"Rules Playtest AWI Black Powder" Topic

Hi All

Just finished a small Black Powder game where we tested some amendments.
[URL=http://s574.photobucket.com/user/rogercas/media/IMG_20160424_143100_zpsmgs7u01n.jpg.html]

[/URL]

Sorry for poor pictures, write up on the blog.

gapagnw.blogspot.co.uk

The game was to test some amendments? What are these amendments exactly?

Thanks for the link to your write up. I am interested in the number of bases in a unit and how many figures to a base that you used.

Thanks.

Matthew

MajorB, from what I read they have changed it to:

Units fire then move, rather than be able to move up close to the enemy and fire while they just stand there.

That is my big peeve with Black Powder also and locally when I do Black Powder games we now use that same change- fire before movement.

It allows the defenders to usually get their shots in which is as it should be.

RogerC, I agree fully with that amendment!

Units fire then move, rather than be able to move up close to the enemy and fire while they just stand there.

That is my big peeve with Black Powder also and locally when I do Black Powder games we now use that same change- fire before movement.

Ah, I see. Interesting. I tried that mod myself, but in my experience fire before move led to very stilted games whereas the RAW has a much more dynamic feel.

It allows the defenders to usually get their shots in which is as it should be.

Isn't that what the Closing Fire rule is for?

The problem with closing fire is that it does not stop an opponent from getting close and during rather then going for melee. If you walk into range and the opposing unit is not otherwise busy it should get first shot.

The problem with closing fire is that it does not stop an opponent from getting close and during rather then going for melee.

I'm sorry I don't undertsand your cmment. Closing fire is delivered against a charging unit. If the defenders succeed in Disordering the chargers then they fight at -1. If they cause them to become Shaken the chargers must take a Break Test.

If you walk into range and the opposing unit is not otherwise busy it should get first shot.

I presume you mean moving into range but not charging to contact? If so, the question of who shoots first is a bit academic, since the game system is not rigid about timing. If I have a British infantry unit in line that marches up to a French unit, stops and delivers a volley, who is to say that the French should shoot first?

The issue we found Major B is that in the case of this game the British could march to short range and deliver a volley. They would have 1 easier to hit as its short range and one extra die for being first fire. The unit they are attacking is Militia and wavering. So they only save on a 6 and have to break test after every casualty. So the defending line of 4 militia battalions will potentially all break without firing a shot. Not really the game we were looking for.

45th div they are 50x50mm bases with 6 figures on each typically (though some of the militia have a bit less so they look less uniform) and there are 5 bases so 30 figures per unit.

in the case of this game the British could march to short range and deliver a volley. They would have 1 easier to hit as its short range and one extra die for being first fire. The unit they are attacking is Militia and wavering. So they only save on a 6 and have to break test after every casualty. So the defending line of 4 militia battalions will potentially all break without firing a shot.

Sounds quite historically accurate to me.

MajorB – it also applies to Militia firing at veterans. The side that moves up gets to shoot first. All I can think of is those Monty Python skits where a policeman watches on while a burglar robs someone.

If you use the Last Argument of Kings supplement amendment which does not allow units that make more than one move to fire as well, then I find the game sequence generally works just fine….

To be fair I have played Black Powder raw a couple of dozen times and never had an issue with the phasing. Some of the guys I play with had concerns so we agreed to try some amendments that others had suggested, I was pleasantly surprised, I feel they are slightly more balanced. As Dynaman says would it be realistic for Militia to march up to short range and volley a battalion of the Guard, a bit of bum dice throwing and they have broken without firing a shot.

One last thing to consider, this also allows for the tactic employed by the British, the Swedes in the Great Northern, the Carlists in Spain and other troops with aggressive tactics (Highlanders in the 45?) to march up to short range. Take a volley from the enemy then in their own turn fire one close range volley and charge through the smoke and into contact having hopefully disordered your foe. Personal preference of course but I do think this amendment adds something to the game.

All wargames are an abstraction. They also usually have an artificial turn sequence imposed on the model of reality. Therefore just because a unit apparently cannot fire at an attacker until it is "their turn" does not necessarily mean that in reality they did not open fire when the attackers came within range. The action of firing in a wargame is a mechanism that allows the players to assess the impact of firing in the context of the game. It may actually represent a number of volleys (dependant on the time scale).

