"Use for Snipers in an ECW game?" Topic

I picked up a Warlord "Specialists" set today. I liked the sniper and the petardier (I think…if not…I'm painting the stick of dynamite looking thing red-putting an Acme label on it-it's begging for something silly).
Do y'all use a sniper rule? I thought there was one in 1644 and WHECW but that may be out of scope (lower level) to the MoA rules I've put together. If nothing else, I'll just paint the guy up and put him behind a hedge or something as a distraction or piece of eye candy.
Your thoughts?

'Sniper' suggests a certain degree of accuracy. If you can pick off an individual target with a matchlock musket you're a better man than me, Gunga Din

The Siege of Manchester (1642) was pretty much ended by a sniper's bullet.

The Royalist commander was shot dead by a musketman positioned in the Cathedral tower (which may or may not have been cheating.)

Well, if it was a gamekeeper's rifled firelock, assuming that such existed, wouldn't it have had some decent accuracy?

I always thought hitting anything you were deliberately aiming towards that was smaller than say, a barn, at a range in excess of 10 yards with the weapons available in the 1640's was more a matter of blind luck?

If that were true, wouldn't it have made more sense to give up firearms and pick the crossbows back up?

I recall an article on 17th century Matchlocks, where an antique firearms expert managed to hit a man-sized target roughly 50% of the time, at a range of 100 yards.

There were good rifled 'fowling pieces' available (for a hefty price) that were accurate by the standards of the time.

As 'A Near Thing' mentioned they were most prominent in sieges, I think mixing up Lichfield and Manchester? At Lichfield Lord Brooke (Parlt) was famously shot by Dumb Dyott from the cathedral tower. Rupert had a pair of rifled pistols that allegedly he demonstrated by potting the weathercock off a nearby church steeple!

These would be really specialist weapons, expensive and time-consuming to make and probably slow to load. Not the sort of weapon that was given to an ordinary musketeer. Given that huntin' shootin' and fishin' were major pursuits I guess there could be a fair number of rifled guns about, often they were in the hands of experienced gamekeepers. Presumably game and vermin have not become easier to hit over the last 350 years?

Now that y'all have kicked the subject in the , do you sages use snipers in your ECW games?

I wouldn't use them, they make nice vignettes but are too specialised to use in a normal game.

Nah,WHECW is fantasy anyway,so I plan on getting that Warlord sniper for my game. Looks cool,and an added element that is fun.

No, don't use them. Nice eye candy , tis all really.

More trouble than its worth for MoA ECW Pilum.

the eagle
aka demigamer on MoA forum.

A while back, I read a book on early gunpowder weapons that included a study done using weapons from the Gratz armoury in Styria.

They were bench-firing the weapons on a range and the accuracy of the weapons was to a great extent determined by the quality of workmanship rather than the age.

Interestingly a good wheel-lock horse pistol was similar in accuracy and lethality to a modern pistol.. just not as many shots.

There was one musket, one of the more recent ones, that was so scary they stopped testing with it : the ball could go damn near anywhere it was so erratic.

Definitely thinking of Manchester, but as cathedrals were the tallest buildings around at the time I bet it would have been a popular spot for any marksmen!

As for the original question, I would only use a sniper if there was a historical precedent, such as in siege warfare, and probably never in the open field.

Ah, wargaming relevance, yeah OK,

I don't think there's much place for using snipers in field battles. You could have the figures join the dragoons perhaps, but just treat them as additional ordinary dragoons.

For small-scale skirmishes, I think they are a possibility. In the skirmish at Coleford (OK storming a village but not really a siege) the Royalist commander Lawdley was allegedly shot by a sniper using a silver bullet (naturally necessary to pot such a demonic cavalier!). Just as an aside, Carlo Fantom, a Croatian mercenary fighting for Parliament, was believed to be a 'hard man' that conventional bullets could not touch (very Warhammer!).

