John Ferry wrote:
General Whitehead
I would not expect agreement from you on any topic in which you had already formed a contrary opinion, but a little respect for the two people who put together the games of Overland, chich seem to be enjoyed by quite a few people, would go a long way toward me giving you any in return. Since you and I have our plates full, why don't you play a mule shoe scenario against Ken Jones or any other competent opponent. DO NOT use column assault and see how far you get.
John Ferry
Commander
20th Corps
I hope no one was thinking I was showing disrespect. I apologize if someone took it that way. I just think using it doesn't reflect Civil War tactics at the time. However, it is much easier to play the game as written and not worry about whether this or that rule does a better or worse simulation. Everyone has their own likes and dislikes as well as their own interpretation of what Civil War tactics actually were. I'll play by any rules most of the time but prefer having the column restriction and for Turn play the separate melee phase.
I questioned the use of column having any advantage in the game system when used as method of assault over line because mathematically there is no advantage to using it in the game system. If the melee is through the frontal hexes the game has the same stacking limits and melee results whether the attack is in column or line. It is actually slightly worse than line because the defensive fire against a column is more effective than against a line. In the example of the Mule Shoe I don't remember any roads so the column formation will not have a movement advantage over line either.
As for the Overland campaign game it reflects the situation very well. The Union will beat the snot out of the Rebel in just about every scenario. Cold Harbor being the one that won't go their way. There might be another but I haven't played some of the others as much as Wilderness and Spotsylvania.