Thus in this example and using move and shoot, if the defenders are broken as a result of the attackers advance and shooting it means that that was the overall result of the attack. If the defenders are not broken then they get to shoot back and this represents them being a bit more effective in defence shooting at the advancing target and possibly inflicting casualties on the attackers.

Another thing to bear in mind in BP is that if the Special Rules applied such as Militia and Wavering make the defenders too brittle then you should consider adjusting the application of Special Rules to give the level of resistance you think the defenders could offer.

I get all that, in this instance it worked better firing then moving, it reflected the actuality of Cowpens and Guildford Courthouse where pretty poor militia were asked to deliver two volleys then retire. This they did in both cases and caused significant casualties to the British regulars which ultimately led to a defeat for the British at Cowpens and Phyric victory at Guildford Courthouse. Don't get me wrong its the first time we played it this way and although I liked it we need to play it some more before I am decided.

as the creators themselves said, the ruleset is a toolbox. If move than fire works better for southern AWI for you guys more power to you. I like the idea a lot and will probably try it, or expand closing fire to any unit that gets within 12" of a unit. Each supplement plays with the rules a bit like Zulu with its 1v1 close combat which prevents the little brit units from being instantly overrun. point being do what you got to do!

Appreciate that Phil. We have a large Carlist game next weekend where we will use the amendments. Will d a full AAR with pictures on the blog.

I modified the BP rules slightly to "fix" this problem. If the moving player moves into close range, then the non moving player gets to shoot first. However they give up their ability to shoot on their next turn. This prevents exactly what the other writers have mentioned, the moving player marches to close range and blasts away while the non moving player is too dumfounded to do anything. We simply mark the non moving unit with a 22 shell and that signifies they can't fire on their next turn. The problem is even worse in LAK because each brigade has a Bn gun. That too would get to trundle up into close range, blast away while the non moving player just stand there stupified. A friend compared that tactic to using infantry assault guns to support a close assault in WWII! We have used this modification for about 5 years now here in my gaming group in No Virginia and it works just fine. I have run probably 60+ games with Black Powder in playtests for my scenario book on Ferdinand here in No Va and at major HMGS conventions. Everyone picks it up pretty quickly.

Thanks for that Tim, I really don't see an issue with tinkering with the rules to ensure you get the right sort of result. I can see how your answer would work. We played the amend explained earlier with firing then moving at the weekend in aCarlist War game which went really well. Did a write up on the blog if your interested. gapagnw.blogspot.co.uk

*Roger C Those look great, and the AAR report, well done.

Guys Ive yet to play only one BP game, but enjoyed a couple of All the Kings Men.
I too have issue with your enemy getting first shot while you do nothing (just stand there).

It would seem only realistic, even 'some' militia would shoot first if nothing more than a moment of 'panic' and reaction fire.
Im glad to see that many here veiw rules as "guidelines" (make the game your own) and not written in stone.

Thanks Part time gamer. A number of the supplements recommend if you are going to fire then you can only move once, this would certainly help. Our version seesm to work, We have tried it for pike and shot but it doesn't seem to work as well. Not sure why.

I know I am late jumping in here but we altered the movement / shooting to as follows.

If you roll low enough to move twice it is an adder, not another full move and a deduction on you shot for that adder.

If you roll lower enough to move 3 times, again it is another adder and not shooting allowed.

How far a unit may move is also dictated by the formations, whish also affects adders. Columns move quicker then lines, simple.

T

Hi Tony, columns moving quicker makes sense, not sure what you mean by an adder sorry.

RogerC
Hi Tony, columns moving quicker makes sense, not sure what you mean by an adder sorry.

Yea that one kind of lost me a bit too.
I 'read' "..its an adder" to mean, the extra move was a 'freebie' so to speak, that is would Not interfer with getting to shoot. I may have that backwards.

The idea of moving then shoot, while def. does nothing, recalls Bolt Action's Melee rule.
Att. makes their attack def. does Nothing, until 'their' casualties are removed.
THEN what if any def. are even left make their melee 'counter attack'. "seriously guys?"

And I agree, a defending unit should get taht 'opportunity fire' if the enemy marches with in range, and by all means, that Op Fire would count as the def. 'shoot' in their upcoming turn.