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 Fri Dec 15, 2017 4:51 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Shooting caputred guns for VP
PostPosted: Sun Mar 07, 2010 4:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:48 am
Posts: 332
Location: Las Cruces, NM USA
Somebody show me a historical example of that happening?

The club needs to ban this activity immediately. I can see spiking and I agree that Tiller needs to change a rule, but this activity just is plain BS.

Lt. Col Elkin
Chief Engineer-AoT


“I have come to you from the West, where we have always seen the backs of our enemies. . . . Let us study the probable lines of retreat of our opponents, and leave our own to take care of themselves. Let us look before us, and not behindâ€


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Mar 07, 2010 5:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2003 5:54 pm
Posts: 332
Location: USA
I'm not sure the club needs to ban this. If it bothers you this much take it up with your opponent before the game. Personally, I think it should be allowed to fill in the gap left by the programmers in terms of not awarding victory points for guns captured unless occupied. But if I had an opponent that fealt strongly about this like you do, I would agree to not do it.

General Don Golen

I Corps /Army of the Potomac
"The Iron Corp"

Image


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Mar 07, 2010 5:23 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 9:52 am
Posts: 952
Location:
In a campaign game, there's not much of an option. If you don't shoot the guns, the enemy gets them back unscathed in the next battle. Some play campaign games without the artillery option for that reason.

Historically, Loring says he "destroyed" his guns before infilttrating his division through the Yankee lines after Champion's Hill. I'm not sure how he accomplished that, or how effective it was.

The artillery option is something I hope we discuss at Tillercon and fix what's broken. Overall it is a lot more accurate representation than the artillery simply disappearing, as was originally the case.

MG Mike Mihalik
2/4/I/AoMiss/CSA


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Mar 07, 2010 6:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 22, 2001 4:51 pm
Posts: 2809
Location: Massachusetts, USA
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by HomerS</i>
<br />I'm not sure the club needs to ban this. If it bothers you this much take it up with your opponent before the game. Personally, I think it should be allowed to fill in the gap left by the programmers in terms of not awarding victory points for guns captured unless occupied. But if I had an opponent that fealt strongly about this like you do, I would agree to not do it.

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

Exactly.

<b><font color="gold">Ernie Sands, General
4th Brigade, Cavalry Division, XIV Corps,
Army of Cumberland, USA
Image
Image
ACWGC Records Site Administrator
</b></font id="gold">


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Mar 07, 2010 9:45 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 24, 2001 8:26 pm
Posts: 446
Location: USA
I am not sure that destroying captured guns is adequately covered in the discussion so far, or covers what LTC Cruces objects to.

I doubt that shooting captured guns was commonly used, but I have read accounts of loading multiple charges and then filling the rest of the barrel with mud before setting it off, or even putting the guns barrel to barrel and setting them off, presumably at a safe distance and fused.

I would propose that spiking a gun be kept as is would satisfy a requirement, such as a twig or nail in the ignition hole, both of which I have read an account of SOPs to restore use, and then:

Spiking a spiked gun a second time would permanently destroy the gun as I described above. It would require a fix by the game designers, which they may deign to do,...or not.


BG Ross McDaniel
2nd Bde, 3rd Div, III Corps, AoG, CSA

Make yourself sheep and the wolves will eat you." -- Benjamin Franklin

"A society of sheep must in time beget a government of wolves." -- Bertrand de Jouvenal

“It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions in favor of vegetarianism while the wolf remains of a different opinionâ€


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Mar 07, 2010 12:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2003 4:32 am
Posts: 1643
Location: USA
The issue is more complex than just "Shooting Guns for VP" not being historic. Historically no one won a battle because of the number of guns they captured or didn't capture. It's a kluge trying to fix another kluge.

What makes it complex is a battery unit represents so many things which in their total justify the high VP assigned them. But in reality were seldom lost in their total. These include a specialized crew, horses, limbers, wagons, carriages, the gun itself, ammo, etc.

Overruning a gun yielded usually the gun and its carriage but little else. The crew probably retreated with everything moveable. So you really had no way to fire it more than once and no way to remove the gun from the field. Most captured guns were recovered by the side that won the battle. You could easily make a case for not having any VP awarded toward determining victory in a game based on guns. They were like the rifles left behind, only a trophy of victory if you were the victor. However, the other side of the coin is without some penalty assigned to losing your guns it would lead to tactics that weren't used in battle.

Then there is spiking a gun. What does it mean in game terms and realism? In reality it was a means of denying the use of the guns to the enemy but little else. Spiked guns, even ones where the carriage itself was destroyed, meant little to the victory. These things were repaired within days of the battle. There primary purpose historically was to prevent the enemy from turning the guns on your own troops or recapturing guns and using them. In game terms it means pretty much the same thing except it keeps you from getting VP as well.

In my opinion the primary purpose of awarding VP for capture or destruction of artillery is to punish improper use of artillery. That is, if a player uses guns like tanks, uses them to block roads, puts them in the front line unprotected, etc. they should suffer when these guns are hit or overrun. Historically, both sides tended to not risk their artillery to capture. In game terms, there is no risk to artillery other than VP. They are much more effective in the battle if used improperly unless there is a VP penalty.

For example, in a battle that tends to have an ebb and flow like the three days of Gettysburg. If you are the Union player it is worthwhile to use your artillery agressively and let it be captured as long as there is no award of VP unless the Rebel army occupies the guns at the end of the battle. If the Union even does a draw they will probably reoccupy all lost ground so there is little risk and much to gain from being aggessive with the guns. This all changes if there is any way for the Rebel to get VP without having to camp on the gun hexes. Then the Union player must protect his guns and withdraw them before they are overrun.

So keep in mind there are two major parts to VP and artillery. One is a punishment for allowing guns to be taken or damaged. The other is an award contributing to victory for holding those guns once taken.


LG. Kennon Whitehead
Chatham Grays
2/3/IV AoM (CSA)


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Mar 07, 2010 12:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 6:49 am
Posts: 522
Location: Black Mountain, NC
One thing that did occur when guns were captured is that the south in particular would/could leave lesser guns behind and take any better guns they had captured, thus upgrading their force.

MG D. Groce
Commander
V Corps AoP
"beyond our ideas of right and wrong there is a field, I will meet you there"
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Mar 07, 2010 4:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 2:44 pm
Posts: 45
Location: USA
I can't think of any case where guns were shot to be blown up, but I know that there were several times when guns were carted away by whoever took them (Williamsburg springs to mind). While its not the same thing, it still gives the opposing player some points.

To be honest, it seems that the most basic fix to that problem would be to play without the artillery capture option. I don't have a problem with my opponents shooting the guns, although I usually don't do it myself. It's just faster to come back for it later, even if you just park some max-fatigue unit over them. But hey, if my opponent wants to spend the ammo and time to deploy guns and destroy the old cannon, be my guest. I'll spend my time destroying units that can still shoot.

Maj. Dylan McCartney
IV Brigade/ I Division
XIV Corps
Army of the Cumberland
Union Army


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 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: