Quick Combat values for rifles (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Forge of Freedom: The American Civil War 1861-1865



Message

Berkut -> Quick Combat values for rifles (1/3/2007 10:18:17 PM)

These seem to be off a bit. Of course, I don't really know how these values are used, so I might be assuming they mean more than they do.

Examples: The basic Springfield has a value of 2.

An improved Springfield has a value of 6!

Was it really three times better? Since "improvised" is a 0, and a musket is a 1 it seems odd that the baseline weapon of the war is a lot closer to improvised than it is to a marginally improved model of itself.

QC values:

Improvised 0
Shotgun 0
Musket 1
Minie Rifle 2
Springfield Rifle 2
Richmond Musket 3
Enfield 4
Whitworth 7
Imp. Springfield 6
Lorenz 6
Spencer Carbine 7
Sharps Carbine 7
Henry Rifle 13
Starr Carbine 8
Zouave Rifle 8

Was the Richmond Musket really better than the Springfield? Was the Whitworth really more than twice as effective? Was the Whitworth ever even used at the brigade level at all?

It would seem to me that that the values should be pretty clustered. All the rifles are pretty similar in effectiveness, while the rapid firing repeating weapons are much higher, and much more expensive in initial cost and supply.



balto -> RE: Quick Combat values for rifles (1/4/2007 12:36:42 AM)

Hi, I am brand new to FoF, so I may totally wrong.  But where in the heck did you get those numbers?  I cannot find any of them. 

Go to Manual pages 209-214 and look at the number called "Quick Combat."  For example, Zouave is 200%  where in the heck do you see an 8?

I could be wrong, I am new to this. 



Ironclad -> RE: Quick Combat values for rifles (1/4/2007 2:34:58 AM)

The manual refers to these percentages as being related to 25% per level of Quick Combat. So 200% = 8 X 25% hence the QC value of 8. The values are listed in the QC values mod in the Mods and Scenarios section which is from jchastain who uses them for reference in his PBEM AAR.



Mike Scholl -> RE: Quick Combat values for rifles (1/4/2007 4:19:28 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Berkut

These seem to be off a bit. Of course, I don't really know how these values are used, so I might be assuming they mean more than they do.

Examples: The basic Springfield has a value of 2.

An improved Springfield has a value of 6!

Was it really three times better? Since "improvised" is a 0, and a musket is a 1 it seems odd that the baseline weapon of the war is a lot closer to improvised than it is to a marginally improved model of itself.

QC values:

Improvised 0
Shotgun 0
Musket 1
Minie Rifle 2
Springfield Rifle 2
Richmond Musket 3
Enfield 4
Whitworth 7
Imp. Springfield 6
Lorenz 6
Spencer Carbine 7
Sharps Carbine 7
Henry Rifle 13
Starr Carbine 8
Zouave Rifle 8

Was the Richmond Musket really better than the Springfield? Was the Whitworth really more than twice as effective? Was the Whitworth ever even used at the brigade level at all?

It would seem to me that that the values should be pretty clustered. All the rifles are pretty similar in effectiveness, while the rapid firing repeating weapons are much higher, and much more expensive in initial cost and supply.



Some of these do seem very strange. The Springfield and the Enfield were VERY similar..., and both were "minie rifles" in that they fired the Minie Bullet. As did the Lorenz. And the "Richmond Musket" being better than the "Springfield Rifle"? And most of all the variation of 2 through 6 for what were all very similar weapons...



christof139 -> RE: Quick Combat values for rifles (1/4/2007 5:46:28 AM)

There was not virtually any differance in range and accuracy of the 1855, 1861 and 1863 Springfields, they could be included as one type.

The Richmond Musket is the 1855 Sprinfield made in percussion without the Maynard Primer from the machinery captured at Hapers Ferry early in the war. The Richmond was considered by both sides as a first class arm. In the mid 1960's or so, some fellow traded a Richmond in very good condition for a brand new Cadillac.

There was also a Harpers Ferry Rifle, which I do believe was simply an 1841 Miss. Rifle made at Harpers Ferry. The Miss. Rifle was favored by Confeds and Zouave units, and many private Confed firms made copies of them.

The Enfield did have a longer range than the Springfield.

The Lorenz came in batches that were both good and bad. Good batches were appreciated as it was a good rifle of solid construction.

Very few copies of the Remington Zouave Rifle were ever made, only several thousand, and it is basically a .58 cal. Miss. Rifle more or less. A good weapon.

I wonder where the lousy Liege is as it's not in the list.

I imagine the Genric Minie Rifle as rifled SB's of various yaesr and makes, poor batches of Lorenz, hunting rifles even, and other 2nd and 3rd class rifles.

