American Civil War Game Club (ACWGC)

Most games have the rebels running out of small arms ammunition resupply long before the end of the scenario, drastically reducing their ability to fight. It's not enough to be barefoot and hungry.[:p] We often have a lot of units, sometimes dozens, who need to be withdrawing from contact or will be taking fire without being able to reply. [xx(] This is especially a problem in some of the longer scenarios such as Gettysburg. It is the same in TalonSoft and HPS.

I submit that this is ahistorical. I don't know of a battle that has the rebel army needing to retire from the battlefield because they ran out of small arms ammunition. (other than Bunker Hill [;)])
Individual units being pulled back for resupply,...yes. On both sides. But why must the rebel army supply always run dry?

I propose that a "fix" is needed and am opening this thread for suggestions.

If a basic load for the infantry soldier was 40 rounds, it would be easy for a regiment to fire it all away in 20 minutes. I would think that their commanders accordingly, when knowing that supply wagons were not available, exercised fire discipline, firing in volleys on command, to keep their units combat worthy. Somehow, running out of ammunition was not that common a problem.

Possible fixes...
1. Double the supply... or even <u>unlimited small arms supply</u> from supply wagons. (That would certainly cause players to protect their supply trains from capture.) Where and when did a division ever expend all of its small arms ammo? Was there also a supply train for a corps? Lee's chief of artillery, supervising the softening up barrage before Pickett's Charge, warned Lee that he was running low and would not be able to support the assault if it were not launched promptly. I would bet that in the coming days that the caissons of his firing cannons were resupplied from another source. Otherwise, Meade would have likely felt free to attack, which he did not in the following two days.

2. In the Hamilton thread on proposed changes, we discussed that individual units might have a built in supply level, which could be watched by the owning player to determine when it is time to withdraw or resupply the unit. <font color="yellow">There could also be a control similar to our present HPS for conserving fire at minimal or medium distances, this time firing at half power to conserve ammo expenditure. I don't much like this one, but it is better than what we've got.</font id="yellow"> On the positive side, it would lower casualties, which tends to run far ahead of historical levels in our games.

An optional patch would just suit me fine.

It is also bad enough in HPS that the Union can use provost troops for frontline combat. I actually like having them available to protect union communications, but when they're added to Union cavalry units, which many are excellent quality, then J.E.B. Stuart's division cannot stand against them at Gettysburg, much less try to attack and break them, unless the Union player is timid and/or incompetent. But all this is another issue that deserves its own thread. I like some of the ACW house optional house rules on the subject, but the more operations that can be programmed into the game engine, the better.

BG Ross McDaniel
2nd Bde, 3rd Div, III Corps, AoG

“Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the
right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable, a most sacred right—a right which we hope and believe is to liberate the world. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people, that can, may revolutionize, and make their own of so much of the territory as they inhabit.â€

LESS AMMO for REBS!

LESS AMMO for REBS!

[:p]


General Jeff Laub
Union Chief of the Army
ACWGC Cabinet Member
http://www.geocities.com/laubster22/UnionHQ/

I agree, more ammo. And not just cuase I play the rebs in this club.

It is my opinion (Ross can tell you that my opinion is rarely humble) that the historical way to play these games is to shoot a lot and melee a little. Sure, troops can stand in line a little longer than perhaps is historical (a unit can move and shoot in these games for 8 hours straight as long as it does not acrue much fatigue), but I have had some cases where most of a division is out of combat very quickly despite low losses.

Brig Gen Jim Pfluecke
II/III AotM

A lot depends on the purpose a particular game mechanic is add to achieve. Not knowing the designer's intention my opinion is that small arms supply was added to limit combat by forcing units that fire to much to have to resupply and if the army fires to much they will run out of ammo.

My main criticism of the HPS system is that it gives you no effective means of managing the use of that ammo. While offensive fire can be controlled there are only to extreme settings for the AI Auto Defense Fire, minium range only or fire at anything. While I agree at the fire rates players use in the game an army could use up its available supplies, putting in a game mechanic that simulates this is pointless unless it game also includes a game mechanic for the player to control his ammo expenditure.

I propose two possible solutions:

The first should be easiest to implement. Just add a medium range (2-3 hex) setting so you can keep regiments from wasting ammo. I think most games would be played at this setting if it was available. And, it would more accurately reflect historic use of the weapons. Regiments didn't run out of ammo mostly because they didn't go around firing it at targets 400-600 yards away.

The second method is to improve the way the AI uses ammo. Have a threshold set instead of a range. The game fire mechanics allows any firing unit to pretty accurately know their average probability of a hit. Allow the player to set what level to use to determine if a unit will fires. For example an average probability of killing >5 men as a threshold would cause regiments to fire only if the equations indicated the median kill was five or greater.

If you give people a means to effectively manage their fire then ammo depletions will have the desired affect of limiting excessive combat. As currently implemented it means the Rebels will lose any battle that lasts more than two days.

