| American Civil War Game Club (ACWGC) http://www.wargame.ch/board/acwgc/ |
|
| Engine upgrades prioritized http://www.wargame.ch/board/acwgc/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=8429 |
Page 4 of 5 |
| Author: | Doug Burke [ Tue Sep 20, 2005 12:29 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Been on vacation for the last two weeks so I'm a little late but here are my thought anyway. Not sure at all what "Marching Fatigue" means. If it means marching all night then it would be one of my choices. If it means marching before going into battle then it would not as there are 100's of examples of ACW troops doing just that and fighting well (Jackson's all day Chancellorsville flank march being one the most notable examples). So, my choices: -Night movement fatigue -Brigade Combat Effectiveness -Campaign Encryption General Doug Burke |
|
| Author: | Richard [ Tue Sep 20, 2005 10:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
On the subject of <b>fatigue marching</b>, before incorporating it into the HPS engine, it might be useful to take a look at how <i>Age of Rifles</i> (an old 1996 game, contemporary with the BG games) handles this - when a unit's about to move, the pre-plotted route is indicated in green, yellow, orange & red. This isn't just for show: if a unit moves "out of the green" then it will accumulate fatigue and if it moves "into the red" it will accumulate extra fatigue. Such a system will make things clearer for the players and prevent them acquiring movement fatigue without realizing it. <i>AoR</i> also makes troops accumulate some fatigue whenever they fire. Incidentally, <i>Age of Rifles</i> also has quite a complex system for <b>artillery capture in melees</b>. Instead of just "magically" disappearing, the captured guns can be either recrewed or spiked by the successful attacker (the player is given the choice - personally, I think it should take time to spike guns and should never occur automatically as soon as they're captured, and it shouldn't be at 100% probability either - for instance, at Inkermann in the Crimean War, the Russians attempted, unsuccessfully, to spike some guns with twigs, while other guns were recaptured before they could be spiked - however, it happens straight away in <i>AoR</i>). Also, there's a possibility - I'm not exactly sure how it's handled - of a defeated battery limbering up and retreating, but often leaving some guns behind to be captured. In other words, <i>AoR</i> has both a gun capture/recrew feature and at least the chance of some defeated guns limbering up and retreating included within the same melee system. Since it's an old game, perhaps the code for this is now available to be studied? Col. Rich White 3 Brig. Phantom Cav Div III Corps ANV |
|
| Author: | Robert [ Wed Sep 21, 2005 7:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
<font color="beige"><b> 1.) Marching Fatigue 2.) Arty capture/recapture/partial retreats 3) Arty prolong(fire & fall back one hex)</b></font id="beige"> <font color="blue"><b>Brig.Gen. R.A.Weir</b></font id="blue"> <font color="yellow">-- CALVERT LINE --</font id="yellow"> 
<b>First--III--AoA CSA</b> |
|
| Author: | Jefferson H. Davis [ Fri Sep 23, 2005 7:56 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Just came up with a new idea! Drunken Commanders! (Preferably mostly Union).....Eeeeerrrrr, perhaps, the effects of blue beef (Probably mostly Confederate)and Venereal desease (Yankee mostly on this one too) should also be modeled!!!!......I'm on a roll now! Think of the possibilities...one scenario The Yanks just sit there because US Grant is on a binge.....Or the Confederates, have lots of stragglers due to men falling out of lines to run to the latrine.......Or lastly Yankee strength reduced by 45% due to short arm inspection......Perhaps, AP Hill will be "Not Present for duty" due to his condition......Pretty historical stuff.....Regards, Hank BG Hank Smith Army of Georgia Smith's Division CO Carroll's Corp |
|
| Author: | Al Amos [ Fri Sep 23, 2005 9:02 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Somebody want to move Hank to the beach. I think he needs some fresh air. [:D] MajGen Al 'Ambushed' Amos 3rd "Amos' Ambushers" Bde, Cavalry Division, XX Corps, AoC The Union Forever! Huzzah! |
|
| Author: | Jefferson H. Davis [ Fri Sep 23, 2005 9:48 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Al, I honestly would have loved to have been at the beach early this morning.....nothing stirs up the Redfish like a good hurricane.....I had other things I needed to be doing today though (besides they'd have busted me fer going down there).......Now I am as prepared as I can be under the circumstances.....just waiting to see if it is going east of us (hopefully, that would be bad for Beaumont.....but we'd be on the dry side), or whether it will keep coming straight and be a direct hit on us......We'll know in the next few hours....Regards, Hank BG Hank Smith Army of Georgia Smith's Division CO Carroll's Corp |
|
| Author: | dgillies [ Sat Oct 15, 2005 5:02 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Let me add one more...[:D] No fire on leader-only movement or formation change. Col. David Gillies 4th Highlanders/I/XXIV/AoJ |
|
| Author: | Ernie Sands [ Sat Oct 15, 2005 6:22 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 dgillies</i> <br />Let me add one more...[:D] No fire on leader-only movement or formation change. Col. David Gillies 4th Highlanders/I/XXIV/AoJ <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote"> I think fire on formation change is a legitimate fire. If you have a column approaching, say 4 men wide and they go online with say 16 men wide, then why would you not fire when they are NOT able to return fire and are slightly disorganized as they change ranks and are presenting a larger target? <b><font color="gold">Ernie Sands LtGen, Commanding, Army of Ohio 
ACWGC Cabinet member </b></font id="gold"> |
|
| Author: | dgillies [ Sat Oct 15, 2005 3:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
No you misunderstand what I mean. Here is an example: A leader is stacked with an infantry unit. The leader (only) changes to mounted formation. Defensive fire hits the infantry unit. Same leader (only) moves into another hex with infantry. Now that infantry is hit with DF too. So, I do not think leader movement (only) or leader formation change (only) should draw any defensive fire. Col. David Gillies 4th Highlanders/I/XXIV/AoJ |
