Uncategorized Uncategorized, Wargames, wargaming 4:20 am
Something I have been playing around with. The idea is that the player is the General of the Army, so does not micromanage the actual combats.
Its a bit rough. I am looking for opinions
1 unit-1 division
Sample Order of Battle
 | Mark on On growing old |
| Mark on Earning £100,000 extra |
 | Keith Flint on Gay Marriage, Atheist Marriage… |
 | Novel Girl on The trials of writing |
 | Rodger on 2011 in review |
| Rodger on Remember those who keep you sa… |
 | little keithy on War of Spanish Succession … |
| Rodger on At the 11th Hour, of the 11th … |
 | Last Hussar on This bloody hurts (and it is… |
 | Neal Croudace on War of Spanish Succession … |
I’ll give them a shot. My first thought though on reading the OOB for Gettysburg is that the CSA forces will be out flanked just by numbers of divisions.
Dan
I think that you really lose a lot when you only have divisions roaming around the battlefield. A division doesn’t begin to replicate what actually happened in many battles, especially Gettysburg.
Think about the action on the first day on McPherson’s Ridge. Rodes attacked with his brigades in piecemeal fashion from Oak Ridge and they all got shot up. Heth did the same thing with similar results around the Chamebersburg Pike. You couldnt replicate this with one unit representing a division. ACW is really a brigade game at its highest level. You try to overlap the other guy’s brigade with your brigade and outflank him and defeat him.
I understand that- this is an experiment really- Lee didn’t ‘see’ the piecemeal attcks of Rodes. Effectively that is the Division doing badly- rolling more Red than White 4+.
The Orbat is from F&F, and is in proportion
So, any progress on these? I’m working on a set of rules with some similar ideas but 1 base = 1 brigade.
They need a playtest to see what the holes are- and I am aware there are holes, most notably in the Artillery rules. I was never happy with the rules for unaatached and/or ‘grand batteries’. The basic Infantry rules I am faily happy with, but a test would see if the mod are proportionate. They should be close as I am quite good with stats/probability.
I like them! I’ve only read through them but they look promising. You have captured the level of operation pretty well I think. Something that other rules often fail to do.
How big is a base? I assume something like 2″-3″ but I am not sure.
John
Thanks John.
The answer at the moment is ‘what ever feels right- was thinking 1-2 inches/3-4cm (yes I know they are different. Like I said above I’m not concerened with what brigade were doing. If this was a napoleonic game there would be no rules for squares- it is assumed the individual unit commanders would know what they are doing. What I would offer for that situation is bonuses for combined Cavalry/Infantry attacks.
I like what I see but am confused – I’m easily confused. Perhaps some examples might help. I don;t get the double rolls to resolve combats. Also, sometimes attached generals give white dice, sometimes red dice. That confuses me. But I like the scale.
No value for Meade or Lee?
Vtsao- Sometimes generals GIVE white (good) dice, sometimes they REMOVE Red (bad) dice. It may be easy to miss the ‘-’ in the red chart. Does that make more sense?
Not sure what you mean by double rolls- do you mean both sides roll, then the result is cross referenced, or that there is two rounds of combat- one to see if the close combat is entered, and one to resolve that after a few turns?
I say the player as Lee/Meade, but you have a point- what if they join a unit- how will this afeect morale. I would suggest Lee is at LEAST a +4 or +5, due to the feelings of his men for him.
Any suggestions will be given consideration.
Generals giving good dice or removing bad dice makes sense but is inconsistent. It throws guys like me off. As I said, I’m easily confused.
About the double rolls: I knew each side rolled plus and minus dice. There are two charts on page 5. The second and smaller one repeats some of the information in the larger table. That threw me. After re-reading it, I think I have the sequence: both players roll plus and minus dice to determine who wins the fight. Then a second round of die rolling determines losses suffered.
I don’t think Meade or Lee should be leading charges – Confederates demanded Lee go to the rear when he tried to at the Wilderness. But they should be able to have some affect within 12 inches on reaction tests – at least tests to go forward or to rally. And Lee should have more of an effect than Meade, while Bragg or Burnside should have none.
Artillery thoughts: intrinsic guns should be able in influence combat, and possibly influence reaction tests at a distance.
Grand batteries could have effects varying from very little – the bombardment before Pickett’s charge – to highly effective – the close range fire from Hunt’s batteries at Malvern Hill and into Pickett’s charge. The 60-gun battery at Shiloh did unsettle the Union defence at the Hornet’s Nest, so offensive fire could be effective. Perhaps the main effect of artillery should be modifiers on combat and reaction?
The problem is I haven’t really looked at these in too long a period. The basis was that cross referenced chart for combat resolution. However I haven’t playtested them, as I was not sure about the artillery rules, and I didn’t want a freind to lose an evening’s gaming on something that didn’t work.
Comments such as yours are helpful- I will have another look at them and see if I can clean them up. Looking at them now I can see what you mean about attached artillery- the trouble is there was a subtle evolution of ideas between rules being written and the sample army list.
I suggest replacing
-1 White Cannons taken for ‘Grand Battery’
in Ongoing Combats with
+1W per Artillery factor with Division
also with the Charge test, use the defenders (only) Artillery factor. What I don’t know is whether to give the defender a White dice per factor, or the attacker a red one. The former moves the result towards the right, while Attackers +Red moves it up the table.
Just found the rules — I’ve just printed them out and will study them. I’ve moved from On to Richmond, to Johnny Reb, to Fire ‘n Fury and am looking at Volley & Bayonet Road to Glory. I’ve been playing around with the KISS Rommel, Megablitz, Assault Gun WWII rules, and like the idea of Brigades/Divisions and little or no paperwork. Right now, I lean toward Brigades being the maneuver unit, but I’ve never considered divisions — I’ll get back to you. Like your charts! I do have to stay away from regimental scale histories when I’m reading and stick to Division and Corps level histories.