ACWGC Forums

American Civil War Game Club

* ACWGC    * Dpt. of Records (DoR)    *Club Recruiting Office     ACWGC Memorial

* CSA HQ    * VMI   * Join CSA    

* Union HQ   * UMA   * Join Union    

CSA Armies:   ANV   AoT

Union Armies:   AotT    AotC    AotP    AotS     Union Army Forums

Link Express

Club Forums:     NWC    CCC     Home Pages:     NWC    CCC    ACWGC
It is currently Mon Apr 19, 2021 7:34 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Some JTS critisims.
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2021 12:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2020 4:25 pm
Posts: 23
Location: Oregon, USA
Historically a rout meant that the men threw down their weapons and ran. I a men routed into the enemy lines they were either shot or captured. How is it in these game a unit can rout through enemy lines, regain order and cause chaos behind lines. They did not stay together when they routed they don't have weapons... whats up?

A unit that routs into enemy line should just be eliminated.

In a current game I have captured some artillery. How is it that it still shows "x" guns? Why doesn't is show a number?

_________________
Lt. Col Ross G.
Army of the Potomac V/3/2


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Some JTS critisims.
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2021 12:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2021 5:19 pm
Posts: 38
Sir!! You have to understand us Rebs a little better is all.... sometimes the bugle calls get a little confusing.... and we hear “chow time” instead of charge.... and that mass of soldiers you see as “routing” are only really looking for a place to sit and grab a bite to eat...no Reb would ever truly rout. As for the cannons.... well sir we like to paint logs once in awhile and let you yanks “capture” them.... it makes us laugh to watch you yanks try to figure out where the powder goes:)

_________________
Lt.Col W. Stewart
6/4/1 ANV


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Some JTS critisims.
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2021 1:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2020 4:25 pm
Posts: 23
Location: Oregon, USA
Problem is it is the yanks routing through my lines. Seems after capture even the dumbest reb would be able to recognize logs.

_________________
Lt. Col Ross G.
Army of the Potomac V/3/2


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Some JTS critisims.
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2021 1:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 1:55 am
Posts: 271
Location: Currently on Assignment North of Dixie
If they rout through your lines they should be extremely easy to capture. I prefer the enemy to rout behind my lines because it means they are effectively in Andersonville already. When they rout backwards behind their own lines I just think, "what a shame!" :)

_________________
Colonel Blake
Confederate CoS - Deputy Commandant of VMI - General Busybody


Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Some JTS critisims.
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2021 3:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2020 10:42 pm
Posts: 163
I don't think elimination for a routed unit would be appropriate as often such units could reform and rejoin the fight. However, I share your pain with units routing behind your lines. I do my best to hunt them down and eliminate them although that does not always happen in heavily forested areas so I then have to be 'aware' of them for the rest of the battle.

Captured Artillery
The captured artillery is no doubt no longer 'captured' because you must no longer have a unit with it and now Fog of War means you can no longer 'see' exactly what is there so an 'X' appears.
Solution - play with the 'Artillery Capture' optional rule unchecked. That rule allows any number of weird and unrealistic situations. Here's one:
My mounted cavalry charges and captures some guns. Hooray, my ever capable cavalry has automatically manned those guns.
My opponent tries to retake those guns and advances two infantry units from a flank. My newly captured cannons fire at one of his two infantry units as they approach and disrupts one. The disrupted infantry can now not melee BUT neither can the other large and fresh infantry unit because my small cavalry unit in the hex is mounted.
My cavalry move off, or are moved off after enemy fire. The enemy moves on the hex with the guns. Are they automatically remanned as my capable mounted cavalry were able to do? No they are not, they can only be remanned by deducting sufficent men from a unit with the artillery to be recrewed at an F rating.

The Artillery Capture Optional Rule must be the stupidest optional rule of the lot. Highly unrealistic. I ardently wish the Artillery Capture rule reflected the reality of captured artillery during the war but it doesn't. If it did reflect the reality of capturing artillery during the war I would be heavily in favour of it.

