Just to compare some rules, I am taking a single situation from the Rebel & Patriot rules (Osprey Publishing) and seeing how it works out with various rules sets.
Scenario A - First Clash at Lament Ridge, is the scenario that R&B suggest to start with as it has fewest aspects to it, of course making it ideal to ‘fit’ to test with other rules.
The basics are that we have an open table with a ridge in the middle and an objective on the centre of the crest. At the end of each turn, the side that is the only side that has a unit within 3” of the objective gets 1 point. At the end of the scenario, the side that has gained the most points from the ridge will get +3 Honour Points. There will also be some Honour Points for casualties caused.
In addition to the hill, I have added a field (rough ground) to each side, so that both halves of the battlefield are the same. At the end of turn 8 and each following turn, there is potential for the game to randomly end with the rolling of a D6.
Using the R&B rules the sides for an ACW 1862 battle might have;
Union - 2 Veteran infantry, 2 Green infantry, 1 artillery
Confederate - 3 Aggressive, but poor shooters infantry, 1 artillery
The Confederates will be player 1 (this was diced for). In each game the units will be set up in the same positions as they are in game 1 and they begin 9” in from the respective edges of the table.
Rebel & Patriots;
With just 4 - 5 units per side and mirrored terrain in a meeting engagement setting, rules will need to have some dynamic aspects to make the scenario interesting. It is an intro scenario and as such, high demands should not be placed on it.
There is an activation system and each unit must declare an action and then attempt to activate to execute that action. The maths of this just falls on the side that things will likely activate, but nothing can be taken for granted and failures do come at important moments. So in this game, a Union unit was about to charge up the hill, but failed their activation. That resulted in them taking an extra turn of fire, which inflicted casualties and then a failed morale test, causing them to retreat ½ a move and take a disorder marker - I like that narrative.
Two artillery units were plugging away at each other and artillery even when in the open, count as being in cover and so each turn the units were inflicting one hit on each other. The activation system broke that cycle when the Union artillery failed to activate for their own fire, while the Confederate artillery did activate and so got the extra hit.
So overall activation is bringing some command chaos into our small scene.
The Confederate artillery fired at one of the Union green units, getting a very good score. I suppose they got lucky with the dice, but when you are rolling 12 of them that sort of thing can happen! Anyway, over the course of a couple of turns, the artillery saw off the Union infantry unit, which had taken 3 disorder markers (in this game disorder is a serious status that can lead to unit removal). At this point I was so bothered about the effect of the Confederate artillery, that I used Union artillery to counter-battery fire. I don’t know whether this sort of duelling is a normal default in this system due to artillery effectiveness. I say this because as a counter argument, on one turn, Union artillery rolled 12 dice and didn’t get any hits!
Overall, firepower seems quite brutal and I only saw one attempt at closing to assault. For the rest of the game, units were content to fire. That seems about right on an ACW battlefield, but was it the same in actions from the American War of Independence or French Indian Wars? … I don’t know enough to say. However, saying that, many scenarios are about capturing ground and while fire, especially from Close Order infantry using Volley Fire ‘may’ force the enemy back with losses and disorder, in our situation here, the Confederate ‘aggressive’ infantry traits certainly make them more effective in assault than when firing - so what would you do!
I do like the simple way that effects are brought into the game. For example our Confederates are aggressive so in combat they score hits on 5’s and not just 6’s, while they are classed as poor shooters, so they hit only on 6’ and not 5’s like other line units do. The description probably handles the Confederates of 1862 quite well with elan and smoothbore muskets taken into account without undue overhead of rules.
I used my Epic figure blocks, which fit with the term ‘multi figure basing’, the actual system uses single basing so that casualties can be removed individual and I suppose that does give an instant visual of strength, but I prefer the multi base and just putting strength dice behind the unit, with the benefit that you don’t end up with weedy looking units that have become skinny due to casualties and these dice work fine, they are no more onerous than they are in countless other systems.
One thing I have stumbled on …. and this is no fault of the rules because they are trying to show a company level game, but I would hopefully want to use R&P rules in bigger settings and having one unit lined up behind another brings no benefit because ‘supports’ don’t count in the system and indeed there are dangers being in this position because if the front rank is forced to retreat and is blocked by friends, then they lose 1 strength point for every inch that they can’t complete their retreat move by (a nice rule). So for me to have bigger games with this slick system, I would need to move to smaller unit frontages, so that the army can fight on a wider frontage rather than in depth on my table.
There is quite a lot of nuance in the game and it is certainly entertaining. It moves along quite handily and is not at all mathsy or anything like that.
