ACWGC Forums

American Civil War Game Club

* ACWGC    * Dpt. of Records       * CSA HQ    * VMI   * Join CSA    

* Union HQ   * UMA   * Join Union     ACWGC Memorial

CSA Armies:   ANV   AoT

Union Armies:   AotT    AotC    AotP    AotS     Union Army Forums

Link Express

Club Forums:     NWC    CCC     Home Pages:     NWC    CCC    ACWGC
It is currently Wed Dec 11, 2019 7:08 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: New PDT movement values?
PostPosted: Sun May 27, 2018 11:34 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 3:24 pm
Posts: 776
Location: Terra
From a discussion about the movement of supply wagons I'm interested if these also get standardized like it's to be done with the weapons values?

_________________
Lieutenant General Christian Hecht
Commander I Corps, Army of the Potomac
Image
Union Cabinet Secretary
Support adding a AAR SUB-FORUM


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Jun 06, 2018 5:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 9:52 am
Posts: 865
Location: USA
You should see this in the new updates

_________________
Brig. Gen. Rich Walker
AotW I/3/4
Scenario Designer:
Franklin, Shiloh, Chickamauga, Antietam, Atlanta, Chancellorsville, Petersburg


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Jun 14, 2018 10:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2003 4:32 am
Posts: 1696
Location: USA
The PDT is used to "fix" a lot of things within a scenario or campaign so probably isn't that good of an idea to view the PDT as one size fits all. Weapons and tactics shifted throughout the war as the troops and officers became better trained on how to use them and what their limitation are. Also movement for things like wagons and artillery varied considerably between battlefields in the more developed East versus the West. Weather rules can be used to handle some things but others like the quality of roads and trails can only be handled through the PDT.

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


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Jun 14, 2018 10:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 9:52 am
Posts: 1081
Location:
KWhitehead wrote:
The PDT is used to "fix" a lot of things within a scenario or campaign so probably isn't that good of an idea to view the PDT as one size fits all. Weapons and tactics shifted throughout the war as the troops and officers became better trained on how to use them and what their limitation are. Also movement for things like wagons and artillery varied considerably between battlefields in the more developed East versus the West. Weather rules can be used to handle some things but others like the quality of roads and trails can only be handled through the PDT.

Hi, General,

I think you have a point concerning the current PDT, but what I would rather see is an expanded PDT that might include a couple more levels of woods and roads, with different movement and/or combat effects. I don't think I have seen a game where there is any practical difference between a road and a pike, even in bad weather. Given the movement rates I guess a trail could represent a poor road right now, but a separate poor road category that might only cost wheeled vehicles extra movement points is a possibility. I think any improvements in the use of weapons and tactics are better reflected in the unit quality ratings. Also, I think the officer philosophy needs an overhaul. Right now leaders skulk behind the lines and the 10% increase for the leader in melee usually isn't enough incentive to risk him. Maybe if you increased the quality of every unit stacked with a leader a level or two leaders would start behaving like leaders.

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


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2018 12:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 3:24 pm
Posts: 776
Location: Terra
Any expansion of the terrain would not only mean programming resources used but every map would have to be reworked to utilize this, and if the scenario designers are up to this or see a need for this at all is questionable.

The unit quality ratings usually do not seem to reflect tactics & weapons but rather the personal view of the designers, at least I can't remember seeing any designer noting that he changed quality to reflect such things. So forming a base PDT over all games is good as the designer could do changes to reflect special scenarios like 1st Bull Run that was really something different compared to later battles.

Officers do not need to be treated differently, the +10% instead of +20% like in the Napi series was surely done purposely. The problem is just that the games often don't use additional leaders like regimental colonels who would lead their regiments into battle or at least some 2nd in command. Risking the brigade leader and in case of his loss seriously hampering the performance of all regiments in a brigade is generally a bad idea no matter how high the melee bonus is.
And a raise in quality is also not needed as a leader already gives a +1 moral bonus to the units stacked with him.

_________________
Lieutenant General Christian Hecht
Commander I Corps, Army of the Potomac
Image
Union Cabinet Secretary
Support adding a AAR SUB-FORUM


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Jun 16, 2018 6:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 9:52 am
Posts: 1081
Location:
C. Hecht wrote:
Any expansion of the terrain would not only mean programming resources used but every map would have to be reworked to utilize this, and if the scenario designers are up to this or see a need for this at all is questionable.

First of all, not every map would need to be reworked, and even those that did might only require minor changes. Supermaps like Overland are another story. But, as it is, the experience of fighting in the Wilderness under the current PDT does not comport with actual accounts of the battle. I can't imagine that adding one or two extra types of roads or woods and adding movement and combat values in the PDT would be all that difficult. Scenario designers might welcome the added flexibility. Or not. Don't know how difficult it would be to add new terrain types but my guess is not very. The folks in charge might feel the need for any changes at all to be questionable, and yet over the years they have added a number of features, usually in the form of optional rules, most of which I consider enhancements to the gaming experience.

Quote:
Risking the brigade leader and in case of his loss seriously hampering the performance of all regiments in a brigade is generally a bad idea no matter how high the melee bonus is.

That is certainly true in the game, but apparently not in the war, which is my whole point.

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


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 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:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group