"PICKETT'S CHARGE rules review" Topic

My review,…

link

Very useful, thank you!

Excellent write up and reflects the chapters I have read so far. I tend to read each chapter about 3 times and these rules IMO easily sink in and make sense .
The more I read these rules the more I want to play the game and I think the author has done a great job in making them easy reading. I have struggled in places with General De Brigade and parts of GaG in the past so this makes a great change of direction for me as I won't have anyone to teach me the rules as I am perhaps the only person at the club interested in this conflict.

Many thanks

Sounds interesting, thanks for the write up.

Here's the link to the interview that the lads from Meeples and Miniatures did with the Author of the rules:

link

Played three games of PC and totally loved it thus far. Lots of Command and Control issues but runs very smoothly.

Very easy to pick up the basic mechanics of movement, firing and combat but the Staff Officers system is just brilliant.

Management of the effects of the inevitable friction which will occur is the key. Makes you feel like you're commanding a Divison.

Our group has been searching for a good set of ACW rules. We've previously played, F&F Brigade and Regimental, also Longstreet and still found them wanting. Maybe will try PC. Thanks for your post!

Played all three and PC feels the best so far!

I'm considering using the LONGSTREET campaign system with the Pickett's Charge rules.

Very good review I got a real feel for the rules by reading it.

Longstreet Campaign System?

Could be done but you'll have to find a way to convert battle losses from PC into Stands for the Longstreet after action sequence.

Some kind of exchange rate to turn "hits/casualties" for each Regiment into stands lost. Bearing in mind the number of losses in PC is a measure of fighting effectiveness not simple dead and wounded it might take some trial and error.

You can get some hefty losses in Stands in Longstreet which might be hard to replicate in PC to give you unit churn.

Where does one purchase these rules?

From Too Fat Lardies

toofatlardies.co.uk

On Military Matters will have them, too.

Excellent! Thnak you!

I bought the PDF on the TFL site. I will probably get the written rules as well from OMM or Eureka USA.

Hi,
Sorry but no imput into this discussion except to ask if anyone else finds it strange that the softback £24.00 GBP rule set is printed with only one of three columns on a page is actually rules,the other two columns only having a small even if perfectly formed,print of an ACW figure.
I would have preferred a)a shorter and cheaper rule book or b)empty spaces put together to create half to full blanks on which some really nice ACW prints,rule clarifications etc could have been displayed ??
As to the rules,sorry but not convinced that "Staff Officers" are a real answer to Command and Control issues,PIPs as we called them years ago.
Why the large increase in Artillery ranges over G at G even at 15mm puts a strain on games space ?
G

Have some sympathy with the views on layout but it's a modern trend to make rule books less text intensive I'm afraid. Personally, it wouldn't have mattered to me if it had been full of pretty pictures either. I know what ACW soldiers look like and have miniatures of my own, so looking at other peoples efforts when I'm trying to learn a rule set never impresses me.

In the long run the words are what matters and no matter what set of rules we are talking about nice photos don't improve poor rules. Fortunately in this case they don't have to as the rules more than look after themselves!

"Staff Officers" are indeed PIPs in a fancy hat but they are the best variation of this method I've come across and are innovative in terms of the way the author has tied them into to period feel he's created for the game overall.

Artillery range? Haven't found it a problem to be honest. I'd have to go and dig up G@G to compare. All I know is that they are under a pile of rules including Regimental Fire & Fury and Longstreet waiting for something better to turn up and now it has.

On a practical note we have been playing 15mm on 6x4 with no issues. Yes the ranges are long but they were in the Civil War, you just had limited opportunities to take advantage. The artillery rules in PC cover this well and actively discourage pointless banging away at dots on the horizon.

Sad to say but as is often the case with wargames, playing them is they only way to find out, numbers on a peice of paper don't tell the whole story.

The enteral issue, make a judgement on a read or review and you can maybe miss out on a good thing. Buy a set and be delighted or furious at the waste of money.

Never a fool proof option available in my experience.

Any good for solo use ?

