American Civil War Game Club (ACWGC)

ACWGC Forums

* ACWGC    * Dpt. of Records (DoR)    *Club Recruiting Office     ACWGC Memorial

* CSA HQ    * VMI   * Join CSA    

* Union HQ   * UMA   * Join Union    

CSA Armies:   ANV   AoT

Union Armies:   AotP    AotT

Link Express

Club Forums:     NWC    CCC     Home Pages:     NWC    CCC    ACWGC
It is currently Fri Mar 29, 2024 10:18 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 77 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 13, 2005 5:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 9:52 am
Posts: 1324
Hi, Al,
You are right, of course, but the view I was trying to express was that if they pass they ought to remain in good order. My experience is that while flank morale modifier is a good thing (imho) on balance it isn't enough to make forming a solid line advantageous. If units adjacent to routing units wouldn't disrupt automatically, I think it would make the solid line the preferred tactic.

MG Mike Mihalik
1/III/AoMiss/CSA


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 14, 2005 12:48 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2001 3:21 pm
Posts: 215
An action point system (like the WW2 series) might be the best solution to a weak defence. See my last post at the topic <i>1/2 Defence - Full Offence - Right - Wrong?</i>

With the current system, an attacking unit can use up its full movement allowance, then fire and then melee too! But with an action point system, if a unit used up more than 2/3 of its allowance it wouldn't be able to fire. Also, in order to melee, a unit (or at least infantry) normally requires most of its action point allocation - so an attacking unit would need to start out adjacent or maybe one hex away from the defender in order to melee.

Adopting an <b>action point </b>system would thus:

1./ Reduce attacker firepower in proportion to movement expended.
2./ Give the defender more time to respond before getting meleed.
3./ Allow defending artillery the chance to limber up and fall back without getting rushed from a distance and then meleed.
4./ Permit retreating defenders to fire and then fall back, rather than having to fire <i>after</i> falling back at long range. Alternatively, the retreating unit could chose to sacrifice firing in exchange for 1/3 extra movement.

An action point system is a more flexible system and a more logical system. I'm convinced it would be a better system than the one we've currently got.

Col. Rich White
3 Brig. Phantom Cav Div
III Corps ANV


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 77 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 109 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