Chris




Berkut -> RE: Quick Combat values for rifles (1/4/2007 6:21:21 AM)

Thanks for the info Christof.

I would venture ot guess that the actual combat value of most of these weapons, even the ones considered marginally superior, at the brigade scale, was pretty much the same.

Of course, not knowing how the game uses these numbers, we don't really know what impact they actually have. They might, in all reality, be very minor.



Twinkle -> RE: Quick Combat values for rifles (1/4/2007 9:09:25 AM)

And an even stranger thing is that these values do not seem to take any account of the tactic used on the battlefield... just some firing effectives that have been found out way after the war itself, and that part is possibly wrong (see Christof's post). The close firing distances, most often below 100 yards means that all rifles are effective killers, because soldiers did not fire at individual soldier. They fired at targets big as a couple of barns. Another thing was that almost all long distance fire was not aimed and adjusted for range, units could stand and fire at each other with every single shot going low or high (depending on range).
 
Someone searched the Official Record for references to adjusting aim due to range (I read about this in North & South which is the 100% best ACW journal existing, and a subscription is cheap... even to Sweden) and he found just one such reference in all the hundreds of thousands battle reports
 
It would be nice to see how Quick Combat Values translate into the number of kills, i.e. WCS please give us the entire math used in QC, because something is really wrong if two even sized armies meets and on of them take 90% of the losses.



Twinkle -> RE: Quick Combat values for rifles (1/4/2007 9:12:02 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

Improvised 0
Shotgun 0
Musket 1
Minie Rifle 2
Springfield Rifle 2
Richmond Musket 3
Enfield 4
Whitworth 7
Imp. Springfield 6
Lorenz 6
Spencer Carbine 7
Sharps Carbine 7
Henry Rifle 13
Starr Carbine 8
Zouave Rifle 8

Some of these weapons should as well not be allowed for brigades to have, wasn’t the Spencer something that only a few battalions had?, and so on...



christof139 -> RE: Quick Combat values for rifles (1/4/2007 2:57:35 PM)

All the regiments in Wilder's Lightning Brigade except one had repeaters, and as the war progressed some color guaards of regiments equipped themselves with repeaters, and more and more Union cavalry was equipping with repeaters, so maybe a game limit of only 2 brigades at one time in the Union forrces may have repeaters. Junst my opine, something like that. maybe 3 Brigades. Whatever.

Actually aimed fire was taught in the USA and CSA Armies, and many of the troops were already familiar with firearms anyway. The accuracy of American fire was considerably better than that of uropean fire, and this is in Livermore's Numbers and losses. However, in the heat of combat with all the tension and fear etc., many people just point and shoot in the general direction of the enemy. So, since the hits are low in both the American and european militaries of the time, it really doesn't make all that much of a difference, and a hit $tage can just be within reasonable limits. Buck and ball was used on a quite frequent basis in both rifles and SB's for close range firing, so the hits at close range would be considerably higher than at mid and far range. No big deal to me if the hit %tage is a little high for game purposes, just don't make it too high!!! Maybe: 3% close, 2% mid, and 1% far for simplification, something like that.

Also, there were only three regiments that were equipped with Colt Revolving Rifles in actual battle that I know of: the 36th Illionois (Pea Ridge, etc.), and a Conneticutt unit of the AotP during the 1862 Maryland Campaign but it did not fight at South Mountain or Antietam as it was detached, and a Michigan regiment or a good part of it at the Siege of Vicksburg I do believe. if anyone knows the number of the Michigan Regiment I would like to know so I don't have to look for it, and I have the Conneticutt regiment's number in my mass of scribbled papers on Antietam. The 1st US Sharpshooters had them at first but didn't use them in combat. Some Garibaldis, a company at least, had them in Italy.

Ranges = pointblank to about 700 yards. At the battle of Piedmont in 1864 in Virginia, there is a description of assaulting Union troops firing at Confeds in fieldworks in a wood and actually hitting some it seems from an estimated 700 yard range. If on a nice open field maybe 400 yards would be a normal range to open fire, and these are of course rifle ranges.

Chris




balto -> 8 levels of QC? (1/4/2007 5:27:17 PM)

In reference to IronClad's reply..., the 8 levels of QC combat?  Please tell me where this is at in the manual and explain this to me? 

I am sure the 8 levels thing is correct, but what and where is that. 

I thought the 25% for the Minie was saying it modified the Strength of a Brigade.., so if you have a 3000 man brigade, it now attacked at 3750 (3000 + 25%) for purposes of determining how much you DEAL DAMAGE (manual section 2.4, page 71).  And a Zoave Rifle would DOUBLE the damage.  No idea what that 8 level thing is.

Any help on this would be greatly appreciated as I am still studying the manual and I cannot wait to PBEM (and lose). 

Thanks to all.



