" SALUTE ACTION AT ANTIETAM A.A.R." Topic

Salute 2016 – last play test for "Pickett's Charge!" ACW rules prior to publication – and all in the glare of the Salute public! Our Action at Antietam game represented the intense action around Dunker Church and particularly the Sunken Lane, between the confederate forces of General Hill and the federal forces of General French during the Battle of Antietam in 1862.

[URL=http://s204.photobucket.com/user/dcrbrown/media/2.%20Texas%20brigade_zpsqjttegi1.jpg.html]

[/URL]

See the full AAR and Pickett's Charge rules updates on the following link:

link

[URL=http://s204.photobucket.com/user/dcrbrown/media/7.%20Remain%20firm_zpsf4ttwe0q.jpg.html]

[/URL]

DB

very interesting write up, and interesting rules concept.

The Stonewall Brigade was by the Dunker Church as well. Great looking game.

Nice looking, interesting rules. If these are brigades then there are several entire Zouave brigades on the table.

Don't think they were ever brigaded together and certainly not full divisions. But very nice looking battle. But I still say regimental 15mm is the way to go. YMMV.

I think the game was "based on" Antietam rather than 100% accurate.

There was a Zouave Brigade later in the war, during the Overland Campaign but not commanded by Weed who was killed at Gettysburg and if we need to be pedantic, was actually commanding Battery I, 5th US Artillery as their Captain, at Antietam.

Also, my own 28mm Irish would point out that no one retired from the real fight and the Sunken Road was taken by Richardson's Division of which they and Cadwell's Brigade were part not French's so the comment about it ending "much as its historical equivalent" is stretching things a bit.

Mind you, it would have been hard to replicate the contributory panic in the Confederate defenders caused by trying to pull back units from the hopelessly overcrowded position.

Anyway none of this matters much – as a game – it appears to have shown the key point of actually having a set up that involves Regiments and has an effective Command system which is good enough for me!

Get thee to a printers, DB!

eagerly awaiting this one I have to say!

Will Pickett's Charge be compatible with the four scenario books released for GaG?

Nice. Can I ask what material you used for the ground cover? Was that some sort of cloth?

Patonius,

Yes, althougth the game does not rely on a distinct figure scale as one "base of figures" in the game simply represents 75 to 80 men. (I still use a 1:20 scale representation simply because regiments with 20 or more figures simply look good!) As base sizes are not essential to the game, there is no need to rebase, so figures used for Guns at Gettysburg, Fire & Fury or Johnny Reb rule systems will match "Pickett's Charge!"

DB

Is the number of bases significant? We use large bases with anything up to two dozen figures so would that be manageable?

UFB,

Units, i.e. infantry regiments and cavalry, can have from three to six or more bases.

Small units are 3 to 4 bases, standard units 5 to 6 bases and large units 7+.

So even with a large basing system, just modify accordingly if you wish. So if you have bases with say, eight figures mounted just class these as "two bases" , a twelve figure base could be classed as three bases, and so on.

With you 24 figure bases its probably best just dividing them by 4 to give the "base" equivalent.

It's entirely up to the players – the game doesn't specify how figures should be mounted or what a base of figures must be.

DB

Dave,

Do the Brigades have sub orders (for want of a better phrase)?

I get the Battle Line or Reserve bit but is there another level similar to the old Attack, Engage, Defend, Hold, Move routine below this, to say what they are supposed to do from these positions.

Fantastic looking game and I'm looking forward to the rules!

Traj,

The rules adopt three command states for brigades, these are Obeying Orders, (may act as the player desires), Hesitant, (limited options with no forward movement permitted) and Faltering – poor morale, at risk of withdrawing or breaking up.

There are no conditional or prescribed order requirements under the Obeying Orders status. Player's orders are in general dictated by the scenario / game objectives and of course their position in the divisional battle line. (E.G. an historical equivalent would be "hold the enemy in check for as long as possible" (issued by a Union general at Gettysburg) or "Carry the hill occupied by the enemy" issued by a Confederate general at Gettysburg.)

Therefore in an attacking scenario those brigades that obey orders will adopt an aggressive stance, aiming to take an objective or support an attacking brigade relevant to their position in the battle line. There is no requirement in the rules to act in a prescribed way, such as "must advance at least X distance per turn" or "must charge at least X units per turn", (which I'm not entirley sure there is historical evidence to support in most battles). Those detailed decisions are down to the brigadiers (i.e. the players) who execute their mission as they see fit under the circumstances.

Hope that helps.

DB

Nice looking minis! What scale?

Thanks DB,

One thing I forgot to ask is how the Battle Line is defined within the game.

Say we have a Division with three Brigades. Three in a line – then all in the Battle Line. Two up one back – two in the Battle Line, one in Reserve one assumes.

What if you want to stack one side and advance two Birgades one behind the other and hold the third in Reserve on their flank. Do both the advancing Brigades count as in the Battle Line?

Don,

All 28mms – mostly Perry's and a few Redoubt.