Though there are relatively few rule pages, I did find that I had to jump between sections to find various things and I think fuller familiarity would take around three games or so …. but that is no different to many rule sets and here the turns fair rattle along. I think they achieve a good balance between fun, playability and a good feel.
Stats for Line Infantry - Move 6´´, short range fire 12´´, long range fire 18´´.
In our Rebels & Patriots game, the Confederates spent the most number of turns with the objective and so were award +3 Honour Points. Both sides suffered less than 33% casualties, so each side got +2 Honour Points for that, leaving the Confederates with a clear victory …. this time!
****************************************************************
Next we move onto Black Powder. We will use the same parameters as the first game for set-up and victory conditions. This means we shall ignore the usual Brigade Break rules for formation collapse. I also like the rule from the Glory Hallelujah supplement that states units moving two or three times in a turn cannot fire in the subsequent Shooting Phase - I apply that rule to all BP games and will do so here.
Our set-up looks exactly the same as the R&P game and the Confederates will be Player 1, but here we are calling the individual infantry units regiments, making our force the size of a single brigade. For our smaller table, it makes sense to reduce all game measurements by half.
The biggest criticism that Black Powder (BP) seems to come in for is the generic nature of the rules, but I think one really needs to use the unit characteristic traits to elevate them above that and that just needs some deeper familiarity with the rules. So for example if we take the Confederate line infantry unit from the R&P game that was labelled aggressive and poor shooter, we can reflect the same by the fact that the Smoothbore Musket has a shorter range in BP and for aggression we can give them the ‘Tough Fighters’ trait, which allows them to re-roll a failed hand-to-hand combat dice or if using the Glory Hallelujah perhaps we can take the ‘Rebel Yell’ trait.
For the Union green troops, we can give them the ‘Freshly Raised’ trait. Here when the unit first fires or fights, it rolls on a chart and its true mettle is revealed - for good or bad! We will give our two brigade commanders Command Ratings of 8. When wanting to do something, our regiments will roll against that value and depending on result can move once, twice, thrice ….. or not at all! This is bringing the same sort of dynamism / chaos into the game that activation did in the R&P game - not everyone likes this aspect of the rules, because you can have units sitting on their hands for several turns, but I do like my command chaos.
As a counter to that, there are some circumstances when units automatically get one move and if within ‘proximity’ range of the enemy, the unit can automatically get one order as it acts on its own initiative, so in many respects it is the march to contact where the chaos sits and it is probably a good thing that players have a hand of restraint placed on their shoulder to prevent all of that perfect parade ground marching around.
The brigade commander can attempt to give an order to an individual unit, but once that attempt fails, no further order can be issued to the rest of the brigade. It can be more efficient to issue one single brigade order to the whole brigade (to do the same thing), fine if they pass the command roll, but it is the end of the movement opportunity if you don’t.
We saw both exampled in the game. On turn 1, the Confederate commander gave an order for the whole brigade to advance 15´´. This would bring the Confederate centre and wings up onto a line running along the crest of the ridge. The command dice (2D6) resulted in a ‘5’, which was low enough to give the force three lots of their 6´´ (our halved measurements) movements, which brought them onto the objective at the hill crest.
By contrast, in turn 1, the Union commander wanted to issue individual orders. He ordered the lead infantry unit in the centre to make one move. It did so when passing the command roll. The second unit (artillery) was ordered to deploy ….. it failed the command roll and at that point the Union manoeuvre part of the turn ended. It was worse than that in fact. The Union had rolled Double Six, meaning they had to roll on the Blunder Table. They rolled a ‘4’ which meant that the artillery was obliged to make one move to its right, putting it in the field amongst the rough ground.
Within the first two turns, the effect of these systems was that forces that had started with equal chances in most respects, now saw that the Confederates had reached the objective and could now sit and hold the position, racking up victory advantages, while the Union were in a bit of a mess below, with much of their stuff unmoved - they have their work cut out now!
Turn 2 made matters worse as the first Union unit to test for orders failed and so the brigade commanders could issue no further orders to anyone in that turn, the Union were stuck for now and the game was already breaking down into some interesting episodes, which would no doubt be different on a future re-run of the scenario.
I would be fair to mention that we are focussed in on a single brigade here and that I would likely use the rules for a Divisional game, with say 3 brigades in it, so some of these variables may balance out across the whole table over a turn or two.
