while the remaining units of the line would proceed on their original course -- totally ruining the nice pretty battleline, which would be a very historical outcome.

I have no idea what would be involved in making this work, of course, and it may not be any easier than implementing simultaneous movement, but it just <i>seems </i>to me this would be a much simpler engine change.


Your humble servant,
Gen 'Dee Dubya' Mallory


David W. Mallory
ACW - General, 3/2/I/AotM (Club President & Cabinet Member)
CCC - Lieutenant, Georgia Volunteers, Southern Regional Department, Colonial American Army

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">The neat thing was in the "simultaneous" part, a number of things could happen, most without analitical predictability. Factors of leadership presence, leadership experience, unit morale, fatigue, unit experience and disruption status compared to that of the opposing unit are accounted for. For example, if a defender gave a "retreat" order and an attacker gave a "melee" order, whether the defender has retreated first or is hit before retreating is dependant on the above factors. Obviously if the defenders have been given a "hold at all costs" order then it may be a lot harder to be overrun then if they have been given a "retreat" order".<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I have not looked at the Punic War rules yet, though I have downloaded them and will look them over later, but I have advocated simultaneous preplotted turns for many years. I do agree with General Burke that there needs to be some sort of AI that governs a unit's actions in the course of a move. Kind of reminiscent of the immediate action drills they used to teach us in the Marine Corps; if you get ambushed and the ambushers are within 50 yds, you assault through the ambush. If they are farther away, you resort to fire and maneuver. If a unit is in column and takes fire, does it continue to march or form into line? Does it matter how far off the firing unit is? I think some form of discretionary orders ought to be available when plotting movement to cover some eventualities, and I think that will become the meat of the game rather than micromanaging unit fire. I expect it to also be more realistic and rewarding.



MG Mike Mihalik
1/III/AoMiss/CSA

Hi Guys..

Just to let you know..Here is a link to what will be the New Ancient Worlds Wargame Club..Not officially open just yet...

Please have a look around and see what you think..

www.awwc.net



Major Dean Beecham.
2nd Division
Artillery Brigade
AoC.

Please have a look around and see what you think..
--------------------------------------------------
Dean
Hey this looks good!!




[:)]

Colonel Tony Best
Army of Georgia