I can see the point raised about the layout of the book. However I really don't want to go back to the old days of type set rules book with a few if any black and white sketches . I agree however the pictures can become a distraction as I am one of those that gets distracted! But I don't think its too bad in this book compared to some double pages spread pictures in other rule books. However there is a separate market of people who just buy rules books just to read but never play a game and I think the eye candy helps to sell the book in this respect to that market segment.

As regards solo use . The main problem I see is that you will know what the intention of the "other" side as regards staff officer disposition .I think they can be adaptable.

As with most games I play solo , I make one side considerably stronger that the other and take the role of the underdog. Sometimes I get the Mrs to throw the dice as well. Playing solo is a useful way of trying out new game mechanics and trying new tactics so I do, do it quite a lot.

As the publisher I had more responsibility for the layout of the rules than the game designer, so I should answer that question.

The pages are laid out in three column format, of which two are full of text (i.e the rules) and the third is reserved for illustrations, period quotes, section headings and the likes.

What we find is that people no longer want rule books jam-packed with text. It is far easier to read and understand text where the layout doesn't present you with that wall of script, we are simply following current trends in using a more reader-friendly layout to make the rules easier to read and understand.

The price of £24.00 GBP is nothing to do with the price of producing the book. It is reflective of the cost of developing and producing a game system over a period of years. For most people, the rules are the single most important in determining whether a game is enjoyable or not. At £24.00 GBP that equates to two packs of unpainted Foundry Figures or only a bit more than a single box of plastic Perry Miniatures. I think that is a very good deal indeed. The fact that we have incurred additional production costs by laying it out in a more user-friendly manner is a bonus.

As to Staff Officers and Pips, my own comment would be that Staff Officers act very differently to most Pip system and that my own experience with the game is that the allocation of command resources in the command phase makes for a really fun and enjoyable game.

Cheers

Rich

I would have thought solo works quite well.

The number of staff offices is unpredictable, you often will not have enough and even where you do you can still screw up the Brigade activation process which negates their worth anyway.

Good for foxing the intentions of whichever side you are in charge of at that point.

Why the large increase in Artillery ranges over G at G even at 15mm puts a strain on games space ?

Right lets have a look at this shall we? All mesurements below are for 15mm.

In G@G there are five types of artillery batteries and in PC this has been extended to six by bringing in 24pdr Howitzers.

At "Canister" of the five: one has gone up by 5cm and two up have gone up by 3cm the other two are the same.

At "Effective" three have gone up by 5cm, one has gone up by 10cm, the other is the same.

At "Long" one is up by 5cm, three are up by 10cm and one by 20cm.

So for the three most common the "space straining" is 10cm.

Max Range for any available gun is now 120cm instead of 100cm. A "massive" increase of 20cm or 8in for those not wishing to do the conversion. Not likely to ruin a game in my view. Particularly as the weapon in question is the 20pdr Parrott.

If any of your opponents suddenly develop a fondness for this gun in order to take advantage of this bounty, I suggest a playful punch in the mouth and a reminder that, at Gettysburg, both sides added together accounted for 17 of them, out of a combined total of 631 assemble pieces!

Hi Grognard66

Sorry but no input into this discussion except to ask if anyone else finds it strange that the softback £24.00 GBP GBP rule set is printed with only one of three columns on a page is actually rules,the other two columns only having a small even if perfectly formed,print of an ACW figure.

It seems a pretty reasonable price for a set of (IMHO) excellent rules. They are handsomely produced, seem robust and the QRS and overall presentation is first rate. Most importantly however is the fact that these rules are VERY good.

As to the rules,sorry but not convinced that "Staff Officers" are a real answer to Command and Control issues,PIPs as we called them years ago.

Well, IMHO I think that the Staff Officer / PIPS system in PC isn't quite the same as say the PIP system used in DBA (for example). First off you need to discover exactly HOW MANY 'PIPS' you'll have at your disposal and then you have to decide on how many 'PIPS' you will allocate to a given task to be conducted by those 'PIPS' (Staff Officers).
As a veteran of many years service I think that simulating command 'FRICTION' is one of the most difficult things a rules writer has to grapple with. If it can be done effectively AND relatively simply then that's quite an achievement. I think in the case of these rules it's been done particularly well.

Why the large increase in Artillery ranges over G at G even at 15mm puts a strain on games space ?

