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 Thu Mar 28, 2024 4:08 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: HPS/BG
PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:13 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2001 12:37 pm
Posts: 356
Location: USA
Some questions- please answer some or all>

1.How are the Campaigns?
a. Does their length cause game drop outs?
b. Are they balanced?
c. Is the experonce as fun as BG or HPS stamd alones?
2, Since the club is diffusing due to more different games, scenerios etc, is this having an effect here at the tavern or with the club? Good or bad?
3. Why don`t we have more afteraction reports? It would seem that a campaign discription would make for interesting reading.

Whatcha thinkin guys?

Field Lt. Tony Best


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 17, 2006 7:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 1:46 pm
Posts: 192
Location: USA
Dear Field Lt. Best,

Hey Tony......I'm playing my first campaign which is Cornith. I do not understand the Victory Points. The first scenario was a draw in which I took Luka. In the second scenario I decided to withdrawl to meet VanDorn. To gain a draw in this scenario, I need somthing like 7600 points....That's a hell of alot of Yankees to eliminate...Bottom line, it can't be done? So I'm waiting to see what my options are the third scenario and it will be then I decide if I'm having fun or not......I am having fun with the game and club as I always can find a Yankee to play. I win, I lose.....So the club is good by me! I proposed Afteraction Reports sometime ago but have not written or submitted a report to date. Some of these guys can just talk and talk and talk and I enjoy, and enjoy and enjoy....Maybe I'm lasy, or don't have the time or just can't write well. I do record action notes of every turn in every scenario that I'm played to date....Remember when you were a Yank and destoyed me at Gettysburg? That was the second game I ever played with a human and it's all documented. It woulkd be nice if I could scan the notes and submit as a file?

Are you coming to Gettysburg March 4th?
Taker care.....,





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 Jan 17, 2006 7:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 24, 2001 11:25 am
Posts: 1022
Location: USA
Lt. Best,

1. I like the Campaigns.

a. Due to their length, I haven't finished very many yet, though. I've had two dropouts in Gettysburg campaigns, but they were both near the beginning of the first battle, and I don't think either one was related to the length of the entire campaign.

b. I haven't played them enough to know if they are balanced or not. I have completed two Corinth campaigns (including one against the A/I!), and won both of them. I have another nearly finished (when General Gast returns), and I fully expect to win that one, too. On the other hand, this was General Gast's first opportunity at a Corinth campaign and I took advantage of that. I'm on the first battle of a Corinth campaign against General Salvemini, who quite apparently knew more what he was getting into. Although I expect to win this first battle, the margin of victory will not be nearly as high this time. I'm having fun.

2. The more games & scenarios available, the fewer all club members have in common. There were only 5 Talonsoft CW games. There are now (so far) 6 HPS games, and the larger maps and campaign options allow so much more to choose from. Add in all the custom scenarios, and there are a lot of options out there. I wouldn't have it any other way, but it does make it harder to find a single scenario that everyone shares.

3. Like role-playing, after-action reports ebb and flow. At one time there were many after-action reports available. If a person seeks after-action reports for ideas on how to play the same scenario himself, refer to item #2. There are fewer reports on any single scenario because there are so many scenarios to report on. If a person wants to read the reports for the vicarious thrill of seeing a battle through someone else's eyes, that's something else entirely. Since each after-action report would presumably deal with a scenario few have already played, it falls on the writer to describe much more in his report (forces available, terrain, road network, geographic objectives, etc.) than he would have to do for a scenario many were already familiar with. Some people would rather play a game than write about it.

There is also a plethora (no, I didn't just spit at you -- that's a big word I just learned [:)] !) of locations to post these reports. When I first joined the club, there was a CSA HQ site where these were posted for the Rebels. Now, for the CSA side, there is the War College and the Southern Raiders Tavern, and (I think) one of the Confederate armies even has an army-specific place to post such reports -- all of which have their own separate security measures.


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: Tue Jan 17, 2006 1:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 9:52 am
Posts: 1324
Hi,

In my opinion, the campaigns are an excellent concept. I think they
were designed and playtested in single phase. Since my first campaign
at Gettysburg, we have been playing multiphase, and I think it affects
play balance. Even in the single phase, I think the Corinth campaigns I played favored the Union while the Ozark campaigns favored the Confederate. Never finished a campaign in the other games.

