American Civil War Game Club (ACWGC)

FELLOW NEW TO WDS CIVIL WAR GAMERS,

Going to start a thread here to share Learned info from game play please feel free to comment, correct, or add to this thread.

1. Reinforcements: When reinforcements arrive, you can delay the entry by hitting cancel. you can then enter them at a later date of your choosing.
In a current battle I assumed that I needed to protect the entry hex with a force in the area or else the cannons that were to come on alone would be captured
by the Union Cavalry in the area. my blocking force was wiped out but gave as good as they got so it was a wash point wise. Now i am delaying the cannon entry until such time as I have a force available to brush them aside.

2. Skirmishers True they give you eyes out 2 hexes but also, they cost your opponent movement points to enter, However, once the first unit moves in this extra cost does not apply to others that move in.

_________________
COL. R.T Coyne
7th Brigade 4th Division" Coyne's Cavalry Rangers"
1st Corp Army of Northern Virginia

Well, I'm no newbie but, as I said on another forum several months ago, I'm "still learning". Every now and then something will occur that is new to me and reminds me of the depth and richness of the games.

I'm not quite sure what to think about the 'cancel reinforcements' feature. I briefly checked it in one title and saw that, if I cancelled them, they were then available on the next turn. Other subsequent reinforcements (same entry hex) were also available. Would that always be the case? I'm not sure. I think in one scenario I played a long time ago an early reinforcement was substantially delayed (they had a percentage chance of coming on from a specific time) and since it was delayed the subsequent reinforcements (from the same entry hex) were also delayed until after that first delayed unit had arrived. I'm unsure whether it was coincidence or purely down to chance but at the time it felt like the delay of one unit affected the arrival of subsequent ones. It completely ruined my strategy for that entire battle.

I'd be interested to hear of other thoughts on the 'cancel reinforcements' feature. I'm not 100% sure that it is a good thing.

_________________
Paul Swanson
Lieutenant-General
First Division
First Corps
Army of Northern Virginia

In that Corinth game, where I played the Union twice and lost twice, I delayed Sherman for a complete 24 hours. They were not hiding in the woods that whole time. Too bad for me that that was too long-LOL. With that said, a player can bring any and all reinforcements, after they show as arrived at any time. Just select the one you want and cancel the rest. A cancellation of one will not delay another, even if they are coming in at the same hex. I see it as the officer receiving orders to wait for further instructions before advancing.

_________________
Brigadier General Richard Walker
II Corps, 4th Division, 6th Brigade
Army of Tennessee
(JTS/WDS Scenario Designer)

I've 'slept on it' and woke up very worried that delaying reinforcements could unbalance many scenarios. Essentially, units are hidden 'beyond the edge of the world' and a large force can be built up that then emerges in the flank/rear of an opponent at a convenient time. The converse situation is why we have Rule 6.1.1.3:
Players who withdraw any of their forces from the battlefield map, other than via a designated Exit Hex or as specified in the scenario as a victory condition, shall suffer a two-step reduction in the level of victory.

I think we may need a Club Rule in the Gaming Section to prohibit delaying reinforcements (in addition to my proposed 'No Artillery Scouts' rule). I remain interested to hear from others on this matter, pro and con, although I am worried that now the information is 'out there' the ability to delay reinforcements could be a significant problem in some scenarios if some use it to their unfair advantage.

_________________
Paul Swanson
Lieutenant-General
First Division
First Corps
Army of Northern Virginia

I would rather see that as a house rule, not a club rule. Also, it would only be an issue for a very few scenarios.
I see it more as a command decision that enhances strategic thinking. Why couldn't riders be sent to inform a column that it would be unwise to advance at this time. Almost all scenarios have a set time for the arrival of reinforcements. These can be seen by all.

Referring back to our recent Corinth game, since you knew exactly when and where my northeastern reinforcement would arrive, there was an ambush set up with a large contingent of reb troops waiting and behind breastworks. Now, don't misunderstand me, I would have done exactly the same thing, so well done. I'm just saying that since all scenarios have a reinforcement dialog that can be seen by opening the editor or and companion game file, this proposed rule limits some available options that was built into the game for a reason. I know these things because I was there in the beginning.

_________________
Brigadier General Richard Walker
II Corps, 4th Division, 6th Brigade
Army of Tennessee
(JTS/WDS Scenario Designer)

Your fears have a different side to them. There are situations where you have to delay reinforcements because the opponent has overrun the entry hex in strength and if you bring them on board, they will be slaughtered even with the 5 (and more for a few scenarios) hex routing and the elimination of any unit on the reinforcement hex that is programmed into the game.

No Artillery Scouts rule? Is that why my artillery doesn't hit anything so often, they are blind?

_________________
Gen Ned Simms
2/XVI Corps/AotT
Blood 'n Guts hisself, a land lovin' pirate. Show me some arty tubes and we'll charge 'em.
VMI Class of '00

I can see the sense in that as it would be dependent upon the scenario. It is something for people to consider when selecting scenarios. I'll wait and see what other responses may be made and then consider drafting a house rule, unless someone else can propose one.


As advised in a separate email, the battle I referred to in my first post here was not our recent game.

The strategic positioning of your army prior to the entry of your northeastern force provided me with the perfect opportunity to bushwhack your men. Naturally, I was careful to stay an acceptable distance from their entry, so my lads were not affected by when they arrived.
I never expected the 'delay of Sherman' and thought he had been cowering deeper in the forest where I did not check (my units were needed elsewhere and didn't have the time to search behind every tree). Also, naturally for me. as soon as Sherman's force was discovered men were dispatched to get at him. As I said at the time:
"Sherman sighted. Earl Van Dorn has offered a bounty of a month's furlough for the men who kill or capture him."

