American Civil War Game Club (ACWGC)
http://www.wargame.ch/board/acwgc/

Proposed Rule Changes , Games - Public Comments
http://www.wargame.ch/board/acwgc/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=11911		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  dmallory [ Sun Feb 10, 2008 3:42 am ]
Post subject:  Proposed Rule Changes , Games - Public Comments
Officers of the Club:

It has been suggested that this club expand its base of 'authorized' games. With that in mind, the following motion was made and approved by the Cabinet:

<b>That the Club Rules be modified to include the games "Forge of Freedom" and "American Civil War: The Blue & The Gray", by changing the second sentence of item 1.1 to read as follows:

"These games are currently the Talonsoft and HPS Simulations American Civil War games designed by John Tiller, as well as the game Forge of Freedome (FoF) and American Civil War: The Blue & the Gray (ACWBG)."</b>

Club rule changes must be approved by the entire club (see item 9.1). Before calling for a vote, however, we wanted to allow time for public comment on the change.

If you have input to this rule change, please feel free to express your views here. We're allowing 1 week for public comment. Voting instructions will be provided next week.


Your humble servant,
Gen 'Dee Dubya' Mallory

Image
David W. Mallory
ACW - General, 3/2/I/AotM (Club President & Cabinet Member)
CCC - Lieutenant, Georgia Volunteers, Southern Regional Department, Colonial American Army
Author:  Den McBride [ Sun Feb 10, 2008 10:53 am ]
Post subject: 
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by dmallory</i>
<br />
"These games are currently the Talonsoft and HPS Simulations American Civil War games designed by John Tiller, as well as the game Forge of Freedome (FoF) and American Civil War: The Blue & the Gray (ACWBG)."<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Gents, 2 comments.

First of all, I'm not violently opposed. I do hope there's been some thought put into the issue of equivalency, in terms of how points would be awarded. The current norm emphasizes play and length of play, with a somewhat minor nod to success. This I feel is the right approach. I don't know enough about these other engines to know if they afford similar opportunity. It would be unfortunate if trying to be more inclusive somehow sparked a bun-fight over points allocation.

Secondly, Cabinet may wish to take advantage of this change to specify the inclusion of the Matrix genre of the Battleground games, just so people don't think those are excluded.

My respects to the members of Cabinet.

Gen. Den McBride
ANV
swampfox_csa(at)yahoo.ca
Author:  Ernie Sands [ Mon Feb 11, 2008 4:29 am ]
Post subject: 
Den:

The added games will be scored using the same criteria we now use.

It is a good idea to add MATRIX (because of the Talonsoft/Matrix connection) to the game mix rules, but we would not necessarily add another game from Matrix, unless it was on the ACW, fit the club and had a following.

<b><font color="gold">Ernie Sands
General, Commanding, Army of Ohio
Image
ACWGC Cabinet Member
ACWGC Records Site Administrator
</b></font id="gold">
Author:  laubster22 [ Mon Feb 11, 2008 12:50 pm ]
Post subject: 
Good point on the Matrix release - good that the process of soliciting feedback is working![8D]

Image
General Jeff Laub
Union Chief of the Army
ACWGC Cabinet Member
http://www.geocities.com/laubster22/UnionHQ/
Author:  warbison [ Mon Feb 11, 2008 4:52 pm ]
Post subject: 
<font face="Book Antiqua"><font size="4"><font color="orange">Gentlemen! <salute>

At the risk of sounding ignorant, can a link to both games be provided as I really have no knowledge of these gaming titles? Is there any other gaming platforms that provide an avenue for PBEM for these games? Do we know if there is any kind of demand for these games?

I would also like to point out that the training academies would then have to provide support to these new games. It would be interesting to see just how many current members of the Club have either gaming title? I certainly don't at this time.

Respectfully,</font id="orange"></font id="size4"></font id="Book Antiqua">

<font color="orange"><font size="4">Nick Kunz
Image
General
Interim Commander
Eastern Theater Command
Confederate States of America</font id="orange"></font id="size4">
Author:  nelmsm [ Mon Feb 11, 2008 5:54 pm ]
Post subject: 
Here is the link to the American Civil War: Blue and Gray:
http://www.ageod.com/game-AGEOD%2527s%2 ... NG100.html
There is a demo available. You can also find it listed at the Matrix Games site as it is available for purchase there also.

