American Civil War Game Club (ACWGC)

Gentlemen,
I know captured enemy artillery must be manned to keep the VP's with the artillery capture option,
but when ammo wagons alone occupy the hex, not only maintaining captured artillery VP's but
also manning and firing the captured artillery, albeit at an F rating, is this not going too far, cannot this
be patched, not a big fan of house rules except column melee stipulations that most of us use according to
common sense and historical play, but must we stipulate before a battle, ammo wagons cannot capture
(by that I mean uncrewed previously captured artillery alone in a hex) artillery with ammo wagons and crew
and fire the artillery. Another reason the artillery capture rule becomes less and less attractive to me.
Correct me if I am wrong and missed something, but they were uncrewed, occupied by an ammo wagon, shown as captured and returned fire with nothing but an ammo wagon in the hex on replay. If that is possible
then their rating should be Z, with a 50% possibility of casualties to the crew, at least.
I did not replay this over and over as the Zapruder film, writing this as an afterthought some turns later but without redownloading turns is this possible? I know teamsters are members of the opponents army
but occupying abandoned artillery for VP's, surely (and don't call me Shirley) should be restricted to infantry or cavalry, no matter how small (as long as they are big enough to man as many artillery pieces as they have men available, and returning fire by an occupying ammo train impossible).
--This is an edit edition after some more afterthought, there was no question, the artillery is listed as captured,
with only an enemy wagon occupying the hex, captured artillery under the capture artillery option fires on behalf of the side that occupies the hex.
And hopefully some debate (but I know the advice for me, don't use the artillery capture option), in campaigns you don't always get to be the one to choose the options, and a lot of my opponents forget
and always allow the default options selected by the game at the start of the campaign despite warnings
that we need to check the agreed upon options, can't this be corrected also.
Sounds like a lot of bitching, but I have all the Civil War and Napoleonic games, played Panzer Campaigns, Squad battles, Colonial era, Modern campaigns as well as participating in them personally and am only interested in historical and logical play.
And I am not complaining about my opponents using this, (to me an illogical rule), you use every tactic available as long as they are within the rules, and this is clearly within the rules (for now).
Your thoughts, rebuttals, suggestions, comments, constructive suggestions are welcome and only make the games better, and if I am wrong then I stand corrected, and welcome any useful discussion.

I agree with you, general. By themselves, wagons shouldn't be capable of firing artillery. Another problem is infantry firing at full strength AND firing captured artillery. Plus, it isn't right that crewless artillery counts against friendly stacking limitations but not enemy stacking limitations. There are many flaws in the system and improvements proceed at a glacial pace.

At the Tillercon last May, Rich Walker said John Tiller was receptive to the concept of crews, which if done properly might alleviate some of the problems, though not the one you mention. Overall, I think the artillery capture and other options are improvements, but they could have been implemented better. So far, this is the only game in town, and we have to live with what we've got. Despite much room for improvement, though, it is still a wonderful system in many ways, and I am grateful for it.

_________________
MG Mike Mihalik
Forrest's Cavalry Corps
AoWest/CSA

Gen Mihalik,
You pointed out some other things I hadn't even considered that are wrong with this option. Thru
100 games this was the first time I noticed a wagon capturing (uncrewed and already captured guns) and firing 2 batteries, just too many things wrong with this option for now. Historically, how many times have
captured guns been recrewed by the opposing side, a handful, probably the more important aspect of the rule is occuppying the guns for VP's, as we Rebs took 40 guns at Gettysburg but were able to retrieve none of these guns from the battlefield, so I can see the VP apsect of the option, then you could bring in being able to move captured guns, etc, etc. For now I will go without the artillery capture rule.
These are my favorite wargames, to me the best out there, and the Civil War my favorite era. Any complaint or gripe is to make them more historical but also understand there has to be a balance so they are also fun and playable. Any option will have it's positives and negatives.
I have pics and
a genealogy of 4 of my direct descendants that served with Texas, and with a help of a fellow member I now have actual muster rolls, requisitions for forage, notice of wounding and other actual documents from footnote.com and the national archives. I only mention this as I have always had the genealogy and oral history from grandparents and grandaunts and uncles now gone, but is neat to have actual documents.
A small advertisement for this members site http://civilwarvignettes.com, I got many documents from footnote.com, and awaiting any documents from the national archive, they charge you $25 per search per person, but if nothing is found they charge you nothing. I have found complete histories on 2 that served and survived the war but am trying to find out about 2 of the 4 brothers that died in 1862, but so far have found
nothing but dates and locations of their deaths, no muster or unit assignments. All I had before was a genealogy book written by a relative many years ago and some notes from a reenactment site in Houston, this has been a recent and interesting endeavor, so hope this helps anyone else in search of records and documents of service.