|
| Author: | Ernie Sands [ Sat Oct 15, 2005 5:06 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 dgillies</i> <br />No you misunderstand what I mean. Here is an example: A leader is stacked with an infantry unit. The leader (only) changes to mounted formation. Defensive fire hits the infantry unit. Same leader (only) moves into another hex with infantry. Now that infantry is hit with DF too. So, I do not think leader movement (only) or leader formation change (only) should draw any defensive fire. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote"> I did misunderstand. I read your message wrong and thought you were making TWO statements. I see now that you were ONLY speaking of a leader changing formation or entering/leaving hex. <b><font color="gold">Ernie Sands LtGen, Commanding, Army of Ohio
ACWGC Cabinet member </b></font id="gold"> |
|
| Author: | Lawrence Bertolino [ Fri Oct 21, 2005 11:01 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
My priorities would be: 1) Artillery Capture/recapture 2) Camapign Encryption 3) Artillery ammo pool LTG L. G. Bertolino The Pelican State Brigade Commander, Bishop's Corps, AotM |
|
| Author: | Richard [ Fri Oct 21, 2005 11:43 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
What exactly is the "artillery ammo pool" suggestion and why would this be a more logical engine ungrade than proper artillery supply wagons (just like small arms supply wagons)? Or might "artillery pool" = supply wagons for guns? I think we need the actual physical supply wagons rather than some abstract "pool", for the following reasons: 1./ The wagons actually need to be close enough to supply the guns (probably 5 hexes, just like for small arms). This would have a significant impact on gameplay and makes sense. 2./ The extra wagons will help clutter up roads and cause problems for an army wishing to move swiftly, especially once we get the weather feature carried over from the Nappy engine. This will mean the players will have to make a decision about mobility or maintaining supply. 3./ The wagons might get captured. So a big NO to an artillery pool and a big YES to physical supply wagons. I'm sure everyone agrees that this feature should really have been present back in the old BG engine, so it's well overdue. Let's hope we don't need to wait much longer. Col. Rich White 3 Brig. Phantom Cav Div III Corps ANV |
|
| Author: | Scott Schlitte [ Fri Oct 21, 2005 12:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The arty ammo pool thing is to get ammo deducted by gun vs battery to eliminate the need to not want to use one/two gun sections when you have bigger batteries around. The wagons are also a good idea and maybe the two could be used in conjunction of each other. On a different issue - marching fatigue. Most people want this to penalize night movement. Agreed. But... what about if a general planned a night combat and had units for it sleep all day? I would like to address marching fatigue this way: allow units to force march with a higher movement rate and added fatigue. Also add fatigue for night movement. But, also allow units to bank a sort of fatigue reserve where they would accumulate points for each turn not moved, fired, or fired upon and these would be expended to negate night marching/forced marching fatigue later. MajGen, 2/VIII/AoS "Beer! It's not just for breakfast anymore!" |
|
| Author: | KWhitehead [ Sat Oct 22, 2005 5:38 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 Richard</i> <br />What exactly is the "artillery ammo pool" suggestion and why would this be a more logical engine ungrade than proper artillery supply wagons (just like small arms supply wagons)? Or might "artillery pool" = supply wagons for guns? I think we need the actual physical supply wagons rather than some abstract "pool", for the following reasons: 1./ The wagons actually need to be close enough to supply the guns (probably 5 hexes, just like for small arms). This would have a significant impact on gameplay and makes sense. 2./ The extra wagons will help clutter up roads and cause problems for an army wishing to move swiftly, especially once we get the weather feature carried over from the Nappy engine. This will mean the players will have to make a decision about mobility or maintaining supply. 3./ The wagons might get captured. So a big NO to an artillery pool and a big YES to physical supply wagons. I'm sure everyone agrees that this feature should really have been present back in the old BG engine, so it's well overdue. Let's hope we don't need to wait much longer. Col. Rich White 3 Brig. Phantom Cav Div III Corps ANV <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote"> It isn't really any more logical, actually it has very little logic but it already exists so just changing the rate of use to be based on number of guns rather than batteries would probably be an easier "fix" than a new ammo system based on wagons. Small arms system based on wagons an random ammo depletions isn't really logical either. If one wanted to be "correct" then each unit, infantry or artillery, would carry a certain amount of ammo that firing would slowly use up. When the unit was depleted of ammo it would then have to draw from wagons which also have an amount they carry. In some ways a "pool" is more logical for artillery than infantry. Artillery contained its own transport, limbers, that could be sent back to the army trains for resupply before the guns ran out of ammo. A "pool" probably better simulates this in some ways than wagons. If you used wagons with artillery you would probably have to give them a much larger resupply radius to simulate this inherent transport ability of batteries. BG. Kennon Whitehead Chatham Grays III Corps, AoM (CSA) |
|
| Author: | A de Mere [ Sat Oct 22, 2005 11:58 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
My priorities would be: 1)Campaign encyption 2)Bridge repair 3)Arty capture/recapture (Losing quality. Maybe in campaign there can be assigned the cannons captured to the army with the original quality, or the quality of other batteries of the new Batallion). Also interesting: -Night movement fatigue -Cavalry Breakdown/recombine (as in Nappy) -Engineering units -Weather/LOS limitation -Mtd Cavalry skirmisher ability -New "bivouac" formation for faster fatigue recovery ( Very original). Regards: Lt. Gemeral A. de Meré 1st Corps ANV CSA A. de Meré |
|
| Page 4 of 5 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|