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 Thu Oct 19, 2017 12:25 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 5:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2001 5:01 am
Posts: 564
Location: USA
Mark,

Sounds like you need to make a couple of HPS scenarios for your battles around Winchester.

Also sounds like I gotta get this game. [:D]

I'm enjoying the reports, and am hoping you win!

MajGen Al 'Ambushed' Amos

The Union Forever! Huzzah!


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 10:12 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 22, 2001 8:05 pm
Posts: 846
Location: Panhandle of Texas
Haven't had much to report on for the last few turns but I'm in a bad spot. My PP have dropped below 800 and I will now lose 3 pp per turn because we've started 1863 without me being able to declare emancipation. Going to have to go like gangbusters in 1863 to make up a lot of lost ground.

General Mark Nelms
6/3/IX/AoO
"Blackhawk Brigade"
Union Military Academy Instructor
Union Cabinet Secretary


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 1:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 22, 2001 8:05 pm
Posts: 846
Location: Panhandle of Texas
Haven't been keeping up with this as well as I should have so let me catch up. Just finished up the winter and I'm in bad straights. Since I didn't declare emancipation I'm losing 3 PP per turn. Last month I took Savannah in an amphibious invasion led by Hancock and I've repositioned my transports for another one as soon as the time is right. This month I've moved Hancock inland from Savannah hoping to put pressure on the Rebels and stretch their forces thinner, though even with the exaggeration of the FOW, the units screen shows me to actually be outnumbered. Sherman is once again moving on Humboldt but this time I kept some forces in Cairo rather then Paducah and they are unspotted which should help my odds. Grant moves on Murfreesboro but not in the strength I wanted as some of my leaders got initiative and some didn't in his area. McClellan was quiet and only sent Sickles to garrison Savannah behind Hancock, hopefully to be in a position to make a move inland next month also. The Navy is doing their job as according to the reports the blockade runners only snuck in 37 supplies last turn and this turn I got a cruiser outside of Galveston which should cut him down some more.

General Mark Nelms
6/3/IX/AoO
"Blackhawk Brigade"
Union Military Academy Instructor
Union Cabinet Secretary


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 20, 2008 2:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 22, 2001 8:05 pm
Posts: 846
Location: Panhandle of Texas
Well if things weren't bad enough the computer has raised havoc with my leadership. McClellan resigned and I was forced to move Halleck east and name Fremont TC for the west. Built up my armies in the West last turn so their was no action there. In the East I sent Burnside to invade Charleston, Hancock moved from Savannah to take Port Royal, and Banks moved inland from Jacksonville to attack Pensacola. Didn't figure they would all work but that that one or two would work hoping that he wouldn't have enough reserves to counter all of them. Banks was defeated (and wounded) while Hancock took Port Royal (and was wounded) and Burnside was sent back to Washington. With Fremont as the TC only Sherman in Paducah got initiative in the west this turn so he once again moves on Humboldt. Grant built up some more. In the East Phil Kearney launched an amphibious attack on New Bern hoping to gain anohter foothold on the coast. Harpers Ferry was also retaken. The numbers in the Units screen show the forces on both sides to be fairly even but I don't know how much of that to believe but the next few turns should give a good indication.

This game is basically over as far as victory or defeat is concerned as my political points are down in the 600's and I can't possibly gain enough back to get Lincoln reelected in Nov. 1864 but we're playing it out to see what I can accomplish. For any of you who might be scared off afraid that Union numbers would just overwhelm the Confederacy this should be a good indication that the CSA defense is hard to crack as they have better leaders and with being able to react into battle with unspotted forces (therefore more powerful) they can turn back attack after attack. Of course I'm not the best player either so that hurts also, but with the Political Point victory determination I feel that this is a pretty balanced game.

General Mark Nelms
6/3/IX/AoO
"Blackhawk Brigade"
Union Military Academy Instructor
Union Cabinet Secretary


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 20, 2008 5:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 22, 2001 8:05 pm
Posts: 846
Location: Panhandle of Texas
Well Sherman was once again driven back from Humboldt but it was much closer this time. He has saddled back up and went back in again. Grant finally gets initiative and overruns Mufreesboro which will hopefully put some more pressure on Nashville. Kearney was successful in New Bern and has been reinforced. I had moved a cavalry brigade into Savannah last turn and they were able to overrun Waycross without having initiative to add another conquered region to my total. No initiative in the East so those forces just built up while the cavalry again raided Manassas. Finally getting some momentum now that it's too late. Also, the Navy has repositioned its transports for another invasion as soon as we get initiative.

General Mark Nelms
6/3/IX/AoO
"Blackhawk Brigade"
Union Military Academy Instructor
Union Cabinet Secretary


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 20, 2008 6:34 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2001 5:01 am
Posts: 564
Location: USA
<center>"Of course I'm not the best player either"</center>

WOW! A game that finally factors in the Union's achille's heel the first few years. That's great! [:p]

MajGen Al 'Ambushed' Amos

The Union Forever! Huzzah!


