American Civil War Game Club (ACWGC)

Okay, so I see often the discussion about Blitz tactics used in Turn based play. Who can define exactly what that means? If I move all my forces forward and then melee once with each one, is that blitzing.

Just curious.

Lt. Col. John Lutes
2/2/XIV

NO,

Blitz is the concept of a melee to move one or more enemy units from a defending hex, then moving in fresh troops to melee other units in the rear. At least that's one definition.

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

No.[:p]

<b><font color="gold">Ernie Sands
General, Commanding, Army of Ohio

ACWGC Cabinet Member
ACWGC Records Site Administrator
</b></font id="gold">

Because of the mixed functions (move,fire,melee) in Turn based you can use a tactic that many modern and WWII simulations use. You can advance units that are furtherest from the enemy line (usually in the rear) and use them to break the front line with fire and melees. Then you can move another set of units to repeat as needed to open gaps in the enemy line. Then you can send through the breakthrough exploitation units (in modern games these would be the panzers) to run deep behind the enemy line taking out easy target like artillery and supply wagons, siezing key terrain and turning back to encircle units bypassed in the front line.

If you strike along say a division or corps front selectively breaking the line where there are open areas then exploiting with infantry in column and cavalry, you can take out a mile long section of line in one turn. I have seen entire divisions taken out this way. I have also seen entire battles fought without the attacking force ever leaving column formation so they could get high exploitation movement (in this case a one corps attack caught a two corps army withdrawing using road movement to get behind them destroying the entire force).

The only defense is like modern warfare a defense in depth. Usually at least a two brigade line. But the main problem is Civil War troops weren't able to execute such complex tactics. That required mobility and radios of modern war.

LG. Kennon Whitehead
Chatham Grays
1/1/III AoM (CSA)

So in simple terms it would be the fact that the break thru and turning movement is completed in the same turn.[?]

Lt. Joe McCleery
4/3/VI
AoS

That's about right. So the new optional Melee rule will eliminate those kind of tactics

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

Some members have also highlighted the time factor. For instance in a 20 min turn or whatever would a division/corps etc. have sufficient time to first move up to the enemy line, possibly fire, melee to force gaps in the line then have rear units brought up to move through and further melee the reserve line if one exists or possibly attack artillery and supply wagons not to mention turning back to encircle bypassed units. The games allow a player to do all this within the time limit and it is all quite possible using blitz tactics but could it all be carried out in reality...within 20 minutes?

Colonel John Sheffield,
1st Brigade <b><font color="red">[Fighting First]</font id="red"></b>
2nd Division,
XXIII Corps
<font color="orange">Army of the Ohio.</font id="orange">
<font color="red">U.</font id="red"><font color="white">S.</font id="white"><font color="blue">A.</font id="blue">

The problem comes from the players exploiting the engine, the one who brings up the rear ranks often in column, blows the hole then uses the front rank to exploit the hole. This is where the time factor comes in, by the time the unit in the rear moved forward 600 yards, fired and meleed the 20 minute turn should be over and the front rank unit would not be able to move to exploit the hole.

In the PzC games this is not a problem since everything costs MP so if you move up a unit from the rear it doesn't have enough MP to fire or assault the front unit, also those games have turns that are several hours long, one kilometer hexes and the communication and control ability to make these kinds of moves.

Personally I like playing turn mode because if you advance the front rank to blow the hole in the line then advance the rear rank into the hole you are simulating what was actually supposed to happen in ACW combat. Granted we do have a lot more control than the real commanders did and our attacks are more co-ordinated than was normally possible still it's better than playing in phases that allows a couple of small 25-75 man units to hold up the advance of several thousand men for 20 minutes.

My complaint is the fact that the defending units still fail to fire prior to being meleed more than half the time. I seldom see a melee halted because the attacker was D'd, historically units often advanced to assault only to halt before reaching the enemy line due to heavy fire.

Gen. Ken Miller
1/2/VI
AoS

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I have also seen entire battles fought without the attacking force ever leaving column formation so they could get high exploitation movement (in this case a one corps attack caught a two corps army withdrawing using road movement to get behind them destroying the entire force).


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

Whole Corps attacking in column formation? All I can say is:


YUM[^]!


Bring'em on. I'm hungry

2nd Lt. Beno
5/2/I AoP
USA

The other unrealistic thing about these tactics is that while the attacker can co-ordinate any number of units in intricate manoeuvres with multiple waves of attackers, the defender must simply sit back and watch it all happen without any opportunity to react, either by pulling units back to restore the line, withdrawing units and batteries, or by meeting the threat with second line units. For me either the new optional melee rule, or embedded melee phase rule (in the case of MP games) is essential.


