Sunday 24 May 2020

Steve ...and the American Revolution

So, Steve over at Sound Officers' Call, has been tinkering with Neil Thomas's Napoleonic Rules, in order to develop an AWI variant.
'Hold the line boys!'
 His changes sounded really interesting for the Revolution, so I set up a quick game.
 
Steve's changes:
  • British Drill: no first stand loss morale check (this becomes VERY important and is very representative of what we read).
  • No free turns or pivots for Continentals (again, makes sense)
  • Morale Checks for chargers/chargees - this is very akin to what we read about in AWI battles, the effects are so realistic - and with simple, yet accurate, mechanics.
  • Rally & Commanders - can rally off hits (I didn't use this enough in the game - though it is both accurate and critical to gameplay).


A few things I threw in:
  • Light infantry can get cover saves in the open - although this does give them a little too much staying power potentially. An alternative might be to reduce their number of bases.
  • Militia find it harder to both hit and stand - a simple change like this can be readily instituted via making a 4-6 success of the D6 a 5-6 instead. It does make the militia a bit poor unless they are behind a fence (with cover saves) - but that seems fine.

 General:
  • The turn sequence - charge, move, shoot etc. remains relatively unchanged, but for an IGOUGO system, it flows smoothly with a lot of action. Again, so good for a very large game, or as a battle mechanic for a campaign.
  • With a system based around stands/degrading hit points, it's also very reminiscent of the 'Pike and Shot' computer game, with attritional style warfare, if you resort to musketry, but still retaining the ability to move and surprise the opponent for a canny general.

Now, it was a short game, but to me, that exhibits the excellent potential for something larger like Germantown (Steve working on) or Monmouth, or as way of fighting the multiple battles of a larger undertaking; testament to both the NT rules, and their ability to be easily 'hacked' to make them what you want.

Also of course, is the fact that saving throws are only used practically (i.e. in cover, or in my instance for light infantry). We see this in sensible rules like Volley and Bayonet too, as well as NT. In the Slack Chowder for instance, they are out of control and used like Warhammer...  (y'all knew I had to get a BP crack in, right?)

 There were 7 units a side - the Americans had the edge in terms of defences, while the British had some advantages in light infantry and staying power.

 The fence would grant a saving throw due to cover, unlike  BP, where a saving throw means something very different.


(The publishers of Slack Chowder defend their Saving Throw mechanic...)

 On the American left, the continentals were deployed in force.

 On the right, a cavalry clash would move back and forth, with varying degrees of morale roll success dictating the play.


 Big advantages using Generals for rallying here - but next time.

 I didn't give any bonus to British firepower, but perhaps something worth thinking about...though the morale benefits they receive are quite influential.

 The Continentals did get some luck in terms of morale.

 German Jaegers move on the flank of the cavalry clash.

 British guards will also charge the rail-fence. That is not going to end well...

 A small engagement, with a flank ready to crumble...

 The British horse breaks the American cavalry, allowing a flanking action.

 ...a developing crisis in the centre.


 With hand  to hand threatening to completely derail the fragile militia, the end is not in doubt...

 'Wait 'til you see the whites of their eyes...'

 Morale is not something which the militia can be relied upon to hold onto...

A great game, and a lot of takeaways which have me thinking re. rapid setup and large battles, and/or campaign battle rules.

 

36 comments:

  1. I enjoyed reading Steve';s ideas, and your additions seem simple and reasonable as well.
    Never been a fan of saving throws, but I could live with them for cover only. I recall that in Hail Caesar (of the Slack Chowder stable), everything got saving throws for almost any activity.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Interesting indeed...
      NT uses saving throws to actually 'save' vs something.
      Same with the Volley and Bayonet - and I note that Blucher and In Deo Veritas have been heavily influenced by V&B.
      Warhammer seems to use saving throws to save vs the other player's dice roll. I think they missed the point somewhere around 1981.

      I do recall, and I am not making this up, that my eldest daughter played Battlelore and a few other tabletop wargames when she was 8 or 9.
      We then tried the warhammer starter set (I got it cheap). Even at that tender age, and with some experience of how games worked, she remarked 'there are just too many dice rolls'...