_________________
Brigadier-General Swanson
Commander
4th Division
II Corps
Army of Northern Virginia


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Some JTS critisims.
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2021 4:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2020 4:40 pm
Posts: 49
IMHO - - Although there are several flaws with the artillery Capture Optional Rule, it is still far better than turning it off. With it "ON" artillery can be captured and used by the capturing force (although I agree that the capturing unit should be required to deduct the troops required to re-man (or re-occupy with gender non-specific carbon units) the guns. with it turned off overrun artillery is simply destroyed and removed from the map, which IMHO is even far more "unrealistic"

V/R

Josef Seidl, BGEN, CSA
Commanding Stuart's Cavalry (4th DIV / I Corps)
ANV


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Some JTS critisims.
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2021 4:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2020 4:25 pm
Posts: 23
Location: Oregon, USA
Quaama...It is exactly those that rout behind lines that I am referring to. They are unarmed and and near helpless in the rout. Instead they reform at full strength and are a PIA to take care of,

Indeed I am no longer sitting on the guns. The fight has moved on, How stupid these rebs are, turn their backs on the captured guns and forget how many there were.

I believe that it is historic to capture artillery and turn in on the original owners. Don't see the problem in this. When recrewing it does subtract 100 men from the chosen unit.

_________________
Lt. Col Ross G.
Army of the Potomac V/3/2


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Some JTS critisims.
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2021 4:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2020 4:25 pm
Posts: 23
Location: Oregon, USA
Quaama...It is exactly those that rout behind lines that I am referring to. They are unarmed and and near helpless in the rout. Instead they reform at full strength and are a PIA to take care of,

Indeed I am no longer sitting on the guns. The fight has moved on, How stupid these rebs are, turn their backs on the captured guns and forget how many there were.

I believe that it is historic to capture artillery and turn in on the original owners. Don't see the problem in this. When recrewing it does subtract 100 men from the chosen unit.

_________________
Lt. Col Ross G.
Army of the Potomac V/3/2


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Some JTS critisims.
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2021 5:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2020 10:42 pm
Posts: 163
Josef Seidl wrote:
IMHO - - Although there are several flaws with the artillery Capture Optional Rule, it is still far better than turning it off. With it "ON" artillery can be captured and used by the capturing force (although I agree that the capturing unit should be required to deduct the troops required to re-man (or re-occupy with gender non-specific carbon units) the guns. with it turned off overrun artillery is simply destroyed and removed from the map, which IMHO is even far more "unrealistic"

V/R

Josef Seidl, BGEN, CSA
Commanding Stuart's Cavalry (4th DIV / I Corps)
ANV


I beg to differ so I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

My view is that having them 'removed' simply reflects that during the melee the cannons were destroyed or damaged to the point where they are not viable weapons. To me, having them magically remanned (with men appearing out of thin air to do it) and firing away in the same twenty minute period they had meleed in just defies belief.
I am further annoyed that in a campaign situation, where there is a battle and guns are captured, there could be a strong argument for, rather than against, having the rule as surely any guns captured in one battle could be repaired and manned ready for the next. Unfortunately, that doesn't happen, see http://wargame.ch/board/acwgc/viewtopic.php?f=159&t=22065. Although losses, and even fatigue in some instances, do carry over gun captures are not added to the OOB of the side that captured them! Madness!

_________________
Brigadier-General Swanson
Commander
4th Division
II Corps
Army of Northern Virginia


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Some JTS critisims.
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2021 5:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2020 10:42 pm
Posts: 163
R. Greenley wrote:
[1] Quaama...It is exactly those that rout behind lines that I am referring to. They are unarmed and and near helpless in the rout. Instead they reform at full strength and are a PIA to take care of,

[2] Indeed I am no longer sitting on the guns. The fight has moved on, How stupid these rebs are, turn their backs on the captured guns and forget how many there were.

[3] I believe that it is historic to capture artillery and turn in on the original owners. Don't see the problem in this. When recrewing it does subtract 100 men from the chosen unit.


1. I understand and agree. Unlike artillery capture (which can be checked or unchecked) I do not see what can be done about it. I try and hunt them down if I can but I'm not always successful in doing so.

2. Perhaps they had greater concerns than to bother about counting a few cannons :lol:.

3. See above post in response to BG Seidl in relation to this and an additional gripe about this rule in regard to campaigns. I have no inherent problem with the recrewing part of it BUT if they are capable of firing the piece then surely they are capable of limbering it up and moving it. Although ... can captured artillery 'retire by prologue' if that optional rule is checked (which would enable you to move the piece, slowly, back to your lines or to a more favourable location)? I don't know as it is very rare that I have a battle with the odious Artillery Capture rule checked. Perhaps someone knows the answer to the retire by prologue query.

_________________
Brigadier-General Swanson
Commander
4th Division
II Corps
Army of Northern Virginia


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Some JTS critisims.
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2021 6:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2017 4:55 pm
Posts: 278
Gentlemen

Two favorite topics over which debate has raged for a long time.

