American Civil War Game Club (ACWGC)

Some observations on recent posts.

Indeed in the Nap games it is common for a unit to have higher casualties and still win the melee. I haven't been able to get a precise explanation, but believe there is actually a 2 step process in the Nap engine -- one which determines casualties and one which determines the melee winner (based on a second calculation of losses that is not displayed). It also appears to me (from observation) that all modifiers are not applied to both calculations. I assume both game engines are essentially the same and don't know why this result is more common in the Nap games (I think it can easily occur 10-15% of the time). I agree that it is reasonable to win with higher casualties, but I do cringe when such a loss results in a zoc kill -- after all those brave defenders were beating off the attackers in greater numbers!

On limiting melees to disrupted units. Again in the Nap games there is a manpower reduction factor if disupted units are included in the melee and I don't know if this is on the list for the ACW games, but I think the idea is also a reasonable house rule in the flavor of the historical battles and it would add to the value of keeping units in command control, making that a more important element of a game.

Lt Gen Bob Breen
Commanding 4th Bde, 2nd Div, VI Corps, AoS
"Where we lead, the Army follows" - VI Corps

I put this on the other thread.

In terms of programming, would this be a reasonable optional rule addition to the game engine?

In order to perform a column melee, a unit must have at least half or more MPs remaining. In other words, you must really want to use the column formation and not just tank down a road and attack!

Rich

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Rich Walker</i>
<br />I put this on the other thread.

In terms of programming, would this be a reasonable optional rule addition to the game engine?

In order to perform a column melee, a unit must have at least half or more MPs remaining. In other words, you must really want to use the column formation and not just tank down a road and attack!

Rich

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

You could make it better. 1/4(RU) or greater MPs remaining for line units also. Also make each unit pass either a morale check or a command check before it is allowed to melee. Units that fail are disrupted and not allowed to melee. If you really want to add a twist, make the morale check happen when the melee is resolved(too late for the attacking player to change his mind) so the attacker will never know how many axctual units will participate in the final attack.

Col. Phil Driscoll
1st Brigade/1st Division/VCorps/AoP

I like the idea of programming into the game that column melees would be limited by remaining movement points. It would go a long way toward limiting this for players against it that hadn't made any house rules before the start of a battle and would still allow its use in the more necessary occasions with towns and bridges. It sounds like something that wouldn't be too hard to program into a future patch.

MajGen, 2/VIII/AoS
"Beer! It's not just for breakfast anymore!"

The only time I have seen the attacker suffer more casualties and win a melee in the HPS system is when one of the defenders had already been defeated and forced to retreat into the hex on a previous melee of the same melee phase. In fact, one time I forced a unit to retreat into a hex that contained only a leader. When I meleed that hex (which I could do because the leader had not yet been involved in a melee), there were zero defensive casualties but I still won the melee. It is probably a bug in the system.

MG Mike Mihalik
1/III/AoMiss/CSA