| American Civil War Game Club (ACWGC) http://www.wargame.ch/board/acwgc/ |
|
| QUESTIONS ABOUT ATLANTA CAMPAIGN ORDER OF BATTLE http://www.wargame.ch/board/acwgc/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=10841 |
Page 3 of 3 |
| Author: | Al Amos [ Mon May 21, 2007 10:34 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Gilbert, Make a version without the infantry, problem solved. MajGen Al 'Ambushed' Amos 3rd "Amos' Ambushers" Bde, Cavalry Division, XX Corps, AoC The Union Forever! Huzzah! |
|
| Author: | Douglas Strickler [ Tue May 22, 2007 5:22 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
General Collins, Without meaning to sidetrack the topic here, I would note the following regarding the Brandy Station scenario. General Amos has supplied one fix. Another - less drastic - solution exists. I take it that you have been playing the historical scenario. If not, then you are getting consistently bad luck with the random scneario selection in the campaign. There are 24 scenarios supplied in the campaign folder. 1/2 of these feature the Confederate infantry reinforcements (Rodes' division) arriving begining from noon to 1:20 p.m. with only a 30% chance of arriving on time. This should considerably delay the arrival of his forces and their impact on the game. I'm not sure how I could design the scenario without infantry. There are - after all - two brigades of Union infantry included - as there were in the actual battle. They weren't employed very effectively, but they were present, and were involved in the fight. In my experience players use these Union infantry far more effectively in game play than they were in real life, helping to skew things in the favor of the Union. I did remove a host of scenario varients that featured a Corps of Union infantry and all of Ewell's Corps either arriving or on map at the start. These would have truly made for a radically different battle. To do this I removed an entire branch of the campaign that would have given the players an option to alter the forces at the start. In essence you advocate for including an ahistorical scenario as the historical. I, with all due respect, think that goes too far. Anyway - General Amos' solution looks like a good one to me. Game on! Doug |
|
| Page 3 of 3 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|