clive
Lance Corporal
Posts: 44
|
Post by clive on Oct 15, 2023 8:38:13 GMT
Having spent the last few months painting up my American Civil War collection I was keen to put them into action. So for the test game we simply lined up two equal forces to see how they would get on. The battle was fought on a Table 6 foot by 12 foot. The infantry regiments consist of four bases each of four figures so 16 figures in a regiment, eight figures in a cavalry unit, three guns and crew and an artillery battery. So the battle started well for the union who for the first couple of turns seemed to have the advantage however the Confederates fought them to a stalemate on their left flank and their position was weakened when one of the regiments refused to face a confederate charge and ran only rally when it reached the edge of the table but too late to play any part in the rest of the battle. In the centre the game developed into a battle of attrition between firing lines which the confederates won due to superior luck. Union brought their artillery to close range to try to give them an advantage but by the time it happened it was too late to change the course of the battle. Union right now collapsed in the face of superior confederate numbers. The whole game using the Neil Thomas rules only took about 2 1/2 hours to play, the number of units on each side was 12 infantry regiments one cavalry unit and two artillery batteries. The figures are a mix of manufacturers including BMC, IMEX, HAT, and a lot of Call to Arms. Cavalry are Britains. Photos on my blog and also more details on the rules used. jameswargamingweirdness.blogspot.com/2023/10/54mm-acw-battle-report.htmllink
|
|
|
Post by Mike Lewis on Oct 15, 2023 15:37:12 GMT
Looks like a very good game - great figures.
I'll be intrigued to see your adaptions of Neil Thomas when you have them written up. I tried the rules in the Introducing set but didn't think they worked that well and had started to rewrite them.
|
|
|
Post by patrick on Oct 15, 2023 17:17:37 GMT
Great game, thanks for posting.
|
|
|
Post by zuludon on Oct 15, 2023 18:44:24 GMT
Great looking game! I also would be interested in your Neil Thomas Napoleonic Rules tweaks.
I used his Napoleonic rules twice for Waterloo and thought they worked quite well for large numbers of 54mm figures.
Nick Stern
|
|
clive
Lance Corporal
Posts: 44
|
Post by clive on Oct 15, 2023 20:19:43 GMT
Thanks all for your interest and positive comments.
I find his Introduction to Wargamimg and One Hour wargames too simplistic, but Napoleonic Wargaming works well for big games. This battle was 15 units per side.
I made a number of changes which are at the end of this post.
The new command rule worked well it gave just enough friction for the game too little be a little bit unpredictable without it being dominant.
The new inter penetration rule worked really well because it meant that we could bring forward fresh units to replace those that were degraded, though there is a risk that the interpenetrated unit would suffer more casualties as a result.
If an interpenetrated unit failed a morale test as a result of being interpenetrated, then it threw a D4 to see how many hits it took.
This works really well 'cause it means that sometimes an interpenetrated unit takes no casualties at all, or if you're unlucky you might lose a base, which I think reflects the loss of morale/cohesion which could happen if a worn unit was replaced by a fresh one.
The new test to charge and test receive rules also worked well and were just right for Acw. So we had cases when chargers refused to charge, and in one case a fresh charged unit refused to stand and ran off instead. They ran for two more moves and only rallied when they were just about to leave the table.
So most of the time the infantry stood and shot at each other, and then there were occasional charges when the opposing generals thought that they had the advantage, which I thought was very American Civil War.
Acw amendments for Neil Thomas Napoleonic rules.
Sequence
Both sides declare charges
Roll for initiative – winner chooses to move first or second
Firing – simultaneous
Melee – player with initiative chooses order of combats
Command
Command friction– roll a D6, on a 1 the unit may not move. Does not apply if there is a staff officer with the unit.
Units accompanied by a staff officer test when they lose a base – on a 1 the officer is killed. And not replaced.
Move
Infantry move and fire – 8 inches, move and not fire 12 inches
Cavalry move and fire 12 inches, move and not fire 20 inches
Artillery may not move and fire. Limbering is free, move is 12 inches
Units may turn up to 45 degrees without penalty.
Ranges
Rifled musket – 18
Carbine - 12
Artillery – short range under 20 inches, long 20-60, point blank (3 dice halved) 0-8 inches.
Firing
Units may move and fire at a penalty of -1.
Skirmishers – infantry units may deploy in skirmish. If so they are 1 point harder to hit. They may not charge, and if charged must fall back 1 move and take a morale test.
Charge test
Morale roll affected by modifiers
-1 per base lost;
+1 if unit is accompanied by a staff officer
+1 for Confederates
Test before any defensive fire.
Receive charge test
Morale roll affected by modifiers
-1 per base lost
+1 if unit is accompanied by staff officer
+1 if unit is in cover
Failed charge – unit may not move, may fire
Failed stand test – unit falls back 1 move facing away from the enemy and takes morale test. Unit must test each turn until it passes to return to the battle. If it fails in subsequent rounds it does not take more casualties.
Charger occupies the ground. Infantry may charge larger units.
Cavalry may only charge infantry units they outnumber. They may charge artillery frontally but must test to charge with -1 modifier. They use the same combat factors as infantry.
Units may interpenetrate, except when charging. The interpenetrated unit must take morale test. If the test is failed it takes D4 additional casualties.
|
|
|
Post by epturner on Oct 16, 2023 23:20:11 GMT
That was very inspiring. I have been slowly working on 54mm ACW forces, as well, and your figures look really fantastic.
I like the mix of manufacturers and poses.
Thanks for sharing.
Eric
|
|