I just didn't see this as an issue in the two games I played. Both in 28mm on a 8x5 table.
I guess all I can say or ask is, "Have you played a game using these rules"?
I would recommend you give them a crack. A review can only give you at best an indication of what a set of rules play like.
I'm a very keen student of the ACW and a veteran and I always try my best to write a review that gives a feel of what the rules play like. I also first read the rules author's design notes/ philosophy to see what he's trying to simulate.
For me, these rules come the closest at putting me in the position of a Divisional or Corps Commander during that particular conflict.

How many stands per Regiment are you running in 28mm?

We typically use 5 for a regular regiment, 6 for large and 4 for small

How many stands per Regiment are you running in 28mm?

As per the rules suggest.
3 for a small Regt
4-6 for a regular one and 7 plus for large
4 figs in two ranks on a 40mm square base.
Looks very good
I also have some figs base in single rank with 3 figs on a 50mm wide base that's 25mm deep.
We experienced no issue even with slightly different basing.

Thanks, we have been playing in 15mm on a 6 x 4 while learning the rules and the stuff I've posted to date on the two "first impressions" threads I started, was based on observations from that.

We have found PC a good game in a compact area and I was just checking out how it might be when we upscale, which was always our intention, as we are lucky enough to have armies in both sizes.

As I think I mentioned elsewhere, we are looking at a mix of 5's and 7's, based purely on appearance, unless looking to do some kind of refight. I'd be loathed to use 3's in 28mm that's one of the downsides of Longstreet!

Our stuff is also in two ranks of four figures but on a slightly smaller 35mm square.

Just a question of reproducing the same density or footprint ratio at the larger scale really. I sometimes find the difference in available table space can alter the "feel" of games with the same rules if you don't watch out.

I was conscious that somewhere in the rules, or other related items I've read, there's a mention that PC was written with 15mm first in mind.

As there are no hard and fast ground scale considerations to allow for it shouldn't make any difference to game play but in some cases over the years its seemed that the physical constraints of the table seem to be reflected differently by what sizes the writing and play testing games were most conducted in. Game creators never notice it as they are rightly focused on making things work as designed and its hard enough getting the job done, never mind testing more than one scale!

So, we are talking about a brigade of 4 or 5 regiments equaling 20 to 25 stands, or 80 to 100 figures? Then a division would require between 100 and 200 figures on fifty stands?

Bit more than that @ 5 Stands per Regt.

1 Brigade = 4 Regiments = 80 Figs (4 x 5 x 4)

1 Division = 3 Brigades = 240 Figs (12 x 5 x 4)

Add or subtract for bigger or smaller Regiments or Brigades! :o)

Looks wise they just look about right. Painting wise its an achievable target. Win Win Imo.

The games look is helped by the emphasis on Brigades and Line of Battle.

Lines of Brigades with Regiments in line gives a clear shape to the game and the correct shape too. Check out the video posted by Tango01 on why Infantry fought in line – looks like a PC game, only bigger!

Check out the video posted by Tango01 on why Infantry fought in line

Do you have a link?

Here you go!

link

Thanks

Hi,
I have downloaded PDF version of rules,different format to the softback booklet seen at a Convention here in Yorkshire recently,nowhere near as much 'wasted' space as in booklet.
Tiny comment,Page 80 Brigade etc markers,just wished there was small gaps between markers so you could laminate once printed
G

Doesn't stop you laminating them Grono just makes them pain to cut up afterwards! :o)

Printing on thin card (wish I could tell you the weight but I buy the packet by sight) when laminated gives a nice appearance an enough thickness to be durable.

I did a couple of copies of each which gives enough for most games.

Cutting with good size sharp scissors was a matter of keen eye and steady hand although I freely admit four sheets was enough to convince me I'd not want to make a career out of it!

BTW: Not sure about the appearance thing, my pdf looks identical to my hard copy!

Hi Traj,
Definitely a different print re Booklet and PDF,go figure !!
I must admit to being mistaken re laminating.
Roll on a game to test out the rules :)
G

Here are some thoughts so far on issues I've found with Pickett's Charge. Mind you, I like the Fire Results, the Staff Officer concept, and the Morale results, so please don't think I am just being negative.