One thing that did help the Union was that their unit in the centre that did move, was now within rifled musket range of the ridge ……. but, the poor old Confederates sitting there with smoothbore muskets, did not have the range to fire back at the Union unit. The Union no doubt see an opportunity to duel here, without risk to themselves, but for every turn that the Confederates remain the sole force within 1½´´ (our reduced measurements) of the objective, they are gaining ‘Honour Points’ - a term we are using from the R&P scenario rules.
For firing, the line infantry generally roll 3 fire dice to get hits, that is okay, but then the target rolls dice to try and save itself from said hits and from a narrative point of view ‘saving’ just feels a bit off to me and over the course of play there are moments when it just becomes strangely annoying in a solo run game, but I suppose it keeps the maths right so that units stay in play for long enough for the game to work, because lost and shaken regiments are the way to see the entire brigade swept away.
Artillery is less effective than in R&B and though it can feel a bit under powered compared to some rules, it does become deadlier at close range and really the artillery feels about right in this game as some of its effect can be seen in other parts of the rules, for example when targets take Break Tests from artillery fire.
There is disorder in the game that can fall from fire and hand-to-hand combat. If a unit gets a disorder marker, it is restricted to not being able to use orders in its next Command Phase, plus it suffers mods in combat and morale tests. But at the end of that turn, the marker is automatically removed, so it causes a sort of command hesitation effect. It can feel a little random or disconnected when it happens because it is attack rolls of ‘6’ that generate disorder, seemingly luck based, but again this consternation in the ranks is working within the maths of the game and if I were bright enough, I could run stats to compare with other systems that are doing similar things, just by different means.
As units absorb hits, they will approach and then exceed their ‘Stamina level’, by becoming shaken, which is one of the triggers for a Break Test - the results can be anything from ‘carry on’ (roll high) to ‘removing the unit from play’ (roll low).
The Confederate leader wants to rally the unit on the crest, so he attempts a rally order, which is successful and it reduces the units number of hits by one and the leader becomes attached the leader to the unit …. but the leader is now in harms way.
The whole process of Rally becomes increasingly important during play as units slide further towards being shaken, with a risk that the entire brigade could break! The battered Confederate unit on the hill needs to withdraw before further harm causes its collapse and removal from the game. It uses ‘proximity’ to order itself one move to the rear and then the good ordered unit that was behind it, moves up to replace it on the crest line. The Union regiments below that had been considering a charge on the ridge, now faces a fresh unit, so are cautious - that was nice.
But …. the Union cannot just sit on their hands and let the Confederates collect victory points from the objective on the crest. The Union announce a charge move and state that the regiment behind will follow up as a support. BUT, the Confederates can give Close Order fire in response and closing fire gives a -1 mod to the die roll, so they are firing with 3D6 looking for 3+ to hit.
The Union hold their breath! 3, 5 and 6 are rolled, so 3 hits and the 6 gives an automatic Disorder result. The Union roll their 3 Saves dice and surprisingly roll all 3 saves, so no hits, but the Disorder result stays! I’m not sure how I feel about that, but it does raise an eyebrow. For me, it seems a little contrived and I wonder about the extra work (double the dice throwing) to get to that result.
Hand to Hand combat is simultaneous fighting with each side getting 6 dice, despite the Union getting a +1 mod for the charge, they suffer a -1 on each die roll for the Disorder and the Confederates with the Tough Fighter trait gets to re-roll a failed die. After all that die rolling, the final result is that the Union suffer 1 hit. This would normally mean the Union fail and should take a Break Test, but they get the +1 for the supporting regiment to their rear and so we get a draw …. they must now fight on into the next players Hand-to-Hand phase.
The fighting here goes on for a bit longer, but then the Union win a round of Hand-to-Hand fighting and the Confederates are force to Take a Break Test. They suffer a -3 penalty for excess casualties and being shaken. They fail badly and are removed from play, a good decisive result.
As the game goes on, excess casualties and being shaken or disordered start to work into the various modifiers in the system and become deciding moments. For several turns, the Union Commander tries to order his right flank in the field to ‘rally on him’, but the attempts fail and continued firing on the unit by Confederate artillery in the end sees the green Union infantry unit removed from play after a failed Break Test.
The Confederate brigade is in a mess and the sensible thing is to withdraw the whole brigade, but before that can happen (we are on turn 12) the random end of turn dice roll brings things to a halt. The Union have been in possession of the crest for 5 turns, but the Confederates had it for 6, so they get +3 Honour Points. However, the Union get +1 Honour Point for causing at least 33% casualties on the enemy and +2 Honour Points for themselves not losing 33% casualties to the enemy. This causes a draw, which considering the tense fight and the number of troops reduced to shaken status, it is probably a fair result.
