Napoleonic Wargame Club (NWC)
https://www.wargame.ch/board/nwc/

Action Point System
https://www.wargame.ch/board/nwc/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=9049		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Richard [ Wed Jun 06, 2007 11:25 pm ]
Post subject:  Action Point System
As we all know, units can move their full movement allowance, then fire at full effect and then melee too, yet they can't remain stationary and fire two or three times instead, nor can they fire and then fall back. This really doesn't make a lot of sense!

Consequently, the current system heavily favours the attacker, who can rush forward, fire at full effectiveness and then melee, while the defender may (or may not) get in a few ADF volleys, often only at medium to long range.

The current system also heavily penalizes a defending or retreating army, since it's not possible for a static defender to trade unused movement allowance for extra firepower, nor can a unit fire before retreating, but must retreat and then - if still in range - fire at long range.

It makes sense that if a unit isn't spending time moving, it could be using that time for reloading and firing instead ... and of course that's just what a static defending force would be doing.

Similarly, if a unit has already used up its full movement allowance, why has it still got sufficient time to fire and then melee too?

So, while HPS has introduced many other useful new features to the original 1990s engine, surely it's high time to update the old BG combat system and replace it with a more flexible - and more realistic - action point system?

The PzC, modern and squad battles engines use an action point system, so why not the earlier games too? Surely a 20 minute time slot worked in exactly the same way pre-1900 as post 1900, so if a unit wasn't spending that time marching forward toward the enemy, he could be spending it reloading and then firing again, or else falling back after having fired?


Lt.Col. Rich White
4th Cavalry Brigade
Cavalry Corps
Anglo-Allied Army
Author:  D.S. Walter [ Thu Jun 07, 2007 12:35 am ]
Post subject: 
No objection, just pointing out one weakness of the action point system, since you mention the disadvantage for the defender in the present system. In a way, the PzC system is even less favorable for the defender, for two reasons:
1) Units don't lose their remaining points when moving into a ZOC (they can't, or else they couldn't fire/melee any more), so the attacker can move up, fire, and if he has points remaining, withdraw into cover again.
2) "Dancing". You can easily soak up all the defensive fire rounds of a unit (usually 3) with expendable or heavily armoured units, then do pretty much whatever you want even within the defender's ZOC for the rest of the turn - move by countless units in travel mode, fire at him at your leisure, without the least risk. One of the pertinent weaknesses of the system when played in one-phase mode.

<center>
[url="http://home.arcor.de/dierk_walter/NWC/16thLD.htm"]Image[/url]
Brig. Gen. D.S. "Green Horse" Walter
~ 16th (The Queen's) Light Dragoons ~
4th Brigade, Anglo-Allied Cavalry Corps
----------
~ 3rd (Prince of Wales's) Dragoon Guards ~
[url="http://www.geocities.com/militaireacademie/"]Image[/url]
</center>
Author:  Richard [ Thu Jun 07, 2007 12:52 am ]
Post subject: 
Perhaps these issues could be resolved by:

1./ It costing additional action points to move into (and possibly also out of) an enemy ZOC. (We've already got this in the ACW engine with the "deployed skirmishers" feature, so expanding this to cover <i>all</i> units should be fairly straightforward)

2./ Have a max stacking hex limit <i><b>during</b></i> a turn as well as at the end of a turn, to make unit "dancing" harder.

3./ Have no 3 max volley restriction on ADF against adjacent units. Thus any unit moving adjacent to - or attempting to melee - a defending unit <i>automatically</i> incurs ADF.

4./ Pinning defensive fire, that prevents the attacking unit from conducting further movement or meleeing, but allows it to use up any remaining action points in firing.

5./ Alternatively, why not just retain the no further movement rule (except for charging cavalry) for units that move adjacent to enemy ZOC? The units would still be able to fire and/or melee - provided they still had sufficient action points left - but wouldn't be able to move away again.


Lt.Col. Rich White
4th Cavalry Brigade
Cavalry Corps
Anglo-Allied Army
Author:  pacowork [ Thu Jun 07, 2007 3:48 am ]
Post subject: 
Rich,

There are some errors with your basic premises about how the HPS engine currently functions:

* Units that fire after moving do so at 50% strength. This movement penalty carries over to the next phase, e.g., non-phasing units that moved in the preceding phase also fire at 50%. Only stationary, phasing units and non-phasing units that did not move in their preceding phase get to fire for full effect.