Some folks have probably dropped a campaign because it was too long, or because they got such a shellacking in a scenario they felt it was useless to go on. I think a campaign is every bit as fun as a stand-alone battle, if not more so, because you have more uncertainty in a campaign scenario. One of the disappointing aspects of the campaigns is sometimes they suddenly end when you don't think they ought. But there is a campaign design feature in each game we can use to create the perfect campaign.

I think the whole hobby is becoming more diffused with more games being created in every historical era. How folks can belong to all the different clubs and have time to adequately participate in all of them amazes me. But variety is a good thing.

One of the things I used to like back in the days of Avalon Hill and when I first joined the club was a series replay, where two players would play a game and post each move, with comments. There would also be comments by a neutral party. I think it finally bogged down and disappeared, but I learned a lot from the series and enjoyed reading the commentary.

MG Mike Mihalik
1/III/AoMiss/CSA


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2006 2:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2003 4:32 am
Posts: 1737
Location: USA
First, Gen. Mihalik, Gen. Laabs and I have a replay going in the Southern Raiders. Since we are doing it to see if there is any strategy that might win in the historic Gettysburg scenarios we had to post it where Yankee spies can't easily see it.

Now to the questions posed:

<font color="red">1.How are the Campaigns?</font id="red">
Generally I like the campaigns. They create situations where the players no longer can look up the exact times each brigade will show up on the field. This creates games more like Litton's scenarios.
<font color="red">a. Does their length cause game drop outs?</font id="red">
This is a real problem. For players who can't handle game turn arounds of 2-3 turns per week, campaigns aren't good choices. The game shouldn't last longer than the Civil War did.
<font color="red">b. Are they balanced?</font id="red">
Considering the scope of the campaigns I would say yes but there is no way to know if all campaign brances lead to balanced results. That said, campaign scenarios are not balanced. Some are forgone conclusions which can descourage players who don't take a longer view. The Yankee will never win Winchester. There are a number of other scenarios that look like they were designed to force historic outcomes as well. With the campaigns you must take a longer view or you will get fustrated with some of the battles along the way. Also, you may find that after winning or losing every scenario, the last battle may actually still be balanced. I have now run into this on a number of campaigns. The side losing is given substantial reinforcements or position turning what might look like a walk over into a serious contest.
<font color="red">c. Is the experonce as fun as BG or HPS stamd alones?</font id="red">
I have always found HPS system more to my liking than the BG system. Mostly BG oversimplified so many systems like fatigue, ammo, casualties, that I didn't like it. I tend not to play the short scenarios so I can't really compare them. My understanding is the BG had more than HPS.
<font color="red">2, Since the club is diffusing due to more different games, scenerios etc, is this having an effect here at the tavern or with the club? Good or bad?</font id="red">
This does create a problem for game discussion. I believe there are 20,000 scenario variants in CG. Which means no two games are going to be exactly alike. The historic scenarios don't have this problem but given the number of HPS campaign games even the number of historic games gets to be overwhelming. But part of the problem is the lack of participation in the forums not the number of games. We could easily start a thread on every historical battle for game and historical discussion (how well the game reproduces history say) but it doesn't do any good if the same three or four posters on the forum make all the comments.
<font color="red">3. Why don`t we have more afteraction reports? It would seem that a campaign discription would make for interesting reading.</font id="red">
Some of this is going on in the side specific forums but not as much as could be. I don't know how well it would go over in the main forum. Some people may not like having there game retold showing how badly they got their butts kicked.[:D]



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


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2006 5:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2001 12:37 pm
Posts: 356
Location: USA
Bill- Thanks for your after actions. A bit brief but enlighting all the same!![:)]
Kennon-, I have come to realize that perhaps the stand alones are not the primary focus of the designers that perhaps play balance might need tweaked. By the way, I did find yours and Mikes replays in the Raider Tavern-good stuff!!!
Mike David etal.-thanks for your insights,

My appetite is primed for more comments-sirs??!!![:)]

Field Lt. Tony Best


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2006 10:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2003 4:32 am
Posts: 1737
Location: USA
You also will probably find that the short standalones are designed to reproduce a particular historic situation like Devil Den, Wheatfield or Culps Hill fights. These by there nature are not balanced. The designer may make them balanced by giving VP levels that would make the historic result a draw so that you are essentially playing against history as well as another player. Otherwise, Pickett's charge should allways be a Rebel loser.[:D]

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


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2006 6:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2004 1:45 pm
Posts: 817
Location: USA
Hi Tony,
Being a newbee, only been in the club about two years. I've come to like the campaigns better. As Mr. Bill stated if you what to end a campaign early get with your oppenant and agree on what the end. Hey Bill you forgot the P at the end of the AARP[:p]

Lt. Col. Gery Bastiani
Fightin' Carolinians
II/2/4 AotM CSA


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:11 pm 
I have played a number scenarios from HPS Franklin, Gettysburg, amd shiloh modules. Some seem unbalanced one way or the other. I think this is due to the 200 plus scenarios per module. However, the way this club is organized, it is not so bad.[8D]

Lew Fisher


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 9:45 am
Posts: 414
Location: Ireland
Hi Tony!

