American Civil War Game Club (ACWGC)

I will not comment on the value of individual scenarios but the variety is there to give people choices. If a scenario has 'hist' or 'historical' in its title then this is usually the scenario that the designer thinks best replicates the historical situation. To see the differences between them there is often an indication in the Description for each scenario. Your example is a little unusual as there are two 'historical' scenarios (plus their weather variants). However, if you look at the Description you will see that 2a says:
'Some Abatis has been removed and breastworks added.'
Perhaps there is some uncertainty over what defences were historically present. Or perhaps it is simply to give the players a choice [I'd imagine it would be a little easier for the attacker if the abatis are removed.]

The same for 'Alter OB' and 'Graphics'; they are simply there to give players some choices about how they view/play the battle.

"Also looking at weather effects, it seems Nov 7 1861 in Belmont was a totally clear day, yet the weather versions indicate some probability of snow ..."

Again, it's about choice. Perhaps there was a chance of snow and other things so they have been allowed for to enable someone to test such 'what ifs'.


Sometimes the Campaign Notes for different titles can also provide insight into why some choices were made.

Finally, you may also come across some odd titles that include terms like c1u1, c1u3 or c3u1. I only found out last year what those terms mean. They are scenarios from the campaign games in the titles. For example, c3u1 for a specific battle refers to the Confederate third choice (c3) and the Union first choice (u1). Thus, many battles (from the campaign game) will have different variants and, yes, there are usually [I hate to say always] weather variants of each of them.

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

There is only one Campaign Shiloh. It was originally published by HPS, then went to JTS and finally WDS. But they are all the same scenarios. There might have been some fixes along the way, but generally all are original. The game engine has changed considerably since the HPS version, but that did not impact the scenarios. Over the years, the naming conventions have changed a bit for subsequent titles. FH and FD for example are not necessarily meant to be immediately understood but should be made clear after reading the scenario description. FH-Fort Henry, FD-Fort Donelson. I did that more for myself to keep them organized at a glance. Not the best, I know.

Weather was a new feature at the time, perhaps Shiloh was the first to use it. It was not meant to reflect historical weather for that specific time in history. Some were, but many are not. The intention is to add some variability to the original non weather scenarios. A bit of flavor as it were.

At this point, 20+ years later, I don't think renaming the scenario list would be beneficial. Especially when you consider club records use the current names.

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

That is certainly an old post from 2020/2022. Being new, I wonder how you found it. But yes, it is worth a look, thanks.

Edit after a quick review: I think I need to demote Stevens from Corps to div commander so that there is no gap in the command structure from the bottom up. And since Reno cannot be both Div and Corps at the same time, we stop at Div. That means there is no Corps commander.

Also, both Stevens and Kearny were killed in the battle and placed correctly, so no changes there.

Thoughts?

WOW, when I made that one change, I had to change it for a total of 24 scenarios. This includes those in the campaign files.

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

The boys seemed a bit skittish and prone to run (the wrong way) so I went looking.

Burnside was Corps CO, but was in transit (as was the 3rd Division) so only the 2 divisions took part. Makes sense (to me) to have Stevens and Reno as Div COs, only c5000 men total with Reno acting Corps CO in Burnside's absence. 24 scenarios to change, ouch, sorry...

_________________
Lieutenant Chris Horn
II Corps, 2nd Division, 6th Brigade
Army of the Potomac, USA

Rich, I have a tweak for you. It's in the very scenario that we are currently playing, Chancellorsville 080C. Everything is supposed to be equal, yet the Union has 48 less cavalrymen. All cavalry units are 100 men except for 'Indep. Co. DC Cav' which has only 58 men. I would guess that inequity would also appear in any other variants of that scenario. Also, the Confederates have a cavalry Corps Commander whereas the Union cavalry report to Sixth Corps.
I don't think it has any real effect on the scenario. Cavalry can sometimes be a hindrance rather than a help in some scenarios.

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

Let me look, ty

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

A few minor points since I'm sorting all scenarios on dates in Campaign Shiloh to get a timeline for a campaign, the 1st 5 the year s/b 1862, the last 2 year s/b 1862, also month s/b 4:

File Name-Title (YYYY-MM-DD)
080 Jk_Battle of Jackson.scn-On the way to Shiloh; March 25, 1862 (1861-3-25)
081 Jk_Battle of Jackson (v.1).scn-On the way to Shiloh; March 25, 1862 (1861-3-25)
Weather_Jk_Battle of Jackson (v.1).scn-On the way to Shiloh; March 25, 1862 (1861-3-25)
Weather_Jk_Battle of Jackson.scn-On the way to Shiloh; March 25, 1862 (1861-3-25)
085 Jk_Cavalry clash near Jackson.scn-Cavalry clash near Jackson; March 29, 1862 (1861-3-29)
199 XX_Battle of the Ridges.scn-Battle of the Ridges (1861-5-1)
Weather_XX_Battle of the Ridges.scn-Battle of the Ridges (1861-5-1)

_________________
Lieutenant Chris Horn
II Corps, 2nd Division, 6th Brigade
Army of the Potomac, USA

I fixed this by reducing one of the CSA cav units to 58. Also, Doubleday's picture appeared twice (Phelps) and I felt that the supply wagons were either too many, or overvalued. The easiest way to fix these issues without going into each scenario was to alter the OOB. In that way, all the scenarios that use the OOB are the same. With regards to the supply wagons, they are now supplied to 100 each not 300.

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

I don't currently have Shiloh loaded, but that is no problem to do. I are saying the dates I used are 1861?

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

I agree that there is an oversupply in Chancellorsville 080C but am unsure that a 66% reduction is justified. I've used up a lot of supply during the game and currently have one at full supply, one at half supply and the rest are below 25% (including the two that were rudely captured and had to be retaken) or essentially empty.
My big worry would be if the OoB for that scenario is used in longer scenarios as that would mean they would be greatly undersupplied.

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

This particular OOB is only used with "equal" scenarios/variants. On my side, I still have 5 unused supply wagons, and the rest are still not near to zero. Also, there should be a little more effort to protect them and not rush to the center of the battlefield.

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

A 66% reduction just seems high to me.

I thought your cavalry would be heading to the rear to attack supply. They did appear from the opposite direction to where I thought they would come [well done] but I was ready to make them pay a penalty for raiding my wagons.

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

Yes, in all of them scenario header has year=1861, which is in the scn file so for Weather_XX_Battle of the Ridges.scn for example, the 1st 3 lines are (the relevant line is # 3 starting with YYYY M D H M for info):

18
Battle of the Ridges
1861 5 1 5 0 1 0 1 40

I obviously don't know the programming logic but for scenarios with weather not sure how this impacts whether the weather kicks in (sorry, no pun intended).

LATE EDIT: I checked EVERY scenario in EVERY WDS ACW title, the only other scenarios with the problem were in Forgotten Campaigns 015-620221-[H]Valverde.20.scn and 016-620221-[H]Valverde.30.scn both of which show 1862-03-21 as start date in scn file, battle took place February 20 to 21, 1862? Murfreesboro (Campaign Chickamauga) showed up with scenario start in 1862 but different year in description (1863) but it straddled 1862-63 so that's OK.

_________________
Lieutenant Chris Horn
II Corps, 2nd Division, 6th Brigade
Army of the Potomac, USA

I will load up Shiloh and get it corrected

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

150 then for a 50%

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