| Colonial Campaigns Club (CCC) https://www.wargame.ch/board/cc/ |
|
| So Do Most Like ... https://www.wargame.ch/board/cc/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2443 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | 780 [ Fri Jul 12, 2002 7:22 am ] |
| Post subject: | So Do Most Like ... |
ADF ON and MDF OFF? I noted that this was the trend for the tourny but how do you feel about it? For me I find that this series and the time scale allows for too much firing if the MDF is off. I prefer to play it like the 32 bit BG ACW series with the ADF coming later in the MDFPhase. I know that the fire value is less (and really that is another point - with less fire you are less likely to D someone before they attack you - I keep nice neat tidy lines and NOONE is gonna sneak in on my flanks!) but to me it takes away from the game with all of the random shooting in a five minute turn. One shot (Deer Hunter) is fine with me. Comments? I like ADF in the other Tiller games by the way and wouldnt play a MDFPhase in the Nappy or ACW engine again. Well maybe some time ... but never the Manual Phase thing anyway with ADF OFF. Maj. Bill Peters, Morgan's Rifles, American Army Commander of French Dept. |
|
| Author: | Mike Cox [ Fri Jul 12, 2002 9:50 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Fullblown single phase ADF. I think that the constant opportunity fire is a good representation of the constant rolling fire that was common, once the initial volley was released. The entire complicated firing platoon system was devised so that a constant fire was fed from along a regimental line. In addition, the break down of fire discipline was common, and officers on both sides complained that once firing began they struggled to reign in the constant firing by the ranks. Of course if you march right up to a firing line, you should expect to take fire the entire way, or at the very least a large volley causing more casualties than reflected in the one shot. Richard White and I did a comparison of idelntical scenarios played both ways (both of which I embarrassingly lost), and the multiple phase was far bloodier in the long run. I think this was due to every unit that had an enemy in range took a shot. As opposed to the random fire. Of course this may contradict my previos statement, but I never claimed to make sense for more than one sentence at a time. (If that!) Lt. Colonel Mike Cox New Jersey Militia (1st Hunterdon Cty) AdC American Army |
|
| Author: | KO [ Fri Jul 12, 2002 10:37 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Mike, I agree with you about the continually firing as you approach the defenders. It would be foolish to think troops would not fire at troops coming to kill you but, maybe a limit on how many times a unit can fire. Say a unit that is disrupted may get off less rounds than a unit that's still in good order or rifles were slower to reload than the smooth bore. Just my 2 cents. Lieutenant Kenny O’Leary 52nd Oxfordshire, Center Wing |
|
| Author: | G Cope [ Fri Jul 12, 2002 11:38 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'm with you all the way Bill I have nothing against the Single phase option ... just prefer the the shoot'n to come in bunches <img src="http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/smilie/shootout.gif" border=0> Garry Cope Brig General [url="http://web2.airmail.net/gco047/1776/DucCope/ddillon.htm"]1er,7e,d'Dillon,French, CCC[/url] (SecWar) General [url="http://web2.airmail.net/gco047/csausa/OCS/OCS.htm"]CSA OCS, ACWGC[/url] (Commandant) |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|