Here is the link to the Forge of Freedom web page:
http://www.matrixgames.com/games/game.asp?gid=333

Not sure how many of the club members have the game but there was a thread not to long ago asking about the ACWBG game and several members responded with their experiences. I've since picked it up but it I'm going to need a computer upgrade (next week hopefully) to get it to play right. I can't speak about Forge of Freedom. As for providing support for training games that is something that each individual army will need to address. I do know that the Colonial Campaign Club has added Birth of America, the sister game to ACWBG, to their roster of sanctioned games.


<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by warbison</i>
<br /><font face="Book Antiqua"><font size="4"><font color="orange">Gentlemen! <salute>

At the risk of sounding ignorant, can a link to both games be provided as I really have no knowledge of these gaming titles? Is there any other gaming platforms that provide an avenue for PBEM for these games? Do we know if there is any kind of demand for these games?

I would also like to point out that the training academies would then have to provide support to these new games. It would be interesting to see just how many current members of the Club have either gaming title? I certainly don't at this time.

Respectfully,</font id="orange"></font id="size4"></font id="Book Antiqua">

<font color="orange"><font size="4">Nick Kunz
Image
General
Interim Commander
Eastern Theater Command
Confederate States of America</font id="orange"></font id="size4">

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

General Mark Nelms
6/3/IX/AoO
"Blackhawk Brigade"
West Point Instructor
Union Cabinet Secretary
Author:  mihalik [ Mon Feb 11, 2008 6:45 pm ]
Post subject: 
Hi,

Personally, neither of these games appeals to me, but each appears to have a following. I certainly have no objection to including them among the games authorized by the club. The more the merrier, I always say!

MG Mike Mihalik
1/III/AoMiss/CSA
Author:  tony best [ Tue Feb 12, 2008 12:41 am ]
Post subject: 
I say-the more the merrier!! I am not familier with the two new games mentioned but I have just started "Three Days at Gettysburg( 3DOG)" via cyberboard and it seems great! I know from the past that Victory games " Civil War" is great and Mark Harmons "For The People" has an avid following.There are many more. All need not contribute points but afficendos could meet and discuss them similer to Consimworld. Perhaps different rooms for each game discussion?

I heartily agree that this is a good direction for the club.[8D][:D]

Colonel Tony Best
Army of Georgia
Author:  Gary McClellan [ Tue Feb 12, 2008 1:51 pm ]
Post subject: 
I think both games would be worthy additions to the "club roster" and I fully support their inclusion in the club.

You may wish to check with the CCC in terms of scoring, as they are allowing Birth of America from AGEOD.

Major General Gary McClellan
1st Division, XXIII Corps
AoO,USA
Author:  Ernie Sands [ Tue Feb 12, 2008 5:58 pm ]
Post subject: 
In the CCC, the same scoring rules apply to all games played, including Birth Of America.

<b><font color="gold">Ernie Sands
General, Commanding, Army of Ohio
Image
ACWGC Cabinet Member
ACWGC Records Site Administrator
President, Colonial Campaigns Club
</b></font id="gold">
Author:  D.S. Walter [ Wed Feb 13, 2008 11:59 pm ]
Post subject: 
Ageod's American Civil War ("The Blue and the Gray") is an excellent game and I am all for it. BTW, the official abbreviation is "AACW" and should probably be used that way in the rules.

Gen. Walter, USA
<i>The Blue Blitz</i>
3/2/VIII AoS
Image
Author:  Boyd [ Sat Feb 16, 2008 7:26 am ]
Post subject: 
Okay, I will be the first rebel and state I would be <u>against</u> expanding the base of authorized games from something other then the BG & HPS format. This club for 10 years has coalesced around these two games successfully. I am afraid allowing other types of Civil War games (that differ greatly in the way they are played from BG & HPS) would create gaming fractions within the club.

I like knowing that when I come to the MDT the conversation will be about BG & HPS games. And when I am in the Dept of Records I can measure everyone elses records against my own since we all are playing the same game.

If in the event the club votes to authorize FoF and/or AACW I would suggest those two games have their own message board within the club. This will allow everyone to find discussions and conversations on the game format they are interested in (or articles of secession might have to be drawn up again [:D][:p]).