I find the Black powder rules very well explained, whatever you want to know is in there, it might take a bit of time to work through all the verbage, but it is there, somewhere!
On the face of it, I am not keen on ‘Saves’ they feel gamey and ‘Disorder’ does not particularly feel connected to anything else …. Just rolling a ‘6’. But everything mathematically is fine to bring a cohesive whole.
I like the order chaos and I particularly like movement in which a unit is simply picked up and moved ‘over there’ without all the unnecessary finesse of wheeling, pivoting and reduction in movement allowances when making fancy pants movement to get from A to B … your mileage may certainly differ on this point.
When bringing them to the small table, you have to remember that these rules were intended to allow large games to actually be completed in a reasonable time, so entire brigades being swept away is part of the design goal ….. but I felt my commanders focus was deteriorated a little by his focus being on just dashing around trying to save that unit, then this unit from being shaken, so that the brigade wasn’t dragged in to unrecoverable breaking. I end up feeling that there is ‘a way’ to get the best out of playing BP, rather than just the game leading me on a journey of battle.
It is very difficult to compare Black Powder and Rebels & Royalists for the kind of game that I want to play i.e. several brigades involved and supports being used in combat. I think BP is better suited to the purpose, but I like the story telling of R&P better.
Stats for Line Infantry (using ½ measurements) 1 move 6´´, but units have a potential to move three times in a turn, smoothbore musket range is 9´´, rifled musket range is 12´´ and close range is 3´´, again using our half measurements.
******************************************************************
Next we look at Two Flags - One Nation, my home brew ACW rules. Again, all the same parameters of the first game will be used. All the troops will be classed as capable and the green troops will be class as Limited. This essentially influences the various tests in the game.
Smoothbore muskets are reflected in the differing weapon ranges used in the rules and to give the Confederates the ‘Aggressive’ status that R&P did, we shall give the Confederates ‘Rebel Yell’, which allows them when taking a pre-charge test, to test as though they are Superior.
The rules have developed over a number of years and are at a point of being stable enough that I sent off my last couple of revisions to a print on demand printer, just so that it felt like I was working with a proper rulebook, it is already being marked up with red ink, as each game brings a previously unnoticed issue to life, but it is better to handle than all those loose bits of paper.
The basic engine hangs off the quality status of units. Each will be either Limited, Capable (most units) or Superior. There are quite a lot if tests in the game and these will mainly be influenced by unit quality, whether the unit is disordered (-1) and whether the unit has absorbed casualties (-1 per two hits suffered), so it becomes the case that the longer the units have been subjected to the rigours of battle, the harder it will be to pass tests.
To be in command, units must be within 12´´ of their brigade commander. If they move while out of command, it must be towards their commander.
Disorder is an important element in the game. Units ‘collect’ Disorder markers for various reasons. No matter how many disorder markers you have, you are simply disordered. At the end of the turn, a die is rolled for each disorder marker with a 50% chance of removal, so having several markers just means you are very disordered and will take time to sort yourself out.
Units accumulate hits and can operate fairly normally with up to 4 hits. Above that and they are classed as wavering. Each turn a wavering unit takes a Capability Test and failing means that it falls back 6´´ and takes another hit, this process is separate from enemy action and is reflecting the deterioration of wavering troops within what is essentially the front line, the zone of action - their tendency being towards retiring. Units rout once they reach 8 losses.
Units can only do one thing in a turn, so for example you either Fire, Charge or Move. Our game opens by both sides advancing and without disrupting activations or failed orders, the line advances in a cohesive way on its march to battle and we see both forces approach the hill.
Though there isn’t an element of failing orders, there are tests, but failure is not an ‘all or nothing’ thing, so for example, when testing to charge, a pass is a full charge and a fail is a half hearted charge. When testing to change formation, a pass allows the change plus normal movement, a fail just allows the change of formation, such as when the green (Limited) units on the Union flank went into skirmish order, but didn’t roll well enough to move as well.
There are Random Events and we get one as the battles lines close, The Union Commander is shot! He is instantly replaced, but to reflect the hesitation and command confusion that can fall from such things, all units of that brigade each get two disorder markers. Since the brigades are about to close, so much disorder just makes life a little harder for the Union and will continue to for a few turns, while that disorder burns off.
The shooting now starts, hits happen on a 5 or 6. Units that take hits must take a capability test, if they fail they fall back 6´´ and take a disorder marker. The more casualties that a unit suffers, the harder the test becomes to pass, throw in the disorder modifier and there becomes a clear difference between fresh units and units that are becoming increasingly spent.