DB

Traj,

"Do both the advancing Brigades count as in the Battle Line?"

Yes, that would be accounted for by the C-in-C's initial deployment. So if he wants a brigade stacked up behind supporting a lead brigade then fine, it's classed as committed to that position in the battle line.

If later the C-in-C wants to redeploy the "stacked" brigade – this would require a command tasking.

DB

Clear as a Bell !

Thanks DB!

Traj,

Its design is to provide a suggestion of brigade orders without the need to write orders down, place conditions upon the brigades, etc.

By ensuring the brigade must stay in position in the battle line means the player cannot change position exactly when it suits him, nor move regiments from brigades to different places on the battlefield just because he's spotted something that his brigadier almost certainly has not.

It also means that it's probably best to think about deployment at the start of the game – and not halfway through – as I'm prone to do! It also encourages the use of reserves.

DB

DB,

That sounds very encouraging. Given that the whole system of Drill and Manoeuvre was intended to function perpendicular to the battle line, horizontal movement was not any easy thing to do.

I'm afraid too many players look at those neat blocks on battlefield maps without any idea of how difficult it was to keep a Brigade together and move forward without any fancy footwork.

Regiments may have turned or been forced to alter position within the area of their Brigade due to enemy activity but for the most part keeping the elements together was a Brigadiers main task.

Any rules that stop players peeling of units to attack targets of opportunity are most welcome.

Also Reserves are good, too many games end up as table edge to table edge deployments because people forget they know where "The World" ends and real commanders don't.

Some insurance from a second line to guard against breakthroughs and flanking attacks is a lot more important when there is really more "table" than you know about.

While we are talking command: The Staff Officer system, you say in the AAR that there is a maximum of one per Brigade.

How many/few is it possible for a Divisional commander to have and is it fixed at the start of the game?

I ask that on the assumption that it starts at least one per Brigade present and the Divisional Commander/Player gets "X" on top of that according to dice roll or whatever.

Finally, can the "Staff Officer" take a command function, say move a battery, or the extreme case, lead a force like Moxley Sorrel conducting three of Longstreet's Brigades onto the flank of Hancock's Corps in The Wilderness?

I guess that's a matter of if they have a supposed physical presence, or are a rather clever way of representing "command points" or even both!

Traj,

Staff Officer Availability is diced for each turn – so you can never guarantee exactly how many you will receive. A player can never have more Staff Officers than brigades he commands, (unless the Division is commanded by an Excellent C-in-C, who always receives an additional S/O).

We did experiment with making Staff Officers both a representation of the C-in-C's ability to manage the battle and actual personas but abandoned this concept as this lead to all sorts of independent commands springing up!

In the Napoleonic version General d'Armee there is an Imperial ADC tasking available to French forces and these that may act as a brigadier, akin to the Moutons, Morands and Rapps .

Still possibly something for the Optional Rules, you never know!

DB

We did experiment with making Staff Officers both a representation of the C-in-C's ability to manage the battle and actual personas but abandoned this concept as this lead to all sorts of independent commands springing up!

Oh yeah, wargamers, always forget about them! :o)

To be fair, my recollections of staff officer involvements are more akin to battle management than anything else.

They may have involved the critical movement of units from A to B but the heroic intervention was the exception not the rule. Leading wild charges and such wasn't their job. Although I'd be a lying if I said it never happened.

I can see its easier to hold things away from that though, or you may well end up having to write exceptions to the exceptional! Not a good idea. :o)

In my Moxley Sorrel example, I presume you would just have to allocate one of "him" to each of the Brigades making the flanking move?

Now of course such an event would really only happen if entire Corps were involved. Sorrel being Longstreet's Chief of Staff, not just some Staff Captain, but this attack was made by Brigades from different Divisions.

How would this work in PC? Would each Divisional general have to give up a Staff action, or could the Corps Commander add some/all of his to make it happen?

Regarding General d'Armee: I would counsel caution there too. How many times did the Imperial Staff actually get his nibs out of a jam over the course of the war?

Granted those you mention were all Generals, as opposed to Field Officers in the Civil War but they were kept for really serious pooh hitting pretty large fans!

Their existence in "Empire" (yes, I played them too) only made the disparity between French Command ability and the Allies even worse than it already was. May have been historic in some ways but that used to suffer from overuse too, as I recall.

Again it could be a hard course to navigate between one of them appearing in every game and not having a realistic option available in the rules.

At least you can insist that they can only appear if Nappy is on the field, or some such, no similar Civil War get out exists really.

Oh the joy of rules writing! :o)

Traj,

Very good points to ponder – one Imperial ADC version was used as a simple one off tasking, that for one turn granted the player a potential number of extra ADC's – i.e. a command boost!

A good few play tests of the various versions required!

DB

Will need to see the P C rules in action here in England but have resevations ab.
out the use of Staff Officers in such a way,do they not disrupt the chain of Command ?
Napoleon used his 'Pretty Boys' to be assigned special ops or take command in emergency situations,not as some sort of link to his Generals of Division/Brigades.
G