Sieges, definitely useful, and possibly more likely than not.

I'm sure I read this somewhere – so I hope it is true. Prince Rupert had a pair of air pistols. Passing some church with the King he shot at the bell and hit it. the King, astounded at this, bet him a large sum if he could do it again with the second pistol. He duly fired and hiut the bell again. So there were indeed accurate guns around at the time but snipers? I doubt that very much.

I also have read this but weren't they rifled flintlocks? Snipers were gamekeepers used in defence of homes. The best example I bring to mind is at Lathom House where a gamekeeper did damage.

Manchester was not the cathedral where the commander was killed. It wasn't then a cathedral, the Royalist commander was Lord Strange/Earl of Derby who carried on through the ivil Wars until he was beheaded, and (as I have frequently stood and pondered), the church was a powerful fortification if attacked from the Salford side.

Chrome.

WECW does allow players to purchase marksmen to add to units. Our group has run several games with marksmen in units.

I will hold my hands up on that one about THE Royalist commander being killed(i.e. Lord Strange) from the Cathedral tower.

It was actually Captain Standish who was shot, who was commanding the Royalist forces directly attacking the Parliamentarian position, as he looked out of a window from a house in Salford.

And it wasn't a Cathedral at that point but it was the Collegiate Church and by far the tallest building around.

I think I'd probably go with maybe better shots than others in skirmish games, but be happier with "snipers" in siegses – where the defender is likely to know the terrain better and could be able to correct his (or her – at Lyme Regis women were reported as being active as snipers) aim to improve accuracy a bit.

Steve,

Gush and Millward both allowed for "riflemen" which were essentially treated as snipers. Gush's direction was no more than "1 out of 50" musketeers could be equipped with a rifle in 17th century western armies, and any such figures had to be in a separate unit or sub-unit that was not subject to the "normal" mandated target priorities. They could choose targets of opportunity or have their own owner-designated target priorities, including leaders or artillery crews. Also, the petard was covered as an option under siege rules. It was left out of Gush's 2nd Edition, but I have a copy of the 1st Edition which has the rules for using them.

However, as we have discussed on the MoA forum, Gush's rules (and Millward's) were at 1:20 and were definitely based more on micro-managing the individual units than the army as a whole. I think for MoA, unless you want to do a "house rule" for a siege or skirmish, I would just treat the sniper as eye candy and let him skulk around.

Bill

According the Pageant of the Gun by Harold L. Peterson, the guns used for sniping in the ECW were something called a Long Fowler. They were smoothbore but got their accuracy from "the bores were usually very smooth and well polished. The combination of the carefull boring and the long barrel produced an accurate arm as well as a powerful one."

I'd use them in a game.

1. restrict them to a side that has a defensive advantage, not a meeting engagement, so either seige or in-place defender with suitable cover for such a fellow to hide in.

2. In a large-scale game, they'd only affect general figures. Probably the most fair thing is a small chance to injure the 'general' and a larger chance to reduce his command ability due to being distracted/worried by the near misses, etc.

I don't know MoA, but you could do something where the sniper rolls a d6 and the generals roll a d6 + 1, 2 or 3 depending on their armor, staff size (for protection) etc. If the sniper beats the commander's roll, the commander has a slightly reduced command ability that turn since an aid has been wounded and it distracting everyone with his screaming, etc. If the sniper doubles the roll, then he wounds the general, effects should be decided according to your game rules, but perhaps can't move, affect morale, issue orders, or something for a turn, etc.

I believe File Leader has an extensive and humorous officer wounding table for 2d6 rolling from '11' to '66'.

Should provide some humor in a casual game!

H-C: You read my mind! I think some levity definitely is in order. I also would insert a "check fire" roll to see if the sniper is hit with something funny or dire…as in "a scrawny camp dog walks up, sniffs the air and announces the presence of the sniper to the enemy-do you stay or do you go? (No, you don't have to sing The Clash)or something silly like that.