Testing underpins the rules, but I think some might find this tedious. In the opening turns of the games, it doesn’t matter too much, units will frequently pass their test and when they don’t, it can bring some local chaos / nuance to play. But as the game rumbles on to the halfway point, these tests start to become very relevant and you run risks of putting tired troops into harms way and in some parts of the battlefield, worn units will be giving ground and so our interest and narrative gets stronger because of the testing combined with the deterioration of units.
Some time ago, I did try and address what I thought was excessive die rolling. I can’t even remember what I did, but it did streamline things somewhat. Then I had another go, dispensing with some of the tests, but things just felt too generic and the tests came back and so it is the case that an integral part of the game engine is the testing …. Whether one likes that or not is of personal gaming taste. One thing it does do is bring the end stages of the game into focus as increasing number of units enter that ‘Wavering’ status and are compelled to withdraw, voluntarily or not. It does add something to that phase of the fighting by playing out the disengagement aspect of battle.
We get another Random Event … Confused Orders, the Confederate player is allowed to move one Union unit in any direction for 9´´. They select the front Union unit that is atop the ridge. This leaves the unit that was behind it, now in the front line and unsupported. The Confederates seize the opportunity to throw in a charge to contact, hoping their two regiments (one up front and one supporting) can overwhelm the Union defence.
They take a pre-charge test, usually needing 6+ on 2D6 to pass as average troops, but with the Rebel Yell, they will pass on a 5+. They roll ‘9’, so even with the -1 for being Disordered and the -1 for charging uphill, they pass and a full charge goes in (not half hearted). Now the defenders take a test to respond, they pass and decide to shoot, a sort of defensive fire moment …… but even on 4D6 they don’t score any hits, that is a big surprise and the Confederate commander gives a sigh of relief … well you would, wouldn’t you!
Now to resolve the combat, the basic attack dice for line infantry Vs line infantry is 5D6. They get +2D6 for having support, but -1D6 for being Disordered, so six dice are rolled. 5’s and 6’s will inflict hits on the target, but any 1’s rolled cause the attackers to suffer hits. We roll, 6,6,6,4,1,1, so the Union suffer 3 hits and the Confederates suffer 2. The side that has accumulated the most hits so far in the game (not just the close combat) has to retreat and both sides are given a Disorder marker.
Note, units cannot charge on consecutive turns as things with lungs need a breather between such intense moments of action.
The Confederates now have uncontested control of the ridge, but the units on both sides in the centre are starting to accrue hits. They will use the next turn to re-organise and get their fresher units into the front line.
On the Union right, the ‘green’ regiment are having a silly moment. They have gone into skirmish order, which will normally mean they suffer only one hit maximum per fire, but they have moved within canister range of the artillery, which ignores such niceties and the Skirmishers are sent reeling back with 3 Hits!
The Confederates now have a unit with 5 hits and is classed as wavering, so the ‘Retreat Phase’ comes into play, when all units with 5 or more hits test. If they fail they will take an extra hit and fall back, but they pass and hold …. for now!
As we approach turn 7, the Union counter-attack at the ridge and Push the Confederates back. At the same time the Union artillery is dragged up onto the ridge. The tired Confederates below are now at some risk.
The infantry and artillery fire from the ridge inflicts further casualties and the Confederate side, fearing collapse start their retreat. By turn 9, they have got their three infantry regiments off the table, including one that was at 7 hits and close to rout.
As play naturally concludes, the situation is that the Union are left holding the ridge, but they have lost two units, a veteran and a green unit. The Confederates have not actually suffered any lost units.
Adding up the Scenario victory points, the Union get +3 Honour Points for spending the most time on the ridge, but the Confederates get +2 Honour Points for not having 33% of their force destroyed and another +1 Honour Points for having inflicted 33% losses on the enemy. So another draw, which I think is a fair result since the Union hold the battlefield, but the Confederates have saved their brigade.
The scenario ended sooner than the previous two systems and not due to a random die roll ending, but rather because the Confederates exited the battlefield, suggesting that my system is slightly more attritional. I did like seeing the latter stages of breaking off the engagement play out fully.
I suppose of all the systems, I am the most familiar with these and obviously they have been developed with by own preferences and bias in mind, so I don’t offer them up as the best thing since sliced bread!
Stats for Line infantry: 1 move 8´´, smoothbore musket range is 9´´and Rifled Musket is 12´´, though with reduced firepower at the longer range.
*********************************************************************
Finally I put Wargaming, an introduction, by Neil Thomas onto the table. The temptation was to use his One Hour Wargames book instead, which is a regular feature of various bloggers posts. However, after a lot of use with them, I am left feeling that those rules are a little too stripped back for me, with the absence of Command and Morale being of most note.
In his earlier book, Wargaming, an introduction, the rules are necessarily at the simple end of the scale, but morale at least is accounted for.
His infantry use four bases per unit and bases are removed as casualties, which gives a very visual effect of how strong a unit is, but as a consequence, you can end up with weedy one and two base units wandering around the table. Worse, victory is determined when one side has been reduced to 25% strength. Since armies are fixed at 8 units per side, this means fighting can drag on until one side is down to two weedy looking units and that visually, to me at least, does not appeal.
However, we are just using the system, while working with the forces and victory conditions from the Rebels and Patriot scenario, so aiming to inflict 75% casualties shouldn’t be an issue. The rules do not differentiate between smoothbore and rifled musket, but does show the cavalry carbine, so this must be a deliberate design intention.
We can however show the Confederate ‘Aggressive’ status in the scenario by allowing the Confederates to test for charge as though they are elite, but even here, there is only a 50% chance of the charge being made. The Union ‘green’ troops would need to be shown as militia, but I don’t want that to be a foregone conclusion, because it wasn’t in reality. It is preferable to wait until a green unit is tested in battle, they may be an unknown quantity and so we will have their status established the moment they are involved in firing or engaged in hand to hand fighting. A D6 will tell us all! 1-3 and they are Militia, 4-6 will be Average.
In his system, the fields will halve movement and the hill will not impact on movement. Interestingly there isn’t a rule covering limbering or unlimbering. Instead it seems that the player simply chooses at the appropriate time whether the guns are moving or firing and that as a single point does raise some questions as whether perhaps our rules generally cover too many things that don’t actually need covering - perhaps!
Rather like my system, everything can act and so in this ‘mirror’ battlefield game, it will be Player 1 that reaches the top of the hill first i.e. always the Confederates. That initially looks like a problem - but in this system you either move or fire, not both, so here the Confederates, first on the hill, consequently translates into them immediately being target practice for the Union troops below and in this system, firepower is fairly brutal.
For infantry, a D6 is rolled for each base that the unit has and they start with four bases. Hits are scored on a 3+ and in the first round of fire, the Union gets 4 hits …. Ouch. A base is removed per 4 hits (remainders are recorded with a small dice next to the unit) and when a base is removed the unit must take a morale check, which if failed, the unit would retreat a full move. An average unit needs to roll a 5 or 6 to pass their morale, so one can never be that hopeful!
I say ‘ouch’ because if we compare this to say Black Powder, BP would only roll 3 fire dice, not 4 and for any hits scored, the target would get a chance to roll them off as ‘saves’ and they would only face the prospect of testing for retreat if needing to take a Break Test, which would be quite unlikely on an initial round of shooting and so the Neil Thomas system is fairly brutal and that is accepting that as units lose bases, their firepower (i.e. dice rolls) also reduce - so the brutality calms down a bit, but still, a hit on 3+ for firing further than close range is still more powerful than in BP.
I found the firepower so effective, that unless needing to take ground, I didn’t see the point of charging, especially as the target would get some defensive fire on the way in - why give them opportunity of getting an extra chance of firing?
Though the reluctance and danger of charge does seem a realistic reflection of the period. If however the target was down to one or two bases, reducing the effect of their defensive fire, then a charge might be chanced, again a system that highlights not wanting to charge a fresh unit is probably doing something right.
Artillery is particularly vulnerable because they are only represented by one base that can absorb 4 hits, so it can be quickly lost. It has some advantages, artillery can always claim to be in cover and so is allowed to roll for saves, even so artillery remains vulnerable and in our game, each side lost their artillery to the fire from enemy infantry that were in front of them. Worse, one of those infantry units had been declared as Militia. I find this aspect a little dubious, but the lesson is, if you can, keep your artillery well back, which itself is realistic, but having infantry confidently advancing on artillery is not. Also, artillery is not allowed to rally i.e. it’s one base cannot be brought back from the dead …. another reason to look after your artillery.
Rather like our Rebels and Patriots game, the concept of having one regiment behind another to act as a support is not recognised and it is better to have that second unit either further back as a fresh(er) reserve or get it into the front line, as the side with the most firepower certainly has the advantage here. A reserve is useful though as once one of your units drops to 2 bases, you will be very happy to replace it with a fresh 4 base unit to get that firepower back!