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

Infantry ammunition has been a problem for me in the HPS Gettysburg and BG Shiloh full battle scenarios but in my Peninsula games there has been more ammunition than I need.

Paddy Griffith, in his book <i>Battle Tactics of the Civil War</i>, quotes a Confederate Ordnance estimate of 25-26 rounds of ammunition expended per man at Gettysburg. A possible explanation in another book was that a lot of ammunition was recovered from casualties and POWs. The Union records indicated that 60 rounds/man were issued to their soldiers at Gettysburg (5,400,000 rds to @ 90,000 men). Griffith states that I Corps expended 86 shots/man and Geary's Brigade 75 shots/man. In <i>Plowshares into Swords</i>, the story of Josiah Gorgas and the Confederate Ordnance Department, Frank Vandiver wrote that Gorgas tried to maintain a level of 140 rds/man in the major armies. The pre-war regulations called for 200 rds/man.

In my first HPS Gettysburg battle, I depleted 40% of my infantry ammo on the first day. It will be my last HPS Gettysburg battle unless auto defensive fire is off or the ammo situation changes. One thing that might help is to reduce the probability of ammo depletion. Much simpler is just add extra supply wagons. That you can easily do with the editor. My boss, General Whitehead, makes some excellent suggestions, but I will be very surprised if HPS does anything with them anytime soon.

I think that in real combat conditions, rates of fire were slow for a number of reasons, such as poor visibility due to smoke, fouling in rifles, and simple inertia. I think when a unit fired from 500 yards usually only a few designated snipers did the firing. But in the game the chance of a low ammo result is the same. Anyway, General McDaniel makes the point that battles in which ammunition supply wasn't a problem for Confederates historically present a very real problem in some of the games, and in this I heartily agree.


MG Mike Mihalik
1/III/AoMiss/CSA

Is it just you Rebs that have a problem or is it just me? I've played I don't know how many hundred of games in this club and another and I don't think I've ever had a problem running out of ammunition playing as the Union. Now as former Reb Ned Simms will attest most of my troops don't live long enough to have a chance to expend all their ammo so maybe it's just me.

General Mark Nelms
6/3/IX/AoO
"Blackhawk Brigade"

One difference between the armies is the division size. The union has more so it has more wagons so it often has more ammo points pre man.

Jim P
II/III AotM

Not just small arms ammo, but also Artillery. I've had to with draw my guns to keep them from being taken. Also has cost me a few games were artillery fire would of helped out very much. Like in a HPS Ozark game I had going. [B)][:(]

Respectfully,

Brig. Gen. Gery Bastiani
3rd Division, II Corp, Tarheel Division AotM

"If there is a shell or bullet over there destined for us, it will find us" - General James Longstreet

Well, Gary, if you're meaning our game at Pea Ridge where arty ammo would have helped you, that's ENTIRELY historical. Van Dorn managed to put the entire Union army between himself and his supply train in that battle. The Rebs withdrew early in Day 2 because they had no cannonballs left.

Major General Gary McClellan
1st Division, XXIII Corps
AoO,USA

Unless I am missing something here, why can't ammo wastage be handled by simply changing the PDT settings? If one wants to make running out of ammo a rare occasion simply change the PDT setting of 24 to 99.

BG Robert Frost
Army of Cumberland

Yes General McClellan and also against Lt. Col. Alberti at Lexington[B)][:(][xx(]

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Gary McClellan</i>
<br />Well, Gary, if you're meaning our game at Pea Ridge where arty ammo would have helped you, that's ENTIRELY historical. Van Dorn managed to put the entire Union army between himself and his supply train in that battle. The Rebs withdrew early in Day 2 because they had no cannonballs left.

Major General Gary McClellan
1st Division, XXIII Corps
AoO,USA
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Respectfully,

Brig. Gen. Gery Bastiani
3rd Division, II Corp, Tarheel Division AotM

"If there is a shell or bullet over there destined for us, it will find us" - General James Longstreet

It is my understanding that the Rebs had enough ammo to fight a defensive battle on July 4 or 5 if Meade had attacked - small arms and artillery, but did not have enough to sustain the offensive (or the manpower by that point). Ergo, the fact that the Rebs in these games have such a high chance of running out of ammo by Day 3 of G'burg seems unhistorical to me.

I can only recall a few occassions where units larger than regiment size actually ran out of ammo during the war, and most of those were extreme circumstances or small armies opperating in large strategic areas (think Van Dorn in Arkansas, Jackson in the Valley, Jackson at 2nd Manassas before Lee arrived). But I can think of no major engagement between main field armies where ammunition of any type was ever a big issue for more than a regiment here or there.