1. Dividing large regiments into 2 battalions which function independently. NO NO NO. I did not like this idea in Johnny Reb III and I do not like it know. Totally unrealistic. The regiment should operate as one. Bigger regiments were unwieldy.

2. Figure loss versus status. Why are large regiments knocked down a level with the loss of only 4 figures – same as a small regiment? I prefer the Fire and Fury method of Fresh/Worn/Spent which allows one to reflect the enthusiasm or lack thereof of the regiment.

3. Officer jeopardy or lack thereof. I've mentioned this already. I absolutely hate the construct of a SNIPER to account for possible officer casualties. That is cheesey and gamey to the extreme. Johnny Reb does an excellent job of this – better than Fire and Fury, too where an officer can only become a casualty if a 10 is rolled on combat results. Graft the Johnny Reb concept unto Pickett's Charge.

4. Serendipity results (when boxcars are rolled). Fine. Nothing wrong with it. BUT, there should also be a Fate result (bad luck) when snake eyes are rolled.

Grono,

Definitely a different print re Booklet and PDF,go figure !!

OK, that's it, I'm definitely going to do a side by side comparison now. This is hilarious ! :o)

Rev Zoom,

Re: #1 Not liking it is cool but unfortunately it's not unrealistic.

Organisationally the Regiment was divided into two "Wings" one commanded by the Lt Colonel, one commanded by the Major, with the Colonel co-ordinating from the centre. Bear in mind the regulations were written for a unit of 1,000 men so running two 500 man halves made a lot more sense than two halves of 160 odd that you often saw in the field!

Nevertheless Wings were part of the drill book and breaking a Regiment into them was a common and useful option for commanders to deal with various problems from flank attacks to helping get round an obstacle.

That said "cumbersome" is good, if you know what I mean! :o)

Re: #2 I can only assume the levels were set the same to make things consistent as a start point. With the difference made at the top end to give large Regiments the ability to hang around longer due to their size by giving a 2nd level of 10+ and a Disperse of 14+

Never thought about the F & F comparison but yeah I guess the three steps are similar. Not sure how different the two systems are in practical terms. The levels in PC effect the ability of a unit to shoot, melee and charge as well as passing their "See the Elephant" tests. Not a lot else for an indvidual Regiment to do outside of that I'd of thought.

Re: #3 Yeah OK it's a gimmick play but it's not complusory. We haven't used it but trust me when we run the game in public there will be a couple of these jokers in the bushes somewhere on the table! :o)

There are a number of rules that hit Generals on a certain die roll. I think it's a good way of doing it. Provided the figure is close or attached to a unit under fire of course!

Re: #4 There's a rule set out there that does that! Can't for the life of me remember which one, pretty sure it's not ACW though. Tell you what though you could make a double one a dead General. The area of play is right for it. Box Cars only calls up the chart in the Shooting or Charge Combat parts of the Game Turn after all. OK so that makes it the enemies bad luck but he'll get a chance to do it to you under the same circumstances!

Grono,

Working on the basis that it's unlikely we have different books, my only thought is we have different pdfs! Because my two are indentical. Just laid the book down alongside my iPad and went through page by page.

Did you buy the pdf separately?

I got my one bundled in with the book price because I pre ordered. Just wondering if the stand alone pdf is different in some way?

Hi Traj,
The softback version was seen at Leeds Fiasco in October,the PDF was,of course,from the wonderful Too Fat Lardies site,and once printed was a pleasant surprise as not the waste of paper I thought it would be given the Leeds experience :)
Have printed off markers and laminated with no probs,sure is a lot of different types,any ideas how I can best keep them stored,organised AND easy to access when needed ??
I queried the new,increased,ranges mainly because I like to have range sticks,my mentor was the brilliant Peter Gilder,and being a lazy so n so may well ignore this particular item but am really looking forward to playing the rules in anger.
G

Oh Right, I understand now, so we're looking at the same thing now. I saw a pre release copy and that was indeed different.

Markers? Ah the delight of keeping all those little swines in check! Drove me nuts!

Wilko sell small divided storage boxes in their DIY section at £1.45 GBP a pop.

Went mad and bought two, one for each team! Sod the expense, I say!