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 2:43 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Dec 13, 2005 1:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 1:46 pm
Posts: 192
Location: USA
Personally, I think they limit and rob the commander from true command and the thought process. In most scenarios, like Bull Run II, the South is forced to stay close to those objective points. It isn't a big map and there really aren't enough turns to come back at a later time to get those points. Perhaps, limiting the objective points to 50 or 100 points max would be ok, but 500 or 1000 points is a lot of points to make up. Should'nt the objective be to eliminate the other side and drive them from the field....

I do not believe Lee or Grant ever told their troops "Stay close to that hill boys, it's worth 500 points" or "Can you ride back to that pass in the morning and pick up those objective points"

I don't have the answer or an alternative, but I do know I don't like objectives.

Lt.Col. R.E.Daley
1st Corps of the ANV
3rd Calvary Divsion,
3rd Brigade
"We are the Midnight Riders"


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 13, 2005 1:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 2:56 pm
Posts: 112
Location: USA, New Jersey, Ocean County
I think this is a very good question and I would like to see some of the experienced scenario designers outline some guidelines about how to populate a map with useful objective hexes.

From my own limited experience they can be useful to induce one or both sides to take up the offense. They can influence the game to develop along historical lines, which I think is good from the perspective of providing some history. They can also be good in that they may require the acquiring side to keep some troops nearby to garrison them, much like the actual armies had to do along their lines of communication.

On the negative side, I think the high point ones that overly influence the outcome of a game are not very helpful, even if they are located on what are well known pieces of terrain.

Although I have not given the topic a lot of thought, nor do I have a lot of sceario design experience my rule of thumb is that a minor victory should represent a net points advantage to one side that is around 5% of the total enemy value, all the victory hexes should be also worth about 5%, so if you get them all and the casualties are about the same you still get a minor vitory. A major victory would be a net difference of around 10%.


Lt Gen Bob Breen
Commanding XIX Corps, AoS
"Defenders of the Right"


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 13, 2005 2:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2001 3:44 pm
Posts: 143
Location: Canada
I, for one, would like to see a game option which would allow players to toggle on/off objective hex points at the beginning of a scenario.
We all know the historical outcomes, and most know the important hexes to have, whether it be a commanding hill or important crossroads. Isn't a big part our desire to play these games the "what if" component? Are we good enough commanders/strategists/tacticians to succeed where our historical counterparts failed? Would our battle plans work where the famous commanders did not? Why not have an option that would allow us to deviate from forcing players to follow the historical course of events and explore completely new strategies and tactics?
If the VP hex component were an option then players could choose whether or not to play a game that follows historical lines.

Major General Jeff Bangma
Commander, I "Fighting First" Corps
Army of the Potomac


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 13, 2005 5:39 pm 
The objectives, as we see them in the games, are placed in those locations because of the strategic, and tactical advantage they held at the time of the battle. Those values and the fact those locations became vaulable at all were based upon the maneuvering of the armies there, at the time. Having those same objectives in our games, forces us to comply, at least somewhat, with the overall decisions made historically. They also rob of us the ability to do something different. It's quite easy to totally out maneuver your opponent, have a distinct advantage in positioning and lose badly, because he's holding the predetermined victory hexes. You have to kill a lot of him to make up the 2000 points he might be holding on the last turn, so the answer isn't simply taking advantage of your maneuvering and position to attack and destroy. If it were a real battle, no commander would allow his army to be 75% surrounded because he wanted to hold a victory hex. What would be a victory hex in that hypothetical scenario would be a death hex in a real battle.

LtG. J. Cuneo, CSA
Commanding, Army of Alabama
Image Image

"I have seen the faces of men, who had dared death so often, it lost its' terror." -J.S. Mosby


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 13, 2005 6:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 9:52 am
Posts: 1324
I think the victory point hexes are necessary toreflect the strategic importance of a piece of terrain. Otherwise you will have maneuvering that bears no relationship to the historical realities. For example, the Union army at Gettysburg might be better off tactically at some point to abandon Baltimore Pike and fall back to more defensible terrain. Without victory points, there is no penalty for this, while historically it might allow Lee to interpose his army between between the AoP and Washington, cutting the lines of communication and perhaps allowing him to seize supply depots and forcing the AoP to attack him on ground of his own choosing instead of vice versa. There are reasons battles developed as they did historically beyond the terrain present in the tactical area of operations, and victory point hexes force us to take these historical realities into account when we play the game.

MG Mike Mihalik
1/III/AoMiss/CSA


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 13, 2005 7:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 9:52 am
Posts: 870
Location: USA
In Shiloh, I cut down the VP values by 60%. In my new title I shall create a few scenarios that have no VP hexes. But not too many, for I see a definite need for them in most circumstances.

