| American Civil War Game Club (ACWGC) http://www.wargame.ch/board/acwgc/ |
|
| HPS ACW games http://www.wargame.ch/board/acwgc/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=7312 |
Page 3 of 3 |
| Author: | tony best [ Sat Feb 12, 2005 2:32 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Rich I like both of your ideas 1. to limit Arty disrupt time 2, a better chance of undisruption for units disrupted by routers. Can this be done? Major General Tony Best AOJ |
|
| Author: | Rich Walker [ Sat Feb 12, 2005 3:13 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Anything is possible. |
|
| Author: | Col. B [ Sat Feb 12, 2005 4:06 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Having a regiment run through a battery is also going to frighten the horses. Maj. Gen. Beno Pickett's Division, I Corps, ANV |
|
| Author: | D.S. Walter [ Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:17 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Col. B</i> <br />Having a regiment run through a battery is also going to frighten the horses. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote"> Maybe, but guns in battery don't need horses. Gen. Walter, USA AoS / War College |
|
| Author: | Michael Smith [ Sat Feb 12, 2005 9:12 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Rich, To answer your question regarding arty fire in Franklin I like it! I'm not saying its perfect just that I think its a drastic improvement over the CC and CO models. I do not have CG so I can't offer any comparison there. Obviously this is just my opinion but its why I keep playing CF and I don't CC or CO. Btw, Rich, I appreciate how willing you are to listen to the feedback from we gamers and to act so quickly in making adjustments where needed! It speaks volumes for you and HPS, thanks again. Best wishes, Maj.Gen. Mike Smith 3/3ANV [url="http://convolutedmuse.blogspot.com//"]Convoluted Muse[/url] |
|
| Author: | J. Corbin [ Sat Feb 12, 2005 10:20 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Michael Smith</i> <br />Rich, To answer your question regarding arty fire in Franklin I like it! I'm not saying its perfect just that I think its a drastic improvement over the CC and CO models. I do not have CG so I can't offer any comparison there. Obviously this is just my opinion but its why I keep playing CF and I don't CC or CO. Btw, Rich, I appreciate how willing you are to listen to the feedback from we gamers and to act so quickly in making adjustments where needed! It speaks volumes for you and HPS, thanks again. Best wishes, Maj.Gen. Mike Smith 3/3ANV [url="http://convolutedmuse.blogspot.com//"]Convoluted Muse[/url] <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote"> OK... I'm a little confused... Why the the various HPS ACW games have different arty effects. I would think that they should all behave the same ? Colonel John Corbin Commanding officer 2nd Division XVIII Corps AoJ |
|
| Author: | Gary McClellan [ Sat Feb 12, 2005 10:22 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Mostly it is because the different games have been done by different teams, and there isn't full agreement between the teams as to how powerful guns and the like should be. You'll see the same thing in the Nap games, especially with movement. Ideally, they should all be the same, but you can go ahead and get Drew and Rich and all into a room and see what happens [:D] Col. Gary McClellan 1st Division, XXIII Corps AoO,USA |
|
| Author: | Col. B [ Sat Feb 12, 2005 7:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by D.S. Walter</i> <br /><blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Col. B</i> <br />Having a regiment run through a battery is also going to frighten the horses. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote"> Maybe, but guns in battery don't need horses. Gen. Walter, USA AoS / War College <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote"> But a battery without caissons and horses is just VP's for the attacker. Maj. Gen. Beno Pickett's Division, I Corps, ANV |
|
| Author: | J. Corbin [ Sun Feb 13, 2005 9:00 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Gary McClellan</i> <br />Mostly it is because the different games have been done by different teams, and there isn't full agreement between the teams as to how powerful guns and the like should be. You'll see the same thing in the Nap games, especially with movement. Ideally, they should all be the same, but you can go ahead and get Drew and Rich and all into a room and see what happens [:D] Col. Gary McClellan 1st Division, XXIII Corps AoO,USA <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote"> From what I have read it would seem that the players here might be able to provide some work on this... May I suggest to all that an adhoc committe be formed with the intent to hammer out consistant pdt values for the weaponry these games use ? After a standard is reached on paper we could test play the new pdt files.... Any thoughts ? Colonel John Corbin Commanding officer 2nd Division XVIII Corps AoJ |
|
| Author: | KWhitehead [ Sun Feb 13, 2005 2:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Actually the differences between artillery in Corinth and Gettysburg are very slight. I checked only two type of guns the N (Napoleon) and T (Parrot) but they are the predominant types. The main difference is on Version 103 of Corinth that lowered the N's close range factors. Here are the main changes: N (Napoleon) Distance 1 2 3 4 6 8 10 13 Corinth 1.01A 14 11 7 5 3 2 1 0.5 Corinth 1.03 12 10 6 5 3 2 1 0.5 C. Gettysburg 14 11 7 5 3 2 1 0.5 T (Parrott) Distance 1 2 3 5 10 12 14 18 21 Corinth 1.01A 8 6 5 4 3.5 2 1 0.5 Corinth 1.03 8 6 4 3.5 3 2 1 0.75 0.5 C. Gettysburg 8 6 5 4 3.5 2 1 0.5 Actually based on at least these two guns it looks like Gettysburg is based off the first release of Corinth rather than the later patches. I don't have CF and CO so can't compare these. Maybe someone else can add their numbers for these two gun types. Col. Kennon Whitehead Chatham Grays III Corps, AoM (CSA) |
|
| Author: | Rich Walker [ Wed Feb 16, 2005 2:36 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I believe Corinth and Ozark uses the same values. <i>Campaign Franklin</i> uses the following as in your example: N (Napoleon) Distance 1 2 3 4 6 8 10 13 Corinth 1.01A 14 11 7 5 3 2 1 0.5 Corinth 1.03 12 10 6 5 3 2 1 0.5 C. Gettysburg 14 11 7 5 3 2 1 0.5 <b>C. Franklin 1.03 25 18 10 8 6 4 2 1</b> T (Parrott) Distance 1 2 3 5 10 12 14 18 21 Corinth 1.01A 8 6 5 4 3.5 2 1 0.5 Corinth 1.03 8 6 4 3.5 3 2 1 0.75 0.5 C. Gettysburg 8 6 5 4 3.5 2 1 0.5 <b>C. Franklin 1.03 9 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 </b> |
|
| Author: | D.S. Walter [ Wed Feb 16, 2005 3:37 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
My guns at Nashville are closing in on the Reb lines now ... if they (the Rebs) don't run first, I will be able to report on their (the cannon's) effectiveness. Long range fire, so far, seemed more decent than in the other HPS (ACW) games. Gen. Walter, USA AoS / War College |
|
| Page 3 of 3 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|