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 Tue Dec 12, 2017 5:12 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: kennesaw mountain
PostPosted: Sat Feb 11, 2012 5:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2003 4:32 am
Posts: 1642
Location: USA
What makes the HPS system difficult to use for Petersburg are the ZOC rules and lack of extended lines. One source gives the value 1600 men per mile. That means game wise that you would have to be able to deploy the equivalent of a brigade to cover 18 hex front. Using hard ZOC's it could be done if the individual regiments were small enough but the game just can't handle full strength regiments since they can't spread out enough to produce the low density lines used around Petersburg. It would probably require having an OOB with company to battalion size units so they could occupy the extended trench line system.

_________________
General Kennon Whitehead
Chatham Grays
AoT II/1/3 (CSA)


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: kennesaw mountain
PostPosted: Sat Feb 11, 2012 7:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 22, 2001 4:51 pm
Posts: 2804
Location: Massachusetts, USA
KWhitehead wrote:
What makes the HPS system difficult to use for Petersburg are the ZOC rules and lack of extended lines. One source gives the value 1600 men per mile. That means game wise that you would have to be able to deploy the equivalent of a brigade to cover 18 hex front. Using hard ZOC's it could be done if the individual regiments were small enough but the game just can't handle full strength regiments since they can't spread out enough to produce the low density lines used around Petersburg. It would probably require having an OOB with company to battalion size units so they could occupy the extended trench line system.


You can say THAT again. :lol:

_________________
General Ernie Sands
President ACWGC -Sept 2015
Western Theater, Commander, USA
Image
Image
ACWGC Records Site Admin


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: kennesaw mountain
PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2012 8:40 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2001 3:21 pm
Posts: 212
Location:
I also prefer the SSI idea of time based rather than HPS's random chance. It's more logical and the longer a unit spent entrenching the stronger the position ought to become, but with the maximum level higher in 1864 than 1862.

Brig. Gen. Rich White
III Corps ANV


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: kennesaw mountain
PostPosted: Fri Feb 24, 2012 11:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 7:45 am
Posts: 68
Location: USA
I suppose Petersburg would be a difficult design primarily because two types of engagements that might be fought. On the one hand, at engagements like Jerusalem Plank Road and Five Forks, units of both sides came out into the open in regular formations. On the other hand, when/if Grant decides to hit the main reb line at the Crater or in 1865, the Rebel infantry is likely to be spread out in companies and battalions to cover the trench lines. Even at Fort Stedman Union forces might have been broken down into companies to cover the union trench lines. There might therefore be only a couple of ways to deal with the situation: 1) Have Confederate formations split to smaller sizes such as companies (lots of counter pushing) 2) Allow only hard zones of control in trench assault scenarios (if the bigger units can cover all the ground) 3) Allow units to 'breakdown' and 'buildup' which can be done in the PZ Camp. series 4) Simply skip any options for Grant to assault the main Petersburg line meaning there would be no need to have smaller units (though the point of a campaign would be to lead to the final assault or some attempt by the rebs to flee or launch their own attack)... All that being said, I still think it is a worth title. A new book is also coming out on the subject by none other than Edwin Bearss which might shed some much needed fresh light on the campaign. It looks like a good read...

http://www.amazon.com/PETERSBURG-CAMPAIGN-Eastern-Battles-August/dp/1611210909/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1329020456&sr=1-3

One quick note on the cumulative defensive modifier problem when dealing with advanced works. Hypothetically speaking, if we allowed units to build 3 levels of works with a 70% modifier for the highest level, an advanced fortification in a forest would result in a defensive bonus over 100%. I suppose the easiest way to deal with the problem would be to not allow the most advanced works in trees or rough terrain. From the pictures I've seen, most advances works were in fact in the open with clear fields of fire. Thus it might be workable to allow the most advanced fortification in a clear hex, but not in a wooded one. After all, digging deep entrenchments and embankments in heavy forest just ain't going to happen without clear the trees, roots and rocks. It would be much easier to do it in a Farmer's field in because the ground has been regularly tilled.

_________________
MG R.Virts
Cast Iron Division
VI Corps, AofS


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: kennesaw mountain
PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 4:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:48 am
Posts: 332
Location: Las Cruces, NM USA
After my experience with trench warfare in the Atlanta game, I don't think I would want to be the Union player in this one.

MG Elkin 3rd Div (2nd Cav) XVIth Corp AotT

_________________
I have come to you from the West, where we have always seen the backs of our enemies. . . . Let us look before us, and not behind

Image


Top
 Profile Send private message E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 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: