Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

75,000 volunteers needed!

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Gary Grigsby's War Between the States >> Opponents Wanted >> 75,000 volunteers needed! Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
75,000 volunteers needed! - 8/26/2008 6:03:31 AM   
JAMiAM

 

Posts: 6165
Joined: 2/8/2004
Status: offline
Well...maybe not *that* many, but I am winding down some games and will soon need new blood.

1861 scenario, Historical leaders, CSC and FOW on. Either side. Prefer to not use the limited command recovery rule. Am open to discussions on Kentucky. I can go "no holds barred" or something along the lines of the house rules I suggested in this post. Or, something else entirely. [Note: Kentucky Honor Rules have been amended and are at the end of this post.]

Just to give you a heads up, the game will be brutal. Of the "fresh meat" that I got from my last call out, one (Confederate) player surrendered after his April 1862 turn. After the reaction battles of my May 1862 turn, the Union led 1079:823. Half of Mississippi and Tennessee was overrun, Manassas taken, and several bridgeheads established along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts. He still had some fight left in him, but figured it would be better to build his skills a bit, before a rematch. Another player is bravely soldiering on as the Confederates, but the game will likely end with zero Confederate PP's within the next four turns, before the end of the 1863 campaign season. Yet another Confederate player disappeared off the face of the earth after thirteen turns.

A couple other games are still going and are better match-ups. I've got a leisurely paced game with WarHunter, where he is the Union. Unfortunately, it is with Semi-Random leaders. There are definitely some issues with the randomization scheme used by the game, with some pretty screwy results. However, we're both plodding along with the good, the bad, and the ugly. Finally, my grudge rematch with Erik Rutins is coming down to the wire in an extremely closely fought game. He was able to get Lincoln re-elected, but the timer is ticking and he will be having to fight tooth and nail to knock my Confederates down to zero PP's by the start of July 1865. It's February 1865 and I've still got 763 PP's. An epic game, to be sure!

Anyhow, please respond in this thread, or by PM, if you're interested.

New Kentucky Honor Rules.

While Kentucky is neutral, that is, neither aligned with either side, nor a permanent state, the following restrictions apply to both sides:

1. No strategic movement, rail or naval, allowed into any Kentuckian region on the first player turn that the region is attacked. Only tactical movement, as restricted below, and amphibious invasions, are allowed.
2. On the first player turn that any Kentuckian region is attacked, no units may move into it by tactical movement, unless they begin their turn with a leader that has initiative. Also, no leaders may move into the region, unless they too, have initiative.
3. No tactical movement, nor amphibious invasion, is allowed into a Kentuckian region unless it will contain enough units to ensure that it is "pacified" at the end of the player turn.
4. You may not conduct an overrun of a region, until there are three times as many units in it to ensure that the region is "pacified" at the end of the turn. All overrunning units and their leaders must remain in the newly "pacified" region until the start of the next player turn. If you don't meet this threshhold, then you may not click the overrun icon, and must leave the forces in the region to do battle with any enemy militia that may spawn, as well as any reacting enemy forces.
5. "Pacified" is to be defined as having a number of friendly Infantry, Militia, Cavalry, or Mounted Brigades remain in the region through the end of the player turn in which it is first attacked, that is equal to, or greater than, the sum of two times the number of Population in the region, plus the number of Resources in the region, plus one.
6. On subsequent turns, a player may reduce the number of friendly units in a previously pacified region, voluntarily, or involuntarily, without concern for movement restrictions under these house rules. Note that this is at his own risk of inviting partisan activity in the region.
7. These movement restrictions expire immediately when Kentucky aligns with either side, or becomes a permanent state of either side. Note that the latter case is checked at the end of the first player turn in which Kentucky is invaded, when the file to be sent to your opponent is being saved.


To make it easier to see the necessary force needed to pacify, or overrun, a region, I've listed the regions and amounts below. The first number is the necessary amount of Militia, Infantry, Mounted, and Cavalry units needed to pacify, and the second is the amount needed to conduct an overrun.