      I reckon she was onto something.

      Delete
    2. LOL, re 1981. I'd say well before that myself.
      Mostly it is just inelegant, brute force game design, and also unnecessarily slows down the game.

      Delete
    3. I think, as wargaming stumbled from its humble origins, and being a somewhat intellectual pursuit (at least it thought it was), overbearing (not necessarily complex) mechanisms were required. Perhaps gamers needed to actually feel that they were fighting something. Today we realise, that it doesn't have to be the rules we're fighting.

      That's not to say we're completely out of the (miniature) woods yet.
      I remain convinced that if Field of Battle had the same marketing and support as Slack Chowder, it would be a major step forward. Though the British scene, and to some extent the world scene, with decades of domination by warhammer and its ilk, will find it hard to develop anything groundbreaking - at least in the mainstream.

      Though of course, wargamers said the same thing about those unfashionable D&D players in the 70s ...and look where that ended up.

      Delete
    4. I would agree with you re: the potential effect of equivalent marketing. Still, I have run a great many games with Field of Battle at US conventions. Many players are fine with it, and I have a core group of players that love it, but still many players just don't like polyhedral die, dice, and the reduction in their ability to control things. Of course, Slack Chowder itself has a mechanism that introduces reduced control itself, although in a less chaotic and less elegant fashion than that of FoB.

      Delete
    5. Ah...now there you have it exactly.
      That's what I hate about Slack and love about FoB.

      In FoB, the card draw dictates my 'luck' to a large extent - though filtered via the command deck allocation, yet it's what I do with that luck that makes the game. There will be a few bad rolls (movement for instance), which slows things down, but it makes narrative sense - always.

      In Slack, a system that makes you roll 2d6, then calls it 'fog of war' if you happen to roll too high, completely arbitrarily stops your brigade. It's completely random ...and don't start me on the so called command blunders.

      Like Warhammer, it comes from a place of having to try hard to explain what is happening. Explaining anything that happens in FoB, in terms of narrative, is very easy.

      The dice probably bother people because warhammer forced the industry backward in terms of what dice could do, with polyhedrals being seen as an RPG thing, and d6 the order of the day because of the bell curve, which still is not a valid reason.

      But as Steiner says, the design of FoB - with opposed polyhedrals and odd/even results removing the need for another 3 or 4 tables and excess time, is absolutely inspired.

      Delete
    6. Yes, I was going to observe that about the 2D6 command rolls in SC, but I figured I'd let you do it, Darren! :-)

      Delete
  2. All of the AWI amendments seem reasonable to me. Ass me into the amp of those detesting Saving Throws. I don't enjoy seeing hits erased and discovering that a hit is not really a hit.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes indeed.
      Looking back at some rules now, where a saving throw is due to cover, or I guess it's even used for armour in warhammer, there is a reason; a sound justification. In BP it appears to be a way of deflecting your opponent's joy. Certainly, BP deflected my joy.

      But yes, saving due to a decreased chance of suffering casualties makes sense. To discover that 1/2 your hits are deflected because of the stone wall is a decent mechanic. If said mechanic simply lengthens a game and forces one to roll more buckets of dice...is there really a point?

      Delete
    2. Great Typo Jon, especially in context! :-)

      Delete
    3. Whoops! That is what get for responding via the phone.

      Delete
    4. Cell phones need a setting for "I'm over 40, so i don't type with two thumbs!"

      Delete
    5. Yes, agreed, Allowances should be made.
      Though granted, I still like the typo, and will find a way to use it at work!

      Delete
  3. Darren this is excellent! Wonderful post, and your figs really look good on the table!!
    I think we're onto something here with the NT mods. I'm going to keep trying them. Also trying to hack into the "Hold the Line" rules but will need a hex grid for that one.

    I like your additions and was actually thinking about lights saving in "the open" to represent their dispersed formation and their skill at finding cover. Noted,sir!