Hi, General Vaden,

I read with interest your post in the ancestors thread, and am glad you were able to find out so much information. I ought to do more digging on the Louisiana side of my family.

The nice thing about options is that they are options, and others have deselected the artillery options due to frustration with its limitations.

I think you might be surprised how many times artillery was turned on its former owners. Gettysburg was an exception, as either the guns were rendered unusable by removing essential equipment (Smith's NY Battery in Devil's Den) or the guns were held too briefly or were damaged. In the books I have read recently, Union troops who captured guns on top of Missionary Ridge turned the guns on the fleeing rebs, only to find there were no friction primers. They detonated the charge by firing a charge from a rifle into the breech. In the Crater, a Union sergeant took two guns damaged in the explosion, rendered them operable, and that was the only close artillery support the Union troops had during the battle. That sergeant received the MoH posthumously. Anyway, I think it is a viable aspect of artillery capture. My only reservation is I think ammo ought to be limited, like when artillery is isolated and has a chance of running out of ammo. But then, I disagree with the whole artillery ammo pool concept anyway.

_________________
MG Mike Mihalik
Forrest's Cavalry Corps
AoWest/CSA

Gen Mihalik,
I just think it was the exception rather than the rule, and certainly at time in various
battles guns were turned on their former owners. I also like artillery ammo per gun,
certainly helps the Rebs. I guess I'll have to mention to future opponents at the beginning
of games, no wagons crewing guns, don't like to get mired down in house rules,
but never thought I would see that, but as for now the game allows it.
Anyway, I was just adding the piece about researching ancestors from the Civil War,
to bring Tom Simmons site http://civilwarvignettes.com, to the attention of all members of the club,
he does the research for you and provides background, and personal and unit history
in a very nice presentation. He is putting all the information we found on the 2 brothers
that survived the war together and I will be glad to share his presentation when it is done
with any other members that might be considering using his service.
Here is one where he traced a pistol a man bought at a yard sale to the soldier that owned it and
carried it at Gettysburg http://civilwarvignettes.com/ymarshall.html
thru the serial number and first initial and last name engraved on a plate at the bottom of the handgrip, interesting stuff and nice profile of the soldier.

_________________

General Ray,

Where do you hail from? I noticed you mentioned Houston in one of your posts.....

Hank Smith

Bob (General Weir),
That is what I do, spike the gun, when my opponent insists on using this option.
The option becomes a big factor at Shiloh, the Rebs will initially overrun many
guns that will then be left in the rear of the frontlines, but must be manned for the
VP's, that was my whole understanding of why the rule was even proposed, you must
choose between keeping the victory points by occupying the guns but leaving much needed
troops behind to do this that are needed at the front, the enemy overrunning the guns not needing
to crew the guns while if you recapture the guns you lose troops to recrew these same guns is flaw enough
not to use this rule. The original rule, the guns are considered, removed or spiked but useless to the enemy,
therefore you are awarded points.
Again, my major argument right now, my opponent, who I enjoy playing and has 50 battles under his belt,
has used 2 ammo wagons to man, shoot, and retain VP's, simply by occupying these hexes that were previously
captured by infantry or cavalry, for which neither were penalized to provide crews, so teamsters are manning
captured guns, the game allows this, this is not historical or logical, and this will be a house rule with me, I hope I do not offend my opponent and he is only doing this because the games allows this, but I would rather play historically than take advantage of unrealistic loopholes., but this will be a pre game house agreement with me, along with column melee only under certain conditions, should my opponent insist on artillery capture. Other than that one I always play with all options except the first three.

_________________

Bob,
We agree entirely, and that there should be sufficient forces to man these guns,
and I know there is a restriction on recrewing guns that should also apply to this option,
infantry must recrew field guns and cavalry must recrew horse artillery, was in the regular
rules, seems sane and logical as they operate differently, have a different doctrine and different advantages.
I like new options, exciting at first, but not this one. I have yet to use retire by prolonge, but it was
standard drill and hope to use it one day, and everyother option (to me) seems an improvement
and make the games more historical. I guess that's a pretty good average 4 out of 25, and the first one
is phased play and the next 2 optional fire and melee. Either you play phase or turn and I think the next
major question will be do you play arty capture or not, in finding an opponent.
Good discussions.