As to routing "partisan" unit--various house ruled have been used to address "gamey" tactics using routing units. It is the only way to address this to the mutual satisfaction of the players.

Artillery capture. I won't play with it turned on. Allows for more reckless use of guns (and penalties to the capturing side) than occurred historically that is not offset by the supposed gain in historical accuracy that allows them to be recaptured.

_________________
Lt. General Walter A. Dortch
PRESIDENT, ACWGC
Commander, Eastern Theater, USA


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Some JTS critisims.
PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2021 8:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2020 4:40 pm
Posts: 49
One last comment on this matter, and then I will hold my peace:

Quaama stated:
"My view is that having them 'removed' simply reflects that during the melee the cannons were destroyed or damaged to the point where they are not viable weapons. To me, having them magically remanned (with men appearing out of thin air to do it) and firing away in the same twenty minute period they had meleed in just defies belief."

Let me address this in two ways, from a historical perspective and a "game" perspective.

Historically in this era (Napoleonic and ACW), there are literally dozens if not hundreds of examples where enemy artillery was overrun. in almost every case, the artillery overrun was not "Destroyed or Damaged beyond repair" and frequently returned to the battle in relatively short periods of time. Now, the artillery limbers were usually fouled and limber horses killed, so the overrun guns could usually not be limbered up and hauled away, but that did not prevent them from being used. There are dozens of historical cases where artillery batteries changed hands several times in a battle and were subsequently used in that same fight (First Manassas and Waterloo are prime examples of that).

Now to the game perspective:

I am not hard over on playing with the "Artillery Capture" Optional rule on or off. I've played it both ways, and each has its advantages and flaws. The MAJOR flaw with Artillery Capture "ON" is that the capturing side does NOT have to re-crew these captured Guns. Massive deficiency! Yet when the original owning side recaptures them, they must be recrewed; again a Major deficiency when compared to the previous case.

The major problem from my perspective on playing with Artillery Capture "OFF" is that when overrun, those guns simply vanish into thin air which is also historically very inaccurate.

So all of that said, I'm happy to play this optional rule either way, and both options offer different tactical considerations in the game (and gross historical inaccuracies). Bottom line, make your choice an informed one when choosing whether or not to turn "ON" the Artillery Capture Optional Rule

Cheers and good Gaming!!!

V/R

Josef Seidl BGEN, CSA
Commanding Stuart's Cavalry (4th DIV / I Corps)
ANV


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Some JTS critisims.
PostPosted: Wed Mar 31, 2021 12:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2020 4:25 pm
Posts: 23
Location: Oregon, USA
Thanks for the great discussion.

I have realized that the game system has no concept of line of battle so how can it know a unit passed through enemy lines. Perhaps they could keep the last movement stored, then a retreat would retrace this path (It was safe back there). Then the unit should take some percentage loss for those that strayed.

_________________
Lt. Col Ross G.
Army of the Potomac V/3/2


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Some JTS critisims.
PostPosted: Thu Apr 01, 2021 1:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2003 9:52 am
Posts: 1210
Location:
Couple of points.

I seem to remember a time when you could at least see where enemy routed units were going at the beginning of replay. Haven't seen that in quite awhile.

The problem I see with artillery in this game is that the crew is an abstract concept. You get no points for killing a crew, and it is an all or nothing proposition.

Artillery capture and spiking are historical and I use that option. So is retire by prolong, which I never use because the artillery is disrupted when you use it.
I know of no historical justification for that, but maybe it is the only way John could think of to halve fire. At any rate, the only historical instance I know of was Bigelow's
Battery at Gettysburg.

_________________
MG Mike Mihalik
Forrest's Cavalry Corps
AoWest/CSA


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Some JTS critisims.
PostPosted: Thu Apr 01, 2021 4:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2020 10:42 pm
Posts: 163
I have used retire by prologue rarely (I think only twice). I have no issue with those retiring units being disrupted because to retire 125 yards in reality would mean all the artillery equipment (limbers, caissons etc) would be out of place and have to be relocated causing real life disruption and slowing the rate of fire. My query (simple curiosity) was can captured artillery retire by prologue if both those optional rules are in effect? [I will still avoid the Artillery Capture rule. Not because I do not believe it occurred but because I consider the way it operates in the game is unrealistic.]

_________________
Brigadier-General Swanson
Commander
4th Division
II Corps
Army of Northern Virginia


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: R. Sickbert, Todd Hively and 30 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

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group