Recommend
3 
 Thumb up
 Hide
8 Posts

The Guns of Gettysburg» Forums » Rules

Subject: Union attacks on objectives not fully controlled rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Tom Kassel
United Kingdom
Unspecified
Unspecified
flag msg tools
The Union is under Hold general orders. The Confederate attacks and brings an objective under a field of fire. At the end of the nex Union phase, he orders attack. On his subsequent acion phase, his attacks succeed and the Confederate units imposing their field of fire on the objective are defeated but not destroyed. At the end of his action phase, the Union must again declare an attack phase, even though the Confederate units must make a mandatory withdrawal. So two consecutive attack phases are required. Is that correct?
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rachel Simmons
United States
Los Altos
California
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
In the situation described, the Union must declare Attack General Orders again, but because the Confederates will withdraw in their next turn, the Union does not have to pay a penalty if they make no actual attacks in their next turn.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tom Kassel
United Kingdom
Unspecified
Unspecified
flag msg tools
The big penalty is when night prevents them declaring attack general orders. If the Confederates bring a objective under field of fire on the penultimate turn before night, it is game over as the union will be unable to make the second attack declaration.

This occurred in a solo trial when late confederate arrivals meant few objective moves and the central objective was rather exposed. As things developed it would have been safer to move it into Gettysburg town where it would be safe from field of fire with only a communication path to worry about.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tom Kassel
United Kingdom
Unspecified
Unspecified
flag msg tools
I have confused my example. When the confederates have approached an objective on the penultimate turn before night, the union is unable to make the first attack declaration due to upcoming night and loses immediately. It is when the confederates cover the objective on the ante-penultimate turn before night that he union loses because he cannot make the second required attack declaration.

The first case even loses when the union had anticipated the confederate move and has declared attack general orders in anticipation and performs his attack successfullly. The presence of confederate units which must withdraw is still enough to win the game for the confederates.

I wonder what purpose is served by requiring atack orders when the relevant confederate units are obliged to withdraw.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rachel Simmons
United States
Los Altos
California
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
In the original design, the Union simply lost immmediately if they failed to fully control all three objectives. The opportunity to re-take them was added fairly late in the design process.

If as the Union you find the situation unpleasant when you lose an objective, my reaction as the designer is that it is supposed to be unpleasant. Your solution to the problem is: Don't lose them.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tom Kassel
United Kingdom
Unspecified
Unspecified
flag msg tools
OK, seems rather challenging for the Union if his reinforcements prevented many/any objective moves.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rachel Simmons
United States
Los Altos
California
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Playtesting for balance was a process that I called my "Playtester death march." It was grim. Tough and dedicated playtesters were dropping dead along the road because of an endless series of tweaks to the victory conditions.

There are situations at the extremes of the variable reinforcement system that really are unbalanced, but I pushed it as far as I possibly could to find a good balance. I do think it was successful overall and the system produces (reasonably) balanced games for a very wide range of reinforcement entry times, but not for the entire possible range.

Imperfect as it is, I am pretty pleased with the balance as published, though I would think long and hard before attempting a similar system again. Way, way too much work.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tom Kassel
United Kingdom
Unspecified
Unspecified
flag msg tools
I can imagine. People often carry on to excess about the many potential combinations in CDGs, but I can see how the variations in arrival times and locations would be a real nightmare in testing.

Speaking of death marches, how is Stavka these days?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.