There is an ability to rally a base back. Essentially, instead of moving, a unit that cannot be theoretically fired upon in any way by the enemy, can dice to rally a base back. Leaders and command are not used in this game, so this in effect works like a self rally.
On our battlefield, the ridge becomes an interesting feature. When you stand on top of it, you get shot at, when you hide behind it you can attempt rally. When the enemy is on the hill, you have nowhere to hide and so cannot attempt to rally while within their weapon range and they shoot at you. In our game, the Union got their guns onto the hill and that ended any chances for the Confederates to rally …. unless they re-took the hill and there came a tipping point when they were just too weak to do that.
There are some things in the rules that are simply not covered, such as what to do when a units retreat path is blocked by friends. I decided to take the view that if it is not mentioned, then it doesn’t matter and simply allowed interpenetration without issue.
Despite me ‘knowing’ that charging is bad, I had the Confederates charge up the hill against a 4 base unit. They have to test to be able to charge. We are calling our Confederates ‘elite’ for this test to represent that ‘aggressive’ status that the scenario gives. They pass, just about, on a roll of ‘4’ and they charge to contact. The Union get a round of defensive fire, inflicting 2 hits. The Confederates are already carrying 2 hits, so with a total of 4 hits, they lose a base. The Hand to Hand combat has simultaneous combat with hits on scores of 3+. The Confederates are only rolling with three dice because they have lost a base, but the defending Union have four bases, so get 4D6. The Union inflict 2 hits, the Confederates inflict 3 hits.
Since the Union lost the most in that moment, they must retreat a full move. They are already carrying 2 hits, so the additional 2 hits cause them to also lose a base. At the end of the Confederate turn, they must make all pending morale checks and so their victorious unit on the hill which lost a base must check. It fails and retreats down the hill, now neither side controls the ridge.
By turn 9, the game ends, not because the random ending has kicked in, but rather because I have called it! The Union have three units on the hill and their firepower is decimating the Confederates below them. The Confederate remaining strengths are 1 x 3 bases, 1 x 1 base and 1 x 2 bases. They have too much ground to cover to get back to the hill to counter-attack and if they did, they would lose more bases on the way and also being within shooting range of the artillery, could not rally. Since the Union holding the ridge don’t need to move, they could spend every turn shooting (can’t shoot and move in the same turn) and that would be a lot of firepower and so with the situation hopeless for the Confederates, the game is called.
This is very much a Union victory. They were Player B, but had the advantage of an extra infantry unit. I can see why in the system, the army lists fix the army size at eight units each as this does provide a bit of equalisation with all of that initial 4 base firepower on the loose and perhaps that is needed.
By the end of the game, I felt that the musket was king and that manoeuvre and artillery played second fiddle to that. I didn’t of course have cavalry and maybe this system needs that (they are in the fixed army list) to break things up a bit or to add more variety as overall I felt the rather generic nature of the rules came through and left me with little interest other than to shoot my way through the enemy - perhaps a more dynamic table, terrain wise might have helped.
BUT, it should be remembered that the whole point of these rules is that they are part of a book that serves as an introduction to wargaming and in that regard, they do an absolutely splendid job and really cannot be laid bare to criticism.
Conclusions.
Those with the fortitude to have read this far may wonder what was the point of all of this. For me, there was a serious point and since so much effort went into it, I thought it worth sharing as I rationalise my thinking behind what sort of rules that I want.
The last figure game I played was enjoyable, but towards the end of the game, I just wanted it to end, because my back was increasingly getting uncomfortable and so it left me wondering whether a faster pace of game would help get around that ongoing issue. So my thoughts are quite personal to the gaming problems that I have at the moment and so in a way that distorts what I might normally view as a ‘best set’. I am coming to this with a clear bias, but that bias is not without its own complications.
I do not like calling a game early, especially when one side simply feels like it is losing and / or can’t win. Better to carry on and let the winning side explore the parameters of their victory and also to play out those intricacies of disengagement and rearguard actions, especially against the background of the victors being likely exhausted and possibly being without reserves or perhaps they have held their cavalry back for such a moment - fancy that!
So my need is for something that ends naturally within a reasonable time and the two things that seem best able to meet that are streamlined easy play rules and scenarios that are not too ambitious, but good enough to be a pleasure to play. That does of course nicely marry with my wont of having smaller armies (Pocket Armies) that don’t require a shedload of work (read painting).
Has any of the above helped? Yes I think so.
One thing that sticks out is that although we seem to get quite precious about rules, in truth they are generally more similar than different, doing the same things to the same end, but maybe with different language or processes.
