"Volley & Bayonet: Need Road to Glory?" Topic

A quick question for those of you familiar with V&B. I want to get both of the SYW supplements (Austria vs. Prussia, and The Strategic Flanks).

Do I need to have the first volume – V&B: RtG – to play the game? Are the rules (amended for SYW) in the supplements? Is the focus of Road to Glory ACW? I think I've seen this discussed here before, I'd just like to clarify before buying.

Thanks. Cheers.

The absolute latest rules are in V&B Road to Glory. But you could play the battles in the SYW scenario books using the old rules. It won't be the same as the new rules, but it would work. One cosmetic change: the old rules called intrinsic artillery battalion guns, now they are called dedicated guns. IMHO the new rules clean up some glitches in the old rules. Road to Glory is a scenario creation system for pick-up games.

The only rules in the supplements are scenario-specific rules. At least that's what I recall.

Oh, yes, a second edition, I seem to remember that…

Ordered all three.

Tsao is correct, as always. You'll need a rule book, preferablynthe new one to fully use the two scenario books.

Yep,

You need the update V&B Road to Glory for the two SYW supplements, as they were published only after fielding the revised Road to Glory V&B rules. Though, honestly, I have never fully adapted to the revised rules. I stay with most of the first edition rules. – as it stands brilliant to the present day. TMO the first take is always the best, and more often is spoiled by those sticklers of rules, which the second edition apparently had to give way. V&B RTG, though, provides some more clarification, that is missing with the initial dash-off rule set.

Cheers,
Christian
crogges7ywarmies.blogspot.com

I have used the scenarios with my original version of the rules – no problem… You do need some rules though .

Thanks again, respondents!

All three books are on their way right now.

Tsao is correct, as always

Gee Rich, maybe you can tell my gaming buddies that. And my wife.

Where are the new rules available from?

Test of Battle games:

testofbattle.com/drupal-4.7.4

JAS

Also, On Military Matters.

link

Is the basing still 3 inch by 3 inch for ACW?

Yes, 3"x3" – JAS

Does anyone know what "wing scale Volley and Bayonet" is?

In the draft version of the 2nd edition that was circulating for years, there were a number of optional, smaller scales (like "wing" and so on). For instance, if you round everything down by half, you get a 1"=50 yards ground scale, 30 minute turns, and 250 men per strength point, and your 3" frontage now holds about 4-500 men instead of 1000. People use this scale to play V&B at the regimental level.

I use a sort of compromise between the two. I use 1000 men "linear" stands instead of the "mass" 3x3" stands, and just allow them to form one behind the other to get the massed/supported bonuses if they wish.

CAT,

So your stands are 3 in X 1.5 in?

Well … that would have been ideal, but of course I had my own fiddly basing system that I was using for regimental games, which I then adapted to V&B.

Since I'm using 3x 10mm figures on a 15x15mm square as the basic element, I put 5 of them on a magnetic/metal sabot to create a 75x15mm "linear" base. I then position the 2nd "supporting" base 2" behind the first. The basic idea was to recreate the 3" flank size of the massed bases. It actually looks great – separate compact lines just like in the period drawings. It's not as fiddly as it might sound, as I follow a general rule of "move the first base, slide the second base behind", and we only use one set of markers for paired bases, etc.

The advantages to this are 1) you can deploy over a wide frontage if you want to increase firepower or just cover more ground, but of course you are weaker in melee, 2) odd hits are always taken from the first base, so they inevitably are removed first, creating a nice weakening of that brigade as it takes casualties, and 3) because of that, it's actually a good idea to keep a base or two in reserve, so you can slide them in to support weakened brigades.

It adds a lot to the game without changing the rules or slowing things down – except perhaps some additional tactical thinking time. The only rule adjustment I made was to scale – to make the individual stands more sturdy, I give each one 3SP instead of 2.

Cheers,

Christopher

PS – I'm writing up a House Rules document at the request of a couple of other TMP'ers (slight C&C and arty house rules included) if you would like a copy.

Definitely ! I would love to see a picture of your stands if you have one.

Sure, I should be able to do that. Actually, the "house rules" for the basing aren't very complex, so I should just write up a version I can copy-and-paste here.

Chris, your basing ideas and house rules sound like it makes a much more interesting game for SYW. Look and feel for the period is important to me, so it seems to me that maybe as is V & B is not the best SYW ruleset. With so many rules actually DEDICATED to SYW, I am wondering why people go through so much effort to modify rules and/or buy supplements to rules that are obviously made for other periods. I know some people think all Horse and Musket period is essentially the same with just the need for tweaking here and there. That argument doesn't hold with me. I think Grommet37 just having to ask for so much clarification about a rule set is indictment about it not being the right one. There are a couple other rule sets that I see this with too. Age of honor, valour or eagles or something- do I need this or that core rule vs supplement etc etc??? ACW and NAP and SYW are COMPLETELY different beasts. If I am putting this much effort into making a beautiful army and I want to see linear tactics on the table, I want a rule set that focuses on that.

Hi daler – you make some good points, and certainly the interaction of command, weapons, and tactics in the three periods are very different. I started out with Napoleonics, and V&B certainly "feels" like it has a Napoleonic focus to me, which the new rule book reinforces. I don't know how much the two extensive scenario books elaborate on that for the SYW, but it certainly is a lot of attention. Just to be clear, however, my house rules are what I came up with to play the ACW with V&B, not the SYW. I think the basic idea of emphasizing the interaction between supporting battle lines carries through the various periods, if in slightly different ways. How much each gamer wants to emphasize that is a personal choice, but I agree that seeing it on the table is visually rewarding, and being able to play the tactics is rewarding for my play style. One of the reasons that I went with V&B for large scale battles was that it seems robust enough to handle these sorts of variations.

Cheers,

Christopher