American Civil War Game Club (ACWGC)

NOTE: If you haven’t already read the post Total Casualties in the ACW series games – Thesis, you might want to do that, as it provides background for this discussion.

I know stacking is a popular point of discussion here at ACWGC, and it should be, because it has many implications for combat and movement. I whole heartedly endorse the new artillery stacking limits (even as a Union player). I propose that the infantry stacking is far too high as well. Currently, 1000 men can fire from a single hex. This is probably double the number men that should be able to fire from a hex. In Hess’ book “Civil War Infantry Tactics” he cites testimony to Congress that a 475-man regiment would have a 140 yd frontage. Since the ‘frontage’ of a 125 yd long hex is 144 yds, it seems reasonable to say a 500-man unit could fit into a single hex.

I am NOT proposing to reduce stacking to 500 men per hex. That is an arbitrary and unrealistic fix to the problem. I propose that the WDS ACW series borrow some really great rules from the WDS Napoleonic series. Units should be assigned lines with-in a hex. Up to 500 men can be in each line. If 2x 400-man regiments are in a hex, one is in the front line and the other is behind it in the second line. ONLY the front line can fire and assault/defend in melee. Everyone in the hex takes damage from fire into the hex (decreasing effectiveness in each subsequent line).

There have been efforts to spread out the units by increasing the damage inflicted on overstacked hexes. But I think a more effective way to get players to realistically deploy their units is to limit the amount of firepower that can come out of a hex, this rule would do that.

Of course, a rule like this has MANY more implications for melee combat. Currently a popular way to ensure the defense of a hex is to fill it as close to the 1000-man stacking limit as possible. Just like fire combat, I would propose that only the front-line unit in a hex would participate in melee to determine the outcome. However, if a hex with multiple lines loses a melee, all units in the hex are forced to retreat, become disordered and must make a morale check, even though only the front unit participated in the melee.

On the attack, a unit could only melee into one of its front-side hexes if there is no enemy unit immediately in its ‘front’ hex. So multiple units from different hexes can attack a single hex (and be considered as participants in the combat), but only if there is no enemy unit in the ‘front’ hex of one of the attacking units. For example, if 2 units are directly lined up with 2 enemy units, they would not be able to gang-up on one of the units by both attacking the same hex. However, if two units are facing a single unit (either by itself, or at the end of a line) then the assumption is one unit would be able to turn the defenders flank and so they could both attack. The 1000-man maximum would still apply to the attacker, even if attack from multiple hexes.
Using this mechanic would penalize the ‘every other hex’ line defense by ceding the tactical initiative to the attacker, while also negating the unrealistic defensive advantage of over-stacked hexes.

I must point out that while this probably seems like the attackers will have a new found advantage, if the number of morale checks increases, then more attackers will be disordered. Additionally, if defenders set up solid lines, only the end of their lines will be subject to gang-up attacks. This will make the flanks more vulnerable, as they historically were.

Lt Col Matt Clausen
1st Brigade
3d Division
V Corps
Army of the Potomac