LOL, whenever Sherman appears in a scenario I'm out to get him. Once I was able to shoot and kill him at First Manassas. I was very pleased at that as I think it would have saved the Southern citizens a lot of grief and destruction of their infrastructure.

_________________
Paul Swanson
Lieutenant-General
First Division
First Corps
Army of Northern Virginia

See here (https://www.wargame.ch/board/acwgc/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=24046) for some detail on the Artillery Scouts. That thought came up during a recent game. Small artillery units are highly effective scouts.

_________________
Paul Swanson
Lieutenant-General
First Division
First Corps
Army of Northern Virginia

Quaama wrote:
"I've 'slept on it' and woke up very worried that delaying reinforcements could unbalance many scenarios. Essentially, units are hidden 'beyond the edge of the world' and a large force can be built up that then emerges in the flank/rear of an opponent at a convenient time. The converse situation is why we have Rule 6.1.1.3:
Players who withdraw any of their forces from the battlefield map, other than via a designated Exit Hex or as specified in the scenario as a victory condition, shall suffer a two-step reduction in the level of victory.

I think we may need a Club Rule in the Gaming Section to prohibit delaying reinforcements (in addition to my proposed 'No Artillery Scouts' rule). I remain interested to hear from others on this matter, pro and con, although I am worried that now the information is 'out there' the ability to delay reinforcements could be a significant problem in some scenarios if some use it to their unfair advantage. END QUOTE"

I do not see it that way at all. If you want to delay entry because of the danger of bringing a force on piecemeal is too great, why not allow delay?
Also, IMO the Gamey tactic of Reinforcement Ambush could be lessened

Lastly Fighting till you have a victory then trying to exit before your Opponent can counterattack is wrong but delaying your troops is a tactical decision that prevents opponents from getting cheap points by beating your guys up as you attempt to defend your reinforcement area

SEE WILDERNESS BATTLE 118-604505 WILD A5 ENTRY HEX 0-167

_________________
COL. R.T Coyne
7th Brigade 4th Division" Coyne's Cavalry Rangers"
1st Corp Army of Northern Virginia

I delay reinforcements all the time. It is a necessity in some situations where the enemy has worked their way to the edges of the map in order to ambush your men as they enter.

No sane player is going to bring troops onto the board where they can be slaughtered. And if it was "required" to bring them on then others (people like me) would make it a point to aim for entry locations to set up massive kill zones.

The best way to avoid that is to delay the arrival of units who you know are coming on the map at a vulnerable location. WDS allows people the option to bring units onto the map or not just for that very reason.

_________________
Gen. Blake Strickler
Confederate General-in-Chief
El Presidente 2010 - 2012

To me, this feels the opposite of the realism your posts often call for. If the opponent knows where your troops come on, and they've set themselves up to punish your incoming men, why should you be forced to bring them on? If this was a real scenario, would a commander willingly and knowingly walk their men into a perilous situation? Here you have to choose between the lesser of two possible evils (between this situation and the one you listed above), and to me the best option is to have no rules regarding this. Could someone be gamey and keep their men off the field? Sure. But you know where they are coming on, which is already just as gamey, so you can plan for it. This is a much less damaging situation than forcing units on the field by rule. The ability to not bring on reinforcements was added to prevent people from planning strategy around trapping reinforcement units in an unrealistic and ahistorical manner.

_________________
General Michael E. F. Barycki
4th Bde, 5th Div, XV Corps, Army of the Tennessee
http://www.civilwartees.com/
http://www.gettysburgcandles.com/

BTW, for those interested in scenario design and related to the topic of delayed reinforcements. Scenarios can be either altered or newly created that use "Alternative" entry hexes with variable times of entry. In using this feature, the above topic would be moot. I have used it on several occasions. Some well done, others need improvements. As long as units of the same group are not wildly separated, it is a great feature and adds incalculable re-playability to scenarios.

_________________
Brigadier General Richard Walker
II Corps, 4th Division, 6th Brigade
Army of Tennessee
(JTS/WDS Scenario Designer)

Personal Preference Opinion - I've never cared much for variable entry locations and times. Depending on how the scenario is designed it is possible that a division with four brigades may enter the map from each of the four corners due to their randomized entry locations. It makes command and control impossible to maintain. A well-designed scenario should (in my opinion) have randomized entry locations set for divisions as opposed to brigades to avoid this. But I feel like, in most cases, the units arrive by brigades and are subject to being scattered to the four winds. And even if the units arrive by divisions, then you could have a corps with four divisions arriving from all four directions and that still makes command and control an impossibility. As someone who prioritizes a strict adhesion to the command radius school of thought, it just doesn't appeal to me.

Again, all personal preference. To each his own.

_________________
Gen. Blake Strickler
Confederate General-in-Chief
El Presidente 2010 - 2012

I have never used skirmishers much. In the woods I understand the point. But in open fields where a lot of the action occurs they serve no purpose. I wish it was different and that skirmishers might go out five hexes in open fields to create a larger speed bump to enemy attacks. Impossible I am sure.

_________________
Gen. Steve Griffith


Army of Northern Virginia Commander

Yes, that's a big problem.
In a recent game over one-third of my force was detached for most of the time as some Divisional and Corps commanders arrived at different locations from their men. As they were separated by a river and enemy forces it was impractical to get them within range of each other. The only saving grace was that the Army Commander (who had a 20% chance of arriving from early on [three locations]) never showed up. For sixteen consecutive turns he failed to enter the battlefield [the odds of that are astronomical]. Had he showed up on the seventeenth opportunity 100% of the army would have been detached. I conceded before I found out if he would ever show up, the battle had already been decided.

_________________
Paul Swanson
Lieutenant-General
First Division
First Corps
Army of Northern Virginia