I too am reasonably new to campaigning. To Me - and I am struggling to come to grips with this - the Logic behind a Campaign has a different Focus to that of the Stand Alone scenario. In the scenario . . it is all out or Bust. Win or be Defeated. Fighting for a Draw is defeatist and in most cases - a Recipe for Inviting a Defeat.

However, in a Campaign . . I try to assess just what it is that each side wishes to achieve. If the Rebs merely wish to hold a Union force at bay and retain control of say . . a Town, often the best strategy is to play for a Draw, in that - altho' the Union hold VP Hexes . . . merely holding on to the Reb Hexes and hurting the Yanks as much as poss, will be sufficient to place the Union at a disadvantage in the <i>next</i> Battle in the Campaign.

Of course . . . this can work in reverse for the Union side as well.

<i>If</i> your union opponent makes an obvious error, like leaving a flank in the air . . and the Reb can strike, inflicting profitable damage . . all the better. A VP Hex <i>may</i> become available to the Reb for the taking and a Vic achieved in the Battle.

I have only completed one campaign thusfar, so I feel that I can't comment on their balance.

As has been said before . . campaigns - by their length - entail a committment of both Players . . . all one can hope for is that, nothing from Real Life causes a halt or temination of the Campaign.

Yayus Indeedy Tony - the campaigns are FUN! Different from BG, but Fun nonetheless.

Pat.

Patrick G.M.Carroll,
Brigadier General.
Carroll's Corps,(II)
"Spartan Southrons"
Army of Georgia.
C.S.A.Cabinet Secretary

" When My Country takes it's rightful place, amongst the Nations of the World, then and only then, let My Epitaph be written. "


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 26, 2006 1:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2001 6:24 pm
Posts: 140
Location: USA
I like campaigns very much, because they require you to think about the next battle. The world doesn't end at sundown.

Have completed 3 Corinth campaigns, 3 Ozark campaigns. Coming up on third match of my first Franklin. Never gotten past about turn 20 of a G'burg campaign, just started another in hopes of improvement.

Corinth is my favorite because of the intricate branching. Franklin's probably my least because you hit the same three fields in succession, almost every time. Ozark is like that also, except that there's three possible campaigns, and the terrain is almost unique among our battlefields.

One thing I wish they would do with campaigns is create a chain of command for brigades, so that a dead brigadier is replaced by a named commander with something more than a default rating. I can understand having an F/F Col. Anonymous at the height of a raging battle, or perhaps even for a few days as they get adjusted to their command, but seems like even a Lt. Col. would be a little better than that after a week or two.

Lt. Gen. Matt Perrenod
<i>The Blue Ghost</i>
VIII Corps, Army of the Shenandoah


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 02, 2006 12:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2001 12:37 pm
Posts: 356
Location: USA
Due to the positive reports here I have started my first campaign-Corinth. Not my usual modus operendi but very early in the campaign and I am having a good time. I started totally blind so in that sense it is like Litton`s blinds( I have since started to check out some of the scenerios so I am losing that blind feel but curiosity over takes me[:p])

Lt Colonel Tony Best
Army of Georgia


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 02, 2006 2:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 22, 2001 4:51 pm
Posts: 3524
Location: Massachusetts, USA
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by tony best</i>
<br />Due to the positive reports here I have started my first campaign-Corinth. Not my usual modus operendi but very early in the campaign and I am having a good time. I started totally blind so in that sense it is like Litton`s blinds( I have since started to check out some of the scenerios so I am losing that blind feel but curiosity over takes me[:p])

Lt Colonel Tony Best
Army of Georgia

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

FYI, Corinth updates are now available at HPS.

<b><font color="gold">Ernie Sands
General, Commanding, Army of Ohio
Image
ACWGC Cabinet member
</b></font id="gold">


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 78 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:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group