ACW Supply

[Gary McClellan]

Lots in here, and it's fairly complex.

I'm not privy to the sales numbers, but my understanding has always been that the Panzer Campaigns games have always led the way in terms of sheer sales and popularity. I have no real sense of the newer Panzer Battles, or Modern Campaigns games, and how they fit into that.

I think one source of your frustration is that there is a certain disagreement between people of what the blackpowder games are. Are they simply a tactical game, or are they operational/tactical? That really does make a great deal of difference, and many of your frustrations (like replacements and supply system) are born of that. Those are considerations that really come into play as the engine gets pushed further and further into being operational games.

One thing I noticed working with John over the years, is that he always very much had his idea of what the game was, and in the end, he made the final call. I could request something, but if it didn't meet his vision, it didn't happen. Now, I never worked on NAP/ACW, and there weren't really any 2 day battles in the Seven Years War, so I never pushed into that aspect of things, so I'm not sure if that preference for tactical vs operational/tactical was something that came from John, or just a reflection of the specific pushes and requests from the designers of those games.

I do think that for a whole raft of reasons, the core blackpowder engine (M&P, EAW, NAP, ACW) really struggles as you try to push into operational concepts, and I'd rather see new games with a truly operational focus than trying to expand into a blended Operational/Tactical approach.