"Black Powder Questions" Topic

I have a 5 foot by 9 foot table, and have used it for three games of Black Powder, without any problems. I am using 20 mm figures, using equally 14 Infantry, 2 heavy cavalry, 2 light cavalry, and three artillery.

We are doing it this way to learn the rules. We have started on the table in a meeting engagement style with set up 12 inches in from the edge, a take and hold where one side starts on the table, with reserve, and the other side coming on from the table edge.

The three moves has not been a problem, as people have stated before, you must lay out what your unit is attempting to do, then a dice roll must be passed. I have seen my opponent fail to move his entire flank for three straight passes, and have also seen a unit get to move three moves three times in a row, but failed to take advantage, as he either did not plan on getting those rolls, or he was left hanging, as even with three turns he was unable to get where he needed.

One must remember, that a unit say, french line in column of attack, may very well with the extra command increase be able to move three moves charging a British line, but with if that British line is supported, and the French column of attack fails to bring in support. they may very well be forced to retire or even rout.

From having played a limited amount of times, it appears that this game plays very much like Warhammer, as it is meant for one to come to grips and get stuck in. It does not allow a lot of room for Maneuver, so your set up dictates how things may unfold.

My group likes the game for it's easy and fast play qualities. I also like being able to customize a unit for those special units that stood out, vs just the run of the mill units.

JD

The range of smooth bore muskets seem a little over inflated compared to both unit frontage (if using 24 man battalions) and artillery ranges. Does anyone familiar with the rules think the rescaling of small arms fire would throw any other gears out in the system?
regards
Max

Telling the other side what you plan to do certainly seems odd. I used a similar system for a few years and it never seemed to work right. It puts your plans right up there for the other side to take advantage of. If you can do it no problem, but if you fall short your hung out to dry. How could the other side possibly know what your objective is? How could they even know that you have fallen short of your objective?

Certainly seems strange that a commander (you the player) are obligated to commit to a course of action before you know what your troops are capable of.

This forces you to commit to short term objectives which seems just as strange as you can later discover that your troops can do more.

Seems like the cart is in front of the horse.

Glenn,

The idea is around combining the freedom not to write orders, or have to draw big arrows on maps while preventing people taking the wiz.

Actually, come to thing of it, there's a set of rules out there somewhere that expect players to put cut out arrows on the table top but that's bye the bye.

As for being hung out to dry, well that can happen but if it does it's generally a player taking too much of a risk. That's what the system builds in. A steady advance or the chance of a mad rush – it's your choice. You can get three moves in a turn but there are big deductions for obstacles and you may need one of the moves to change formation, so the concept of units screaming across the table that has concerned some people isn't really practical in most instances.

I have to say it feels more realistic than totally predictable moves where both commanders can calculate to the minute when a force will arrive and plan accordingly.

"Certainly seems strange that a commander (you the player) are obligated to commit to a course of action before you know what your troops are capable of"

Surely this happened all the time. It's not the troop's capability; it's the state of the ground you did not allow for, the incompetence of unit commanders, or whatever else wastes time.

That's what the Command/Movement part of the rules actually represents, uncertainty and variable passage of time.

You only declare intended move by intended move, once the units are on the table your opponent has a fair idea what's going on anyway. The main aim is to stop players changing their minds. You have to think head and plan. It makes for a much better game.

Also nothing requires you to take a big risk. Infantry move in 12" increments and you don't have to take all the moves the dice may give you. Saying to an opponent ‘This Battalion will advance and deploy into Line behind that hedge, (two ‘moves' required, #1. 12" advance and #2. Formation Change) is not likely to figure in you Top Secret files is it?

This what actually happens, its not you saying on Turn #1 ‘I intend for this Cavalry Division to sweep round behind that wood and smash your flank, while the Old Guard pin you to your front'

It's a different level.

Thanks Trajanus, makes more sense now.

Best regards,

Glenn

If it rains does that make Black Powder unplayable?

Link to an AAR report of a 15mm ACW Black Powder game using the 2/3 scale.

link

Ranges and movement rates all seemed perfectly reasonable in play.

Cool report – In the end though shaken units can't charge so the blunder may not have seem them charging to their doom :)
We would play it that the commander took off without rallying them – 'follow me men' ---- ooopppss where are they :)