Berkut -> RE: 8 levels of QC? (1/4/2007 5:30:52 PM)

Holy crap balto, if that is accurate, then these values are *grossly* over-stated!

There jsut wasn't that large a difference in the effective firepower of these weapons!



balto -> RE: 8 levels of QC? (1/4/2007 5:34:04 PM)

Berkut, I am not a very bright man. So do not put any thought into reading my posts. Lets see how this pans out.




Mike Scholl -> RE: Quick Combat values for rifles (1/4/2007 6:32:22 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Berkut

Thanks for the info Christof.

I would venture ot guess that the actual combat value of most of these weapons, even the ones considered marginally superior, at the brigade scale, was pretty much the same.

Of course, not knowing how the game uses these numbers, we don't really know what impact they actually have. They might, in all reality, be very minor.




Maybe not the same..., but a variation of 2 to 6 seems quite excessive for what were all basically rifled muzzel-loaders using minie-type bullets



Berkut -> RE: Quick Combat values for rifles (1/4/2007 6:37:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl


quote:

ORIGINAL: Berkut

Thanks for the info Christof.

I would venture ot guess that the actual combat value of most of these weapons, even the ones considered marginally superior, at the brigade scale, was pretty much the same.

Of course, not knowing how the game uses these numbers, we don't really know what impact they actually have. They might, in all reality, be very minor.




Maybe not the same..., but a variation of 2 to 6 seems quite excessive for what were all basically rifled muzzel-loaders using minie-type bullets


Yeah, but if the firepower formula looks something like

FP = 25+QCRating...

then the numbers don't really matter much.

Which then begs the question of...why have them modelled at that level of discreteness? If the difference between 2 and 6 is minor, then it is likely that the difference between 0 and 2 is minor as well, which would be an issue.



balto -> RE: Quick Combat values for rifles (1/4/2007 9:01:32 PM)

Man, you are really confusing me now. Where do you get the "25" from?

And the QC rating is a percentage, so what the heck?



Ironclad -> RE: 8 levels of QC? (1/4/2007 9:02:08 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: balto

In reference to IronClad's reply..., the 8 levels of QC combat? Please tell me where this is at in the manual and explain this to me?

I am sure the 8 levels thing is correct, but what and where is that.

I thought the 25% for the Minie was saying it modified the Strength of a Brigade.., so if you have a 3000 man brigade, it now attacked at 3750 (3000 + 25%) for purposes of determining how much you DEAL DAMAGE (manual section 2.4, page 71). And a Zoave Rifle would DOUBLE the damage. No idea what that 8 level thing is.

Any help on this would be greatly appreciated as I am still studying the manual and I cannot wait to PBEM (and lose).

Thanks to all.


It on page 156 of the manual (Advanced game, weapons) and states;

"Quick Combat: In quick combat brigades receive a bonus to damage based on the Quick Combat rating of their firearm. Each level of Quick Combat rating that a weapon has increases damage by 25% (the rating is shown as a percentage in the table in the Appendix)."

I am curious whether these and other modifiers introduced in the intermediate and advanced games have an impact on who actual wins the the fight between individual units in Quick Combat. I raised it in a post but was never answered.

In the QC section (see Manual page 71) the rout check appears not to be influenced by the casualty figure (described as damage done). However as the latter is calculated using the salvo outcomes there is a direct correlation.

In the modifiers added in the intermediate and advanced games it gets more complicated. Some (eg upgrades) appear to give a percentage possibility of getting +1 to a salvo bonus. Others (eg weapons, brigade special abilities, brigade attributes) give a percentage increase/decrease to damage done. My query is are these in fact tied into the salvo/counter salvo calculations. If not then you could presumably have an extreme situation where one unit wins the salvo exchange ie the individual combat whilst suffering massive casualties.

So please can we have an explanation of how these inputs affect the combat results in QC.

Also re the earlier discussion point it would help to know what influenced the selection of the QC weapon values. There does seem to be a larger discrepancy than one reads in accounts about the different rifles. However I do enjoy having such a wide choice of differing weapons so this is one area of the game where my preference would favour playability over strict historical accuracy.





Sonny -> RE: 8 levels of QC? (1/4/2007 10:48:23 PM)

If these figures are used as multipliers it may go a long way toward explaining the lopsided casualties we have seen.



jchastain -> RE: 8 levels of QC? (1/5/2007 9:24:57 PM)

By the way, if you look in the mods section, you'll find an edit I did to the weapons file that displays the QC value in game (as well as the siege bonuses).  For anyone playing primarily quick combat (either PBEM or just skipping detailed combat), the QC value is a key piece of information when choosing weapon upgrades.  I suspect an official patch will eventually display it more prominently, but for now the mod is an easy quick fix.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.59375