Paducah: 4/12
Henderson: 2/6
Bowling Green: 4/12
Louisville: 6/18
Glascow: 4/12
Lebanon: 3/9
London: 4/12
Lexington: 6/18
Ashland: 1/3
Knott: 1/3
Pike: 1/3

[Aug 27 edit to number 2, adding restriction to leaders]

< Message edited by JAMiAM -- 8/27/2008 8:43:15 AM >
Post #: 1
RE: 75,000 volunteers needed! - 8/26/2008 7:18:40 AM   
GShock


Posts: 1245
Joined: 12/9/2007
From: San Francisco, CA - USA
Status: offline
I think the CP recovery, semi random and hidden, are highly realistic rules. U have to discover the stats and really put the right man in the right place. Of course it makes the game much harder but thats what we want after all. The more realistic, the better. This game has a huge potential...2by3 has a huge potential. AWD is a masterpiece and i think WBTS took the best out of it, adding the initiative concepts that are revolutionary. On the semi-randomization, perhaps it's too hot. Maybe a slight less randomized set would do but the leading concept is still there: CSA has advantage with leaders even when they are semi randomized. 

(in reply to JAMiAM)
Post #: 2
RE: 75,000 volunteers needed! - 8/26/2008 7:56:17 AM   
JAMiAM

 

Posts: 6165
Joined: 2/8/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: GShock

I think the CP recovery, semi random and hidden, are highly realistic rules. U have to discover the stats and really put the right man in the right place. Of course it makes the game much harder but thats what we want after all. The more realistic, the better. This game has a huge potential...2by3 has a huge potential. AWD is a masterpiece and i think WBTS took the best out of it, adding the initiative concepts that are revolutionary. On the semi-randomization, perhaps it's too hot. Maybe a slight less randomized set would do but the leading concept is still there: CSA has advantage with leaders even when they are semi randomized. 

It's not that it's "too hot". It's that it is too unrealistic. The leader specialty rating is constant, but the Attack, and Defense values are completely randomized without regard to each other, or to the leader's basic strength or weakness. Thus, you get silliness like a 4 Inf leader being hamstrung with 1/1 Attack/Defense values, or leaders getting wildly divergent A/D values of 1/4, 4/1. Likewise, you commonly get results from the randomizer of having mediocre 2 rated leaders suddenly becoming attack and defense specialists with 4/4 ratings. These results are anything but realistic. None of the historical A/D values vary by more than 2. That is, you have the rare occasions of 3/1, 1/3, 4/2, or 2/4, where a leader was notably more effective on the attack, or defense, but again, they are very rare. The randomization scheme makes these types of results much more likely, and throws in the wild 1/4, and 4/1 results to boot.

(in reply to GShock)
Post #: 3
RE: 75,000 volunteers needed! - 8/26/2008 9:24:01 AM   
IronWarrior


Posts: 801
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: Beaverton, OR
Status: offline
JAMIAM, I'd be up for another game if you're still looking to start some more games. Don't know if I'm still up to your level of play, but I should be able to at least do better than last time.

I figured I'd put myself out of my misery, only because you had other games going and didn't want to waste your time, but I'd be happy to see one through to the painful end lol. I have plenty of time to fit in a couple games, and the only one I have running right now is as CSA in April '63 with the Union down below 800.

Agree about random leaders, I've tried other games with it and I can't stomach seeing things like Jeb Stuart as a horrible cavalry commander, etc.

I'd be willing to try your house rules on Kentucky. I don't really know the best way to handle that one, but I'm open to try it.

Would still prefer to be CSA, even though I know I'll get trounced...

(in reply to JAMiAM)
Post #: 4
RE: 75,000 volunteers needed! - 8/26/2008 4:47:27 PM   
JAMiAM

 

Posts: 6165
Joined: 2/8/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: IronWarrior
JAMIAM, I'd be up for another game if you're still looking to start some more games. Don't know if I'm still up to your level of play, but I should be able to at least do better than last time.

Hi Bill! I'd welcome another game. You can show me what you've learned, and hopefully, I can give you a few new surprises...


quote:

ORIGINAL: IronWarrior
I figured I'd put myself out of my misery, only because you had other games going and didn't want to waste your time, but I'd be happy to see one through to the painful end lol. I have plenty of time to fit in a couple games, and the only one I have running right now is as CSA in April '63 with the Union down below 800.

Good to hear it. Send me a starter turn, whenever you're ready.


quote:

ORIGINAL: IronWarrior
Agree about random leaders, I've tried other games with it and I can't stomach seeing things like Jeb Stuart as a horrible cavalry commander, etc.

Amen, brother!


quote:

ORIGINAL: IronWarrior
I'd be willing to try your house rules on Kentucky. I don't really know the best way to handle that one, but I'm open to try it.