Regards,

Brig. Gen. Alan Lynn
2nd Div, II Corps, AoA
VMI Training Staff

God Bless <><

Now that we have it established that running out of small arms ammo is ahistoric for the rebels, contrary to our games and especially for the 3 day Gettysburg scenarios, I would prefer that we keep the number of supply wagons limited to divisions. It will be more realistic in reflecting the need for large forces to stay within range of resupply when firefights are imminent and penalize those units which cut loose and attempt an encirclement, as with Van Dorn putting the enemy between his maneuver force and his supply train. In theory his plan looked good. [B)][8][xx(] But the damnyankees did not come apart when they found that they were being attacked from both sides! [:0][:I]

That being said, <u>where is this PDT file found</u> and <u>how do we get to it</u>? <blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">why can't ammo wastage be handled by simply changing the PDT settings? If one wants to make running out of ammo a rare occasion simply change the PDT setting of 24 to 99.
BG Robert Frost <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Is it modified by editor programming? Inquiring minds want to know. [:p][:o)][8D] I am definitely into easy when it's available. [:p][:D]

Ross McDaniel

Although I disagree with the premise that units above regimental size almost never ran out of ammuniton I do agree that the Confederate's are under supplied in our games and especially in Gettysburg as Ross and others have noted. I am playing the Gettysburg campaign now as the Rebs (just for a change of pace)and have already lost a large battle partly due to running out of ammuniton and worse yet not having ENOUGH wagons to supply my army when it dispersed over a large map. As a bare minimum the ability to distibute ammo with the troops by increasing the number of Reb wagons i s needed (even if they have lower resupply values).

I am reading a book on Champions Hill by Timothy Smith and it seems during that battle a critical counter-attack by two CSA brigades under Generals Cockrell and Green were forced to withdraw after running out of ammo. This was aggravated by the incredible decesion by the Confederate command to withdraw the trains away from the field prior to the start of the fighting. Also, at Chancelorsville several Union brigades were completley depleted and withdrew themselves.

So while I don't see it as ahistorical to run out of ammo,I do think it is inaccurate that the Seceesh are so badly handicapped in some of the games..[^]

Lt. Gen. Ed Blackburn
II/VI/AoS

"Forward Bucktails"

<font color="yellow">My responses</font id="yellow"><blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">...I am playing the Gettysburg campaign now as the Rebs (just for a change of pace)and have already lost a large battle partly due to running out of ammuniton and worse yet not having ENOUGH wagons to supply my army when it dispersed over a large map. As a bare minimum the ability to distibute ammo with the troops by increasing the number of Reb wagons i s needed (even if they have lower resupply values). <font color="yellow">[:)]I believe that if you keep getting experience as the rebel, that you will find that you are running out of wagons by nightfall of the 2nd day, unless the number of supply factors is considerably increased. I can cope with divisional supply train range limitation, but low and no ammo for dozens of regiments is a fatal handicap on that 3rd day.</font id="yellow">
...book on Champions Hill by Timothy Smith and it seems during that battle a critical counter-attack by two CSA brigades under Generals Cockrell and Green were forced to withdraw after running out of ammo. This was aggravated by the incredible decesion by the Confederate command to withdraw the trains away from the field prior to the start of the fighting.
<font color="yellow">The rebs would have had ammo if the commander had not been incompetent and sent his supply train away.</font id="yellow">
Also, at Chancelorsville several Union brigades were completley depleted and withdrew themselves.
<font color="yellow">Again, either their supply was misdirected or they deliberately moved out of supply range for a temporary battlefield advantage. One could have infinite supply, but when the troops are out of range of the wagons, they may run out of supply. [;)][:o)]</font id="yellow">
So while I don't see it as ahistorical to run out of ammo,
<font color="yellow">I certainly agree for units (any size) which are out of supply range.</font id="yellow">
I do think it is inaccurate that the Seceesh are so badly handicapped in some of the games.. <font color="yellow">I agree. Of course not! we have hundreds of scenarios. But if you want a good beating 20 times in a row, play me in 3 day Gettysburg, most any TalonSoft or HPS scenario, while I take the Union forces. I find that the only way that I can last as the reb against a good player is to practice strict fire conservation starting the first day, which really puts a crimp on my first day offensive. Not fair!</font id="yellow">[}:)][:(][8]
Lt. Gen. Ed Blackburn
II/VI/AoS <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote"> Remember that several Union western offensives were put on stand-by because of rebel cavalry raids against their supply lines. Genrl Sherman was especially alarmed when he learned that Bedford Forrest was the raider. When Sherman abandoned his supply line and started his march to the sea, there was no sizable rebel force to fight and stop him along his line of march. His army ate by plundering the Southern resources and had seldom any need to expend their ammunition.

I don't really like the idea of unlimited small arms ammo. What if supply wagons were replenished each night? That would address the fact of limited supply, but would necessitate some fire discipline.

Alternatively, when a wagon is depleted to zero, a new one might appear at a depot or edge of the board. The need to protect supply lines would be realistic and usually quite important.

Ross McDaniel

<font color="yellow">After thoughts</font id="yellow">:
What if there was a corps or army supply train that could replenish divisional trains by coming adjacent? That might create the limitation that we are looking for. But I don't like the idea of introducing something that did not exist or serve that function.

What if divisional trains replenished, say, 60 pts/hour, to reflect wagons arriving? The programming would be similar to fatigue recovery.