ACWGC Forums

_________________
Lt. Gen. Blake Strickler
Army of Northern Virginia Commander
Confederate CoS - CSA Cabinet Member
El Presidente 2010 - 2012

I agree. If players agree to play historically, the house rule makes complete sense.

_________________
Major JJ Jansen
2nd Calvary Division, Commanding
3rd Calvary Corps (Forrest's)
Army of Tennessee
CSA

I'm not deep in that topic but isn't there a probability that trenches are build set in the PDT?
If so did the old titles get their PDTs updated to allow trenches at all?

Titles not using trenches should have zero build probability and only allow them in special scenarios that maybe depict sieges or so.

_________________
Lieutenant General Christian Hecht
Commander I Corps, Army of the Potomac

Yes. When the PDT files were updated they included the code to allow for the building of trenches. From a developer standpoint this is a nice thing to add as it allows customized games to include them if the game creator/designer wants them to be there. But for the already built scenarios which come with the title, and are the ones we play 99.9% of the time, the addition of trenches makes the scenario play radically different than it was created to be.

_________________
Lt. Gen. Blake Strickler
Army of Northern Virginia Commander
Confederate CoS - CSA Cabinet Member
El Presidente 2010 - 2012

In that case they should really set the PDTs to appropriate values for the time, until the suggested housrule needs to be used.

_________________
Lieutenant General Christian Hecht
Commander I Corps, Army of the Potomac

If I might add a friendly dissenting opinion. Part of the reason why I play historical wargaming is not necessarily to repeat history but to take what I've learned from it and apply it to different situations. In essence, just because an event unfolded in a certain way does not mean I have to repeat it. I think the ability to entrench on any map--regardless of the campaign--gives players the ability to mold their gamestyle to the situation.

Given the example of Lee building trenches at Antietam. Anyone who does even the most basic level of research knows that the Union army has a significant numerical advantage over the CSA (as in the majority of ACW battles). Furthermore, they know that the only reason that Lee's army was not destroyed was because of ill-coordinated attacks and McClellan's refusal to use his reserves. Lee's ability to parry each of McClellan's assaults was only successful because Lee understood McClellan's fighting style. In wargaming against an opponent, it is likely my opponent is as knowledgeable about the Battle of Antietam as myself. If we were forced to play without the ability to build trenches, then my opponent knows my options for beating him are severely limited. Disallowing the use of entrenchments forces me to play on my enemy's terms instead of my own.

Educationally speaking, allowing the construction of trenches lets the player experiment with different playstyles: defense in depth, the use of strongpoints, or a static trenchline for example. While trenches do favor the defenders immensely, on no map does the player have the ability to have an infinite trench system--it will have to end at some point. Going back to the Antietam example, just because I build a solid trench network in the West Woods, does not mean the enemy has to attack me there. They could leave a holding force to check me there and then attack me on a separate part of the line or outmaneuver me altogether. Trenches are not the end all be all on the battlefield, and I think part of the reason why they are problematic for some players is because they rush into them too quickly without getting a proper assessment of the battlefield and finding an opportunity to maneuver around them. As Patton said, "Fixed fortifications are monuments to the stupidity of man." Going back to the example of trenches on Cemetery Hill, if that were the case for me then I wouldn't attack that position and try to maneuver around the enemy.

The American Civil War was among the first modern wars and many lessons were hard learned. I think it would beneficial to allow for gamers to learn from these lessons and be allowed to apply them as they wish. While I absolutely agree that no entrenchments could be a great house rule for some, I don't think it should be the default. Sorry if this sounded like a rambling rant. But as someone who likes to take the strategic initiative and tactical defense, I would prefer to keep my trenches.

Thoughts?

_________________
BGen Treuting

1st Corps
3rd Division
2nd Brigade "Hood's Texans"
ANV

_________________
Lt. Gen. Blake Strickler
Army of Northern Virginia Commander
Confederate CoS - CSA Cabinet Member
El Presidente 2010 - 2012

Good idea.

I hate trenches. Unless I am in them. Then they are great.

_________________
Lt Col Steve Griffith
ANV

Interesting to note that "rework and rebalance scenarios" ranked 4th out of 8 in priority in the recent WDS survey.

This can difficult when you consider that the system has two different modes of play and 27 optional rules.

I suppose technically each scenario should be playtested in each mode with no optional rules, but when I took part in the playtest of Chancellorsville we played strictly phase using some optional rules and even the no column attack house rule. My regular opponent during these playtests was Ken Miller. Also one against John Ferry, and some solitaire where I played both sides. There were other playtesters and I don't know how they handled it.

Anyway, my take is that if trenches weren't created during a given battle or campaign historically, the trench feature should be disabled, as General Hecht suggested.

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

So essentially we have 4 options:

1) Change nothing. 2) Request another Optional Rule be created to enable or disable trenches in a scenario. 3) Create a club wide optional rule where two players decide together to allow trenches or not to. 4) Request that scenario designers remove trench building from scenarios they were not used in historically.

Looks like a poll or survey to me. At least we will have quantified data to point at then.

_________________
Major JJ Jansen
2nd Calvary Division, Commanding
3rd Calvary Corps (Forrest's)
Army of Tennessee
CSA

A lot of good points have been brought up, and I agree that there definitely should be a rebalance of trenches. However, in my experiences where I generally play more open ended/meeting engagements rather than the historical scenarios, I think it makes sense to allow trenches since the victory points are generally not dependent on seizing arbitrary victory hexes. Overall, I'm leaning toward leaving it to the players to decide on a case-by-case basis rather than installing an overarching rule change. Next time WDS leaves a poll I will definitely add rebalancing to trenches for consideration.

_________________
BGen Treuting

1st Corps
3rd Division
2nd Brigade "Hood's Texans"
ANV

I think it should be added as an optional rule and let the players decide.

_________________

General Lynn Newell
Commander
Army Of The Tennessee

I don't mind to allow players to find out how Shiloh was with trenches. but if that extends to allowing such things in a historical scenario then those aren't historical anymore.
It would be better to and a PDT that allows trenches and just set up a second set of scenarios that uses that alternative PDT.
Anyhow, for now trenches are surely a thing the players should not only take a look at, but also agree to use or not use them.
Better be save then sorry.

_________________
Lieutenant General Christian Hecht
Commander I Corps, Army of the Potomac

I agree that it would be a great Optional Rule for a future version to include.

Until then, everyone be sure to be on the same page as your opponent before starting a game. If you don't want trenches to be used, make sure you state that at the start.

_________________
Lt. Gen. Blake Strickler
Army of Northern Virginia Commander
Confederate CoS - CSA Cabinet Member
El Presidente 2010 - 2012

I agree with William. 'What-If' is one of funs in wargames. It is good to have a chance to try trench in the early war. But I will ban the trench in most games. Jesus, it's hard enough to attack now. I like mobile warfare and don't want trench warfare of WWI style. In addition to the house rules, players can ban it by editing the PDT file now if necessary.

_________________
Lt Col Ashdoll Ren
5th Seres' Brigade
1st Division / Stewart's Corps / Army of Tennessee

JTS: Antietam, Atlanta, Chancellorsville, Forgotten, Gettysburg, Ozark, Peninsula, Shenandoah, Vicksburg