Colonial Campaigns Club (CCC)

Colonial Campaigns Club

*   CCC Join   New Game Entry   End Game Entry

*   CCC Staff   CCC Rules   FAQ   About the CCC   Awards Center   Training Center

*   The British Armies in America

* Continental American Army

* l'Armée de Terre Royale (French Army)

* Indian Alliance

 

Club Forums:     NWC    ACWGC     Home Pages:     NWC    ACWGC    CCC
It is currently Sun May 04, 2025 4:40 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Double Challenge
PostPosted: Wed Jan 02, 2002 10:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2001 4:21 pm
Posts: 144
Location: United Kingdom
Would any Colonial be interested in a double fight of the same battle (either 1776 or 1812) one using the newer single turn method and the other using the old multiple phrase?

(I've only ever played the single turn method and would like to compare the two and perhaps find out why some people still prefer the old style game)

Ens.Rich White
28th North Glos.Rgt.
Right Wing, British Army 1776


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 03, 2002 6:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 22, 2001 5:51 pm
Posts: 1951
Location: USA
Most Colonials can't even play ONE game, but you might find one to accept the challenge!<img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle>

<b><font color=gold>Ernie Sands
Col, 3rd East Kent,CCC
President, Colonial Camp Club
LtCol,1 Konig,VIII,AdR
BG,CO XXIII Corps AoO
Sch,183Inf,VIII,PzC
Pvt B Co, 3/3-MBC </b></font id=gold>


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 03, 2002 5:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2001 12:39 am
Posts: 791
Location: USA
But Ernie, you forget that some of us see double on occasion! Double your pleasure, double your fun! In fact, better make mine a double.

In which case, Richard, I'll be happy to take part in this experiment. Either game is fine. What did you have in mind for scenario/options?

Cpt. Cox Cox
NNJJMM

Edited by - Mike Cox on 01/03/2002 22:12:40


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 03, 2002 10:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2001 4:21 pm
Posts: 144
Location: United Kingdom
Mike, glad you're able to see double, like myself - must be all that Christmas good cheer!

I've never yet played Bennington, but suspect the historic scenario is very unbalanced, so how about trying the "what if" b scenario? I'm fairly easy about options (apart from using the rifle effects & Cornwallis cannon) although it would be best if both games used the same options except of course the manual/automatic defensive fire!

So, unless you'd prefer otherwise, shall we say Bennington b scenario with all options for both games except Rifles & Cornwallis cannon?

Ens.Rich White
28th North Glos.Rgt.
Right Wing, British Army 1776


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Mar 24, 2002 6:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2001 12:39 am
Posts: 791
Location: USA
Dragging this out of the depths of the vaults....

Ens White and I have just finished the trial. I am embarrassed to report that we ended with a draw and a Major American Defeat. Rich knows his stuff and I could not get anything going. Hat's off.

One Phase: Draw, 87 points (820/0/0/4/0, British 418/0/4/44/8)
Four Phase: Major American Defeat, -101 points (American: 936/0/0/5/6, British 407/0/1/0/2)

Same basic strategies and tactics were employed by both sides in both games.

One observation is that the 4 phase is bloodier because every unit in range will fire, more often than not causing casualties. (We used ADF.) This made the British/Hessian ability to assume X order more pronounced. (The colonials all had rifles and were militia in name only. - unable to form X.)

I was able to get at his guns because of the more fluid nature of 1 phase, accounting for 80 of my points.

Any other experiences in 1 phase vs 4?

Rich - your thoughts?


Maj. Mike Cox
New Jersey Militia
(1st Hunterdon Cty)
AdC American Army

Edited by - Mike Cox on 03/24/2002 23:45:09


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 25, 2002 6:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 11:37 am
Posts: 955
Location: TEXAS
Yes, Richard. How did you like the 'old style'? I love to play the old version (right Sean! <img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle>).

So holler when you need an "old timer" game <img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle>

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)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 26, 2002 1:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2001 4:21 pm
Posts: 144
Location: United Kingdom
I agree with you Mike about the 4 phase ADF and the guns - unlike in the 1 phase, you can't just shove intervening units out of the way in order to get at the opponent's artillery. It's also possible that I was "luckier" in the 4 phase regarding units routing.

In answer to Garry - I'm more than willing to fight another 4 phase game, although I probably prefer the single phase game engine for its fluidity and unpredictability (I still play the old Battleground games quite a bit, but this was actually my first Campaign 1776 game with the old engine.)

Anyway, Garry, on which battlefield would you prefer to meet my gallant Redcoats?

Ens.Rich White
28 North Glos Rgt
Right Wing, British Army 1776


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 29 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
POWERED_BY
Localized by Maël Soucaze © 2010 phpBB.fr