Regards

Maj Gen Boyd Denner,
2nd Division Commanding
II Corps
ANV
"God Bless the Alabamians" Gen. Robert E. Lee - The Wilderness 1864
Author:  D.S. Walter [ Sat Feb 16, 2008 8:21 am ]
Post subject: 
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Boyd</i>
<br />Okay, I will be the first rebel and state I would be <u>against</u> expanding the base of authorized games from something other then the BG & HPS format. This club for 10 years has coalesced around these two games successfully.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

That exactly is the reason why lately I have felt more and more like being on my way out. I am still fascinated by the Civil War, I still value the roleplay and comradeship in the club, but after seven years and about 150 battles, the games have begun to become a bit boring. I hope that the club will remain open for new games portraying the Civil War equally well on a different level, and for me, personally, that would be a reason to stick around.

The club is much more than just a set of games. It's the <b><font color="yellow">American Civil War Game Club</font id="yellow"></b>, not the HPS/John Tiller Game Club.

Gen. Walter, USA
<i>The Blue Blitz</i>
3/2/VIII AoS
Image
Author:  nelmsm [ Sat Feb 16, 2008 8:43 am ]
Post subject: 
Ford ran a lot of years with just the Model T but that didn't keep them from adopting new models did it? Are we the American Civil War Gaming Club or the John Tiller American Civil War Gaming Club. I'm of a like mind with Dierk, expansion should increase the interest in the club rather then detract from it. By proposing the rule my intention was to increase the variety of games that club members would have available and hopefully attract some new members, who in turn might become interested in the HPS/BG games also. I can't see that using the same forum for all the games would pose a problem either. Thread titles or at least the first post should steer you away if you don't like the discussion.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Boyd</i>
<br />Okay, I will be the first rebel and state I would be <u>against</u> expanding the base of authorized games from something other then the BG & HPS format. This club for 10 years has coalesced around these two games successfully. I am afraid allowing other types of Civil War games (that differ greatly in the way they are played from BG & HPS) would create gaming fractions within the club.

I like knowing that when I come to the MDT the conversation will be about BG & HPS games. And when I am in the Dept of Records I can measure everyone elses records against my own since we all are playing the same game.

If in the event the club votes to authorize FoF and/or AACW I would suggest those two games have their own message board within the club. This will allow everyone to find discussions and conversations on the game format they are interested in (or articles of secession might have to be drawn up again [:D][:p]).

Regards

Maj Gen Boyd Denner,
2nd Division Commanding
II Corps
ANV
"God Bless the Alabamians" Gen. Robert E. Lee - The Wilderness 1864

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

General Mark Nelms
6/3/IX/AoO
"Blackhawk Brigade"
West Point Instructor
Union Cabinet Secretary
Author:  Ernie Sands [ Sat Feb 16, 2008 12:43 pm ]
Post subject: 
I do see Boyd's point, however, the games will be scored in the same manner as the current games and this keeps the scoring on an equal footing to the current games. As for the forum threads, discussions about the ACW in general and the games specifically will continue as we have now. I doubt that the new games are going to dominate our boards. At first, there might be some discussion generated, but that should die down.

I can give some limited insight to the lessons from the CCC when we expanded the games covered to included Birth of America. There have been some threads about BOA, but the overwhelming majority of the discussions are about the Tiller games and the American Revolution, in general. For these MATRIX games, we, in the CCC (and will be the case in the ACWGC) do not have members that are part of the Matrix teams, as we do with HPS, like Rich Hamilton. In the ACWGC, the scenario designers like Rich Walker are always around to offer insights to the scenarios and games, as Rich is for the technical help we need. With the new games, most questions about the functions of the new games will have to be directed on MATRIX forums, not in the ACWGC forums.

Since we (in the CCC) allowed the new non-Tiller games into the club, there have been 40 BOA games registered and played out of a total games of over 250. There were only 9 individual players from the club involved with those games. And that is in almost one years experience with non-Tiller games. (Please keep in mind that the CCC has a much smaller membership than the ACWGC.)

As for CCC forum discussions about the games, there have been very few threads concerning the BOA game and not hardly enough to disrupt the club.

In fact, the addition was smooth and caused hardly a ripple in the scheme of things.

<b><font color="gold">Ernie Sands
General, Commanding, Army of Ohio
Image
ACWGC Cabinet Member
ACWGC Records Site Administrator
</b></font id="gold">
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/