Here is a small section from one of the reviews done for Campaign Shiloh:

<i>One of the things I wanted to do was to compare the scenario design with John Tiller’s earlier Battleground: Shiloh game. The first thing that struck me was the change in victory conditions. Battlefront Shiloh’s map was littered with close to 2000 victory points in geographical objectives, essentially forcing the Confederate player to stay on the field of battle and defend against an almost mandatory Union counterattack. Campaign Shiloh has only about 700 geographical victory points, 500 of them at Pittsburg Landing. In this situation, reaching Pittsburg Landing and cutting the Union off from their cross river reinforcements should become the goal of the Confederate player. The paucity of geographical objectives leads to another, more gamey option – inflict enough casualties to win the scenario and then retreat out of harms way. Though this would be a tough proposition against a human opponent, it does allow for a more flexible approach by the Confederate player. The designer did include a scenario that gives the Union player an exit hex to increase victory points if the Confederate player does conduct a hit and run.</i>

Read the entire review at: http://www.combatsim.com/review.php?id=727

As for the games that already exist, I would encourage you to use the editor to create scenarios without the VP hexes. It's very easy to do with existing scns, but you'll also want to consider changing the VP level for victory or defeat.

In most of my games, I try not to make it a requirement to control a certain hex for victory, but rather consider them as bonuses that will add a level to your victory in arms.

Personally, I hate to see games won that only were victories because of a few controlled hexes. But for strategic reasons, that is necessary on some occasions.

Also, VP hexes are necessary for the A/I to be programmed. It needs direction, and VP hexes provide the needed direction.

Rich


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 13, 2005 7:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2003 2:58 pm
Posts: 206
Location: USA
I like objectives--without them prior knowledge of the forces and the situations tends to create problems. Objectives tend to artifically prevent it from becoming gamey and retaining some degree of logistical truth. I would prefer, especially in games which are multi-day, to have objective points added and tallied at specified intervals (say mid-night) adding to the need to pursue a realistic strategy for the battle/period.
I will admit they themselves are gamey--but are a necessary evil I feel. Sort of like in some battles the necessity to have release times, otherwise prior knowledge of force compositions and placements overtake the battles.
MG Michael Laabs
3/III A of M


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 10:16 am 
<font color="blue">I think the option to turn off objective points is a good idea. I just won a battle because of objective points, but feel my opponent did the better job of troop management and would have won except for the objectives, I've also been in his position</font id="blue">.

Col. David Groce
3/2/1 AoP
"Taking the high ground"


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 10:40 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 1:46 pm
Posts: 192
Location: USA
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Although I have not given the topic a lot of thought, nor do I have a lot of sceario design experience my rule of thumb is that a minor victory should represent a net points advantage to one side that is around 5% of the total enemy value, all the victory hexes should be also worth about 5%, so if you get them all and the casualties are about the same you still get a minor vitory. A major victory would be a net difference of around 10%.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Lt.Gen. Breen's concept of victory indeed has merit. It's believeable, realistic, and probably would be historically correct in most battles if you consider that retreats and the ownership of the field relates to known losses. You Historians may correct me....

Lt.Gen. Breen's concept would be of great benefit to the South. It would add a degree of game fairness into the game. I presently think that because the games are "Historiaclly Prepared", the games favor the North. It doesn't matter how well the South plays, those 10,000 to 30,000 additional Yankees that show up will most likly give the North a victory. Further, who plays these games historically?

I do love these games and by no means am I knocking the designers.....(Thank-you) I just get a little turned off at times when I'm playing well, very well, but then the troop number advantage of my opponent surfaces and that's all she wrote.

I don't know what the "Victory Conditions" would be, but percentage losses and field ownership factors should decide victory....










Lt.Col. R.E.Daley
1st Corps of the ANV
3rd Calvary Divsion,
3rd Brigade
"We are the Midnight Riders"


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 3:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 2:56 pm
Posts: 112
Location: USA, New Jersey, Ocean County
A couple comments about the 5% suggestion. It was not completely arbitrary. In looking at historical battles over the years, my sense is that the victor incurred around 20% casualties and the loser around 25% -- hence the 5% suggestion. There were clearly many excepions.

The reason for associating 5% with a minor victory is that I have come to the conclusion that we "move and engage" troops much more quickly then our historical couterparts, so time in this game, even if it represents what could be done in 20 minutes, is not historical. We are so efficient we eliminate all the "hurry up and wait" time and get at least twice as much done over any period -- so 5% becomes 10% for a major.

However, what I think would really help make the games more exciting for club play would be some algorithm, unknown to the players, that <i><b>might</b></i> end the game as a victory for one side before the final turn had been reached. Basically representing one side withdrawing after suffering some level of losses. Exactly how it would work, I don't know, but it would eliminate one more thing you could count on (i.e.the final turns) and I think that would make things more interesting. However like ADF, whose algorithm is also unknown, such a rule could be a topic for disagreement. But I still like the idea.

Lt Gen Bob Breen
Commanding XIX Corps, AoS
"Defenders of the Right"


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 5:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2001 12:13 am
Posts: 335
Location: USA
Normally, I think that VP hexes should be fairly limited... and the larger the battle, the more limited the VP hexes. In other words, if you have an 8 turn scenario that's just a "piece" of a larger battle, and that scenario is the struggle for a particular piece of terrain...sure, make it a signifigant source of BP. On the other hand, a larger battle should be more at the discretion of the individual commanders. Perhaps more use of Exit hexes for both sides, as opposed to Victory Hexes.