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 20, 2008 7:13 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 22, 2001 8:05 pm
Posts: 846
Location: Panhandle of Texas
Well I've offered the victory to Rob in this war. I was once again repulsed from Humboldt with Granger and McPherson both being wounded that destroys the Union leadership under Sherman. In the ensuing turn neither Grant or Sherman get initiative. Fremont or Grant were my only choices for TC in the west and you really don't want to put Grant as TC as you then lose his excellent combat abilities and Fremont is just too unreliable to be good TC. Rob also had plenty of troops to outnumber me and retake Savannah and Port Royal despite the troops and fortifications I had there. With his high number of troop and my poor leaders left this really isn't even a good test anymore.

General Mark Nelms
6/3/IX/AoO
"Blackhawk Brigade"
Union Military Academy Instructor
Union Cabinet Secretary


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 20, 2008 7:18 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2003 7:01 am
Posts: 39
Location: USA
I have a hunch our next game won't be so easy for the rebs.

Maj Gen Rob Field
2/III AoA


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 21, 2008 2:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2003 4:32 am
Posts: 1638
Location: USA
I believe we will find this game relatively well balanced once we come up with the correct tactics for the Union. The Union side is much more difficult to play because there are so many choices and limited leadership to take advantage of them. Unfortunately for the Union player those first few months in 1861 are critical for preparing for 1862. Bad luck with initiative can have far reach effects but it is to early to tell whether its critical to winning.

Collins and I have been playing with Fog of War on which not only reduces your ability to see what the enemy is up to it makes cavalry scouting a must to win. It is one of the strengths of the Confederacy until the Union gets better leaders with the ability to attack from two region off. The Rebels can keep their armies back and out of scouting range using their front border regions as a screen. Since unspotted units fight better it is a key advantage. If you add in random leaders and you are really fighting blind.

Supply is the killer for the Rebel side. They start running out in 62 and this can cripple there ability to fight. Supply is used for everything within the game. Rebuilding damaged units, making troops fight at full strength, building fortificatons, and preventing attrition.

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


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 22, 2008 5:42 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2003 12:44 pm
Posts: 1200
Location: USA
Question - What is a Strategic Victory? I've won two and the Reb AI has won two of these, but have yet to find the proper reference in the game manual?

As for tactics, I think the Union will have to get really good at knowing how to constrict supply, especially the Navy. That means controlling Production appropriately. Using the Navy to control the rivers is important as well, and that's best done early in the war.

I've also found that making good choices in leader activation and numbers of leader types to have in play is key. You need every leader you can get, especially early on, and to play to the strengths they do have, which are not necessarily that many.

The Union also has to be able to, once controlling the rivers, carve up the South and choose which areas to just isolate, and which to pursue with the 4 Armies you have available. In the West, you may have the ability to get local superiority in regions bounded by the rivers, where the Rebs can't react to your offensive (providing you DO get initiative!)

This game will largely be played in the West, not in Virginia. The Unions challenge in Virginia will be to force the Rebs to pin down as much troops and leaders as you can there, so you can fight out West. I wouldn't be surprised if standard Reb tactics will be to move Lee West as soon as he's available, leaving their weakest AC and TC in Virginia.

Image
General Jeff Laub
Union Chief of the Army
ACWGC Cabinet Member
http://www.geocities.com/laubster22/UnionHQ/


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 22, 2008 6:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2003 7:01 am
Posts: 39
Location: USA
Hello Jeff,
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">A Strategic Victory is awarded to a victorious attacking player if the defending side has over 20+die(10) units in the land region in which the battle (not all committed units but all units in the region) takes place. A Strategic Victory is awarded to a victorious defending player if the attacking side has over 20+die(10) units in the land region in the which the battle takes place. The winner of a Strategic Victory is awarded 20 political points. The losing side of a Strategic Victory loses 10 political points.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

pgs. 145-146 in the manual


Maj Gen Rob Field
2/III AoA


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 22, 2008 11:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2003 12:44 pm
Posts: 1200
Location: USA
Thanks, Rob.

Image
General Jeff Laub
Union Chief of the Army
ACWGC Cabinet Member
http://www.geocities.com/laubster22/UnionHQ/


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 22, 2008 12:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2001 5:01 am
Posts: 564
Location: USA
So perhaps had Lee gone west historically, the CSA could've won the war?

MajGen Al 'Ambushed' Amos

The Union Forever! Huzzah!


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 22, 2008 12:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2001 5:01 am
Posts: 564
Location: USA
Would this engine be good for the American Revolution, the War of 1812, or the Mexican American War? Or are these out there already?

MajGen Al 'Ambushed' Amos

The Union Forever! Huzzah!


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 23, 2008 6:38 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2003 12:44 pm
Posts: 1200
Location: USA
Al,

I don't think so. It's just that the game isn't set up to where the south could really go on the offensive (no real incentive for them to do so, although that could be a feature added, it seems, just as the Union needs to delcare emancipation, etc. perhaps a strategic option would be for the South to achieve a Strategic or Major Victory in the North, they get outside help, erode Union support (say +50 PP for the South, -100 for the Union), etc. Didn't happen historically, but that was part of Lee's motivation.

Puts some pressure on the South, or gives them an alternative motivation. Not enough time with the game to know if the balance would be impacted too severely, though...

Image
General Jeff Laub
Union Chief of the Army
ACWGC Cabinet Member
http://www.geocities.com/laubster22/UnionHQ/


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 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: