American Civil War Game Club (ACWGC)

I'm not going to say this will happen, but I'm just curious. If arty were exempted or perhaps given a percent chance of not being affected, would that lend to being more historical?



<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 />The fault with the rule is more apparant in its effects.

That rule makes it pretty much suicide to use artillery in anything resembling a historical manner. The effects of "D" are so extreme, so that the firepower is rendered almost null and void, *and* the fact that you can't even made a decent effort to evacuate the guns. Then, as Al said, it's a long, slow process to bring the guns back to good order. Because of all that artillery is used in almost an WW1 style, as distant support, instead of right up in the line like it should be.

Also, batteries often served as rally points for fleeing troops, and that's not likely in this game either.

Brig. General Gary McClellan
1st Division, XXIII Corps
AoO,USA
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

.

If arty were automatically limbered after losing a melee, then took a loss in men that may or may not result in the loss guns (because arty usually got out before they were overrun, but often lost one or more guns while retreating), then it wouldn't matter if they were disrupted.

My reasoning is this: Because the game scale is 125 yds/hex, the arty should have more reaction time to remove themselves before the enemy line makes the magical jump from 125 yards out to zero yards. Even if the attackers moved at a full sprint (which they didn't) the arty would be able to decide if it would stay and fight or run. At that point the question boils down to the amount of infantry support available in the hex. A higher ratio of infantry to cannon, the lower the gun loss. A lower ratio of inf. to arty (ie. NO infantry support) the higher the gun loss, all the way up to the whole battery in the hex.

Maj. Gen. Beno
Pickett's Division, I Corps, ANV

<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 />Gen Walter,

That rule isn't as recent as those that I am refering too. In fact, the surround rule is also not optional. So perhaps it would be more accurate if I said "MOST" new rules are optional!!!

Respectfully yours,

Fld Lt. Walker

P.S. The rule is not just for arty, it disrupts ALL units that have routed units pass through their hex. And though this is inconvenient, it's logical that when 700 scared men pass through your neatly packed lines, your going to become disrupted. So where is the fault in the rule?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Here's a fault - A unit 6 hexes away from the front line, in reserve or moving up, who is disrupted by a routed unit passing through it, but is not under fire, would not likely take more than 20 minutes to get their line back in order, yet routinely units in such situations spend the next hour or longer disrupted because the game makes no differentiation... That is a bit of a fault to me.

But I agree with Gen. Walter. If the artillery isn't going to be benefitted by the same command structure, it should not be penalized by the same undisruption rules. (How hard is it to get a battery back in order? It isn't like the routed men picked up the guns and carried them away with them on the way to the rear... they might spook the horses a bit, but I doubt that horses used to being under fire would be that much more scared by running men - who are smaller than they are, btw...)

Regards,
Lt. Col. Alan Lynn
3rd Battery "Jacksonville Greys"
4th Div, II Corps, AoA
God bless <><

Problem is with the one size fits all. Yes 700 men routing through 100 green troops would disrupt them but no 20 men routing through the Iron brigade would hardly produce anything but laughter from the "Black Hats". And as Lynn pointed out artillery is not easily disrupted by retreating units.

As to the rallying of artillery I wonder if artillery officers could be added to the games? I know the artillery is sometimes assigned to brigades and divisions, but could they have their own battalion and corps officers under existing system? Anyone know the answer?

BG. Kennon Whitehead
Chatham Grays
III Corps, AoM (CSA)

Gen Walter's complaint about a chain of command is a valid one, but it ought to be one that could be easily fixed. If batteries are attached to brigades, as was common, particularly early in the war, they ought to be in the brigade commander's chain of command. If they are in separate brigades or battalions, they should have their own leader, who comes under the appropriate level commander. In Gettysburg, though, that would penalize the Union, whose batteries could receive the benefit of only two levels of command instead of three, but so much depends on leader quality in this system, and artillery morale is usually high enough that any help leads to automatic undisruption.

Folks who are complaining about batteries being overrun must be playing the one-phase system, since infantry interlocking zones of control in the multiphase system prevent infantry from closing with the guns. Players who ignore protecting their guns with interlocking zones of control will suffer the same fate as some of the Union batteries at Chickamauga or the Confederate battalion (Carter's?) that was overrun at Spotsylvania after firing two shots. The bigger problem is that batteries, once overrun, are permanently removed from play. On the second day at Gettysburg, Confederates captured numerous guns, but only managed to hang onto one. Most of the rest were recaptured by the Union and put back in service.

One other thing to consider is whether artillery ought to have the same movement allowance as infantry. I am not very knowledgeable in this area, but it seems to me that artillery batteries ought to have a movement allowance of about 18. I would think artillery marched at the same rate as infantry for purposes of security rather than inherent limitations. On occasions when the guns did limber and get away, it was probably because they outran the pursuing infantry. Of course, weather (mud) might play a big part in a battery's mobility.

MG Mike Mihalik
1/III/AoMiss/CSA

Not all arty is unbrigaded. Most of the confederate arty IS brigaded and the arty MP was altered by reducing the formation change from 4 to 3.

Rich

The best function of artillery in the HPS system (especially in single phase mode) is to quickly exit the map before it's captured & wiped out. Basically, in the ACW engine (Nappy artillery is a different matter entirely, although it still suffers from some of the same shortcomings) artillery is just a liability. But why?

