""Land of the Free" rules overview and a detailed turn" Topic

Here is my overview of the upcoming "Land of the Free" rules.
link

I have also detailed a game turn so you can see the mechanics in action.
link

Your overview was good, but your action by action description of a game turn was great. It really gives a feel for how the game works. I guess the only draw back for me would be the 1.5 hours it took for one game turn for so relatively few units. Do you think that time would reduce with more familiarity with the game?

Again, really enjoyed this.

Thanks for the write up of the turn. I have my first try at the rules today. I do hope that the turn does not take over an hour each.

As an aside for folks interested in the rules, the game is only played out to 6 turns. I think speed of play will increase with play as folks get use to the rules.

Matthew

Thanks very much for the summary, the run through of the turn was very enlightening. They sound very "Move, Shoot, Morale" IGO-UGO traditional stuff. Osprey certainly seem to like to play it safe when it comes to rule mechanisms.

1.5 hours was because it was my first attempt at the rules and needed to consult the book often. It would speed up a bit with familiarity. (Or if I had printed out the QRS or made unit cards- but I was lazy) Also it was a lot of combat resolution and I was taking (blurry) pictures.
Also I used a very small table (3x4) so they forces were pretty much starting at contact range and that turn was pretty decisive.

My ancestors fought against the rebels in 1776 and the American invaders in 1812 The Title "Land of the Free' Is an insult to their memory

Toronto48, a bit thin skinned over a common phrase, eh?

The case could be made that by turning war into a game you are insulting the memory of all who have fought and died in real wars.

No disrespect intended to your ancestors. If I wanted to I could call out everyone who plays the Confederacy in ACW games as insulting the memory of my ancestor who fought for the Union in that war, everyone who plays the Germans in WWI games, anyone who plays Government in the '45, etc.

Your ancestors played to a daw, one loss, one win. Let two centuries passed be past.

They sound very "Move, Shoot, Morale" IGO-UGO traditional stuff. Osprey certainly seem to like to play it safe when it comes to rule mechanisms.

Where did you get that idea? There is no Move Phase, Fire Phase, Melee Phase, etc. Units have a certain number of Maneuver and Combat actions to spend and can spend them in any order they please.

Players do alternate acting with groups of units, but the non-active player's units can interrupt the active player's actions with certain reserved actions.

Thanks for the review. I agree with NM's comments about Osprey's preference for style of rules.
The rules I want to see are those by the guys in Kiev (I think) that were mentioned here about a year ago.

Agree with you Dave I am a bit thin skinned when 1812 is still seen as an attempt to extend American "freedom" to a non free Canada "Land of the Free" is an appropriate name for an AWI or ACW set but not for 1812

The Title "Land of the Free' Is an insult to their memory

Then my ancestors fought against your ancestors….but it was over 200 years ago. I still call you friend.

RaY
Honoured opponents are always friends

I don't like those who dishonour the memory of either side The Anglo-Canadian opposition in both the AW1 and 1812 were fighting for a different interpretation of freedom

In the end it was the same interpretation, with the same roots.

I have profound respect for our neighbors to the North. I hadn't realized this set was supposed to cover 1812 as well, it does seem a very odd choice of title for that conflict.

I live just south of the Border along the St Lawrence, and maybe it that influence but the Loyalist position makes a lot more sense than is usually taught in US history classes.

Check Phillips' "The Cousins Wars" about the English Civil War, the American Revolution and the American Civil War. Often people's political alignments could be discerned by what church they were raised in.

During the Revolution, Whig troops would often put bullets into Anglican churches as they passed and Crown troops would treat Congregationalist (Puritan) churches the same.

That said, I would hope these rules get down to 15-20 minutes a turn with practice. I hope for games that are resolved in 2 hours or so.

Does anyone know if British battalions in the Peninsular War split the colours, and placed them in the middle of the two wings? I am building units of 40 in 28mm Victrix plastics, and do not base my units, so I can depict that.

But others tend to put their figures on solid bases with grasses and the like, and cannot make the change. They also may not use enough "cadre" figures.

I use 2 colours, 2 officers and 2 drummers now for a unit of 40, and occasionally a grenadier officer or light company sergeant to use up these figures..

GdeP

I'm sure turns will go faster with practice and if just moving it goes quick. This "turn" was almost the whole battle. One more turn would probably just be the British chasing the Americans off the table.

@vtsaogames. We conducted our first test of the rules on Saturday choosing Bunker Hill as the battle to refight. We fought to conclusion in four turns spanning about 1.5 hours total. Note that a "Turn" is no ordinary turn. A LOT happens in one turn. In fact, I could imagine some games being decided within one turn.

If you are interested in a brief BatRep of the Bunker Hill game, please visit the link below:

link

Thank you Jon, very nice AAR.

Nice battle report, Jon.

Very nice Report and beautiful figures.

First post – so please go gentle…

I have followed these boards for ages, but never actually joined. These rules do intrigue me however, and have got me to sign up!

I am struggling however to understand the core orders/actions mechanic – forgive me if I am being dense.

If I read it correctly, an average unit has 3 manoeuvre and 3 combat actions each time it is activated, for a total of 6 actions. So it could move 3", shoot, reload, shoot, reload and shoot again. If you use command points you can issue another reload and another shoot action! So that's 4 shots in a single turm.

Is this correct – seems like an awful lot of shooting before the target gets to respond?

This is correct. Welcome to the forum. One thing in your example above is that you now have that element with unloaded muskets. No way to fire a volley into an on coming charge. It took me a little bit to understand the mechanics used too.

Matthew

Thank you for the clarification. I have pre-ordered the rules – but I have to confess I am a little sceptical about whether they will feel right (purely subjective) with that repeated shooting – I know it is a game and not a simulation, but still…

There is an option to store a "fire" as an opportunity fire and an opportunity manuever (i have to recheck the rules on this- but I am not home). The attacker also needs a bit of luck to get that extra shot. First the commander needs to roll 2 or 3 for command points, not need them for anything else, and the unit getting the order must pass a morale check each time (the second at -1). And it would have to be a "fit" (unscathed) unit.
So yes it is possible under perfect conditions.

As I mentioned, I have ordered the book, and will give them a good try.

I am actually quite desperate to find a "modern" set of AWI rules I like. I don't really find BP does it for me, and still use Loose Files & American scramble (with a few mods). I own British Grenadier, but never actually played.

So here's hoping:)

thanks for the detailed turn. that was extremely helpful and way above a simple review! really shows how the game plays.

Just read your blog – very nice. Can't wait for the rules to be available to the general public.