American Civil War Game Club (ACWGC)

The HPS User's Manual states that when the <b>Manual Defensive Fire</b> option is used (that is, putting the game into phase-based mode), that "an infantry unit can only change to Line formation before it has moved although it may move after changing to Line formation." The opposite formation change, from Line into Column, is also regulated by this rule.

This rule is a throwback to the original TalonSoft Battleground games. If you have an original, printed Player's Guide to these games, you'll find the following pronouncement under the <b>Formations</b> entry of 2.0, the <b>Basics of Play</b>: "You can change a unit's Formation during its Movement Phase." The guide then says, "(<b>IMPORTANT</b>: <i>Infantry</i> and <i>dismounted cavalry</i> can change Formation only before it begins to move.)"

The exact reason(s) for this particular ruling are nowhere to be found. Neither John Tiller nor Jim Rose made specific comment in the Battleground guide as to why this rule was established. But because the game was structured on what is now referred to as a "phase-based" program, one may infer that unit formation changes were simply regarded as another "first-in element" of programming; in other words, it was structured as a prerequisite condition of the particular movement program code. There was certainly no historical reason to so structure it!

The new HPS engine, however, is much more elaborate and flexible in its program, and allows units to change formation at any point in its movement cycle. An infantry unit may move in Column formation and then deploy into Line formation provided it has enough movement points available. It may also move in Line formation first and then change into Column, again only subject to the movement point capability. As an <i>option</i>, players may elect to play their game under the old Battleground system (phase-based) if they prefer, but they will be stuck with the same, ahistorical restriction to formation change if they do.

I am a great fan of the phase-based system, but I have always chafed under the unrealistic formation change restrictions in both the original Battleground games and in the HPS optional version as well. The 20-minute game turn provides ample time in my mind for a unit to make a formation change at the beginning of the turn, in the middle of the turn, or at the end of a turn, provided that it has enough movement point capabilty to do so! At least that is what I think! Is there any real reason not to have it so, or to have it reserved exclusively for turn-based play?

I would like to hear some other opinions on this and whether a majority of players feels that the restrictions on formation change in the HPS <i>phase-based play</i> ought to be either completely dropped or made an option.

Maj. Gen. Jos. C. Meyer
Second Division, 14th Corps,
Army of the Cumberland

Hi, General,

I also would like to see the flexible formation change for phased play. I was told that the original rule was deliberately left as is in phased play because someone didn't like players being able to move at road movement rate between hexes out of LOS of the enemy and then deploy into line under cover, without ever getting shot at. My opinion is that if two players want to play that way, it should be their option.

Rich Walker has made a concerted effort to make single turn, with its opportunity fire, the system of choice for everyone. While I applaud his efforts, which include full fire before melee, embedded melee and now proportional op fire, the sticking point is the failure of some units to fire defensively, giving the attacker an ahistorical advantage, particularly in the woods.

MG Mike Mihalik
1/III/AoMiss/CSA

Joe:

Totally agree. Since a lot of us are playing 'phased play' I see no reason at all why an infantry formation can't change formation whenever it wants. It is one of the 'nagging' little rules that has never been corrected and hurts the game as a simulation a great deal.



Bg. General Gilbert Collins
Army of Alabama
III/I/2nd Brigade

Joe:

Totally agree. Since a lot of us are playing 'phased play' I see no reason at all why an infantry formation can't change formation whenever it wants. It is one of the 'nagging' little rules that has never been corrected and hurts the game as a simulation a great deal.



Bg. General Gilbert Collins
Army of Alabama
III/I/2nd Brigade

<font face="Book Antiqua"><font size="4"><font color="beige">Gents,

Have you seen the new changes in the recent HPS patches? There now is an Optional Melee Resolution (OMR) which result in turn play style of play but melee is conducted in a separate phase (if that makes sense to you?). This means you only select Automatic Defensive Fire (ADF) and OMR to get the best of both turn and phase play. Opportunity fire with melee restrictions.

Regards.</font id="beige"></font id="size4"></font id="Book Antiqua">

<font color="limegreen"><font size="4">Gen Nick Kunz

Commanding
3/4/II Corps
Army of Georgia</font id="limegreen"><font color="orange">
Chief of Engineering
VMI & CSA</font id="orange"></font id="size4">

Hi Nick!

Yeah! The separate melee option, or <b>OMR</b>, is an excellent option, first introduced with the Antietam game package. It went a long way to providing part of the former "embedded melee rule" into the actual game. I use it all the time whenever I can negotiate for it in a turn-based game.

But it has nothing to do with <i>formation change restrictions</i> in the phase-based mode. What's needed here, I think, is to completely cancel the restrictions on changing formation <i>before</i> movement in a phase-based game, or to at least make it an option! Further, I don't think it should be qualified by morale or size factors. It should be applicable to all units across the board regardless of how many men are in the unit or what their experience level may be.

If what Mike said is true, "that the original rule was deliberately left as is in phased play because someone didn't like players being able to move at road movement rate between hexes out of LOS of the enemy and then deploy into line under cover, without ever getting shot at", then the formation change restrictions are ludricrous! The scenario described is as real as it would get. Deployment into Line formation under cover after Column movement out of sight would have been a very common and desireable situation for a Civil War regiment going into battle! It is equally applicable to both turn-based and phase-based play!

Rich Walker's design work has been superb, as has been his efforts to make the optional selections as comprehensive as possible. What has emerged are the basis for two, excellent modes of play, each as balanced and structured as one could want at the moment. But they each are also being played at a good, honest rate within the ACWGC and are constantly being tested by the club members for both playability and historicity. As a result, suggestions for improvements are always coming to the fore and being posted for discussion and comments. The beauty of the whole system is that issues like this not only get aired out, but in some cases implemented. In that respect, HPS has good "ears"!

Maj. Gen. Jos. C. Meyer
Second Division, 14th Corps,
Army of the Cumberland

I've always assumed that this limitation on unit formation changing was an attempt to simulate the clumsiness of units, or rather commanders, of this period? The opportunity for changing into line from column and vice-versa is certainly possible within the 20 simulated minutes of the game turn, but how likely was it historically? I mean, did the individual units of a Brigade make their evolutions of formation independently or jointly? In my opinion, Brigade control IS much more 'realistic' if you find yourself having to move up on turn #1, change formation at the start of turn #2 and then finally complete the desired structure of your line on turn #3. This stops you achieving too much out of your men each turn, which is effectively what happens if you do free up every unit to perform free of any restrictions. It may make for a more exciting or dynamic gameplay but I come here in search of the 'authentic'...dare I say: 'realistic'.
I wouldn't mind seeing 'unrestricted movement' offered as an optional rule, but I would be VERY wary of any attempt to limit this ability based on unit size or quality (That would surely further enhance the unrealistic modelling of the Reb side?)
I'm not sure about dropping this feature of the game engine entirely, it's one of the quirks that gives these games their character. It is an oddity but it does provide a way of simulating command inertia and limitations by in-direct means...


Colonel Jim Wilkes.
2nd Brigade, Cavalry Division, XX Corps.
AoC. U.S.A.

Has anyone at HPS ever issued an official reason why single-turn play has free formation change, while phased play doesn't?



Sincerely,
Lt Gen Dwight McBride
V Corps/AOP/USA

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by DwightMcBride</i>
<br />
Has anyone at HPS ever issued an official reason why single-turn play has free formation change, while phased play doesn't?

Sincerely,
Lt Gen Dwight McBride
V Corps/AOP/USA
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I don't know it is official but I can state the obvious reason. In Turn based you can change formation as long as you have movement points to do so allowing you to move forward in column then switch to line when closer to the enemy. Because there is a chance of opportunity fire the defender has some means to react to this and a chance to target the unit while still in column.

In Phase play the defender can only fire after movement has occurred so a player could use column to approach taking advantage of road movement rates, etc., then switch to line so that when they are fired on it will not be in the more vulnerable column formation.

In both situations its a kluge since Column formation in these games is Road or Route Column and no sane commander would use it to approach within firing range of enemy units. The Phase play is probably the better solution for either system since it forces you to pay the price of using this inappropriate formation.

The tactic being simulated, advancing in column of companies (not route) then going into line, was a Napoleonic tactic for deployment when the enemy had only muskets. Unfortunately, the HPS games do not have a true Column formation.

LG. Kennon Whitehead
Chatham Grays
1/1/III AoM (CSA)

Certainly! Phases allow potentially gamey tactics like charging out of the woods in column on a road, changing into line right in front of an enemy, then moving in with absolutely no reaction from the enemy. Can you imagine the howls of discontent when you defend a bridge crossing, only to have the enemy cross in front of your eyes and form up while your men stand there watching in awe?

I'm pretty sure it was discussed in the history of the group, and the restraint of this unnatural mobility was a primary reason for it. Certainly it could be changed...after all, cavalry and artillery can do it. I don't think I'd play a game where it could be done.

[/quote]

I don't know it is official but I can state the obvious reason. In Turn based you can change formation as long as you have movement points to do so allowing you to move forward in column then switch to line when closer to the enemy. Because there is a chance of opportunity fire the defender has some means to react to this and a chance to target the unit while still in column.

In Phase play the defender can only fire after movement has occurred so a player could use column to approach taking advantage of road movement rates, etc., then switch to line so that when they are fired on it will not be in the more vulnerable column formation.

In both situations its a kluge since Column formation in these games is Road or Route Column and no sane commander would use it to approach within firing range of enemy units. The Phase play is probably the better solution for either system since it forces you to pay the price of using this inappropriate formation.

The tactic being simulated, advancing in column of companies (not route) then going into line, was a Napoleonic tactic for deployment when the enemy had only muskets. Unfortunately, the HPS games do not have a true Column formation.

LG. Kennon Whitehead
Chatham Grays
1/1/III AoM (CSA)
[/quote]

Lt. General Dirk Gross
XIV Corps/AoC

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Dirk Gross</i>
<br />Can you imagine the howls of discontent when you defend a bridge crossing, only to have the enemy cross in front of your eyes and form up while your men stand there watching in awe?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Hi, Dirk,

Can you imagine the howls of discontent when your regiment crosses that bridge in column formation, receives a volley without replying, then stands around while every enemy within a half mile rushes over to pour another volley into your regiment before it will change formation?

Most times crossing that bridge, you will run into an enemy ZOC and it won't matter if you are playing phased or single turn. My point is, there is no shortage of ahistorical anomalies inherent in the system. What I am seeking is the option for free formation change in phased play. Your refusal to play against me under those circumstances would be a small price to pay, especially since we've never played anyhow.


MG Mike Mihalik
1/III/AoMiss/CSA