* ADF fire by non-phasing units is at 1/3 strength on the assumption that, on average, they would get to fire 3+ times.

* The initial implementation of the Nap ADF system had no restriction on the number of volleys non-phasing units could execute. During the beta testing for Eckmuhl this turned defenders in line (Particularly the large Austrian bns) into virtual machine gunners, mowing down entire brigades in a single phase[B)]! That's why the limitation was instituted, along with the reduced effectiveness for ADF fire.

* Whereas phasing units undergo an immediate, casualty morale check and can become disordered by ADF fire, non-phasing units do not take their casualty morale check until the start of their next turn. This allows for a projected assault to be stopped in its tracks when ADF fire disorders attacking units.

IMO the implementation of the NME optional rule has, appropriately, strengthened the power of the defender to the point that a very reasonable balance now exists between the relative advantages of the Defender/Attacker.

Regards,

Paco

<i>Maréchal M. Francisco Palomo
Prince d'Essling, Grande Duc d'Abrantes et
Comte de Marseille
Commandant - Ecole Militaire
Commandant - Division de Cavalerie de la Vieille Garde</i>
Author:  Bill Peters [ Thu Jun 07, 2007 4:50 am ]
Post subject: 
At this point (pun) John would have to recode the engine in order to do this. A massive recoding from what I have heard.

And actually Dierk, cavalry was recorded as having "danced" in front of gunners to get them to fire off their round whereupon the remainder of the unit then charged the guns. In combat they did "time" a volley and then use it to their advantage. However, I believe that it was only done on a rare occaision and I would not lobby for a SET amount of shots per unit for ADF.

I have pushed for a variable amount of shots for ADF. Somewhere between 3-5. That way the players cannot count how many times a unit has fired. I would say this: the unit should not have fired in the previous round or really have done anything in order to qualify for FULL firepower ADF. Why: because like Op Fire games you devote the unit to doing just that: holding its place and remaining at readiness. BUT this would allow the unit to fire at FULL value IMHO. Thus if you DONT move, melee or change facing/formation, you should be able to fire at full value. And I would say it would only apply to one hex for infantry and the first 3 ranges for artillery.

For Paco: you said:

* Units that fire after moving do so at 50% strength. This movement penalty carries over to the next phase, e.g., non-phasing units that moved in the preceding phase also fire at 50%. Only stationary, phasing units and non-phasing units that did not move in their preceding phase get to fire for full effect.

Question: do you mean as in Phased play? You are not talking about the unit being penalized in the other player's Player Phase are you? Thus if a unit moves in Phased play in its Movement Phase and then fires in its Offensive Fire Phase it is halved? That is correct. Just wondering if you meant it was halved on ADF because it moved in its own turn.

Bill Peters
Armee du Rhin - V Corps, 5ème Division, 20ème légère Brigade de Cavalerie, 13ème Hussar Regiment
HPS Napoleonic Scenario Designer (Eckmuhl, Wagram, Jena-Auerstaedt and ... more to come)

[url="http://www.fireandmelee.net"]Fire and Melee Wargame site[/url]

Image
Author:  Francisco Palomo [ Fri Jun 08, 2007 12:42 am ]
Post subject: 
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Bill Peters</i>
<br />
Question: do you mean as in Phased play? You are not talking about the unit being penalized in the other player's Player Phase are you? Thus if a unit moves in Phased play in its Movement Phase and then fires in its Offensive Fire Phase it is halved? That is correct. Just wondering if you meant it was halved on ADF because it moved in its own turn.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Bill,

Please correct me if I am wrong, but I thought that the "movement penalty" carried over to ADF fire.

Regards,

Paco

<i>Maréchal</i> M. Francisco Palomo
<i>Prince d'Essling, Grande Duc d'Abrantes et
Comte de Marseille
Commandant - Ecole Militaire
Commandant - Division de Cavalerie de la Vieille Garde </i>
Image
Author:  Bill Peters [ Mon Jun 11, 2007 6:51 am ]
Post subject: 
Paco - no, I dont think so. All units are halved when fire ADF regardless of what they did in the prior player phase.


Bill Peters
Armee du Rhin - V Corps, 5ème Division, 20ème légère Brigade de Cavalerie, 13ème Hussar Regiment
HPS Napoleonic Scenario Designer (Eckmuhl, Wagram, Jena-Auerstaedt and ... more to come)

[url="http://www.fireandmelee.net"]Fire and Melee Wargame site[/url]

Image
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/