I thought your idea, expressed in another thread, about needing to have initiative to do overruns was a good idea, as well. It got me thinking a bit, and I've amended the house rules a little. Let me know what you think of them, and whether you think they need any other tweaking. I'll insert/edit them into the end of the first post of this thread.


quote:

ORIGINAL: IronWarrior
Would still prefer to be CSA, even though I know I'll get trounced...

That's good with me. If you're happy with the amended honor rules, then send me a starter file, when you're ready. If the rules need tweaked, then we can hash them out before we start. Thanks for picking up the gauntlet!





(in reply to IronWarrior)
Post #: 5
RE: 75,000 volunteers needed! - 8/27/2008 8:02:44 AM   
Doc o War


Posts: 345
Joined: 8/14/2008
From: Northern California
Status: offline
Jamiam- Indeed I would like to offer up a battle- Again I think to start I would like to try the South- your New House Rule on Kentucky is interesting- I'd like to give it a whirl- I think I would prefer the South to start- but will trade off next game as the north. One item:
   If you are following my posts you may have seen my Mississippi Mud issue- I have asked for a house rule:  no 1st Turn move by the Gulf Squadron into the River to bombard the forts- - I also asked for no Union Amphib in the Gulf until Oct or Nov 61- this follows the historic abilities of the Union at that time in the Gulf- except for the Islands- those are freebees.- its not hands tying- it was historic reality.  If this would be agreeable- then I say lets unleash the hounds of war. And I will send you a post- my email is Docfstar2@aol.com
  

_____________________________

Tell me the story of the common foot soldier, and I will tell you the story of all wars.
... Heroditus.

(in reply to JAMiAM)
Post #: 6
RE: 75,000 volunteers needed! - 8/27/2008 8:39:15 AM   
JAMiAM

 

Posts: 6165
Joined: 2/8/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Doc o War

Jamiam- Indeed I would like to offer up a battle- Again I think to start I would like to try the South- your New House Rule on Kentucky is interesting- I'd like to give it a whirl- I think I would prefer the South to start- but will trade off next game as the north. One item:
   If you are following my posts you may have seen my Mississippi Mud issue- I have asked for a house rule:  no 1st Turn move by the Gulf Squadron into the River to bombard the forts- - I also asked for no Union Amphib in the Gulf until Oct or Nov 61- this follows the historic abilities of the Union at that time in the Gulf- except for the Islands- those are freebees.- its not hands tying- it was historic reality.  If this would be agreeable- then I say lets unleash the hounds of war. And I will send you a post- my email is Docfstar2@aol.com
  

Hi Doc,

If you're willing to try my house rule regarding Kentucky, then it's the gentlemanly thing to do, in indulging your house rule on the Delta, and Gulf invasions. Truth be told, I generally don't stick my navy into the river that early anyway. Let's settle on October landings for non-island landings in the Gulf being fair game, though, since it is hit or miss, with regard to gaining amphibious initiative. Please send the starter file to iamjamiam AT yahoo DOT com.

By the way, below is an excerpt from my email to Bill (IronWarrior) from the turn that I just finished in our game. It is August 1861, and I went into Kentucky early. Here is an example of the house rule in action.

quote:

Hi Bill,

I screwed the pooch, this turn. Lyon got initiative with his army in Cairo. He had enough infantry and militia to overrun Paducah. This allowed me to not wait until a possible reaction phase triggered a spawning of militia, and gave me the opportunity to build a fort and some depots. However, my other army, in New Albany didn't gain initiative, though enough leaders did individually to move into (but not overrun) Louisville. A dicey move, if you have enough forces to reach and contest Louisville, if Kentucky should happen to go Confederate...

...which it did...

Oh well, that's what I get for not waiting and for getting greedy. Per the house rules, this will allow you and I free movement throughout Kentucky, from your turn onward. Of course, now I have to fight spawning militia in most of the regions, which will make sweeping series of overruns basically impossible.

So, in short, Paducah is pretty well secured, unless you have a huge surprise waiting for me in Humbolt, but the rest of Kentucky is going to be a very different kettle of fish than we are used to.

Looking forward to seeing how this turns out.