[url="http://homepage.ntlworld.com/a.r.barlow/acwgc/acw.htm"]General Antony Barlow[/url]
[url="http://homepage.ntlworld.com/a.r.barlow/acwgc/western_theater.htm"]Commander, Western Theater, Union Army[/url]

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Col. B</i>
<br /><blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I have also seen entire battles fought without the attacking force ever leaving column formation so they could get high exploitation movement (in this case a one corps attack caught a two corps army withdrawing using road movement to get behind them destroying the entire force).


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

Whole Corps attacking in column formation? All I can say is:


YUM[^]!


Bring'em on. I'm hungry

2nd Lt. Beno
5/2/I AoP
USA
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

The Yankee player didn't find it so. You think wow they will take lots of casualties as column targets. Then you see the reality as the AI Opportunity fire allows column after column to move up or through without hardly a shot in anger. Then this tremendous hole open in your line and brigade after brigade using roads to reach deep into your rear. And the extent of the disaster comes through when in two turns you start seeing most of your troops come up flagged as isolated.

LG. Kennon Whitehead
Chatham Grays
1/1/III AoM (CSA)

<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 />That's about right. So the new optional Melee rule will eliminate those kind of tactics

Lt. Col. 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">

Yes but at the expense of becoming "Phased Play". The only thing I found useful about "Turn" was that it allowed players in a mulitplayer game to handle their part of a turn in one mailing. Otherwise "Turn" format gives you Opportunity Fire which solves a rather minor problem at the expense of effective Auto Defensive Fire.

LG. Kennon Whitehead
Chatham Grays
1/1/III AoM (CSA)

A penetration of your line is horrific, but that is due to unhistorical deployments. In these games a continous front and everybody in the front line is the norm. The single phase exposes the weakness of the game engine and the bad habits of players. It can be mitigated if as historicall 1/3 to 1/2 of your force is kept in reserve (not just artillery firing at range). Something which the God like command and control does not even remotely require.

Blitz in itself is not the issue, see Jackson, it is the way units are used due to the full command control.

Unfortunatly the trend is towards more control (micro management) such as 2 gun batteries, reduced turn time and company level units. This increases the command and control and in my opinion enhances the unrealistic aspects of battle bringing them closer to parade ground control (which is the perception of many people as to what happens) rather then batlle level complete confusion. At least the single phase introduces a level of confusion, dealing with situations not expected. Which most people can't handle, see Banks, Hooker,McClellan etc..

Historically once a battle started the commander lost all control of the engaged units. It was only the reserves, in the far rear that were not affected, that could be somewhat controlled to affect the outcome. If you did not have reserves or they were compromised you always lost the battle. This is not the case in these games. Even the control of routed units is exceptional in these games.

As far as exploiting the engine, both sides have the same engine, don't be so set in your ways that you are not prepared, I am sure that many historical leaders faced the same situations, this is my outlook, I am sure the French would have loved the Germans to uses 1918 tactic in 1940, house rules anyone, or the Banks to have Jackson not exploit his incompetence. Both side have the same engine. The games are not realistic irregardless of house rules. Live with it, deal with it, and win the battles. Most peoples perceptions of battle are faulty, mine included, play the game. Put everything up front and deal with the exploitations, your fault. Have defense in depth and defeat your single phase blitzkrieg Rommel opponent.

The basic rules of war apply to these games. If you use them properly you will rarely lose. It is not the tactics (basic competence is needed) that win a batlle but the strategy.

Best Regards,

General Pierre D.
1st Bde, 3rd Div,I Corps
Army of Georgia, CSA

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Yes but at the expense of becoming "Phased Play". The only thing I found useful about "Turn" was that it allowed players in a mulitplayer game to handle their part of a turn in one mailing. Otherwise "Turn" format gives you Opportunity Fire which solves a rather minor problem at the expense of effective Auto Defensive Fire.</i><hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Another thing it gives, which I feel is important, is the ability of infantry to change formation at any time during the movement phase. But the bottom line is that you are right about lack of defensive fire being a major problem. There has been discussion on how to correct this in previous posts, but I think the new melee rule for turn play is a step in the right direction.


MG Mike Mihalik
1/III/AoMiss/CSA

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Could someone, once and for all, come up with a standard set of optional rules with explanations that I can understand?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

An excellent question!!!!

<b><font color="gold">Ernie Sands
General, Commanding, Army of Ohio

ACWGC Cabinet Member
ACWGC Records Site Administrator
</b></font id="gold">