American Civil War Game Club (ACWGC)

NO More Ammo [8D]

or we give the Rebs more ammo and DROP every Reb unit's morale by 1 or two levels. Why do the Rebs run out? Probably because unit for unit they have better morale, and thus will on an average fire more than their opponents. If you rebels routed more and fired less (like the average Union unit), you wouldn't run out of ammo. What makes it worse is our knowledge of the battlefield-if one unit spots another than the whole army knows about it. It gives you much more freedom of movement and ability to react. I would much prefer a command control rule where if a brigade/division is out of command, it could not advance toward(within firing range-5 hexes) know enemy units in LOS. Units in column on roads would not be affected nor would reinforcments. Also units within firing range could not move adjacent to enemy units if out of command. Something along this line would cut down on using up all your ammo. Also units out of command and control can only fire at minimum range. It's not not enough ammo, it's too much control. JMHO OALAH,EGOATAS [:p]

Brig. Gen. Phil Driscoll
1st Brigade/1st Division/VCorps/AoP

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Rich Walker</i>
<br />Guys,

I don't disagree with more detail and realism. I just advocate simplicity.

As for the ammo question, you may well be correct. I haven't played a full three day battle to know one way or the other. But I would like to make one general comment. These games generate 10x more firing then a "real" battle. Folks have said that the "real" armies rarely had ammo problems. Well that may be, but I can assure you, that if a "real" battle had as much firing as we tend to engage in during the course of a game, ammo would most likely have been a bigger problem. IMHO


Capt. Richard Walker
I Corps
Army of the Mississippi
2nd Brigade, 3rd Division
"Defenders of Tennessee"
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I don't disagree that ammo should be limited or that there is entirely to much combat. My problem is that it is limited and there is no way to effectively control the use of it. With only two AI Defensive Fire choices, Minimum Range and anything you can see, along with auto resupply of every fool unit that happens to pass by a wagon, there is no way to limit the combat so the ammo will last.

That is why I suggested just giving us an extra level of AI control so we could set fire at 1, 2-3, max ranges. This would allow us to shut down most of the wasteage and some of the excess killing.

The other suggestion I like is to make wagon resupply of units a command rather than automatic. This would allow us to ration out our limited ammo.

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

I believe that this topic is just about discussed out.

I agree with Rich Walker that KISS should be sought, (Keep It Simple, Stupid!" for those who have not served) and I appreciate that game designers don't want to micromanage or make players micromanage. However, there are considerations that will require a little more programming or changes by designers that would improve the games playability and realism that are presently lacking. We should use already existing game programming patterns where ever feasible.

It appears to me that it is established that the whole bloomin' rebel army should not run out of small arms ammunition in so many scenarios. The scattered unusable small factor wagons are frustrating also.

I suggest for both sides:

1. Supply wagons with an unimpeded line of supply should be replenished at some numerical rate to reflect arriving wagons, automatic and similar to fatigue recovery. I suggest that it be possible for a supply unit to reach zero and stay on the map for replenishing. Surrounded wagons should not replenish. Overnight to dawn should find a near depleted wagon back at maximum value, if there has been no movement or combat. Alternatively, a new unit might appear at a depot or map edge when zero supply factors are attained.

2. When a divisional supply wagon is captured, a new one should appear next turn at a depot or at the edge of the map where that division entered.

3. Supply should not be automatic, but assigned by the owning player. Use the <u>melee assignment</u> pattern to allow consuming multiple small units to keep them from becoming useless for supply.

4. I would also like to have supply wagons subject to rout to encourage players to protect them from enemy fire. Routed wagons should not be usable for supplying combat units. They were not driven by valiant warriors who never got scared.

These changes would keep the games simple for players,[:)] but would require a bit more programming for designers. [:(!][:(][?] While admitting my ignorance of programming, it ought to be easy while using pre-existing patterns. [;)]

Other considerations brought up in this discussion are well worth having their own threads. Too much combat and ammo consumption due to perfect reconnaisance is a complicated subject.

The instant commander's knowledge of enemy strength, unit type, and movement at great distance due to line of sight cannot be completely fixed. However, what if we could not identify what kind or how many units in a stack beyond a certain range? Use the question mark (?) unit when a couple of miles distant from the nearest enemy unit. That would only partially address the problem but it's a start. It would increase fog of war while allowing a bit more deliberate deception.

By the way, I want to thank Rich and other game designers for creating these games that have given so many of us countless hours of entertainment.

BG Ross McDaniel