Colonial Campaigns Club (CCC)

Gents,

Currently in 1812 it is possible for a boat to move into a bridge hex and prevent land units from moving through it. What I need to know from you is:

A) You would like this left as is, so ships can pass through water hexes that have bridges over them.

or

B) Have a change made that boats can no longer enter water hexes with bridges over them.

Please keep this thread on track as I need this feedback from you for the next update. Things have a tendancy to get burried under other comments, etc.

Thanks,

Rich

Ships should not be able to enter bridge hexes

I can't think of any bridges that were large enough to allow boats other than rowboats to pass under them in that period. The method of construction in those days may have even stopped rowboats. So no to boats entering bridge hexes. If the zone of control still holds, a boat in an adjacient hex to a bridge hex should also be able to prevent movement across the bridge. Has anyone used infantry to melee a boat? Does the winner take over a water hex?

Ships, gunboats, etc should not be allowed to enter bridge hexes. In Plattsburg, for instance, a boat can block movement on any of the bridges, completely and you can't DO anything to the boat. Artillery, even point blank, in not effective; you can't melee them.

On scenarios that people might make up, if boats are in it, then they can be placed so they have no need to block the bridges. When you look at it from a phical point of view, BOATS cannot, in reality, stop someone from crossing,BY THEIR presense alone.

Got to go to work, so I can expound on this later.

I would say "no", as it too seriously unbalances the game.

Boats should not enter bridge hexes.

Yes, leave as is. Use a House Rule that stops such nonsense. This will allow for canoes to pass under the bridges.
Sort of like Leaders being used to stop a unit from retreating. Or a supply wagon.

Any other comments or votes?

Rich,

I vote to leave it as it is. Ships should not be stopped by bridges.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Rich Hamilton</i>
<br />Any other comments or votes?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Gents,

This has been changed and will appear in the next update. Sorry Bill & Brett. But the current situation allows for some pretty gamey tactics, and I believe, from my knowledge of the period and those shared here, that it is more realistic to prevent them from moving under bridges.

Regards,

Rich

Maybe fix that for Corinth, too? I had a very ugly argument with my Memphis opponent over this. And could ships maybe have a ZOC, so you don't <b>need</b> to put them under a bridge?

Dierk,

It will be addressed in Corinth with the next patch.

Rich

Rich - and designers shouldnt be putting bridges across wide bodies of water in this period as such didnt exist. Not sure where bridges occur in the scenarios that would stop the boats actually. I mean if the boats are sloops and above then it is impossible to find them on a 2 hex wide river and also impossible to believe that a bridge that was longer than 4 hexes existed in this period.
So I think that the poll is pretty much moot (or is that moat) at this juncture - bridges shouldnt be in scenarios where boats appear and boats shouldnt be allowed in narrow bodies of water. Perhaps a shallow water type hex might be nice?

The primary problem was Plattsburg, but several scenarios have water on the maps, and there's always custom stuff. I tried to remedy the problem with the map editor, but it didn't work, outside of redoing the map into a creek, which would have been a huge change for that map.