However, the exception to this rule is those battles where an individual piece of terrain is actually vital. Pittsburg Landing is properly a gamebreaker. Of course, there are few spots in ACW battles that have a comperable importance.

Brig. General Gary McClellan
1st Division, XXIII Corps
AoO,USA


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 5:20 pm 
CWG2 had the best solution I have seen for this....there were preset objective hexes, just like we have in these games, but then when a hex was severly contested, a victory flag would simply pop up out of thin air....the more that hex was fought over, the more it became worth.....it was a nice compromise....Regards, Hank

BG Hank Smith
Army of Georgia
Smith's Division CO
Carroll's Corp


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 6:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 1:46 pm
Posts: 192
Location: USA
I wanted to add that I'm presently playing a scenario within Campaign Gettysburg and I'm using those 1000 point objectives to stay in the game....How about it Rock?

Basically, I did a royal mistake falling back during the night and got caught. My 3rd Corp almost completly wiped out....My boys have been playing very well these last turns but it's only a matter of time before the Union reinforcements arrives and the fat lady will end her song. We are at Turn 70 or so right now but without those objectives, I would be facing a Major Defeat instead of a draw.....Go get'em Rock.....

Lt.Col. R.E.Daley
1st Corps of the ANV
3rd Calvary Divsion,
3rd Brigade
"We are the Midnight Riders"


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 11:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 24, 2001 11:25 am
Posts: 1022
Location: USA
<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 />In Shiloh, I cut down the VP values by 60%. In my new title I shall create a few scenarios that have no VP hexes. But not too many, for I see a definite need for them in most circumstances.

Here is a small section from one of the reviews done for Campaign Shiloh:

<i>One of the things I wanted to do was to compare the scenario design with John Tiller’s earlier Battleground: Shiloh game. The first thing that struck me was the change in victory conditions. Battlefront Shiloh’s map was littered with close to 2000 victory points in geographical objectives, essentially forcing the Confederate player to stay on the field of battle and defend against an almost mandatory Union counterattack. Campaign Shiloh has only about 700 geographical victory points, 500 of them at Pittsburg Landing. In this situation, reaching Pittsburg Landing and cutting the Union off from their cross river reinforcements should become the goal of the Confederate player. The paucity of geographical objectives leads to another, more gamey option – inflict enough casualties to win the scenario and then retreat out of harms way. Though this would be a tough proposition against a human opponent, it does allow for a more flexible approach by the Confederate player. The designer did include a scenario that gives the Union player an exit hex to increase victory points if the Confederate player does conduct a hit and run.</i>

Read the entire review at: http://www.combatsim.com/review.php?id=727

As for the games that already exist, I would encourage you to use the editor to create scenarios without the VP hexes. It's very easy to do with existing scns, but you'll also want to consider changing the VP level for victory or defeat.

In most of my games, I try not to make it a requirement to control a certain hex for victory, but rather consider them as bonuses that will add a level to your victory in arms.

Personally, I hate to see games won that only were victories because of a few controlled hexes. But for strategic reasons, that is necessary on some occasions.

Also, VP hexes are necessary for the A/I to be programmed. It needs direction, and VP hexes provide the needed direction.

Rich


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

Rich,

Two observations:

1) Re: "VP hexes are necessary for the A/I to be programmed. It needs direction, and VP hexes provide the needed direction."

I must admit I play much less against the A/I than I did in my early days with the Talonsoft games (before I discovered the club!). One of my earliest experiences was as the Union at Wilson's Creek. Sigel had been smashed and was in full retreat, but I decided to 'thumb my nose' at the Rebs and send a lone cavalry unit in to snatch a victory point hex behind enemy lines, knowing full well the Rebs could retake the hex on the next turn. To my surprise, not only did the A/I fail to take the objective the next turn -- it totally ignored it for the remainder of the game! I came away with th distinct impression the A/I used the enemy army for direction, rather than fixed objectives. (Of course, this was with the old Talonsoft games. The A/I with the HPS games probably uses an entirely different algorithm. I just haven't given it much of a chance.)

2. Re: "In my new title I shall create a few scenarios that have no VP hexes."

This is the first I've heard of another new title [:)] ! Can you give us any more hints [:D] ?


Your humble servant,
Gen 'Dee Dubya' Mallory

David W. Mallory
ACW - General, Chief of the Armies, Confederate States of America & Cabinet Member
CCC - Sergeant, Georgia Volunteers, Southern Regional Deaprtment, Colonial American Army


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 11:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 9:52 am
Posts: 870
Location: USA
Now you know that's against the rules. <g> But I can say that the main battleground will take place east of the Mississippi and south of Gettysburg!

In fact I have two titles in progress. I hope (I must be careful here) to make a release this summer.



Rich


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 96 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