1./ Too easily captured and, once captured, it just disappears into thin air - there's no possiblity of guns limbering up prior to melee (how about allowing players to set in advance - ie. for the next defensive turn - whether their guns should stay put and fire defensively or else limber up and attempt to retreat if visibly approached by the enemy?) and the defending player gets absolutely no chance to <i>recapture</i> the guns either immediately afterwards or at a later point in the battle, however unlikely it would be for the attacker to be able to hold onto them in the next player "turn" and in subsequent turns.

2./ Guns are worth too many points, especially in Campaign Gettysburg. This encourages players to go after artillery to clock up victory points. Again, with no opportunity for recapture, once captured guns "magically" evaporate into instant victory points that can never be taken away again, unlike say an objective hex. What exactly is supposed to happen to the actual physical guns once captured remains something of a mystery.

3./ Guns don't tend to inflict many casualties (although of course this varies a fair bit depending on which ACW title is being played) - certainly in Corinth & Gettysburg artillery doesn't seem to inflict sufficient casualties to make it worth risking placing it anywhere near the front line (particularly in single phase mode)


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

BTW,

My previous post concerns Shiloh.

And there are additional changes for arty that have yet to be introduced.

And if you concerned about the VP levels, they can be easily changed, also, the quality can be changed in the OOB. That portion is NOT locked! So if you want them to be all "A's", just do it!

Rich

Yes, it's certainly good to see engine changes in Shiloh that are addressing the issue of weak artillery. Perhaps with the addition of one or two new features and it'll be even better. But, I agree, progress is certainly being made, which is encouraging.

Any chance of revealing what the "additional changes for arty" might be? I've heard a rumour that a gun recapture feature was in the works - it would be great if this were true. In fact, I personally feel that this single feature would solve a variety of related issues and would enhance gameplay considerably.

I know the VP levels can be altered by players - but perhaps the official value is too high in some titles. Anyway, this wouldn't really be an issue any longer if guns could be captured & recaptured, because the VPs would change hands with possession of the guns (just like with objective hexes). So even the high artillery values in <i>Campaign Gettysburg </i>would be a viable level if guns could be recaptured, because the other player would always have at least some chance of recovering the points.

Artillery effectiveness (ie. pdt fire factor settings) is an issue that perhaps needs further consideration and testing, although maybe the "correct" values can never really be determined with any real certainty. I'm not sure what the best values are - and I've heard a range of viewpoints from different players. So, perhaps it's a good thing that the different game designers have their own views on this subject and the values aren't standardized in the various ACW titles?

Nevertheless, just as with the VP settings, I'd be far more prepared to accept "weak" artillery - and risk deploying it near my front line - if I knew that if the enemy rushed forward and captured it I'd have some chance of recovering the guns and wouldn't have permanently lost them.


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

<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 />BTW,

My previous post concerns Shiloh.

And there are additional changes for arty that have yet to be introduced.

And if you concerned about the VP levels, they can be easily changed, also, the quality can be changed in the OOB. That portion is NOT locked! So if you want them to be all "A's", just do it!

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

I thought that both the MAP and OOB files were locked? Only the PDT file could be changed and of course SCN files through the editor.

BG. Kennon Whitehead
Chatham Grays
III Corps, AoM (CSA)

Not everything is locked. You can't add units, or subtract, or change the total strength value. You CAN change quality ratings, picture numbers, unit types.

The main thing is you can't create new OOBs from scratch, or add units to existing OOBs.

Try it.

Rich




<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by KWhitehead</i>
<br /><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 />BTW,

My previous post concerns Shiloh.

And there are additional changes for arty that have yet to be introduced.

And if you concerned about the VP levels, they can be easily changed, also, the quality can be changed in the OOB. That portion is NOT locked! So if you want them to be all "A's", just do it!

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

I thought that both the MAP and OOB files were locked? Only the PDT file could be changed and of course SCN files through the editor.

BG. Kennon Whitehead
Chatham Grays
III Corps, AoM (CSA)
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I have spoken before and basically agree with Col. B. that guns should be able to retreat in melee. High losses in melee may result in the battery getting wiped out, but not automatically as it is now. This represents the depth of guns in the 125 yd hex (at least when stacked with infantry). When not stacked with infantry, they will have poor melee defense due to the small number of crew and would be more likely destroyed.

The disruption problem as I see it is that guns attract routing units. I've had one battery of guns five hexes back from the front line, and by god the FIRST routing unit ran uphill to the left just to disrupt the artillery battery! Is there some way to make routing units find the path of least resistance instead of "a. find battery b. run through battery and disrupt it". And, maybe if a unit has another rout through it, it goes through a morale check instead of automatic disruption. Then the Iron Brigade will resist better, but on the other hand they should recover quicker anyway. It would be nice if unit densities could adjust the morale check for disruption.

Major General Dirk Gross
XIV Corps/AoC

I second General Gross's suggestion that units which are run through by routed units undergo a morale check rather than being automatically disrupted. That ought to apply even moreso to units adjacent to routing units. Some units I'm sure were shaken when regiments to their right or left gave way, but I think the better units would maintain order. It is another penalty for making solid lines instead of the alternate hex defense. That's with rout limiting on. Without rout limiting, the penalty for maintaining a solid line could be too horrible to contemplate. Particularly if you go first and it is the last dusk turn.

MG Mike Mihalik
1/III/AoMiss/CSA

Use FLANK MORALE MODIFIER to keep lines intact, and when a unit routs to your left or right it is a morale check. Being Disordered means you passed.

MajGen Al 'Ambushed' Amos
3rd "Amos' Ambushers" Bde, Cavalry Division, XX Corps, AoC
The Union Forever! Huzzah!