American Civil War Game Club (ACWGC)
http://www.wargame.ch/board/acwgc/

Isolation optional rule too harsh?
http://www.wargame.ch/board/acwgc/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=22600		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Logrus Pattern [ Mon Sep 27, 2021 5:07 pm ]
Post subject:  Isolation optional rule too harsh?
The only thing that bothers me about this rule is that isolation is only checked for at the start of a turn / movement phase. It leads to unintuitive situations in which a unit can be isolated despite being in contact with friendly units and being eligible for having isolation removed. For example this happens when friendly units make contact with an isolated unit as a result of winning melee against the surrounding enemy units. But the isolated unit still remains isolated throughout the enemy's turn. If the isolated unit is also routed, it can be overrun by an enemy unit of any size. This is an unintuitive implementation of the rule.

I would prefer if the game would check for isolation at the start AND end of a turn (or at the start and end of the movement and melee phases, respectively). This would prevent situations as described above. It would also be more intuitive. I and all the opponents I have played against keep trying to rescue isolated units, which often leads to the rescue units being ravaged or captured themselves, even though realistically the isolated units have no chance of being rescued due to how the rule is currently implemented.

Edit: I just read in the manual that the game checks isolation for the units of the player whose turn it is. Might be simple to just make that check for all units regardless of side.
Author:  Quaama [ Mon Sep 27, 2021 5:59 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Isolation optional rule too harsh?
I don't like it when my units are isolated but I do like the Isolation Rules.

The Civil War was essentially linear warfare. It would have been exceedingly rare for a brigade, let alone a regiment, to go wandering off on their own independent operation. I think any units in a game that get themselves isolated at any stage deserve any penalties they receive. It does seem unrealistic that there is no penalty for firing while isolated as I'd think the firing ability of any surrounded unit would also suffer in reality. I do think it completely unrealistic when an enemy sets up a defensive position against the edge of the battle map so it is impossible for their force to be 'isolated' even though they are effectively surrounded on all sides as far as the battle map permits.
Author:  mihalik [ Mon Sep 27, 2021 9:08 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Isolation optional rule too harsh?
I never play with the isolation rule.
Author:  Logrus Pattern [ Tue Sep 28, 2021 6:23 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Isolation optional rule too harsh?
Quaama wrote:
The Civil War was essentially linear warfare. It would have been exceedingly rare for a brigade, let alone a regiment, to go wandering off on their own independent operation. I think any units in a game that get themselves isolated at any stage deserve any penalties they receive. It does seem unrealistic that there is no penalty for firing while isolated as I'd think the firing ability of any surrounded unit would also suffer in reality. I do think it completely unrealistic when an enemy sets up a defensive position against the edge of the battle map so it is impossible for their force to be 'isolated' even though they are effectively surrounded on all sides as far as the battle map permits.


Again my objection is not to the isolation effects -though that might merit a discussion- but rather when the game checks for isolation for a side. Currently it's possible at the end of a player's turn for a unit to be in contact with friendly units (ie back in the 'line') but to still be isolated throughout the next enemy turn.

I would also not argue that the the game's rules are anything other than an abstraction as opposed to a 100% accurate representation of historical reality. Historical arguments can be sidestepped by the realization that the isolation rule is much the same across the Tiller games regardless of time period (eg the WW2 Campaign Series and the Cold War titles all have basically the same rule).

It's a simple rule that more or less gets the job done but falls apart at edge cases. Under the rule a brigade, division, corps or army can form an unbroken line but still be isolated by significantly weaker units, even if the enemy units all only have 1 strength. Conversely, any pocketed force can stave off isolation so long as it is pocketed with a supply wagon of at least 1 strength. But these situations are so unlikely as to be dismissed.

On the other hand I've already seen multiple times the situation I initially described despite being relatively new to the games. Even veteran players make the mistake of thinking they can rescue those units.
Author:  William Stewart [ Tue Sep 28, 2021 9:36 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Isolation optional rule too harsh?
Sigh….. that “veteran” player he refers to is me :(. Personally I like
The isolation rule, as I have learned to pay particular attention to it and use it as much as I can.
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/