Another is whether in order to feel ‘realistic’ everything is thrown in and accounted for. The best example I can offer here is the total absence of limbering and unlimbering rules in the Introductory system. At first you think where the hell are those rules and then as you play you realise it absolutely doesn’t matter, just move or fire the gun as per the need each turn!
That is fine and dandy, especially for an introductory game, but for example in my own rules, limbering aspects are there and I have played games in which artillery have not been able to pull out or deploy in time, or that when under fire, they have hooked up and pulled out on a failed check and it will take two turns for them to get back into position and be ready to fire again and that local nuance has mattered both practically and to the narrative.
My own rules and the introductory rules allow everything to move and so both sides had their uninterrupted line advance rather nicely to the point of contact, where a lot of shooting started …. just walls of fire.
By contrast both Black Powder and Rebels & Patriots have an activation / order system that effectively brings a more random degree of movement. The chaos of this or whatever you want to call it, immediately breaks up a game, which is very helpful on a small table, to deliver a more interesting approach to battle with a much better narrative and local situational nuance, that could also make a second playing of the scenario play out with a different opening.
Out of all these plays, it was Black Powder that I really wanted to re-acquaint myself with and yet by the end of play I had a disappointment almost entirely brought about by the ‘saves’ process. I’m just not very good with opposed die rolls, particularly when playing solo, it is just an extra burden of administration and maths. I would slightly get it in a medieval system and say a sword strike caused a hit and then we test armour type for a saves, but when a line of musket hits a line of troops, it become hard to visualise how they might ‘save’ themselves from those hits ….. however I can see that mathematically, this is just the mechanic that keeps units in the game long enough to ‘feel right’ and that what we might really be seeing is how a target is using fieldcraft or their morale and training to improve their resilience and in that regard perhaps it is the terminology that doesn’t help, but it is clear that Black Powder as a cohesive whole works and is greater than the sum of its parts and for that reason, I would like to return to doing some more games with them - also having the sister games of Hail Caesar and Pike & Shotte with a shared system makes BP a contender that punches above it weight for someone who collects in multiple periods (me).
I enjoyed the Rebels & Patriots and would first acknowledge that these were the rules that I was least familiar with. There are some nice ideas there, presented in an easily accessible format. They play best as intended, a company sized skirmish game and that they would not happily scale up to the giddy heights of a divisional level game and there is absolutely no reason why they should, that is not their task, but I do like a divisional game and I like supports being recognised, so I shall move on.
At the end of the day, that leaves me with Black Powder and my own rules as main contenders. With my rules I have always felt that it is the number of testing rolls that needs to be sold to others, but after replaying this single scenario against other sets, I am left feeling that they do not break things up enough i.e. there is not enough chaos, even the Random Event Table is not enough to help them to make this scenario more interesting.
I have a hankering for wanting to make Black Powder work and I will likely spend a bit of time now with them - but there is a sleeper in the background, not mentioned yet and that is Valour & Fortitude, hosted for free on the Perry website and authored by the Black Powder creator and there is room to say that things that bother me about BP are not present with V&F - also the V&F army lists are moving into other periods that I enjoy. Either way, it looks like Mr. Jervis Johnson’s rules will be visiting my table for a while - thank you.
V&F are still slightly short-hand in nature as they pretend to be a four page rule set and take a few games to properly get acquainted and to appreciate all of the nuance, but they are in my sights again. I am mentioned in the credits from some early day play testing when I looked at them from the perspective of the solo player on a smaller table with smaller forces and the recent versions are indeed now friendlier to smaller games as the brigade is not so fast to shatter, so we shall see.
It is important that the scenario should not be too ambitious to keep the game shorter, but sitting on top of that, rules need to be not only streamlined, but designed to make a smaller game with fewer units interesting, primarily by being a little dynamic in nature and disrupting predictable play.
The bottom line is that I (rather my back) need something that plays to completion in a single shorter session while standing to play - that is the ultimate benchmark and it moves the goal posts on what rules work better for me now. Are there better games out there? Undoubtedly, I’m sure you could readily name a couple, but do they meet the benchmark!
If you made it this far, thank you. I have stayed away from long blog articles for some time and this one weighs in at 8300 words and there isn’t even a murder or a crime to solve! It is a bit self indulgent so your patience is appreciated.
I also run another bit of webspace called COMMANDERS, which is a bit more snippet based than here (certainly shorter reads :-) ), but posting is fairly regular and who knows, you may see something you like! LINK
https://commanders.simdif.com/dear_diary.html