    I need to put a game on the table soon!
    Also digging though my terrain stash I found a close replica of the Chew House! Germantown beckons!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you sir.
      You know, I might give HtL a go too when I get hexes back on the table. I have a pdf of the 1st ed rules but have never tried it.
      Yes - the save for lights seemed to work well - the only proviso might be to reduce them to three rather than four bases, but it's only a balancing thing.
      Really looking forward to Germantown.

      Delete
    2. Darren would you mind sending the PDF copy of HtL? The only version online I cannot find is the AWI one! I actually bought the "remastered" box yesterday.

      Delete
    3. Done sir.
      I'll have a look for more later :)

      Delete
  4. PS I'd probably run at the fence with those Grenadiers charging at me.. great stuff!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes. They are pretty intimidating when my militia bods, some of whom don't even have shoes, are standing behind that little fence...rolling badly for shooting LOL

      Delete
    2. Half naked and half starved. That's the entire gist of the Joseph Plumb Martin book. The fact that the Continentals were even able to keep their army together through those winters is a miracle in itself. Some of the units would go 5 or 6 days straight without being fed.(BTW some of my pacifist Moravian ancestors fought in a New Jersey Loyalist Light Infantry Regiment. My great x 6 or 7 or whatever grandfather (Andrew Whitesell) was a Patriot but some of his 13 children were apparently misguided. Probably made for some awkward Sunday dinners after the war.)

      Delete
    3. Wow. That's some outstanding family history right there!
      Definitely worth exploring.

      Delete
  5. Great stuff, Darren, very interesting. I'm looking at "Rebels and Patriots" for some AWI, but with single stand units rather than individually-based guys. I hope to someday have the versatility you do! I'm working on it...

    V/R,
    Jack

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Jack.
      I picked up a copy of R&P - some nice campaign mechanisms in there too.

      Delete
    2. Have played a few games of R&P and found it very basic and dare I say Slack Chowderish (ie something of a dicefest) It does however play quickly and easily but i find it rather unsatisfying overall.

      Delete
  6. Replies
    1. Thanks Jack.
      More figures to add for next one I think.

      Delete
  7. "Light infantry can get cover saves in the open - although this does give them a little too much staying power potentially. An alternative might be to reduce their number of bases."

    Isn't NT's view that the units represent fewer men, but still take the same number of hits, thus abstracting their use of local cover into the game automatically?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's a good point ...I may be overthinking it.

      Delete
  8. Very nice AWI Armies- and Terrain - well done. I did do AWI many decades ago with AIRFIX and enjoyed the era. Very appealing Battles - like Guilford Courthouse etc. Lot to enjoy. Cheers. KEV.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Kev. You know, it was the Airfix Grenadiers that locked me into this period when I was a kid. I still have them, but spending a couple of company bonuses enabled the metal option about 10 years ago. It's only the last few years that I've got around to painting them - but I simply love this period of history.

      Delete
  9. Spectacular spectacle as ever sir. I do enjoy Mr Thomas's rules, very simple but elegant and as you mentioned easy to hack as required. I agree on saving throws, I understand them for obstacles and armour, but not when you have already rolled 'to hit' and then 'to wound' a la borehammer only to half your hits again because although you managed to make X number of 'to wound'rolls it turns out you didn't due to armour! ( I always thought the order of the rolls were weird, surely armour save before to wound as, you know, you wear armour ON THE OUTSIDE!)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. SImpler, but not simplistic, rules are best - yep.
      Apparently they even allow us to have fun with the game again...
      Hardback book manufacturers may lose sales - but they should have a damned proper job anyway :)

      Delete
  10. Really nice post, I like your figures and table and of course all things NT. I was wondering whether saves for lights in the open was perhaps a tad too much.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You could be right Norm. I may be overthinking it.
      I am descending into giving them cover bonus, while reducing their stands, and forgetting the NT philosophy perhaps.

      Delete
    2. Always a danger with modding simple rules is the number of mods and additions that we (over) think will add to the game to make it more historical (a desirable desire of course) can ruin the playability of the original rules. After many rules and tweaking I am firmly in Brent Omans KISS camp.

      Delete