American Civil War Game Club (ACWGC)

Exactly!

Tactics is the art of manuevering to put firepower on the enemy. Punic Wars & other 'wego' engines capture the feel much better imltho. The rules the engine uses to prosecute the resolution phase could be listed in detail so there need be no dispute about the results.

Brig. Gen. Dale Henken
First Divsion
XVI Corps
Army Of The Tennessee



<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Al Amos</i>
<br />My suggestion to 'fix' the problems....

Use Paul's Punic War engine. [:D]

MajGen Al 'Ambushed' Amos
3rd "Amos' Ambushers" Bde, Cavalry Division, XX Corps, AoC
The Union Forever! Huzzah!

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

I mostly play the Phased game with auto defensive fire on also......I prefer the more defensive nature of the game....I think I would be very dissapointed to lose this option....Regards, Hank

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

Folks,

I hope you didn't misunderstand. WE ARE NOT TAKING OUT MDF!!

That will continue to be an option

Lt. Col. Richard Walker
I Corps
Army of the Mississippi
2nd Brigade, 3rd Division
"Defenders of Tennessee"

. . . uh, the original post in this thread mentions phasing out MDF, Rich---and you wrote it. What does phasing out mean, if not it ultimately being eliminated?

Sincerely,
Brig Gen Dwight McBride
2nd Brigade/2nd Division
I Corps/AOP/USA

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">What the series needs is an option where ADF from infantry vs. infantry would trigger a morale check, cause the attacker to stop and fire back (with no choice from the phasing player) at the unit that fired at it. This was the historical bane of commanders: that the units instead of advancing would stop and fire. Make it applicable only at 2 hexes or less. THIS would slow down the attacker without the common result being disruption. In the next turn the attacker could continue to advance, etc.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

At least this thread has generated some good ideas. Bill is right on
in the above paragraph. And I think preplotted simultaneous turns are the ultimate solution, as Al has suggested. I haven't played Punic Wars, so I don't know how that turned out, but the concept is a good one. IMHO. Oh yeah, in Bill's suggestion I would add units in
column being fired on ought to have a good chance of automatically forming line. If insufficient movement points left, then disrupted line. You still have the problem of crossing bridges though. Just an idea.



MG Mike Mihalik
1/III/AoMiss/CSA

Your right, sorry,

I meant that few players would want to use it, once single phase has been perfected.

<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 />
. . . uh, the original post in this thread mentions phasing out MDF, Rich---and you wrote it. What does phasing out mean, if not it ultimately being eliminated?

Sincerely,
Brig Gen Dwight McBride
2nd Brigade/2nd Division
I Corps/AOP/USA
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Lt. Col. Richard Walker
I Corps
Army of the Mississippi
2nd Brigade, 3rd Division
"Defenders of Tennessee"

The HPS ACW games Aut.def fire and normal turns.

For others taste I play all the Talonsoft ACW titles.

Lt.Col
Ola Berli
1/3/I AoA.

<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 />Your right, sorry,

I meant that few players would want to use it, once single phase has been perfected.

Lt. Col. Richard Walker
I Corps
Army of the Mississippi
2nd Brigade, 3rd Division
"Defenders of Tennessee"
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

For the Turn based (single phase) system to be the preferred mode it will need to have some major reworking. The current system of the moving player have complete control and able to respond to results as they occur so heavily shift the balance to the Attacker that major reworking is required.

My suggestions are:

Put phases for types of action back into the "Turn". That is when the moving player says he is through moving then the nonphasing players units "all" get to fire at full strength. This forces the attacking player to commit himself and not be able to react to bad luck that occurred during his movement. It also gives back to the defender the ability to defend himself. Follow the fire by the melee so that there can't be any exploiting melee results by further movement.

Make the Opportunity Fire during the attackers movement a "free" shot by the defender. That is does not cost the defender his defensive fire or his ammo.

There are probably other areas that need twinking as well and other "rules" that could be included to make things interesting but I consider the above two fixes necessary to stop the Panzer Blitz tactics and put the Defender back as the strongest side in the Civil War.

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

It's interesting that so many of the proposed 'tweaks' to the single-turn system entail things that move that system back closer to the 'phases' approach. Perhaps tweaks to the 'phases' might be a shorter distance to cover?----such as changing formation anytime during a movement phase.

Just an observation . . .



Sincerely,
Brig Gen Dwight McBride
2nd Brigade/2nd Division
I Corps/AOP/USA

Both, but lately predominantly MDF.

Colonel Tom Ciampa

2nd Bgde,1st Cav
XIV Corps, AoC
Games: TS/BG: AN, BR, CH, GB, SH - HPS: AT, CTH, GB, OZK, SH, VK

I play both.

thanks,
B Gen Jim Pfluecke
II/III AotM