ACWGC
* ACWGC     * Dpt. of Records       * CSA HQ    * VMI    * Join CSA    
   * Union HQ    * UMA    * Join Union     ACWGC Memorial
CSA Armies:    ANV    AotW
Union Armies:    AotT     AotC      AotP      AotS     Union Army Forums
     Link Express
American Civil War Books, Magazines and Games for sale (See other items)
Club Forums:     NWC    CCC     Home Pages:     NWC    CCC    ACWGC
It is currently Wed Oct 18, 2017 5:00 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Chickamauga-Rifle vs Musket
PostPosted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 9:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 9:52 am
Posts: 951
Location:
Hi, Rich,

I noticed in the Bridge scenario in the parameter data that a musket at range 1 is a multiplier of 4, whereas the rifle is a multiplier of 4.5. This represents a change in philosophy from previous games, where the musket's sole advantage was range 1 fire. Is there a reason?

MG Mike Mihalik
1/III/AoMiss/CSA


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 3:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 9:52 am
Posts: 809
Location: USA
Sorry, that's another error. It's fixed now

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

I noticed in the Bridge scenario in the parameter data that a musket at range 1 is a multiplier of 4, whereas the rifle is a multiplier of 4.5. This represents a change in philosophy from previous games, where the musket's sole advantage was range 1 fire. Is there a reason?

MG Mike Mihalik
1/III/AoMiss/CSA
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Lt. Col. Richard Walker
I Corps
Army of the Mississippi
2nd Brigade, 3rd Division
"Defenders of Tennessee"


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 19, 2007 5:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 9:52 am
Posts: 951
Location:
Hi, Rich,

I notice the rifle vs musket anomalie probably extends to all
scenarios. I also notice Napoleons fire with a 22 modifier at
range 1, and 16 at range 2, which seems high, especially
compared to 3" rifles. Will there be a Chickamauga patch anytime
soon?

MG Mike Mihalik
1/III/AoMiss/CSA


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2007 3:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 9:52 am
Posts: 809
Location: USA
Any day now. Just waiting on HPS to post it.

Lt. Col. Richard Walker
I Corps
Army of the Mississippi
2nd Brigade, 3rd Division
"Defenders of Tennessee"


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2007 3:13 am 
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by mihalik</i>
<br />Hi, Rich,

I notice the rifle vs musket anomalie probably extends to all
scenarios. I also notice Napoleons fire with a 22 modifier at
range 1, and 16 at range 2, which seems high, especially
compared to 3" rifles. Will there be a Chickamauga patch anytime
soon?

MG Mike Mihalik
1/III/AoMiss/CSA
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Shouldn't the Napoleon have a significantly more powerful effect at point blank range compared to a 3" rifle? I didn't think the 3" had as effective a canister round as the Napoleon?

Regards,

Major Gen. Alan Lynn
CSA Chief of Staff
3rd Bgde, 3rd Cav Div, II Corps, AoA

God Bless <><


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2007 5:33 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 9:52 am
Posts: 951
Location:
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Shouldn't the Napoleon have a significantly more powerful effect at point blank range compared to a 3" rifle? I didn't think the 3" had as effective a canister round as the Napoleon<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Hi, General Lynn,

You are correct. But the Napoleon 1 hex modifier is 22 and the 3" rifle is 9. That is about 2.5 times more effective, and I think that is way too much. In Vicksburg it is 8 for 3" rifle and 12 for
Napoleon, which makes the Napoleon half again as effective. That makes more sense, as the bore size for a 3" rifle is 3" (doh!)and for the Napoleon 4.62, which is a ratio of 1:1.54. I am no physics
expert, though. Maybe they did a study and found a Napoleon cannister round was 2.5 times more effective under 125 yds than the 3". Anybody know?


MG Mike Mihalik
1/III/AoMiss/CSA


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 20, 2007 5:54 am 
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by mihalik</i>
<br /><blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Shouldn't the Napoleon have a significantly more powerful effect at point blank range compared to a 3" rifle? I didn't think the 3" had as effective a canister round as the Napoleon<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Hi, General Lynn,

You are correct. But the Napoleon 1 hex modifier is 22 and the 3" rifle is 9. That is about 2.5 times more effective, and I think that is way too much. In Vicksburg it is 8 for 3" rifle and 12 for
Napoleon, which makes the Napoleon half again as effective. That makes more sense, as the bore size for a 3" rifle is 3" (doh!)and for the Napoleon 4.62, which is a ratio of 1:1.54. I am no physics
expert, though. Maybe they did a study and found a Napoleon cannister round was 2.5 times more effective under 125 yds than the 3". Anybody know?


MG Mike Mihalik
1/III/AoMiss/CSA
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I believe that is probably the case - I seem to remember reading about the difference between a Napoleon canister round and a 3" canister round - the 3" held a significantly smaller number of projectiles and dispersed them in a much tighter area than the Napoleon. But perhaps you are right about the ratio being a bit too high in comparison in Chick.

Regards,

Major Gen. Alan Lynn
CSA Chief of Staff
3rd Bgde, 3rd Cav Div, II Corps, AoA

God Bless <><


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: