American Civil War Game Club (ACWGC)

Gentlemen,

I've a technical problem with my modem and for this reason I can't connect with the net to read mail and update the HC's webpage.

I need some more day to replace it and to get in contact with all the players.

My apologizes for the drawback.

Lt. General Simone Tombesi
Army of the Tennessee
Hill Challenge's Master

I think no house rules is a good solution, players can best decide if they prefer certain rules about scouting with wagons, exiting the map, scouting with Col. Anons, or using wagons and leaders in zoc kills, etc. Everyone has their own feelings about such. Great job so far with the challenge.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by tombesis</i>
<br />After a long time spent to think if modify or not the rules for the problem of players leaving the field after inflicting minor damages to the other formation, and after have heard player's suggestions pro or against the modifications, I decided that for now there will be no modifications at all.

These are my thoughts on the subject:

First of all, I still prefer the actual system of points award which requires that two forces of nearly equal strenght meet on the field, instead of allow very unbalanced games.
This is because, thinking to the "grand campaign" development of this challenge, forces the players to climb the hill step by step, challenging one after the other, players with formations of similar dimensions.
That will make that Hill very high to climb, but that is exactly what I like... [:D]

Even if some player prefers games foughted up to the last man, a lot of them, or at least a good number of who expressed his opinion, say that this is not a real problem and the hit-and-fly tactic is always a war strategy that have sense on a battlefield.

If you combine all the previously opinions you may even obtain the scenario that Mike has more time suggested.
As a matter of fact, a little force may have some success applying the hit-and-run strategy for very unbalanced scenarios, with some minor success to obtain some minor success or at least a draw awarded by a good number of VPs.
This answer, at the same time, to Jerry request to have a limit to the Draw result that these scenarios may have.

So, after all, I think that the best result could be obtained with the minimum level of effort leaving the rules untouched in this field... or at least my minimum level of efforts! [;)]

Lt. General Simone Tombesi
Army of the Tennessee
Hill Challenge's Master
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Col. Jerry Wells
2nd Div. I Corps AoG
Texas Ranger Division

Just for absolute clarity (Simone please verify or clarify):

The victor is determined by having the higher point score;

The Level of Victory is based on the raw point score, <b>NOT </b>the difference between the Player's scores.

Thus:

i) a Player who has destroyed at least 40% of his opponents force will have a major victory as long as he has the higher point score, even if he has only 1 point more than his opponent.

ii) once has destroyed at least 40% of his opponents force that major victory cannot become a minor or a draw due to further losses. As long as he has the higher score his victory will count as a major one.

iii) In reporting Game Results the victor should report his total points, NOT the difference between the players points.

As a result KotH is a bit of a demolition derby relative to many games and campaigns.

Simone, this is correct, no?


Brig Gen Mike Kaulbars
3rd "Freiheit" Division
VIII/AoS

The following is from the rules section on Simone's website:

<font color="red"><font color="blue">At the start of the battle a "starting ratio" is calculated between the two formations.
Example: A force consisting of 5,000 strenght points meet a force of 3,000 points. The ratio is 5,000/3,000=1.67 for
the larger, and 3,000/5,000=0.60 for the smaller. These are the starting ratios.
At the end of the battle Victory Points (VPs) are calculated as follows: The final VPs for the scenario divided per
your own starting ratio.

Example: If the 5,000 force of the above example wins the game and scores 300 VPs, it gains 300/1.67=180 Points to
expend to increase its size. On the contrary, if the 3,000 force wins and scores 300 VPs, it gains 300/0.60=500 Points.
Obviously the higher is your starting ratio, the better are your chance to win the battle, but you will get fewer
points if you win. Conversely, with a lower starting ratio, and you'll have more difficulty winning the battle, but your
winnings will be higher. </font id="blue"></font id="red">
The Victory Levels I have seen from my 17 battles have been directly related to the VPs, mostly Draws with the advantadge to the side who scored more points

BG Frank DiNola
CO Army of the James

Frank

In KotH the Strength Ratio (SR) determines the # of Army Build Points you receive for a victory, but are not considered in any way for determining the actual level of victory.

In the rules as read the level of victoy is based solely on the proportion of your opponents forces that you destroy. 40% or more = Major, 20% to 40% = Minor, under 20% = draw; <b>NOT </b>on the point difference between you and your opponent.

Thus when two equal forces meet, if one destroys 40% of his opponents force while losing only 39.9% of his own, then he gets a Major Victory even though the difference may only be 1 point.

Equally if you destroy 39.9% without losing a single point, it is still a only Minor Victory even though you point difference may be in the thousands.

As for the results of battles, Gen Tombesi depends on us to report accurately and has no way of checking.

If a player reports point difference rather than point total (as I have done [:(]) then Simone will accept that # as the point total - how can he know any different? Unless we report both point difference AND point totals Simone will accept whatever # we send him.

I await Gen Tombesi's input on this, but I believe you will find that this is how the rules read.

Brig Gen Mike Kaulbars
3rd "Freiheit" Division
VIII/AoS

Well... I'm sorry for the great confusion I've generated...
I see that the rules in this point are not very clear...
And the problem is connected with my poor english that force to me to simplify, maybe too much, my ideas.

I try to explain my idea with an example.
Let's assume we have these two forces:
the USA with 5,000 points, and
the CSA with 6,000 points.

Let's say that the USA is the First player in the game.
These are the victory levels as you may find in the BG's Victory Table:
USA Major Victory 2,400 points (6,000x40%)
USA Minor Victory 1,200 points (6,000x20%)
CSA Minor Victory -1,000 points (5,000x20%)
CSA Major Victory -2,000 points (5,000x40%)

At the end of the scenario we may obtain such result in the BG's Victory Table:
800 points -> This means we have a Draw (USA Advantage)
1,300 points -> This means we have a USA's Minor Victory
2,800 points -> This means we have a USA's Major Victory
-2,100 points -> This means we have a CSA's Major Victory
-1,200 points -> This means we have a CSA's Minor Victory
- 10 points -> This means we have a Draw (CSA Advantage)
0 points -> We have a perfect Draw.

You've simply to report the result you see in the BG's Victory Table.
No need to calculate how much forces you've lost or the enemy has lost.

The 20 and 40 % ratios are only used to calculate the starting limits.
So, if we have to speak in mathematical terms, the difference of your victory points and the enemy has to be large enough to reach those limits.

At this point I don't know if all the games have been reported correctly... and this is a BIG problem now!

Please, let me know if you are sure that things went in a different direction in your games and I'll study a procedure to get out of this black hole...


Lt. General Simone Tombesi
Army of the Tennessee
Hill Challenge's Master

OK, so it is the difference in the score, not the raw score.

I am fine with that, but it is not how the rules currently read and they will need to be changed. The rules refer only to % of enemy force, not % greater than one's own losses.

As for your English, it's a LOT better than my Italian, or any other language. I would hate to try and write rules or instructions in anything other than englsh.

Perhaps I or someone else could assist you with a rewrite of the rules to get greater clarity on this and some other issues.

As for historical problems with reporting, maybe it would be sufficient to ask everyone if they can recall how they reported, and if they got it wrong, to offer up a figure that they are comfortable with as reflecting more or less accurately what the true figure should have been.

As for myself, even though I believed that the correct # was the raw score, out of habit I always reported the differential score - so I nadvertently did it right every time [:D].

Brig Gen Mike Kaulbars
3rd "Freiheit" Division
VIII/AoS