(in reply to Doc o War)
Post #: 7
RE: 75,000 volunteers needed! - 8/27/2008 11:01:07 AM   
IronWarrior


Posts: 801
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: Beaverton, OR
Status: offline
I really like this house rule on Kentucky. James decided to be aggressive and he was able to secure the strategic Paducah. Kentucky did go Confederate (50% chance) which allowed me to react to the forces in Louisville and try to contest it, which I did in a fairly even battle with the odds lightly favoring CSA (although I get a feeling James didn't expect this and has a larger force sitting in Paducah :D ). If Kentucky had not gone CSA, I would not have been able to react in Louisville, and James would have taken it. This is really interesting as it factors in more risk for the Union player. I also think this is the first time it actually mattered that Kentucky joined the CSA lol. Any other time it was overrun anyway and didn't last long or have any significance. The Louisville battle was also interesting because I went in totally blind and didn't know what kind of numbers he was bringing in there, it wasn't a sure thing that I could successfully contest it.


At first glance I think it worked really well and it seems fair considering an August invasion, it remains to be seen what the longer term effects are so we'll have to see. It does seem to cover all bases... initiative, slows overuns, and brings more balance to risk vs reward.

< Message edited by IronWarrior -- 8/27/2008 11:51:20 AM >

(in reply to JAMiAM)
Post #: 8
RE: 75,000 volunteers needed! - 8/27/2008 6:24:40 PM   
Troy6677

 

Posts: 26
Joined: 9/2/2007
Status: offline
That Union player under 800 PP in May 1863 that Ironwarrior mentioned would be me.

Mark

(in reply to IronWarrior)
Post #: 9
RE: 75,000 volunteers needed! - 8/27/2008 6:29:54 PM   
JAMiAM

 

Posts: 6165
Joined: 2/8/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mvdh1

That Union player under 800 PP in May 1863 that Ironwarrior mentioned would be me.

Mark

A brave, and honest man, is hard to find.

Hey, we all start off green, and make many mistakes along the way. The trick is to be observant, learn from them, then get back on your horse and kick back - only smarter and harder.

(in reply to Troy6677)
Post #: 10
RE: 75,000 volunteers needed! - 8/27/2008 7:55:38 PM   
Troy6677

 

Posts: 26
Joined: 9/2/2007
Status: offline
quote:

A brave, and honest man, is hard to find.

Hey, we all start off green, and make many mistakes along the way. The trick is to be observant, learn from them, then get back on your horse and kick back - only smarter and harder.


Thanks and how very true. This game is so much fun I don't mind having my sword handed to me. Well, almost anyway....

Mark

(in reply to JAMiAM)
Post #: 11
RE: 75,000 volunteers needed! - 8/27/2008 9:12:56 PM   
IronWarrior


Posts: 801
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: Beaverton, OR
Status: offline
Hey Mark,

Our game has been a lot of fun, I was only letting James know that it was winding down. You've been doing great, you should have seen the score the first time i played James lol.

Bill

(in reply to Troy6677)
Post #: 12
RE: 75,000 volunteers needed! - 8/27/2008 11:36:31 PM   
Troy6677

 

Posts: 26
Joined: 9/2/2007
Status: offline
Hi Bill:

Not a problem at all. I am really enjoying our game and hope for a rematch when it's finished.

Mark

(in reply to IronWarrior)
Post #: 13
RE: 75,000 volunteers needed! - 8/28/2008 8:26:26 AM   
Doc o War


Posts: 345
Joined: 8/14/2008
From: Northern California
Status: offline
James- I will send a starter file- We will use your Kentucky Invasion Home rule- and for the Mississippi Slide rule- Ok on the amphib ban being only to October- By October 61 the Union was beginning to make naval landings- so agreed- Your Kentucky Invasion House rule and the Missisippi Slide rule- (or Too may Southern Officers in the Gulf Squadron)-- anyway- no move into the River by the Union July 61 and no Amphib assaults on the Gulf Coast until October 61- except I will allow the Islands - as the Navy needed them and the Bases there reflect the Navy getting their organizational act together. And the Confeds can't stop it anyway.
It's the landings on the mainland early that were just not possible. A starter turn is forthcoming. I hear the rummble of far off cannon - coming closer. doc

_____________________________

Tell me the story of the common foot soldier, and I will tell you the story of all wars.
... Heroditus.

(in reply to Troy6677)
Post #: 14
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Gary Grigsby's War Between the States >> Opponents Wanted >> 75,000 volunteers needed! Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.266